• Please be sure to read the rules and adhere to them. Some banned members have complained that they are not spammers. But they spammed us. Some even tried to redirect our members to other forums. Duh. Be smart. Read the rules and adhere to them and we will all get along just fine. Cheers. :beer: Link to the rules: https://www.forumsforums.com/threads/forum-rules-info.2974/

Benefits of Capitalism

Zorro

New member
I think this is an interesting answer, to the Occupy Wall Street crowds call for an end of capitalism. Though it may be a bit over their heads, containing words and all.



"Occupy Wall Street Crowd Blind to Benefits of Capitalism"

By Gary Wolfram
William Simon Professor of Economics and Public Policy
Hillsdale College

Whenever I watch media coverage of another Occupy Wall Street event I am reminded of an exchange between Jewish protesters in the 1979 Monte Python movie Life of Brian. One of the protesters asks another what the Romans have brought to the area and the conversation goes like this:

Question: All right, but apart from the sanitation, medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, the fresh water system and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us?
Answer: Brought peace?
Response: Oh, peace - shut up!

The point is that the Roman institutions brought a good deal to the area that was being overlooked by the protesters. The Wall Street protesters, in their hatred of capitalism, overlook things including the fact that over the last 100 years capitalism has reduced poverty more and increased life expectancy more than in the 100,000 years prior.

Every semester I ask my students: "What would you rather be? King of England in 1263 or you?" Turns out, students would rather be themselves. They enjoy using their iPhone, indoor plumbing, central heating, refrigerators and electric lighting. All of these things are available to the average person in America today and none of them were available to the aristocracy when the West operated under the feudal system.

How is it that for thousands of years mankind made very little progress in increasing the standard of living and yet today half of the goods and services you use in the next week did not exist when I was born? It wasn't that there was some change in the DNA such that we got smarter. The Greeks knew how to make a steam engine 3,000 years ago and never made one. The difference is in how we organize our economic system. The advent of market capitalism in the mid 18th century made all of the difference.

We need not just rely on historical data. Look at cross-section evidence. I try another experiment with my students. I tell them they are about to be born and they can choose whatever country in the world they would like to be born in. The only caveat is they will be the poorest person in that country. Every student picks a country that is primarily organized in a market capitalist system. No one picks a centrally planned state. No one says, "I want to be the poorest person in North Korea, Cuba, or Zimbabwe," countries which are at the bottom of the Heritage Foundation's Index of Economic Freedom.

What does it mean to be poor in our capitalist society that the Occupy Wall Street crowd so hates? Robert Rector of the Heritage Foundation has several studies of those classified as poor by the U.S. Census Bureau. He found that 80 percent of poor persons in the United States in 2010 had air conditioning, nearly three quarters of them had a car or truck, nearly two-thirds had satellite or cable television, half had a personal computer and more than two-thirds had at least two rooms per person.

Contrast this with what it means to be poor in Mumbai, India, a country that is moving rapidly towards market capitalism but was burdened for decades with a socialist system. A recent story in The Economist described Dharavi, a slum in Mumbai, where for many families half of the family members must sleep on their sides in order for the entire family to squeeze into its living space.

The Occupy Wall Street movement has shown a lack of understanding of how the market capitalist system works. They appear to think that the cell phones they use, food they eat, hotels they stay in, cars they drive, gasoline that powers the cars they drive and all the myriad goods and services they consume every day would be there under a different system, perhaps in more abundance.

But there is no evidence this could be or ever has been the case. The reason is that only market capitalism solves the two major problems that face any economy-how to provide an incentive to innovate and how to solve the problem of decentralized information. The reason there is so much innovation in a market system compared to socialism or other forms of central planning is that profit provides the incentive for innovators to take the risk needed to come up with new products.

My mother never once complained that we did not have access to the latest Soviet washing machine. We never desired a new Soviet car. The socialist system relies on what Adam Smith referred to as the benevolent butcher and while there will undoubtedly be benevolent butchers out there, clearly a system that provides monetary rewards for innovators is much more dynamic and successful. The profit that the Occupy Wall Street protesters decry is the reason the world has access to clean water and anti-viral drugs.

The other major problem that must be solved by any economic system is how to deal with the fact that information is so decentralized. There is no way for a central planner to know how many hot dogs 300 million Americans are going to want at every moment in time. A central planner cannot know the relative value of resources in the production of various goods and services. Market capitalism solves that problem through the price system. If there are too few hot dogs, the price of hot dogs will rise and more hot dogs will be produced. If too many hot dogs are produced, the price of hot dogs will fall and fewer will be produced.

Market capitalism is the key to the wealth of the masses. As Ludwig von Mises wrote in his 1920 book, Socialism, only market capitalism can make the poor wealthy. Nobel Laureate Friedrich Hayek in his famous 1945 paper, The Use of Knowledge in Society, showed that only the price system in capitalism can create the spontaneous order that ensures that goods will be allocated in a way that ensures consumers determine the use of resources. The Occupy Wall Street movement would make best use of its time and energy in protesting the encroachment of the centrally planned state that led to the disaster of the Soviet Union, fascist Germany, and dictatorial North Korea.

This article was originally posted at the Media Research Center's Business and Media Institute blog.


Consider a tax-deductible contribution to Hillsdale College. You can designate your gift to support any number of programs, including scholarships, Imprimis, and our online educational seminars.
 

joec

New member
GOLD Site Supporter
It is funny Zorro as I have a different impression of what they seem to be protesting. Those things would be big money buying our government, killing the middle class to with most of the wealth going to the top 1% and against bail outs for the banks that brought this country to its knees. I could be wrong but that is the messages I've gotten when one gets by the chafe the press shows for laughs and giggles getting down to what it is really about.
 

AAUTOFAB1

Bronze Member
SUPER Site Supporter
we haven't seen true capitalism in this country in quite some time. if the government allowed capitalism to truly work they would lose most of their power and that ain't going to happen with out a real change,if they did,we would see the producers of this country show every one how create real wealth. the lazy, unmotivated people would just cry foul about how they cannot compete with them,i would say thats why we have a minimum wage,for people just giving a minimum effort.
 

FrancSevin

Proudly Deplorable
GOLD Site Supporter
It is funny Zorro as I have a different impression of what they seem to be protesting. Those things would be big money buying our government, killing the middle class to with most of the wealth going to the top 1% and against bail outs for the banks that brought this country to its knees. I could be wrong but that is the messages I've gotten when one gets by the chafe the press shows for laughs and giggles getting down to what it is really about.

Joec
You seem to know more of 'what this is about " than the OW protesters themselves. Somehow their unable or unwiling to articulte it to the rest of us.
Blame the press if you wish but so far not one coherent interview by anyone of them.

Indulge us...explain
 

FrancSevin

Proudly Deplorable
GOLD Site Supporter
we haven't seen true capitalism in this country in quite some time. if the government allowed capitalism to truly work they would lose most of their power and that ain't going to happen with out a real change,if they did,we would see the producers of this country show every one how create real wealth. the lazy, unmotivated people would just cry foul about how they cannot compete with them,i would say thats why we have a minimum wage,for people just giving a minimum effort.


Agreed. Capitalism has resulted in those things we take for granted evryday. Without it we would not have homes, heat , food, medicines.
Without it's profit motivated innovations we would not be sharing ideas on the internet.
Or making phone calls, or flying planes or driving cars. Oh yes,,,,,and a thriving middle class.

What does socialism bring..Personal failure of the idividual and subsequently of the society.

What does anarchy bring? Total dissilussion of the society, lawlessness , and rule by force of the strongest and most ruthless.

When in history has either of those produced general prosperity and protected individual rights?

When has either tolerated much less enriched the middle class?
 

Zorro

New member
Joec, Would those be the same banks that were blackmailed into making home loans to people that had no way to pay them back? Would it also include the banks that did not want to take the bailouts but were forced into it? Or how about the banks that were forced into bankruptcy against their will, only later to turn out to have been fiscally sound. If you want to blame someone for this mess start with Barney Frank and Criss Dodd, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Just saying :whistling:
 

FrancSevin

Proudly Deplorable
GOLD Site Supporter
Zorro,

Good to see you, thought we lost you.

Good post my friend, glad you are here.
 

joec

New member
GOLD Site Supporter
we haven't seen true capitalism in this country in quite some time. if the government allowed capitalism to truly work they would lose most of their power and that ain't going to happen with out a real change,if they did,we would see the producers of this country show every one how create real wealth. the lazy, unmotivated people would just cry foul about how they cannot compete with them,i would say thats why we have a minimum wage,for people just giving a minimum effort.

True capitalism will never work without some safeguards. If you ever read books about it from a time in our history that safeguards didn't exist and they did for a century or so it was brutal. Read Upton Sinclair's the Jungle for a start. I wouldn't want to live in a world where I left it up to pure capitalism to set the rules on what I eat, use for transportation etc with out some kind of protection against abuse. Hence true capitalism can't exist and it did once to end in failure.
 

joec

New member
GOLD Site Supporter
Joec, Would those be the same banks that were blackmailed into making home loans to people that had no way to pay them back? Would it also include the banks that did not want to take the bailouts but were forced into it? Or how about the banks that were forced into bankruptcy against their will, only later to turn out to have been fiscally sound. If you want to blame someone for this mess start with Barney Frank and Criss Dodd, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Just saying :whistling:

Really it seems that even Newt was in on this scam of forcing them to give loans they shouldn't have to the tune of $1.5 million. I also don't buy the talking points as the problem started long before with other deregulations brought about over the last 30 or so years. Regulation in all cases isn't bad though some might be most isn't.
 

joec

New member
GOLD Site Supporter
Joec
You seem to know more of 'what this is about " than the OW protesters themselves. Somehow their unable or unwiling to articulte it to the rest of us.
Blame the press if you wish but so far not one coherent interview by anyone of them.

Indulge us...explain

Well Franc perhaps it is where and how you read or get your news. I look at all sources then decide for myself not accepting any as being real facts. I also spent a day here with a group of them asking questions as to what it was about. Now not as big a group as in NY but still a good size group for Lexington Kentucky.
 
Last edited:

tiredretired

The Old Salt
SUPER Site Supporter
True capitalism will never work without some safeguards. If you ever read books about it from a time in our history that safeguards didn't exist and they did for a century or so it was brutal. Read Upton Sinclair's the Jungle for a start. I wouldn't want to live in a world where I left it up to pure capitalism to set the rules on what I eat, use for transportation etc with out some kind of protection against abuse. Hence true capitalism can't exist and it did once to end in failure.

Everything needs safeguards Joe. That's why God invented limit switches. :biggrin:

I think the big thing is for Gov't to get out of privatizing businesses and let the private sector do it.
 

joec

New member
GOLD Site Supporter
Everything needs safeguards Joe. That's why God invented limit switches. :biggrin:

I think the big thing is for Gov't to get out of privatizing businesses and let the private sector do it.

Yes there are some thing that should be done by private business and others need to be done by government. A good example is prisons, military, law enforcement, road and infrastructure. These things don't make normally have a profit motive in it and why government should be run as a business.
 

tiredretired

The Old Salt
SUPER Site Supporter
Yes there are some thing that should be done by private business and others need to be done by government. A good example is prisons, military, law enforcement, road and infrastructure. These things don't make normally have a profit motive in it and why government should be run as a business.

Give some thought to privatizing prisons, Joe. It just might work and save us money.
 

AAUTOFAB1

Bronze Member
SUPER Site Supporter
True capitalism will never work without some safeguards. If you ever read books about it from a time in our history that safeguards didn't exist and they did for a century or so it was brutal. Read Upton Sinclair's the Jungle for a start. I wouldn't want to live in a world where I left it up to pure capitalism to set the rules on what I eat, use for transportation etc with out some kind of protection against abuse. Hence true capitalism can't exist and it did once to end in failure.

So you want me to read a book by a socialist journalist about working conditions and how minimum wages needed to be changed? seriously?
 

joec

New member
GOLD Site Supporter
Give some thought to privatizing prisons, Joe. It just might work and save us money.

I heard a news report just today on this. It seems that some privatized prisons here in Kentucky have been lobbing some of our local politicians to give stiffer penalties for minor crimes that wouldn't normally not get prison time. We also have a whole system here that everything costs any one charged with a crime from a traffic fine to a felony to a point they can't possibly pay, hence more jail time. This might explain why the US has the greatest number of people in our prison system many of which are there for minor infractions. Really not a good idea at all but that is my opinion on it. For profit and prisons are not compatible at all to me as would be law enforcement nor judges.
 

Zorro

New member
Really it seems that even Newt was in on this scam of forcing them to give loans they shouldn't have to the tune of $1.5 million. I also don't buy the talking points as the problem started long before with other deregulations brought about over the last 30 or so years. Regulation in all cases isn't bad though some might be most isn't.

Please show me where newt forced them to give loans. Newt was paid to give them advice. Newt is paid big bucks by lots of people and organizations for his advice. That does not mean his advice was acted upon. I am by the way not giving you talking points. I am telling you where to look for the cause of the problem. Do a little research other than talking with the Occutards that have no idea what they are talking about, or even doing there. I am in Seattle and surrounded by this scum daily. The only good that has come out of this is, for once we have the Communist, the Nazis, the Anarchist, the Socialist, the Union thugs, the militant Islamist, and the Democrats together, out in the open for once. With all of them leading the over educated students of nothing worthwhile, around by the nose. Mommy and daddy must be so proud!
 

joec

New member
GOLD Site Supporter
Now he claims he was a historian for them but most will know they don't pay that kind of money for anything like that unless you are a lobbyist. He was hire to use his influence with the republicans to get them on board with Bush and his push for home ownership. Now if you believe his story then I have some swamp land in Louisiana I sell you cheap. Oh and I never said he forced them personally I said he played a part in the scam which a lobbyist does. Yes I also realize that lobbyist are protected under the constitution with the first amendment.
 

FrancSevin

Proudly Deplorable
GOLD Site Supporter
Well Franc perhaps it is where and how you read or get your news. I look at all sources then decide for myself not accepting any as being real facts. I also spent a day here with a group of them asking questions as to what it was about. Now not as big a group as in NY but still a good size group for Lexington Kentucky.

That's wonderful Joe, I'm happy for you and your newfound friends.

But,,,just like them,,,,,,,,,,you didn't explain a damm thing.
 

joec

New member
GOLD Site Supporter
That's wonderful Joe, I'm happy for you and your newfound friends.

But,,,just like them,,,,,,,,,,you didn't explain a damm thing.

What I saying is those I meet where not collage kids but people in their 30's to my age in their 60's. It was also very peaceful really and most of what I heard was anger with the fact that many had worked years and no suddenly unemployed and no jobs. Almost every one would be middle class but some in the late 40's to my age with no chance of landing a job in todays job market. The places they worked have packed it up and gone overseas while those that came in won't hire in that age group for what ever reason. Also most had worked their whole lives and lived within their means. However it got little to no press coverage here that I saw never mind the national press.
 

Zorro

New member
Now he claims he was a historian for them but most will know they don't pay that kind of money for anything like that unless you are a lobbyist. He was hire to use his influence with the republicans to get them on board with Bush and his push for home ownership. Now if you believe his story then I have some swamp land in Louisiana I sell you cheap. Oh and I never said he forced them personally I said he played a part in the scam which a lobbyist does. Yes I also realize that lobbyist are protected under the constitution with the first amendment.

This (below) is what you said.

Originally Posted by joec
Really it seems that even Newt was in on this scam of forcing them to give loans they shouldn't have to the tune of $1.5 million.

So, if you now think the banks were force to give those loans, why are they the bad guys? Why is the OWS mob attacking them?

Bolding mine.
 

FrancSevin

Proudly Deplorable
GOLD Site Supporter
What I saying is those I meet where not collage kids but people in their 30's to my age in their 60's. It was also very peaceful really and most of what I heard was anger with the fact that many had worked years and no suddenly unemployed and no jobs. Almost every one would be middle class but some in the late 40's to my age with no chance of landing a job in todays job market. The places they worked have packed it up and gone overseas while those that came in won't hire in that age group for what ever reason. Also most had worked their whole lives and lived within their means. However it got little to no press coverage here that I saw never mind the national press.

This is like pulling hens teeth.....
Joec, we get it, you identify with these wonderful, abused by the system,everyday common folks.....
I know you may think you understood what you thought I might have asked but what I wonder is did you understand what I asked?

let me try again.......
Joec........ what is their message?
 
Top