Why do people honestly hate capitalism so much now?

Post Reply New Topic

I think this is black-and-white either-or kind of thinking.

Suburbs artificially kept from evolving to urban-like environments are not the same as i.e. building safety rules.

Actually, as slums tend to be illegal anyway, official regulations don't affect them much - but they may affect availability of places to live alternative to slums.

Something like this is happening where my parents live - only not that much money involved.
They bought some ground and built a house some 30 years ago. Now, their house is surrounded by two 4 storey buildings.
That's life. The city sprawled to them.

People not wanting 6 storey buildings casting shadow over their house is another factor that incentivises the restrictions by the government. Politics is always personal. People will vote for policies that benefit them. The upper class of course has the means to do so. The middle class has also significant influence because of relative economic wellbeing and higher education that allows them to influence policies. It is the poor who get screwed because they are underepresented in politics. Even policies that are aimed at improving the life of the poor have a hidden motivation that benefit the middle class and the rich. And I say this from a purely libertarian point of view. State restrictions are never on the side of the poor if you pay attention closer.

Safety rules. Does a government bureaucrat know better than the individual wether a building that they are investing their life savings on is safe to live in?

Safety rules are an effect of centuries of data collected.
So, yes. Centuries of professional data collection are quite likely to contain more knowledge than an individual who wants to buy a house.
If this wasn't truth, there would be no people who lost their life savings in countless possible ways.

somes gov't has to step in and protect its citizens, laissez-faire is just too cold blooded, IOW leave people to possibly harm themselves and just go "tsk tsk, what a dummy!" that just won't do.

Or maybe those are not universal laws but signs of a heavily stratified, plutocratic society you're living in?

I'm saying this in a more universal way. There are countless examples from every country where the working class pays taxes for services the middle class receives or has an easier access to.

And in every government system, corruption can happen.
And every society has some thieves.
And mental illness can happen in any family.

Is it a reason not to try to adress problems to reduce the damage they cause?

Yes I agree that we should try to fix problems. What I belive is that the best way to reduce problems is to keep government intervention as low as possible and also reinforce the rule of law.

Those seem like they might be in conflict. Oversight is required to enforce rule of law, reducing oversight (aka "intervention") seems bound to result in more corruption, shadier business practices, more tax dodging, etc.

It sounds like abolish the police, but just for businesses. They consistently demonstrate they can't regulate themselves, so that might not be a viable plan.

There is economic crime as there are other forms of crime. What is happening though with "policing" the economy is overreach. It's like having the police dictating you in your own privacy how to specifically do your daily activities under threat of incarceration. To the point that you have difficulties functioning as a person anymore. That's what the government is doing to the economy. There is too much intervention. It's not like "abolish the police", it's more like "send the police after crminals, not after law abiding citizens".

I'm late to this discussion, so somebody may have already chimed in with what I'm about to say.
I think the primary reason why people hate capitalism today is because fewer and fewer people benefit from the free market. At one time, the American dream could be realized when business provided workers with a livable wage and benefits. But that had only been because labor had successfully pressured business into doing so. Since the Reagan revolution, with its supply side economics, and the crackdown on labor's power, business people have reaped the rewards of capitalism, but working people have fallen behind and the middle class has shrunk. Today, business' talk of "just work a little harder," and "a rising tide raises all boats," has proven to ring hollow. More and more, capitalism looks like a con job being played on the rest of us.

Can you demonstrate this is objectively the situation, or should I just accept it's an ideological position?

Building Safety Inspectors do.  "Building to Code" is a common practice in the 'States, while throwing together some cinder blocks and corrugated metal next to the same stream used for drinking water and sewerage disposal is more common elsewhere.

I applaud your knowledge of theory. You are sort of right.
In theory you are correct.
Milton Freedman was a person who was proposing a theory. Make note that his theory never existed in practice at all, so assuming what Milton Freedman says is actually now in reality is not a good idea, because its a theory he wants implemented, but it never existed. It might exist in the future.

Central based planning is bureaucratic nightmare and it is hard to plan. You are right that people get too much of one thing and not of certain necessities.

However then you go on saying that Capitalism is not wasteful, and I think anyone who has ever worked for any company will tell you this is certainly not a law. In fact being wasteful is not against Capitalist logic.
I recently worked for 2 companies and they were very wasteful with food. Everything they did not sell went to the trash. Enough to feed whole battalion worth of people and they throw this food away every SINGLE day.

If a company produces 100 million trendy pairs of shoes in East Asia using cheap labor and ships this commodity to US and it flops on the market and only some of it gets sold, because competition was better do you think these shoes go to heaven or something? No, they just get stored and thrown away into landfills or burned. Or in better case get sold to a different market and reshiped.
That being said the company has no way of knowing if they sell the shoes. They just put out a massive marketing campaign and hope it sells. If it does all is good. If it does not it just goes to waste.