Capitalism at its finest?

@jomsim That's not capitalism, that's stupid consumers. Stop buying stuff designed to break and companies will stop making stuff that's designed to break.

@Sicarium well if you had perfectly reasonable consumers and are completely rational and not driven by emotions like greed then communism would perfectly work.

but humans are stupid and make stupid decisions all the time, thats basically the premise of capitalism, trick people into making more stupid decisions. and it works great

@Sicarium To a large extent, one influences the other. Planned obsolescence has been in play for half a century. And while our economic models are judged solely on growth and production, we shouldn't expect much else.

@AngelofFail Capitalism is keeping the fruits of your own labor. That's your income. Communism is the communal ownership of all commodities, including your labor and income.

Wanting to control your own labor isn't stupid or greedy. Distorting what capitalism is to push your own agenda is both.

@jomsim @AngelofFail You too may believe you're too stupid to buy decent products, I don't believe that about myself. Nor do I just assume every other person is inferior and incapable.

@Sicarium well you could argue that if everyone uses their labor and possesions for the greater good it would be way more effective.. however that isnt happening, humans arent ants.

capitalism always means that wealth creates more wealth and given enough time without interventions almost all wealth will end up with a tiny group of people. that pure mathematics and theory of course too. but it helps to be aware of it it and using actualy real world politics to stop this trend.

@AngelofFail Yeah, history has seen enough evil committed in the name of the greater good.

That is false, and assumes no new knowledge, technology, or products. Old wealth collapses, on it's own, all the time. New wealth is created all the time.

@Sicarium like i said its theoretical math and real live interventions like war or new technology influence that model heavily. also if you have a situation with almost no wealth to start at capitalism is amazing, it does creater new wealth and when noone has any wealth it doesnt matter who ends up with the nre created wealth.. a few rich people are better then no rich people.

@Sicarium But by suggesting that you are intelligent enough to buy good products doesn't at all extrapolate into national behaviour, unless you live in a nation of clones of you. Even then we make different decisions on different days.

@AngelofFail Now you're moving the goal posts, while trying to throw war in for the emotional manipulation points.

Again. New wealth is created under capitalism all the time. See every new product, every new company, and every new technology. You don't even the need the company, you can do it yourself. Which goes back to controlling the fruits of your own labor. See self-published ebook authors for an example.

Beyond that, you're not advocating for communism. You're advocating for socialism. Communism is the communal ownership of all commodities. Political power is a commodity. Which means it must be shared equally with the community to have communism. There can be no designated government authority. You're calling for "real world politics" to "stop the trend". That's code for central planning. Hence, socialism.

@jomsim I am intelligent enough to buy good products. So are you. So is everyone else. Stop pretending like you're superior to everyone else.

@Sicarium i am not advertising for one economic system over another... i dont think capitalism is better or worse then communism. it always depends on the circumstances and you correctly pointed out that you cant view an economic system without the political power structure behind it. having an apparatchik (sp?) is just as bad as a billionaire claiming to make politics for blue collar workers...

@Sicarium It wasn't the intention to appear superior. Only you have made comments about your own intelligence. You must agree that people have different abilities to cut through advertising and marketing, though. If not, it wouldn't exist. As an aside, I do feel we're debating a very small point here, and not one that I think is hugely important, either.

@AngelofFail [quote]well if you had perfectly reasonable consumers and are completely rational and not driven by emotions like greed then communism would perfectly work.[/quote]

That sounds like advocating to me.

@Sicarium its not meant to be... arguing for a theoretical system that doesnt work with real people is just theory... a thought experiment if you want to

@jomsim I'm not going to play word games with you. Nor do I feel any particular need to correct your misrepresentation of my comment.

Stop buying products designed to break and companies will stop making products designed to break. Bad consumerism is not bad capitalism.

@AngelofFail A thought experiment requires base assumptions. Your base assumption seems to be that consumers are incapable of rational decisions. That is a false assumption. Which means your thought experiment gets derailed before it begins.

@Sicarium look around you... the people you see every day around you. the people you see online.. the people you see on this very site.

do you really think most of them are smart people ? or do you think most of them are idiots ?

maybe you are a much nicer person then i am... but i assume everyone is an idiot until they have proven differently.

@Sicarium Funnily enough, my last comments could have been interpreted as similar to yours, in that we'd entered a semantic debate and I didn't want to.

I agree that companies wouldn't make products designed to break if nobody bought them. But companies encourage people to, by lying, and some people believe it (different issue, perhaps, but not false). Also, I think planned obsolescence is a different argument. I believe most people buy a new car or phone or computer while their old one is still working, rather than wait until it breaks beyond repair. Capitalism naturally encourages people to change more quickly than they need. If we all bought much less (or nothing), capitalism would be much less attractive. It works better the more productive it is, and the more people buy. Even if what they buy is crap.

@AngelofFail I don't have your sense of elitism, and I don't see how your sense of elitism is particularly warranted.

I could easily point to your typing and conclude that you're an idiot. Or I could have the decency to give you the benefit of the doubt and the honesty to acknowledge that we all have our strengths and weakness. Which would you rather I do?

But you've hit on the fundamental weakness of every single person advocating for socialism. They all think they're smarter. They're not. You're not. Which is why socialism always fails.

@jomsim Capitalism gives you the choice to buy as you see fit. You see that as a problem, I see it as a benefit.

@Sicarium well... your simple minded sight of black and white.. and if you arent for us you are against us is what i view as the main problem in this country right now.

things arent as simple as you like them to be...

@jomsim Did you learn that in your Socialist Stupidity 101 class at university? What you are describing in your child-like manner is consumerism, not capitalism.

You should be embarrassed to post such an idiotic statement but won't be and probably can't be.

Get ready to book that your ticket to Venezuela or Cuba where you can be among like-minded "thinkers",

@AngelofFail That's not my mentality at all. Nowhere have I said that. On the contrary, that's the exact opposite of what I've been saying. But you know that. You're just avoiding the question to avoid exposing your hypocrisy. You want the benefit of the doubt, but you're unwilling to give it to others because you think you're superior. You're not. You are no better than anyone else. Neither am I.

Capitalism acknowledges that. Socialism denies it. Which is why you're advocating for socialism.

@Sicarium I don't see choice as a problem, but I do see the production of crap as a problem because, by our measures, production = success rather than the production of decent goods = success.

Nor do I see that pointing out issues with our system means that I advocate an alternate system, all of which also have problems. But I do think it's really unhealthy to have any system which is unchecked and never questioned. You sound a bit like capitalism is a golden ticket and everything about it is perfect.