By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - It's ok to be angry about Capitalism

rapsuperstar31 said:

If you have money, or at least are good with budgeting I don't think you hate capitalism too much. I know people making seven figures that live paycheck to paycheck, and I known people making $60,000 that are well on there way to retiring early.

Sure you can have a good living off $60,000. Unless you live in a high cost area or you get sick with something outside of your control.

Personally that's one of my biggest issues with this idea. Sure you can live just fine on $60k/year, as long as nothing major goes wrong and as long as you don't make any particularly bad choices. But life and the world aren't perfect, things do go wrong outside of our control.

The other issue, is just because one person is doing good, doesn't mean they can't want to improve things for others. There are successful people that dislike capitalism because they want to better the lives of others.  



Around the Network
rapsuperstar31 said:

If you have money, or at least are good with budgeting I don't think you hate capitalism too much. I know people making seven figures that live paycheck to paycheck, and I known people making $60,000 that are well on there way to retiring early.

This a thousand times over.



It’s okay to not be angry about capitalism



[Switch Friend code: 3909-3991-4970]

[Xbox Live: JissuWolfe]

[PSN: Jissu]

Chrkeller said:
rapsuperstar31 said:

If you have money, or at least are good with budgeting I don't think you hate capitalism too much. I know people making seven figures that live paycheck to paycheck, and I known people making $60,000 that are well on there way to retiring early.

This a thousand times over.

Would be nicer if it was seven billion times over, but capitalism had other ideas.



I take it many haven't watched the video (which is understandable, our attentions spans aren't great) as many of the comments are really only concerned with how one self is doing in the present period

Really this topic and the content of the video is more about our future direction, projecting 50+ years from now with AI and Robots taking over almost every job now available to people in the name of productivity and profit by those wealthiest in control of industry wanting to get wealthier at the expense of the welfare of the vast majority of the Worlds population

Capitalism is good when it's socially conscious, but it must be challenged and questioned when it isnt, being that it's traditional motives are profit and greed, as technology changes, people are at incredible risk if greed is the dominate motivation of the ruling class

Last edited by Rab - on 25 March 2023

Around the Network
mZuzek said:
Chrkeller said:

This a thousand times over.

Would be nicer if it was seven billion times over, but capitalism had other ideas.

Laziness should never be rewarded.  



Chrkeller said:
mZuzek said:

Would be nicer if it was seven billion times over, but capitalism had other ideas.

Laziness should never be rewarded.  

So I guess you're opposed to capitalism, then.

The whole definition of communism is pretty much based on everyone working and everyone getting what they need.

The whole definition of socialism is pretty much based on workers controlling the means of production. 

The whole point of capitalism is that you have people at the top, that are incentivized to make as much as they can, which they usually make far more than they can possibly work for. You have private business owners that own companies. 

They pass on their businesses and their wealth to their kids, who have yet to work for it.  

Capitalism isn't a meritocracy. 



the-pi-guy said:
Chrkeller said:

Laziness should never be rewarded.  

So I guess you're opposed to capitalism, then.

The whole definition of communism is pretty much based on everyone working and everyone getting what they need.

The whole definition of socialism is pretty much based on workers controlling the means of production. 

The whole point of capitalism is that you have people at the top, that are incentivized to make as much as they can, which they usually make far more than they can possibly work for. You have private business owners that own companies. 

They pass on their businesses and their wealth to their kids, who have yet to work for it.  

Capitalism isn't a meritocracy. 

Much like other topics, a balance is best.  There is no perfect system.  Personally capitalism has worked for me.  I've worked hard and have accumulated wealth.  My larger point, which you intentionally missed, was a lot of people are poor because they don't work hard and can't budget.  Not all poor people are victims.

And regardless if people want to admit it, competition drives innovation.  There is a reason most innovations come from the same few countries over and over.



Capitalism is based, mainly, in 2 principles: private property of the means of production and free market.

Both tend, inevitably, to oligopoly and monopoly (since, when improving their competitiveness, companies will eventualy succed over the rest, who won't be able to compete any more, and leave the market to the most succesfull ones, which in their new status won't be affordable rivals for new small companies). Think, for example, in a company who success in lowering their pricess (maintaining quality) to a point where is not viable for the others to lower theirs without losses, and therefore can't compete anymore, being his market share absorbed by the succeding one, which then grows again, being able to again get more income, invest in new products or more efficient means of production, lowering prices again, etc. If one or few can still compete, new initiatives won't have the means and resources to challenge the already well stablished giants with competitive pricess, and innovative companies/products can only gain traction/market temporarily, getting into the same "tend to oligopoly/monopoly" loop again.

Once oligopoly/monopoly is reach, companies can control chains of production/producers and distribution, which can also turn into abussive policies, abussive prices and lobbying against consumers/citizens interests. BTW, this is exactly what we are living nowadays in most "developed" countries, with a bunch of big companies controling sectors such as food, clothing, tech, chemistry, transport, etc. through dozens of other subsidiary companies. In my country, we've seen an extraordinary hike in food prices fueled only by stellar profits from the main supermarket chains (this is: companies rising their prices not due to increased production costs, but to rise their profit margins so their investors have more and more benefits. And this is happening in almost every developed country now!).

So yeah, it's perfectly fine to be angry about a biased by birth system (and we haven't even considered things like exploitation, workers/consumers rights, environmental damages, rampant inequality, lack of access to basic services such as education or health, underpaid people who have to get 2 or 3 works just to pay rent and food, and so many other undesired stuff of both a total free market capitalism or a regulated one, which is what we have now!).

P.D.: For those who say that in capitalism you can get enough money or even get rich with enough effort, just think/research about how many hard working people can't afford basic stuff (housing, health, education, supplies, food, etc.) despite having full time jobs, even effort-intensive jobs. And remember that there's not enouth room for everyone to be an entrepeneur, since we live in a limited world with limited resources and when one owns something, others aren't allow to use that resource for their own initiatives.

Last edited by Zarkho - on 25 March 2023

Zarkho said:

Capitalism is based, mainly, in 2 principles: private property of the means of production and free market.

Both tend, inevitably, to oligopoly and monopoly (since, when improving their competitiveness, companies will eventualy succed over the rest, who won't be able to compete any more, and leave the market to the most succesfull ones, which in their new status won't be affordable rivals for new small companies). Think, for example, in a company who success in lowering their pricess (maintaining quality) to a point where is not viable for the others to lower theirs without losses, and therefore can't compete anymore, being his market share absorbed by the succeding one, which then grows again, being able to again get more income, invest in new products or more efficient means of production, lowering prices again, etc. If one or few can still compete, new initiatives won't have the means and resources to challenge the already well stablished giants with competitive pricess, and innovative companies/products can only gain traction/market temporarily, getting into the same "tend to oligopoly/monopoly" loop again.

Once oligopoly/monopoly is reach, companies can control chains of production/producers and distribution, which can also turn into abussive policies, abussive prices and lobbying against consumers/citizens interests. BTW, this is exactly what we are living nowadays in most "developed" countries, with a bunch of big companies controling sectors such as food, clothing, tech, chemistry, transport, etc. through dozens of other subsidiary companies. In my country, we've seen an extraordinary hike in food prices fueled only by stellar profits from the main supermarket chains (this is: companies rising their prices not due to increased production costs, but to rise their profit margins so their investors have more and more benefits. And this is happening in almost every developed country now!).

So yeah, it's perfectly fine to be angry about a biased by birth system (and we haven't even considered things like exploitation, workers/consumers rights, environmental damages, rampant inequality, lack of access to basic services such as education or health, underpaid people who have to get 2 or 3 works just to pay rent and food, and so many other undesired stuff of both a total free market capitalism or a regulated one, which is what we have now!).

P.D.: For those who say that in capitalism you can get enough money or even get rich with enough effort, just think/research about how many hard working people can't afford basic stuff (housing, health, education, supplies, food, etc.) despite having full time jobs, even effort-intensive jobs. And remember that there's not enouth room for everyone to be an entrepeneur, since we live in a limited world with limited resources and when one owns something, others aren't allow to use that resource for their own initiatives.

A lot of hardworking people who don't build wealth picked poorly with career choice.