WHEREIN WE OFFER A DEFINITION
Interesting question in one of the comments on "Capitalism At Its Best" below. The Misanthrope asks if this is really a symptom of capitalism, or a symptom of human nature.
I'm not sure it's an either/or thing.
Anyhow, for the purpose of this blog, I will consider it a symptom of capitalism when a group of humans, acting together as a business entity with the purpose of making money, acts malevolently* toward another group of humans. When I come across stories about such occurrences, I will talk about them here as part of the new, exciting feature sarcastically entitled "Capitalism At Its Best".
Enjoy!
* obviously, what is really malevolent is open to interpretation. I'll do my best to keep things in perspective. Giving contaminated water to our troops... evil.
4 Comments:
My point is that we see the same behavior in socialist and command economies, which leads me to believe that this is a symptom of human greed, not the system in which it is expressed.
Obviously, this behavior is repugnant. But look what happens? The system punishes it because it is not positive.
When this type of greed is expressing in a government controlled or heavily government regulated scenario, it seems scarier to me because the controlling authority is so hard to punish or control. Who monitors it?
I'd be delighted to post a "Wonders of Socialism" feature highlighting the years of failure and repression that have come out of these systems. One need only look at 1970s Britain, where the government was controlling wages and prices, to see what a disaster that approach is.
Good points and well understood.
You're right - human nature is always expressed, regardless of the system, and human nature often tells us to screw the other guys if we can get away with it.
I think a "Wonders of Socialism" series would be great.
I'm honestly not saying Socialism is better, or without its faults. I'm merely compiling specific examples of people out to make a buck who do questionable things. They could be doing questionable things for many others reasons....
'One need only look at 1970s Britain, where the government was controlling wages and prices, to see what a disaster that approach is.'
Oh and things got so much better in 79 when Thatcher got in, right? If better means increasing unemployment and the outsourcing of jobs much needed at home.
Jackson -
Actually, things did get better. The UK got a much, much higher standard of living and real economic growth.
Post a Comment
<< Home