Why do intellectuals oppose capitalism?

[il Padrino Ute]

Capitalism rewards greed, and that's why it's the best system for governing our economies, but greed needs to be tempered, and the best way to temper greed is to tax the greediest.

Who are the greediest? Are they those who work as much as they can to earn as much as they can? Are they the bosses who demand that their employees work so they (the bosses) can make more money? Are they those who don't work but expect those who do to support them?

[San Juan Sun]

Who are the greediest? Are they those who work as much as they can to earn as much as they can? Are they the bosses who demand that their employees work so they (the bosses) can make more money? Are they those who don't work but expect those who do to support them?

Great points.

I find the ideological basis here for regressive taxation (as wuap put it - to temper the so-called "greedy") to be anti-intellectual.

[hopfrog]

Welcome back!

Thanks. I've been working my ass off and have prepared four new books for publication in 2011. It's kept me away from forums. I've missed y'all!

[il Padrino Ute]

Thanks. I've been working my ass off and have prepared four new books for publication in 2011. It's kept me away from forums. I've missed y'all!

Well, stop being such a capitalist and spend more time here, dangit. This place is better with you.

[wuapinmon]

Who are the greediest? Are they those who work as much as they can to earn as much as they can? Are they the bosses who demand that their employees work so they (the bosses) can make more money? Are they those who don't work but expect those who do to support them?

Yes, yes, and yes. You know that I've written previously on here about my issues with Great Society programs for the able-bodied, so I'm not sure why you're setting me up with these rhetoricals, but if you want to get into a semantical argument about "greediest," we can.

[LA Ute]

Well, stop being such a capitalist and spend more time here, dangit. This place is better with you.

IPU speaketh the truth!

[mUUser]

Stick with Milton Friedman and you can't go very wrong.

[cowboy]

Capitalism rewards greed, and that's why it's the best system for governing our economies, but greed needs to be tempered, and the best way to temper greed is to tax the greediest.

No, capitalism rewards productivity. There is a difference. While not everything he said was gospel, I think Ricardo demonstrated very well that society benefits the most when all of it's members are maximally productive. From that perspective, then, it appears to be counterproductive to provide disincentive to maximal productivity.

[wuapinmon]

No, capitalism rewards productivity. There is a difference. While not everything he said was gospel, I think Ricardo demonstrated very well that society benefits the most when all of it's members are maximally productive. From that perspective, then, it appears to be counterproductive to provide disincentive to maximal productivity.

You cannot ignore human greed when considering any economic system, otherwise any observations are purely hypothetical. Greed motivates those with capital to risk it for more. The problems with capitalism that encumber the societal benefits of maximal productivity are:

1. Concentration of wealth
2. Profit outweighing other concerns (safety, morale, living wage)
3. Monopoly
4. Trust
5. Price-fixing
6. Oligarchy, especially when power is used to crush competition via "legal" means
7. Fascism
8. A typical ignoring of the needs of citizens who cannot contribute to societal productivity
9. Resistance to collective bargaining

[Non Sequitur]

No, capitalism rewards productivity. There is a difference. While not everything he said was gospel, I think Ricardo demonstrated very well that society benefits the most when all of it's members are maximally productive. From that perspective, then, it appears to be counterproductive to provide disincentive to maximal productivity.

Capitalism doesn't necessarily ensure that members of society are maximally productive. Jobs are routinely outsourced to foreign countries. Factories are built in foreign countries. That's capitalism at its finest. Profit at any cost.

The debate isn't Capitalism -- Yes or No. The debate is about how unfettered we allow it to operate. How much we tame the beast.

[BigFatMeanie]

9. Resistance to collective bargaining

Some people see this not as a problem but as a benefit...

[Devildog]

But I can see the world only as I exist within it and encounter its realism.

True for almost all of us... and very well said.

[pellegrino]

I've thought a lot about this thread, particularly with regards to anti-intellectualism within society. I guess my main objections to this article are two:

1- I'm tired of being pidgeon-holed by people. They think that because I'm Mormon then I must be such and such, they think that because I have a Phd. then I must be such and such, they think that because I have long hair, or that I speak a foreign language often in public or because I drive a certain car then I must be . . . I'm tired of stereotypes and generalizations.

2- Just because someone opposes certain negative aspects of capitalism (yes, there are negatives) doesn't mean they oppose capitalism. Like Non Sequitur said, it isn't about capitalism vs socialism or some other sort of , it's about how we let capitalist structures and principles work. It's been proven that capitalist principles have done more to advance society as a whole than any other system, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't have its problems and its drawbacks and just because one criticizes those problems or suggests regulation to minimize or eliminate them doesn't mean that they're anti-capitalistic. Anyone who thinks that unregulated capitalism is the best economic system clearly has forgotten the lessons learned from the Standard Oil, U.S. Steel, AT&T, and a host of other monopolies that would thrive in an unregulated capitalist society. Yes, I'm for capitalism, but unless all capitalists everywhere and forever more become more like the reformed Ebenezer Scrooge, I'm all for regulation that ensures the game is played as honestly and fairly as possible and in a way that will benefit the whole of society, not just those with capital.

[byu71]

I've thought a lot about this thread, particularly with regards to anti-intellectualism within society. I guess my main objections to this article are two:

1- I'm tired of being pidgeon-holed by people. They think that because I'm Mormon then I must be such and such, they think that because I have a Phd. then I must be such and such, they think that because I have long hair, or that I speak a foreign language often in public or because I drive a certain car then I must be . . . I'm tired of stereotypes and generalizations.

2- Just because someone opposes certain negative aspects of capitalism (yes, there are negatives) doesn't mean they oppose capitalism. Like Non Sequitur said, it isn't about capitalism vs socialism or some other sort of , it's about how we let capitalist structures and principles work. It's been proven that capitalist principles have done more to advance society as a whole than any other system, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't have its problems and its drawbacks and just because one criticizes those problems or suggests regulation to minimize or eliminate them doesn't mean that they're anti-capitalistic. Anyone who thinks that unregulated capitalism is the best economic system clearly has forgotten the lessons learned from the Standard Oil, U.S. Steel, AT&T, and a host of other monopolies that would thrive in an unregulated capitalist society. Yes, I'm for capitalism, but unless all capitalists everywhere and forever more become more like the reformed Ebenezer Scrooge, I'm all for regulation that ensures the game is played as honestly and fairly as possible and in a way that will benefit the whole of society, not just those with capital.

I used to sterotype intellectuals. Participation on this board provided me a great awakening. I actually enjoy getting the so called "intellectuals" input on this board and am often in awe of how much they know that I don't.

As an ardent supporter of the HC though, I still look down on those with long hair and beards.

[wuapinmon]

I used to sterotype intellectuals. Participation on this board provided me a great awakening. I actually enjoy getting the so called "intellectuals" input on this board and am often in awe of how much they know that I don't.

As an ardent supporter of the HC though, I still look down on those with long hair and beards.

How could you possibly look down at this pretty plumage?