Is capitalism a selfish meme?
No.
People enlightened self-interest dictates that helping that man might help gene or enable someone else to help gene down the road.
Capitalism is an easy target for children who wish to blame evrytheong on the current system.
What does 'company' and mean?
Think about it, cupcake.
People are meant to be selfish. Love is selfish, friendship is selfish. If you love everyone equally, you don't love anyone at all.
If I like you, I will pull you up from dangling on side of the cliff.
If I don't, I have a good laugh and go on with my business.
>>76607909
Not at all
>>76607909
If everyone acted selfishly but still within a suitable Bill of Rights, then the world would be a good place
>>76607909
It's the least shit economic system for the underclasses
>>76608638
None of those things are selfish, selfish requires exclusive concern for one's self over anything else. It's almost always coupled with some malicious intent.
>>76607909
People need to understand that you have to work with what you've got. Despite people on the left claiming that everything is a social construct and that humans can be socially engineered into being more altruistic, that is bullshit. For that reason, you need to build a society around what people will actually do not around what you wish they did. Capitalism does exactly that. In large scale societies it is impossible to base everything around altruism just like you'd do inside a household or within your family. Instead, the main driver is self-interest. Then, you build a society that tries to take advantage of that: you only get value from other people if you provide value to other people. At the core, this is a selfish based system but that is the exact reason why it works.
>>76607909
It's quite literally the opposite.
Recent studies have started to vindicate the philosophical points of classical liberal/ "capitalist" thinkers from a few centuries ago.
http://www.economist.com/news/finance-and-economics/21607830-more-people-are-exposed-socialism-worse-they-behave-lying-commies
>>76608807
The magical piece of paper will make everyone be good?
>>76608950
>Capitalism does exactly that. In large scale societies it is impossible to base everything around altruism just like you'd do inside a household or within your family
Even with perfectly moral altruistic people socialist ideals still collapse due to that pesky calculation problem.
Socialist ideals cannot physically exist in a permanent state of a small village of less than 100 individuals and will only temporarily exist as a whole society through the tyrannical enforcement of the state before eventually collapsing under the weight of this calculation problem.
The Soviet Union would have collapsed much much much sooner if they didn't have capitalist nations to steer them towards what the prices of things should be
>>76607909
Also, the author of that comic does not understand what Dawkins meant by "selfish" genes. Our genes are "selfish" and we have evolved to care and help in that situation.
>>76609244
>Socialist ideals cannot physically exist in a permanent state outside of a small village of less than 100 individuals*
>>76609244
>calculation debate
Doesn't that apply mostly to central planning?
>>76609244
The calculation problem does not make an economy impossible just inefficient.
Early human societies were composed at most by 200-250 people and people lived rather altruistically. Small groups can live in communism (actual communist not the state enforced one), precisely because reputation is serving the role of money.
>>76607909
>everyone acts selfishly looking out for their own interests only
>society prospers
>everyone looks to help each other and save everyone
>society collapses
Until you can wire man so that he goes out into the field to plow it from sunrise to sunset only to help his fellow man eat, this is the best shit we have.
>>76607909
Just depends on the person. There are plenty of rich people and celebrities who give millions to charity. Not all, but some.
Certainly, there's both more wealth generated and, by extension, given away in a capitalist society than a socialist one. Regardless of socialism's intentions, capitalism is far more effective, even in theory, with giving money to poor people, who generally end up spending that money foolishly no matter what the circumstance.
Selfish people are a social problem, either way. You can't use the government to change someone's feelings. It's the responsibility of other people to shame and ostracize that person if they break the norms.
>>76608982
>http://www.economist.com/news/finance-and-economics/21607830-more-people-are-exposed-socialism-worse-they-behave-lying-commies
That was very interesting
>>76609441
It is based around the elimination of the price system making it impossible to make valid economic decisions first and the issues central planning of fascist/Keynesianist style second.
And all forms of socialism on a large scale are inherently centrally planned just due to the very nature of the ideology.
Even "muh Catalonian anarcho socialism" had boards who would determine rationing and production in a centralized ideal.
>>76609441
It applies to all forms of economic planning. Decentralized planning is just the price system
>>76609500
>The calculation problem does not make an economy impossible just inefficient
No it actually makes any economy outside of what I outlined(and you repeated) physically impossible not just inefficient.
For a time it will struggle on in an extremely inefficient manner held together mostly by the sheer tyrannical forceof the state but that is as much survival as someone with terminal brain liver heart and testicle cancer is surviving before they inevitably succumb to their cancer.
This has been vindicated over and over again with socialist nations either collapsing or adopting market forces to survive.
>>76610003
Venezuela to succumb when
>>76609689
The study itself is much more interesting and is just more evidence that everything leftist faggots say insulting capitalism is just wrong and more and more becomes projections of what their ideals actually cause.
When a Socialist says "capitalism does x bad thing" it is very likely that that is what socialism will actually do.
I hope to see more independently done and comprehensive studies like this so maybe just maybe these faggots will forever fuck off or further prove that they are part of one of the most destructive religious cults in history.
>>76610060
It already is.
It took less than one generation.
Not to mention all of the Western world champagne socialist that praised the rose of socialism in Venezuela are now running typical massive damage control blaming everything but their failed ideology for Venezuela collapsing in the precise way predicted by capitalist thinkers for quite some time.
>>76610198
>these faggots will forever fuck off
>thinking this will ever die
Should we reach 1000 years into the future it still wont change i guarantee it
>>76610384
>this wasn't real socialism
You just know it'll happen mate. The question is when will they stop saying this? Anything short of a pure success story isn't real socialism/communism. You can't win
>>76610421
Hence me calling it one of the most destructive religious cults in all of human history.
The more and more hard evidence that comes out showing Socialism as a failure and impossible ideal the more and more these faggots hold onto their religious scripture worse than the most fundamentalists Muslims.
The only reason they aren't currently openly killing opponents(though they come close with their behavior on college campuses) is because they know they can't get away with it and subversion and indoctrination is still more effective. The second they gain power is the second they will make Isis seem tame in their removal of heretics.
This isn't even speculation it is historical precedence
Owning a company because you believe that you have an obligation to the workers, to your shareholders, to your nation, or to any other higher cause, is not selfish.
Owning a company because you want to use the profits to hire lobbyists and advance your views, to fund museums and art galleries, or to cure polio, is not selfish.
Owning a company because you want to buy a Porsche is selfish.
The majority of workers work for money and nothing more. In this sense, that majority are as selfish as the worst billionaire, they're just not as good at getting money.
>>76610723
thanks for making me sad
>>76610679
>The question is when will they stop saying this
I truly believe a hyper advanced alien civilization could make contact with us and directly call them fucking morons who will only cause poverty tyranny and economic stagnationand regression and they will still call them capitalist shills.
See
>>76610723
It will likely never die.
There will be average income people on a terraformed Venus or Mars living better than the absolute wealthiest(which is true that the average Westerner has access to wealth that the richest of the rich of Marx's time had zero access to) do today bitching about typical socialist tripe.
>>76610816
>Owning a company because you want to buy a Porsche is selfish.
Yes but then there's that whole invisible hand pointed out by Adam Smith.
The beautiful elegance of capitalism is that even the most selfish horrible person working within it is providing benefit to everyone.
Think of men like Bill Gates who gave rise to the computer era we have today.
Even if they were 100% selfish and in it for the money they have enriched the entire world by trillions upon trillions of dollars
>>76610816
>Owning a company because you want to buy a Porsche is selfish.
Not entirely. By buying a Porsche , you're not only supporting your selfish desires, but you're also supporting a car company which you believe in. When you buy a Porsche, you are making Porsche a stronger company. And if you truly believe that Porsche is a good company and want it to expand, then buying a Porsche has selfless reasons as well.
>>76610816
>The majority of workers work for money and nothing more
Money is a means, not an end. People work for money so they can buy things. Having a huge bank account means absolutely nothing if you never intend on spending any of it
>>76611264
hey mate, care to recommend some reading for me? read some sowell and friedman entry level stuff as i work in healthcare and this shit was completely foreign to me but as i learn more i wonder what books i can read now that werent accessible to me before when i didnt know what a dollar was, only how to inject a patient
>>76611408
Freedomnomics is pretty entry level
>>76610817
Don't let ir make you sad use it as a rallying tool to channel the will to ideologically fight against these zealots.
Look here in America.
When much of these left wing loonies went to give an ultimatum to a college president he outirght refused to meet with them and told them to fuck off or be arrested.
He received massive support from the silent majority.
These people are largely just a very loud minority except in academia and can be fought against.
The worse they get the more people will oppose them.
>>76607909
Capitalism is defined by Marx and him only.
It`s socialist meme.
>>76608245
> Capitalism is an easy target
And still you use it to define yourself.
>>76611408
"The law" by Bastiat is pretty entry level
"The road to serfdom" by Hayek is free in audiobook format on youtube.
Pic related is available on Mises.org as is hundreds of books in PDF format
Human action by Mises is also good
But Mises whole extremely good is a bit boring to read even when you're interested in the topic.
There's also John Stossel's book "No they can't" which is good but also entry level.
I'd also recommend Tom Woods podcast which is on his website and on YouTube
>>76611264
>>76611269
Selfish is probably too negatively loaded a word, but buying something for yourself is literally selfish, regardless of secondary considerations.
By all means, spend money on yourself, your family, and your community. You'd be stupid not to, and if we were all altruist universalists we'd all starve.
>>76611402
Yes, but the ones I'm talking about use their money to buy goods, not so they can spend it all on Zika vaccines and investments, i.e. charity and capital.
>>76611728
Forgot pic
>>76611640
People were talking about capitalism for like a century before Marx
Communism is selfish. Forcibly stealing the means of production from your Jewish billionaire boss to be awarded the full value of your labor is in your self interest.
Working for two dollars an hour for 16 hours while your Jewish boss buys his six yacht and saying thank you for the opportunity mister shekelstein is called being a cuck.
>>76611831
>Selfish is probably too negatively loaded a word
That's my point.
It doesn't matter how negatively loaded the word is. Capitalism channels selfishness and altruistic behavior into positives when people engage in it.
It makes motive irrelevant.
Socialism, progressivism(which for all intents and purposes is fascism lite) and fascism care about motives which is why they fail as systems but thrive as ideologies.
>>76611680
I don't pick and choose labels, causes or arguments based on what it signals about me as a person. Even if I did, it's only an easy target for children born after the wall came down. The "only children" clause was important.
>>76612029
>Forcibly stealing the means of production from your Jewish billionaire boss to be awarded the full value of your labor is in your self interest.
>Using the LTV
>Even ironically.
>>76607909
In capitalism it's more like: "hey kid if you spend five bucks worth of effort to help me I'll pay you fifty bucks." Then the kid pulls him up.
>>76612039
>thrive as ideologies.
So does libertarianism, negative externalities be damned. Any time you try to enforce a simplistic idealogical system in the real world you end up with clashes and complications that tear it apart.
>>76612136
The point remains. Communism is inherently more selfish than capitalism. Voluntarily tolerating the massive differences in wealth inherent to capitalism is hardly selfish. More like sacrificial.
>>76611728
>>76611840
Thanks mate.
A question; it seems every society seems to drift towards socialism. The United States has an ever increasing social programs, every increasing government power, you just had a candidate run who, while losing, shows that the upcoming generation are receptive to such ideals. How do you stop this from thriving if it is so bad? How do you keep this ideology at bay when the people won't remember the last time it failed terribly?
>>76612885
But social democracy isn't socialism. Socialism calls for the abolition of private property and the workers owning the means of production.
There is any widespread movement in first world countries calling for the abolition of capitalism. Just a strengthening of the welfare state.
>>76612885
>A question; it seems every society seems to drift towards socialism
This is because the wealth created by capitalism allows for these"luxury" programs. Pic related.
> How do you stop this from thriving if it is so bad? How do you keep this ideology at bay when the people won't remember the last time it failed terribly?
Education and exposure of these horrible people for what they are.
And for god sakes keep your kids out of public schools.
Digest this
Venezuela has 8 times the total oil that America has and people have to wait in line for the better part of an entire day to get toilet paper.
>>76613154
>But social democracy isn't socialism
It still is a failure and makes people poorer than they otherwise would be.
http://www.iea.org.uk/publications/research/scandinavian-unexceptionalism-culture-markets-and-the-failure-of-third-way-soc
>thinking selfishness is inherently-bad
kek
>>76612885
Oh I forgot to list this book also free.
>>76613257
Very good ammo with the "muh Scandinavian Socialism" drones.
R A T I O N A L SELF INTEREST
A
T
I
O
N
A
L
>>76613154
so what is social democracy then? just the expansion of the welfare state? After seeing how successful it has been in the black community why would you want more?
>>76613190
>your kids out of public schools.
its all good for my kids but the majority of children of the nation, the majority of voters will go to public schools where they will have these ideas put into them. As it is now, thats a front we're losing on badly and its only a matter of time until the people learnthey can vote themselves wealth through such policies. I agree with you but i feel a lot more pessimistic for the future
>>76613257
thats a nice read
>>76615060
Taking time to teach kids at home works. Mom loved my fascination with history, so she got me dvds, books, etc about history. She startted me off with the Crusades, then Rome. Fucking amazing to see the future crusades low level tech, and the old Rome state, with such advance engineering.
>>76615743
Again my friend, it works for us but the majority of people dont have chance making me wonder if we're going to be stuck in this endless cycle
>>76613190
Garry Kasparov, like many others, hasn't really understood the scandinavian welfare model and its origin.
It's a long story and people still argue where it starts but quite often the 5th of September 1899, where the capitalist recognized the workers right to organize and strike but in return, the workers accepted the bosses right to lead in the workplace.
It has really helped Denmark during the time of the communist rise in Europe that the workers and the employers had a preexisting platform to discuss.
But even before this, the right to education can also be regarded as a major social reform and that is all the way back in 1814 when the public school system was started.
Or you can say that the real kick off happened in 1933 with the Kanslergade agreement. Where the Social Democratic prime minister made a deal with the farmer/business oriented party Venstre. The agreement was that the farmers and industrialists would get better foundation for their businesses and export opportunity in return for social reforms that gave people who got handicapped from work better rights and better support for the unemployed.
The point is, that Kasparov is completely wrong in saying that we have created the welfare state after becoming rich. As so many other things it has gradually developed and most reforms have happened during moments of crisis. We have become rich because of the welfare system not despite it.
The last example of this was in the late 80's early 90's when once again, employment was low and the economy was shit. The social democrats gave new opportunities for people to get new educations, made it easier to start new businesses etc etc and they called that model the flexicurity model.
I'm not saying that the Scandinavian system is perfect. I'm saying that Kasparov is dumb and wrong.
> tl/dr Garry Kasparov doesn't know what he is talking about
Recommended viewing:
>Debate 1984: Capitalism Versus Socialism, Which is the Moral Social System?
>This is the 1984 public debate between the Objectivists (Leonard Peikoff and John Ridpath) representing the capitalist view,
against the Democratic Socialists (Gerald Caplan and Jill Vickers) representing the socialist view.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGo2G1Sjb6M&list=PLC70DBDE7AFAC0366
>>76616647
>>76607909
Capitalism and communism both fail because the market system has no structural incentive to reduce resource use, biodiversity loss, the global pollution footprint.
It also has no structural incentive to keep human beings employed, in the wake of an emerging technological condition where the majority of jobs can now be done more cheaply and effectively by machine automation.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xGyKuyGhaE
That being said Communism is no different because the flaw is much deeper in the market system itself.
>>76616647
very nice to hear a differing view point, thanks
>>76607909
>>76607909
well actually if that parent was a good parent, helping that parent would help the kid immensely
>>76608982
The argument against capitalism is that greedy sociopaths will manipulate the system to make themselves super rich off the backs of more honest workers.
So how the fuck do these people magically disappear under communism? In communism's case it will be even worse, because the greedy sociopaths won't be starting new businesses or creating jobs, a positive side effect of their avarice in the capitalist society, they will be climbing the ranks of government and backstabbing others to get more political power and wealth.
>>76619282
Benevolent Capitalism is the very best society in both an unideal world and an ideal world.
The market regulates itself, useless worthless people get weeded out by themselves, the system enforces itself, and it creates its own work and value.
Even with Jews trying to fuck it up it still works, even if it's being overburdened. Society is like a filter though, and once it gets dirty you need to take it out and clean it, and sometimes go buy a replacement.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D9mSBQeRlKc
Take the red pill /pol/.
Capitalism and Christianity are destroying white civilization.
