Skeptic Project

Your #1 COINTELPRO cognitive infiltration source.

Page By Category

Forum - People's Capitalism, a less woo-woo alternative to the Resource Based Economy.

[ Add Tags ]

[ Return to General Discussion | Reply to Topic ]
advancedatheistPosted: May 05, 2010 - 11:18
(0)
 

Level: 3
CS Original

By James S. Albus, Ph.D.:

http://www.hplusmagazine.com/articles/economy/peoples%E2%80%99-capitalism-pathway-abundance

Of course, the Austrian economics cultists will object to it because it preserves the Federal Reserve and uses fiat money.

#1 [ Top | Reply to Topic ]
babybackribsPosted: May 05, 2010 - 15:54
(0)
 

Level: 1
CS Original

To be honest, I don't really think it's that great.
I mean, it works out for one or a few countries.
Then that leads me to this question:
Can capitalism survive if 3rd world countries become just as wealthy as 1st world countries?
Am I implying that most capitalist system rely too much on cheaper production costs in 3rd world countries? Yes I am.
If you disagree, then explain why.

Regarding the article:
I saw it when it came out. Frankly, I'm not too convinced it will work.

#2 [ Top | Reply to Topic ]
Edward L WinstonPosted: May 05, 2010 - 16:18
(0)
 

President Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho: porn star and five-time ultimate smackdown wrestling champion!

Level: 150
CS Original

I think it's impossible, because stability in capitalism relies on some being property owners and some being wage earners, not everyone can be "a capitalist" as the article says. Plus the United States and others exploit third world labor to help bring down prices for production, in order to maximize potential profit.

Then you have the problem of artificial scarcity; in order for capitalism to work for items that are very common (like snack cakes) there has be artificial scarcity. That means whoever is selling the snack cakes has to "pretend" they're worth more than they really are by raising the prices. They do this so that they can still make money. Increases in automation, lowering of employment for the property owner, means that they're so cheap to make if they were to sell them with say a 10% increase, they still wouldn't make as much money.

A great example are CDs, which cost less than a cent in some cases to create, but are sold for $12 - $15 USD. There's no reason they should cost that much, even with licensing, most artists make only 25 cents (sometimes less) off of each sale.

Imagine if tomorrow every single person was a millionaire, it's almost impossible to imagine how it could ever work, because it couldn't.

At least, that's how I see it.

#3 [ Top | Reply to Topic ]
babybackribsPosted: May 05, 2010 - 16:47
(0)
 

Level: 1
CS Original

@Edward

I agree. I just can't see "everyone being a millionaire" actually solving anything.
Yes, I'll admit, I think "re-distribution of wealth" is a good thing. So you all can intellectually butt-f*ck me later about my politics.

However, this idea won't work in the long run because at some point, these countries that are used for production will become service based countries (like 1st world) and then the rest of the 1st world will have to come up with something new. War, perhaps?

#4 [ Top | Reply to Topic ]
babybackribsPosted: May 05, 2010 - 16:49
(0)
 

Level: 1
CS Original

Kinda went off topic with my last post..

Basically, the idea of everyone being rich to some extent can't work because inflation will occur to where $1 million isn't really worth shit anymore.

#5 [ Top | Reply to Topic ]