Ironworks Gaming Forum - View Single Post

Magness · 12-15-2001, 10:21 PM

quote:

Originally posted by Dramnek_Ulk:

Capitalism is extremely fragile and does not work nor will ever from an ethical point of view, it barely work in an economic sense. Companies are always expecting to be bailed out by the government, or be given subsidies and preferential treatment and it is so easy for it all to come crashing down. And the whole system has to have lots of safeguards in place to stop it all falling apart. The whole system has to be supported on a never-ending cycle of debt and subsidy adn there must alwasy be someone at the bottem of the chain.

1. Of course, companies are trying to get a leg up on the competition. That's why it's called competition. And just because they ask/demand subsidies from the government, doesn't mean that you have to give it to them!!! The US government rarely subsidizes or bails out companies or industries. Don't blame capitalism for the inability of European governments to say "NO".

And just because a company goes broke and goes under, that does not mean that capitalism has failed. Not in the least. That indicates that capitalism has succeeded!!! In large part, capitalism is a darwinian process ... survival of the fittest.

Capitalism a failure? Look at the US economy since WW2, it has grown steadily since 1945. Yes, there are regular down turns. It's called the "business cycle" and it seems to occur about once per decade. It's very annoying, but not unexpected. But all in all, the US economy is massive and strong and provides well for its people. And it generally works best when the government keeps its hands off. (Yes, some regulation of various kinds is needed, but this is generally done for "good" reasons or to help increase overall stability to the economy.)

What about the Soviet economy? Constant shortages of necessary items. A pathetic distribution system. Everyone, with the exception of those few party members at the top, lived in the same general level of poverty. Yeah, here's how I desccribe communism ... Let's increase the living standard at the bottom by about 2% and then let's make EVERYONE live at that standard. Why? Because if we cannot all have the livings standard of the rich, then we're all gonna live like the poor because we (the party elite) have decided that's what's "fair".

Simplistic, I know. But what the heck, that is what happened.

12-15-2001, 10:21 PM	#81
Magness Quintesson Join Date: January 7, 2001 Location: Manchester, NH, USA Posts: 1,025	quote: Originally posted by Dramnek_Ulk: Capitalism is extremely fragile and does not work nor will ever from an ethical point of view, it barely work in an economic sense. Companies are always expecting to be bailed out by the government, or be given subsidies and preferential treatment and it is so easy for it all to come crashing down. And the whole system has to have lots of safeguards in place to stop it all falling apart. The whole system has to be supported on a never-ending cycle of debt and subsidy adn there must alwasy be someone at the bottem of the chain. 1. Of course, companies are trying to get a leg up on the competition. That's why it's called competition. And just because they ask/demand subsidies from the government, doesn't mean that you have to give it to them!!! The US government rarely subsidizes or bails out companies or industries. Don't blame capitalism for the inability of European governments to say "NO". And just because a company goes broke and goes under, that does not mean that capitalism has failed. Not in the least. That indicates that capitalism has succeeded!!! In large part, capitalism is a darwinian process ... survival of the fittest. Capitalism a failure? Look at the US economy since WW2, it has grown steadily since 1945. Yes, there are regular down turns. It's called the "business cycle" and it seems to occur about once per decade. It's very annoying, but not unexpected. But all in all, the US economy is massive and strong and provides well for its people. And it generally works best when the government keeps its hands off. (Yes, some regulation of various kinds is needed, but this is generally done for "good" reasons or to help increase overall stability to the economy.) What about the Soviet economy? Constant shortages of necessary items. A pathetic distribution system. Everyone, with the exception of those few party members at the top, lived in the same general level of poverty. Yeah, here's how I desccribe communism ... Let's increase the living standard at the bottom by about 2% and then let's make EVERYONE live at that standard. Why? Because if we cannot all have the livings standard of the rich, then we're all gonna live like the poor because we (the party elite) have decided that's what's "fair". Simplistic, I know. But what the heck, that is what happened.