When talk of Capitalism happens, its a lot like Socialism.

[Xolodno]

No one knows exactly what the fuck it means. Some trot out the dictionary definitions...which themselves tend to add to or remove line items rendering them a bit incorrect.

But even then, economists may agree on a definition, but they sure as fuck don't agree what the definition means. There are different forms of Socialism (Nordic Model, Market Socialism, etc.) and some describe Socialism in terms of Communism, a complete different system. Likewise, some describe Capitalism in terms of Anarchy.

Bottom line, there is no "pure" system....just systems in which a country leans towards the most.

If you want to call single payer health care, better retirement benefits, public transportation, etc. "capitalism". Fine call it that, hell you can call it yankee doodle dandy, this economist doesn't give a shit. Lets just get there already.

[Hoyt]

1. The description of Capitialism and Socialism I prefer is the government and corporations working

together for benefit of stockholders, employees, and country as a whole.

I went to a conservative college in late 60s, early 70s, but even they were talking about "satisfying profits," not maximizing profits, even at expense of the country/world. Satisfying Profits took into account social needs.

But, we've gotten into this mode of maximizing short-term profits at the long-term's and peoples' expense.

We really need to get a grip on this shortly.

[unblock]

2. agreed, we'd be better off with a more engineering approach

identify a problem and evaluate the overall impact of proposed solutions.


if it works and on the whole makes things better, maybe we shouldn't worry too much about the labeling.

[Xolodno]

5. Which would no doubt lead us into a Socialist leaning system.

It's what Marx implied. His book the Communist Manifesto and those who have interpreted it since have demonized Communism (and I don't believe that system will work, at least in my lifetime), and by association, Socialism. His real work, Capital, is what should be studied not his philosophical pamphlet that can be read in a couple of hours (2 months if your a conservative...sorry, just had to get a dig in there).

But agreed, its labeling and the stigma it carries. Keynes quiped that his ideas would probably be accepted more, once they weren't attributed to him.

But, negative stereo-types put butts in voting booths. So the labeling continues. Its like using rocks to put in nails, you invent a hammer to do it better and faster, but people refuse because some schmuck said a hammer will make their job harder.

[JCanete]

3. That's fair, although there is a version of capitalism that is actually espoused that is "pure"

capitalism. It may be undercooked, and more rhetoric than reality. But its not like one has to take that argument and then straw-man it to this extreme definition. This is what its salesmen put forward. Whereas with socialism, there is a whole lot of straw-manning going on as well as creating guilt by association to any struggling or failed system that has been labeled under that umbrella.

[safeinOhio]

4. In the late 60s my high school teacher

made us read Atlas Shrugged, so I thought it was great.

2 years later I had a summer factory job and read Karl Marx.


50 years later, I lean way more toward Marx.