@aeleoglyphic@mastodon.social

> Even if you don't include america.

Agreed, I am not including america here specifically. I am speaking of capitalism as a whole (which would include the whole of the EU, the UK and the overwhelming majority of countries world-wide).

> Capitalism in every conception creates inequality.

It doesnt create inequality, it fairly rewards people for the amount of utility they give to society. Since people give utility to society unequally, this means people are **fairly** rewarded and those rewards are unequal.

Capitalism (when healthy) provides equity (fairness) not equality (everyone event) which is exactly how it should be!

> Not just in the context of incom [sic] But in the context of access to resources.

Agreed, and this is a good thing. People who provide more utility to society **should** have access to more resources since they have proven to be more effective in converting resources to utility.

Again equity over equality. The bigger issue is if people have the same access to opportunity. In other words, **if** you can demonstrate you provide utility to society will you have the equity of having access to the resources you have demonstrated you earned. A healthy capitalism does just that.

> Even in some of the european countries non-citizens are forced to pay out of pocket for healthcare.

If you can afford healthcare you should be paying for it out of pocket. If you cant society should help you with welfare programs. A capitalism does not preclude social welfare.

> No human should be denied treatment.

Agreed, and when a capitalist government provides healthcare to those who cant afford it, they are still a capitalist country. Capitalism is not mutually exclusive with social welfare.

> The market decides your worth, which is arbitrary and non-sensical.

No it doesnt. It defines your access to resources, and it isnt arbitrary, it is based on the utility you provide to society (in a healthy capitalism).

The fact that you think a persons worth as an individual is synonymous with the resources they have access to is a very concerning POV.

@Radical_EgoCom @Vincarsi

@freemo

To clarify; "healthy capitalism" is not what the socialist/communists calls "capitalism". We have today a state-induced power structure that breeds off capitalism (unhealthy) for power and control.

What is sickening to me is that said socialists/communists in practice want to get rid of the "good part" (capitalism) from what we have today and keep the "power and control" to micromanage the population to starvation, when the capital runs out.

@aeleoglyphic @Radical_EgoCom @Vincarsi

@niclas

If a capitalism isnt healthy then it isnt a capitalism. So they are using the wrong term.

The fundamental tenant of capitalism is a free market where all players are judged not on who they are or their power, but by the utility they bring alone. If you have an exploitative system then you dont have a free market (as someone is in control of it) and therefore do not have a capitalism to begin with.

@aeleoglyphic@mastodon.social @Radical_EgoCom @Vincarsi

@freemo

We on the capitalism side agree on this, but my point was that when socialists talk about capitalism, they mean the crony-crapitalism we have today (where billions of loot...I mean taxes...are handed out to BigCorps), and therefore the subject can't even be discussed in a honest manner.

@aeleoglyphic @Radical_EgoCom @Vincarsi

@niclas

Yea I get that... my point to drive home to them (not you) is "that isnt what capitalism is at all, you can't just make up words" :)

@aeleoglyphic@mastodon.social @Radical_EgoCom @Vincarsi

@freemo @niclas @aeleoglyphic @Radical_EgoCom My issue with this whole debate is that I was calling out a real problem with the real economic system I am affected by in reality that calls itself capitalism, and you jumped in to defend the hypothetical version of capitalism that can't exist in a pure form so it's irrelevant to my critiques and deflects the point. I want to engage with people about the reality we're facing and discuss potential solutions, not have my energy wasted on pedantry.

@Vincarsi

Difficult to discuss solutions, if the problem can't be properly defined.

@freemo @aeleoglyphic @Radical_EgoCom

Follow

@niclas

Properly framing the problem (which includes clearly defining the terminology) is usually the most important step in reaching a solution. It is also the step most often dismissed as pedantry when it is anything but.

@Vincarsi @aeleoglyphic@mastodon.social @Radical_EgoCom

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Qoto Mastodon

QOTO: Question Others to Teach Ourselves
An inclusive, Academic Freedom, instance
All cultures welcome.
Hate speech and harassment strictly forbidden.