The Rules of Capitalism

[brainburn]

Was browsing around a documentary site and found an extremely low budget anit-capitalist documentary: Capitalism and Other Kids Stuff... The host presents a "general guide to the rules of capitalism" and insinuates that an awareness of these "facts of life" leads to a moral rejection of capitalism.

I think everyone will agree that it's kind of a mess... Nearly makes a few good points, but ultimately fails. Definitely far from the best critique I can imagine. I was just wondering what everyone here thought of these "rules", whether they are problems, and how to solve them if they are... (I'm not interested in any dismissive rebuttals of the absoluteness of some of these rules. For example, I know the poor don't have to pay for every mistake of the rich, we can all get over this point fine. What I'm interested in is not finding exceptions to the more absolute rules but whether a non-absolute and more balanced and realistic version of the same rule might be a problem still.)

 

So, what's your response/perspective on these "rules"?

 

1. The unequal distribution of wealth

2. Those who own the most make the rules

3. The more money you have, the more you can get

4. The less money you have, the less you can get

5. The poorer you are, the more expensive everything is

6. The poorer you are, the worse your health will be

7. The poorer you are, the worse your education and employment

8. The worse the pay, the harder the job

9. The higher the pay, the easier the job

10. If you're really rich, then you're a capitalist and you don't need to work at all

11. The poor pay for every mistake made by the rich

12. Rich people start wars that poor people have to fight

13. Most rich people get rich through inheritance, rags to riches stories are rare

14. Most poor people stay poor through hard work, thrift, and sacrifice

 

[Andrew79]

1. The unequal distribution of wealth

Wealth isn't distributed, it's created.

 

2. Those who own the most make the rules

The government makes the rules.

 

3. The more money you have, the more you can get

You'll have more opportunity, but that doesn't automatically mean those opportunities will be successful.

 

4. The less money you have, the less you can get

It just means you have fewer opportunities.

 

5. The poorer you are, the more expensive everything is

A loaf of bread is the same price for everyone (and, of course, in countries where that loaf is supplied through more capitalist means it is always far cheaper than where it's supplied through any other means).

 

6. The poorer you are, the worse your health will be

The government runs the health system.

 

7. The poorer you are, the worse your education and employment

The government runs the education system.

 

8. The worse the pay, the harder the job

For skillless manual labour, not for much else.

 

9. The higher the pay, the easier the job

Clueless jealousy and hatred of people who've succeeded in life.

 

10. If you're really rich, then you're a capitalist and you don't need to work at all

The previous rule must've riled him up a bit.

 

11. The poor pay for every mistake made by the rich

No, the poor pay for every mistake made by the government (which might include bailing the rich out or deciding a spot of genocide against the darkies might be a laugh).

 

12. Rich people start wars that poor people have to fight

Governments start wars (and have no problem forcing poor people to fight).

 

13. Most rich people get rich through inheritance, rags to riches stories are rare

The first part - so what? (and it's probably a lie). The second part, government education and regulation makes it far harder than it should be for "normal" people to succeed.

 

14. Most poor people stay poor through hard work, thrift, and sacrifice

Poor people stay poor through low quality government education, government regulation, and taxing what they do earn.

 

He's got nothing worth even a second glance.

[Alan C.]

Most of the problems in that list are the result of State intervention into the market.

If you're really rich, then you're a capitalist and you don't need to work at all

He is conflating capitalism with rent-seeking.

While it's true that some capitalists are rent-seekers, it's not always the case. Many capitalists became wealthy because they satisfied the demands of the market.

Most rich people get rich through inheritance, rags to riches stories are rare.

There is no evidence for this claim. Even if it was true, it doesn't matter.

Most poor people stay poor through hard work, thrift, and sacrifice.

This doesn't sound right. Did you mean to write that most people stay poor because they don't do those things?

[lowkey]

At first impression, these "rules" seem to be more a critique of "Crony Capitalism" rather than of simple "Capitalism".

When you add the power of the state to the decision making process, it is almost inevitable that some people will attempt to use their influence to gain a favorable position. 

Greater wealth does come with greater influence simply because with it you can afford to dedicate more of your resources to those purposes.  So it isn't unusual that people use their influence to protect and extend their status in the community.  Rather it's almost to be expected. 

This highlights the problems with state involvement in the capitalist process.  Not those with private ownership, capital accumulation or competitive markets.

[Waster]

I dont even want to reply to those rules, because in capitalism there really is only one rule: No Violence!

All those other rules are his own prejudices. One question for him. How does he know that these observations are the result of capitalism and not of government.

[lowkey]

Second, I would ask the author which form of capitalism he was critiquing.  Is he referring to Mercantilism, Free-Market Capitalism, Social-Market Capitalism, State Capitalism, Corporate Capitalism or a mixed economy?

For each is a distinct form with their strengths and weaknesses.  Many have been created to address the weaknesses in others.  Weaknesses that can be seen in the "rules".

And if the author is unprepared to discuss the various types of capitalism or tries to claim that they're all the same.....well there isn't much point for further discussion because any opinions he has will be influenced by his lack of knowledge rather than any real substantive issues.

[godwin_anarchism]

 an extremely low budget anit-capitalist documentary...

The host presents a "general guide to the rules of capitalism" and insinuates that an awareness of these ...

 

 

2. Those who own the most make the rules...

 

I would argue that "a low budget documentary" made these stupid "rules", and not "those who own the most".

[Bradford26]

 

Was browsing around a documentary site and found an extremely low budget anit-capitalist documentary: Capitalism and Other Kids Stuff... The host presents a "general guide to the rules of capitalism" and insinuates that an awareness of these "facts of life" leads to a moral rejection of capitalism.

I think everyone will agree that it's kind of a mess... Nearly makes a few good points, but ultimately fails. Definitely far from the best critique I can imagine. I was just wondering what everyone here thought of these "rules", whether they are problems, and how to solve them if they are... (I'm not interested in any dismissive rebuttals of the absoluteness of some of these rules. For example, I know the poor don't have to pay for every mistake of the rich, we can all get over this point fine. What I'm interested in is not finding exceptions to the more absolute rules but whether a non-absolute and more balanced and realistic version of the same rule might be a problem still.)

 

So, what's your response/perspective on these "rules"?

 

1. The unequal distribution of wealth

2. Those who own the most make the rules

3. The more money you have, the more you can get

4. The less money you have, the less you can get

5. The poorer you are, the more expensive everything is

6. The poorer you are, the worse your health will be

7. The poorer you are, the worse your education and employment

8. The worse the pay, the harder the job

9. The higher the pay, the easier the job

10. If you're really rich, then you're a capitalist and you don't need to work at all

11. The poor pay for every mistake made by the rich

12. Rich people start wars that poor people have to fight

13. Most rich people get rich through inheritance, rags to riches stories are rare

14. Most poor people stay poor through hard work, thrift, and sacrifice

 

 

I thought it would be fun to rewrite these rules as non-misleading truths.

1. Individuals own varying degrees of wealth. (The unequal distribution of wealth)

2. Individuals who others are more likely to follow will likely be more successful in business. (Those who own the most make the rules)

3.  Exchanges of value are mutually beneficial. (The more money you have, the more you can get)

4.  An individual gains less value in return when exchanging something of lower value. (The less money you have, the less you can get)

5. An individual's capacity for exchange decreases when they have less value to exchange. (The poorer you are, the more expensive everything is)

6. Quality is effected by the value of exchanged items. (The poorer you are, the worse your health will be)

7. An individual's wealth effects their ability to defer gratification. (The poorer you are, the worse your education and employment)

8. A job's pay depends on the level of physical exertion/ability and/or mental exertion/ability required by the employee. (The worse the pay, the harder the job)

9. Competetive pay rates aid in employee attraction/retention. (The higher the pay, the easier the job)

10. Investment is a strategy for increasing wealth. (If you're really rich, then you're a capitalist and you don't need to work at all)

11. Employees and customers are affected by a company's decisions. (The poor pay for every mistake made by the rich)

12. Individuals with less wealth are more likely to join the military. (Rich people start wars that poor people have to fight)

13. Inheritance is a way that personal wealth increases. (Most rich people get rich through inheritance, rags to riches stories are rare)

14. Wealth is dependent on individual habbits, choices and/or mental/physical defect. (Most poor people stay poor through hard work, thrift, and sacrifice)

I was right. That was fun!

[David L]

 

 

I dont even want to reply to those rules, because in capitalism there really is only one rule: No Violence!

 

 

So you don't think capitalism's unrestrained emphasis on work (as opposed to freedom) is going to produce violence in people?  Just inquiring.

 

[Avarice567]

 

 

 

I dont even want to reply to those rules, because in capitalism there really is only one rule: No Violence!

 

 

So you don't think capitalism's unrestrained emphasis on work (as opposed to freedom) is going to produce violence in people?  Just inquiring.

 

 

 

Why would it produce violence and not innovation?

[Hannibal]

 

 

 

I dont even want to reply to those rules, because in capitalism there really is only one rule: No Violence!

 

 

So you don't think capitalism's unrestrained emphasis on work (as opposed to freedom) is going to produce violence in people?  Just inquiring.

 

 

 

I don't understand the question you're asking there. Capitalism *is* freedom. Capitalism is free men exchanging value for value. 

[David L]

 

Why would it produce violence and not innovation?

 

Well, what's underneith the drive for innovation, if you're not first free to just be?

 

 

[David L]

 

I don't understand the question you're asking there. Capitalism *is* freedom. Capitalism is free men exchanging value for value. 

 

I could be wrong, but my understanding is that capitalism is about capital and its accumulation (which essentially means an increasing capacity to do more and more work). It's not about freedom (from work).

[Alan C.]

Where do labor-saving devices come from?

[David L]

 

Where do labor-saving devices come from?

 

Obviously from capitalism, yet with all the tremendous number of technological devices,
automation, and so on that are performing so much work as a result of capitalism, who's been saved from any labor as a result? It's just not in
the capitalist psyche, because capitalism isn't about "saving labor",
it's about increasing it to infinity, no? Don't capitalists want limitless capital, meaning limitless labor? 

[Andrew79]

I could be wrong, but my understanding is that capitalism is about capital and its accumulation (which essentially means an increasing capacity to do more and more work). It's not about freedom (from work).

Capitalism is the freedom to own capital, as opposed to it being state owned or in some sort of forced co-operative (but any co-op or other system can exist within the capitalist system).

Freedom from work? Capitalism doesn't force you to work.

Obviously if you don't want to starve or die of exposure or anything similar you'll have to do something. But that's nothing to do with capitalism.

[Alan C.]

...who's been saved from any labor as a result?

Do you have a refrigerator?

Do you have a mobile phone?

Do you have a computer?

Do you use email?

Do you have central air and heat in your home?

Do you own a car?

Do you buy your food in a grocery store?

Have you ever shopped in a department store?

[David L]

 

...who's been saved from any labor as a result?

Do you have a refrigerator?

Do you have a mobile phone?

Do you have a computer?

Do you use email?

Do you have central air and heat in your home?

Do you own a car?

Do you buy your food in a grocery store?

Have you ever shopped in a department store?

 

I don't mean saved from any specific labors, Alan, I mean saved from any labor generally. Do you see?

 

http://www.alternet.org/story/106830/overworked%2C_vacation-starved_america_ranks_%231_in_depression%2C_mental_health_problems

http://abcnews.go.com/Travel/americans-refuse-vacation-days-lag-rest-world/story?id=11361600

http://20somethingfinance.com/american-hours-worked-productivity-vacation/

http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articles/2012/02/16/Is-America-Overworked.aspx#page1

PS: I'm not for statism, but neither am I for capitalism at this point, until I can be convinced otherwise regarding there being any fundamental freedom inherent in the latter. I'm not saying there haven't been certain benefits to capitalism, I'm just weighing in those benefits now versus the ultimate costs involved that are accruing in continuing to religiously venerate work as an ethic and a virtue in and of itself without end. We are so workaholic now we seem to be working ourselves into becoming a species of cyborgs. !!!   

 

 

[Alan C.]

Have you factored in the cost of supporting the State into your analysis?

I could easily maintain my current standard of living by working 25% less than I currently do, if not for the added costs imposed by the State.

[Hannibal]

 

 

I don't understand the question you're asking there. Capitalism *is* freedom. Capitalism is free men exchanging value for value. 

 

I could be wrong, but my understanding is that capitalism is about capital and its accumulation (which essentially means an increasing capacity to do more and more work). It's not about freedom (from work).

 

 

If you're looking for fredom FROM work, then you're looking to ignore reality and the nature of man. You can't have your cake AND eat it. We work to live. We invest capital to increase production so that we may live better. To want to not work is to want to not live.

[David L]

 

If you're looking for fredom FROM work, then you're looking to ignore reality and the nature of man. You can't have your cake AND eat it. We work to live. We invest capital to increase production so that we may live better. To want to not work is to want to not live.

 

Thanks for your response. What do you mean by live better? Materially better? If so, fine, but how far can that take us? Studies show that beyond a modest standard of living, increasing wealth and material possessions do not contribute to increased happiness. Such materialism may even contribute to feelings of depression, chronic anxiety, and an ultimate dissatisfaction with life.

Is the nature of man merely to be an everlasting worker? I can see work as meaningful self-expression, but in an age of automation and free energy, I can't see much value in promoting a work ethic anymore. What say you?

 

[David L]

 

Have you factored in the cost of supporting the State into your analysis?

I could easily maintain my current standard of living by working 25% less than I currently do, if not for the added costs imposed by the State.

 

I understand the difficulty. There is a present entanglement that does not make analysis completely clear cut. That's why for the moment I'm focusing on the basic precepts and doctrine of capitalism. Do capitalists espouse a work ethic? If so, aren't they inherently averse to advocating that we ever realise the existential freedoms that exist beyond work?

[Brandon Buck _BB_]

"Do capitalists espouse a work ethic? If so, aren't they inherently
averse to advocating that we ever realise the existential freedoms that
exist beyond work?"

 

Are you capable of advocating more than one thing?

 

[Alan C.]

I don't understand the connection between capitalism and more work. The comforts and leisure that we enjoy are unprecedented in history.

One of my grandmothers grew up on a farm in rural Oklahoma. They didn't have electricity, running water, natural gas, central heat/air, or indoor plumbing. They had to butcher livestock and grow crops to feed themselves. They had to chop wood to burn to warm their home. Their work days were long and grueling. It was necessary to send hand-written letters through the mail in order to commicate with people over long distances. Information was stored on paper in filing cabinets.

Today, I spend maybe an hour or two each week procuring food for myself which I can store in a refrigerator. I work in an environmentally-controlled office to which I commute in a car. All of my communications are instantaneous. I use a computer to store information which I can access within a few seconds.

[MrCapitalism]

 

but in an age of automation and free energy,

 

There is no such thing as free energy.

 

[David L]

 

I don't understand the connection between capitalism and more work. The comforts and leisure that we enjoy are unprecedented in history.

 

The creature comforts, yes, the leisure, no way.

Holidays in the Middle Ages, for example, were far more numerous than we enjoy today. Feasts and festivity days were abundant. Work was intermittent, relaxed and unhurried.

Do some research if you're interested Alan. There are a number of books available on the subject regarding capitalism's erosion of leisure. For example, see The Overworked American: the unexpected decline of leisure", by Juliet Schor.

[David L]

 

There is no such thing as free energy.

 

Not sure what you mean. Here's what I'm referring to...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kqLwTI0D7e8

 

[Brandon Buck _BB_]

"Holidays in the Middle Ages, for example, were far more numerous than we
enjoy today. Feasts and festivity days were abundant. Work was
intermittent, relaxed and unhurried."

 

That myth fits well with the myth that free trade has caused harm to society. In the middle ages children started to work at about age seven and more often than not, the "jobs" they had were actually as indentured slaves in someone else's home. Feasts in the town square were held by the peasants because they couldn't store perishables or afford as individual families to buy small quantities of them, so they shared food with one another. Given that the mental health norm of mediaeval people was paranoid schizophrenic, they had little concern for travel as they were too busy killing one another for being witches and raping children to ward off STD's, to bother with a trip to Disney Land.

 

On capitalism and travel, the free market has provided labor saving devices such as cordless and other power tools for tradesmen, electronic office equipment for office workers, et al and those tools are more affordable for more people every day. The state, on the other hand, has increased taxes and regulations, making it cost more to live and making it harder for middle and lower classes to enter the marketplace of gainful income opportunities.

 

The truth of the matter is that capitalism has made our lives easier and has given us extra lleisure time in spite of the predations of the state. In the absence of what is left of true free market capitalism, seven year old Americans would still be plowing fields with plows drawn by sickly mules.

[kirk paolinelli]

 

So, what's your response/perspective on these "rules"?

 

1. The unequal distribution of wealth

As someone mentioned early capitalism doesn't distribute wealth.

Wealth is created and traded by people. Capitalism is a system to do this freely.

 The other problem is that wealth/value of something is subjective to each person.

2. Those who own the most make the rules

This has nothing to do with capitalism, unless your meaning that if you have the most property you can make the most rules regarding use of your property. But that's simple property rights. 

3. The more money you have, the more you can get

Again not sure what this means and it makes no sense to me. Who enforces this rule? It seems as though Sam Walton, Steve Jobs, and Zuckerberg were able to get a lot from a little.

4. The less money you have, the less you can get. 

Who enforces this rule as well. If I buy a dollar lottery ticket or create an invention am I only allowed to get certain amount of money depending on what I started with?

5. The poorer you are, the more expensive everything is

Is lesiure time something? I know this is a lot cheaper for poor people.

6. The poorer you are, the worse your health will be

This isn't a rule and I would guess it's untrue. I recently was inquiring about health and life insurance and not once did someone ask for my asset to debt ratio. So i'm guessing its not that important of a factor. Could you imagine the new pre-existing condition: POOR

7. The poorer you are, the worse your education and employment

Again how what is the criteria for this? It seems pretty subjective? What makes good or bad employment? or What makes good or bad education?

 

8. The worse the pay, the harder the job

Again totally subjective. Who gets to decide if a job is hard or not?

9. The higher the pay, the easier the job

Subjective same reasons above.

10. If you're really rich, then you're a capitalist and you don't need to work at all

Subjective. what is really rich? What classifies as work? Is managing assets work? If not, if I pay an asset manager to manage my assets is he working?

11. The poor pay for every mistake made by the rich

If this were even true what would capitalism have to do with enforcing it?

12. Rich people start wars that poor people have to fight.

Rich people don't start wars governments do. Again nothing to do with capitalism.

13. Most rich people get rich through inheritance, rags to riches stories are rare

Actually I think most millionaires are first generation. But  I think the great thing about capitalism and property rights is that the wealth compounds so in that way we all inherit wealth generationally. 

14. Most poor people stay poor through hard work, thrift, and sacrifice

I believe this is also false. Capitalism raises people from poverty it does keep them in it.

This video is interesting on people all over the world coming out of poverty. He states the biggest difference is the washing machine. How many U.S. households don't have access to a washing machine at cheap price?

The other problem I always have with people talking about the rich and the poor is this. Rich and poor is a comparative term there is no absolute standard for everyone across the globe. And most people who have the resources to make these videos would fall somewhere in the top 10% of wealthy people in the world, but they don't consider themselves as rich. So how do they define rich? and also do they want to equally distribute wealth among everyone in the world? Or just in a very wealthy country where they are in the bottom half?

 

[MrCapitalism]

 

 

Not sure what you mean. Here's what I'm referring to...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kqLwTI0D7e8

 

Would you be wiling to boil that down to something substantially less than one and a half hours? There may be cheap energy, but there isn't free energy...

 

 

[David L]

You say there isn't free energy. Let's talk fundamentals first.

Since this subject seems to divagate from the theme at hand, I'll paste your statement on a new thread titled Free Energy, and we can discuss further. See you there.