China to become worlds next Superpower

[Brandon]

Are you trying to say that the American consumer is stupid?

The only time you see riots are when there is not enough supply to meet the demand. If there are 10 products and 1000 people want them, you will see riots and bad behavior. The nice thing about it all is that they are all luxury items.

When was the last time you saw a rush for bread or toothpaste? In the 25 years I have been around, not once. But the latest video game system, they were rioting when the original Nintendo launched.

The nice things about a capitalist system is you rarely see people killing one another over the things people really need. You see it with the PS3 and the Wii. In the USSR and GDR (east germany before the wall collaped) you saw people waiting in line for hours at the bakery.

Can you tell me the last time you waited that long for something you NEEDED and not wanted?

 

[framed]

Reason:

You Said: California is right behind China in GDP, so when are you gonna post a thread saying, "California realizes it is too good for the U.S. and breaks away."

I'll do that when California has over 1 billion people to harness to support its rise in influence. Its simple numbers, when China learns to leverage its people effectively there won't be an economic engine on the planet that could match it. Yes they currently have problems, but they are making measurable progress and with that their influence is growing.

George:

You seem to have a serious grudge against capitalism! The egotistical comment is funny because when I think of times I've had to put up with the holier-than-thou attitude (outside of church of course) its usually from a would-be socialist.

You're rallying about how capitalism encourages greed, I kindof agree with you but think its a fantastic thing. Communism and socialism deny that greed is part of human nature, and it turns into their downfall when people respond to their policies with self interest. Capitalism instead recognizes greed as part of human nature and harnesses it for the betterment of society. It sets up a system where if you want something you have to work for it, which has most of the population working and producing goods. Its why we don't have shortages of any of our basic needs, it drives innovation, and its why the US economic engine was able to sustain the cold war while the USSR was driven into insolvency.

I'd really like to know what system you recommend in place of capitalism, since the alternatives have already proven themselves historically as failures. I'll take "sheepish consumerism" over the "sheepish entitlementism" of socialism or communism any day, in the former at least people are busy working for what they need instead of complaining that it wasn't given to them.

 

[dong]

I'm not economically minded, so I will only provide a generalised and maybe selectively desultory commentary:

Has this discussion been diverted into a pre-ordained path where "socialism" and "capitalism" have been profiled in diametric opposition? On previous threads we have come up against the distinction between principle and practice, and I think it would be most useful to explicitly acknowledge this. I am in particular focusing on Framed's question to George re: what to replace capitalism with. On that note, I'd also like to say that IMO systems should not be idealised without regard to temporality as social dynamics are consistently changing.

Now for the random note: Instead of would-be socialist I am thinking pseudo-socialist, in just the same way that a pseudo-rationalist likes to justify their profound atheism (refer to the thread about agnostics and disdain for religion...it's very similar).

 

[Brandon]

The principle vs practice argument is always something I use to show the short-comings of communism and some socialist states.

In principle, communism and socialism sound like an attainable utopia but when put into practice it always turns out to be the downfall of those systems of government.

The same is said by socialists about Russia. Socialist say that the U.S.S.R is not true socialism or communism. Socialism always looks good on paper but when put into practice has extremely horrible results.

 

[dong]

I have regarded socialism as an unattainable utopia as, previously pointed out on this thread, it attempts to deny greed. To balance things out, I also regard a true or perfect capitalism as unattainable due to its relation to the liberal axiology that forms the foundation of western societies: the greed panders to a selfishness which has lately become a form of exclusive individualism. What causes the perception of problems is the belief of intrinsic value in material goods, compounded by the impossiblity of consumers being well-informed. Importantly, whilst the ideal that everybody earns what they can purchase through services they provide can be considered a *noble* one, we must compare the reality to that of attempting to nurture every individual to 'unlocking their potential' i.e. causing an unmanageable amount of competition, which causes the prerequisites for meeting "basic" survival conditions to become increasingly difficult to meet.

I am personally not vehemently opposed to capitalist systems- for I am a discerning consumer who buys not so much what he likes but what he feels is suitable to his needs. I am quite able to live by this system myself...but as a population, I do think that this is another piece of the society that is falling apart, and if this way of life is to be defended in any meaningful sense, then the libertarian directives need to take a real back seat and the regulatory brakes really bite so that we can recover some semblance of balance.