In America, we grow up to really cherish liberty and freedom of choice (even if it just the illusion of choice) and so we really idealize entrepreneurship.
Capitalism is the only economic system that allows upward class mobility
The examples of socialism/communism collapse are all within the lifetimes of most (or not far off for those of us under 40). Capitalism hasn’t quite failed yet (2008 hurt a lot and woke some people up to its failures).
It may not be popular with some of the instances on the fediverse but capitalism is the least flawed of all the flawed economic systems. The systems are flawed because they are ran by flawed humans. The best societies take strengths of each system and combine them to mitigate the flaws of each. Capitalism with strong social safety nets is probably the best that humans can do.
Capitalism requires brutal resource extraction, by force, from poor countries and that is usually done by killing, bombing, and using other forms of violence to enforce this extraction of resources.
We (USA) are literally doing it to Venezuela and other countries right now. I’m guessing you are American if you think capitalism with strong safety nets is the best.
You mean Capitalism with Strong safety nets for YOU. Not for people from South America, Africa, South Asia, etc. Americans (among other euro countries and some Scandinavian and east euro countries too) would have to give up a few apparatuses of luxury for the world to be able to afford even half of what we enjoy on a daily basis.
I agree with a lot of what you say. But I’m not sure that social mobility being desirable should be taken as self-evident.
I believe equality is good for us, so if social mobility results in greater inequality, for me that is bad.
And of course social mobility goes both ways when there are finite resources. It can go downwards. You recognise the need for social safety nets, and I would say that these are both more necessary and harder to supply in a more unequal and ‘socially mobile’ economy. At least that is what is happening in English-speaking countries like mine and yours.
The basic assumption is that we should be able to work our way from poverty to prosperity, but I’m saying that all of us should be kept somewhere roughly between the two.
That last sentence is a mixed economy system, which should probably be the best, current way of doing things. Taking the benefits of each successful economical system. Yes, communism was successful in converting Russia from am agricultural-servant nation to an industrial powerhouse. Also, communism didn’t collapse by itself, the USA made everything they could to boycott it, and they still do because they are afraid of it. They are perpetrating their own silent genocide in Cuba, just to ingrain in our brains that communism is sentenced to collapse.
Wait… So all of those rich and billionaires in socialist countries are just figments of imagination?
Also, have you looked at how terrible the US upward mobility rankings are now? Under Capitalism you aren’t likely to move anywhere unless you’re born into it.
The rich and powerful in socialist countries were born into it.
I can’t argue with social mobility being harder than ever under capitalism now. But perception often lags reality which is why people defend the broken system
In America, we grow up to really cherish liberty and freedom of choice (even if it just the illusion of choice) and so we really idealize entrepreneurship.
Capitalism is the only economic system that allows upward class mobility
The examples of socialism/communism collapse are all within the lifetimes of most (or not far off for those of us under 40). Capitalism hasn’t quite failed yet (2008 hurt a lot and woke some people up to its failures).
It may not be popular with some of the instances on the fediverse but capitalism is the least flawed of all the flawed economic systems. The systems are flawed because they are ran by flawed humans. The best societies take strengths of each system and combine them to mitigate the flaws of each. Capitalism with strong social safety nets is probably the best that humans can do.
Capitalism requires brutal resource extraction, by force, from poor countries and that is usually done by killing, bombing, and using other forms of violence to enforce this extraction of resources.
We (USA) are literally doing it to Venezuela and other countries right now. I’m guessing you are American if you think capitalism with strong safety nets is the best.
You mean Capitalism with Strong safety nets for YOU. Not for people from South America, Africa, South Asia, etc. Americans (among other euro countries and some Scandinavian and east euro countries too) would have to give up a few apparatuses of luxury for the world to be able to afford even half of what we enjoy on a daily basis.
I agree with a lot of what you say. But I’m not sure that social mobility being desirable should be taken as self-evident.
I believe equality is good for us, so if social mobility results in greater inequality, for me that is bad.
And of course social mobility goes both ways when there are finite resources. It can go downwards. You recognise the need for social safety nets, and I would say that these are both more necessary and harder to supply in a more unequal and ‘socially mobile’ economy. At least that is what is happening in English-speaking countries like mine and yours.
The basic assumption is that we should be able to work our way from poverty to prosperity, but I’m saying that all of us should be kept somewhere roughly between the two.
That last sentence is a mixed economy system, which should probably be the best, current way of doing things. Taking the benefits of each successful economical system. Yes, communism was successful in converting Russia from am agricultural-servant nation to an industrial powerhouse. Also, communism didn’t collapse by itself, the USA made everything they could to boycott it, and they still do because they are afraid of it. They are perpetrating their own silent genocide in Cuba, just to ingrain in our brains that communism is sentenced to collapse.
Wait… So all of those rich and billionaires in socialist countries are just figments of imagination?
Also, have you looked at how terrible the US upward mobility rankings are now? Under Capitalism you aren’t likely to move anywhere unless you’re born into it.
Edit: I brought receipts: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Social_Mobility_Index
The rich and powerful in socialist countries were born into it.
I can’t argue with social mobility being harder than ever under capitalism now. But perception often lags reality which is why people defend the broken system
Except that’s not what the data shows: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Social_Mobility_Index
What exactly does the data show? The only socialist country on the list in China at #45 while the US is #27 (not great)
If you are saying that the US should be more like Northern Europe then I agree