# Is Capitalism in Trouble?



## wayneL (6 April 2007)

This is an excellent article (IMO) from the Los Angeles Times.

It crystalizes a view that I have been coming to and thought it would be a worthwhile topic of discussion.

Is the article right? Does capitalism need to reinvent itself to survive? I think it might need to at some point.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-barber04apr04,0,5142063.story



> *Overselling capitalism
> Why today's markets are headed for disaster unless there is a shift in focus.*
> By Benjamin R. Barber, BENJAMIN R. BARBER is a professor at the University of Maryland and is the author of many books, including "Jihad vs. McWorld." His latest book is "Consumed: How Markets Corrupt Children, Infantilize
> April 4, 2007
> ...


----------



## noirua (6 April 2007)

Is capitalism in trouble?  No!


----------



## macca (6 April 2007)

It is only "in trouble" because there hasn't been any bad times for 60 years or so and people have been able to purchase everything they want. Supply has also been excellent so there is no waiting list.

There are whole chunks of certain generations here in OZ that have never even lived through a recession, they have no concept of delayed gratification, or not being able to meet their repayments.

Life has been one long easy breeze for them and they simply cannot grasp that it may not always be thus.

The article is from USA and I do think that if they want to stimulate the economy all they need do is raise the basic wage to a living wage. If they made the minimum wage say $12 per hour, it would be a huge boost to the millions of poor over there. 

Here in Oz we really have it good, a very egalitarian society.


----------



## chops_a_must (6 April 2007)

Short term no. Longer term definitely.

In my wayward teens, I was a pinko socialist with communist leanings. And although I'm much more realistic and rational now, I still hold a lot of opinions and continue to analyse social structures from that angle.

And what I see as the biggest problem going forward, is the lack of reward for people adding value to society. At the moment, we have a situation where the rewards are going to people adding nothing but short term wealth, and nothing to the overall benefit of society. 

We can already see the problems developing. Not enough teachers replacing those retiring, same with nurses. And the AMA refuses to allow a larger intake for medicine students, and especially for specialist training. Way to deliberately create a shortage in an expanding population. Lol! But these occupations largely ensure the continued training, and add long term value to the economy, keep people in the workforce etc. etc.

Yet governments don't realise that you can't run the education system like a business. It is an INVESTMENT. It ensures a highly skilled workforce into the future (something you can see falling apart now). 

But that is my 2 cents worth. Areas that keep society functioning will continue to deteriorate into the future.

 

Cheers,
Chops.


----------



## Lucky (6 April 2007)

Capitalism is not in trouble, it's humanity that will have the problem.


----------



## Smurf1976 (6 April 2007)

macca said:


> There are whole chunks of certain generations here in OZ that have never even lived through a recession, they have no concept of delayed gratification, or not being able to meet their repayments.
> 
> Life has been one long easy breeze for them and they simply cannot grasp that it may not always be thus.
> 
> ...



Agreed with the first part but not the last. Lots of people have no concept  not being able to afford essentials and actually having to go without. They've never been without 3 or more meals a day, phone, housing or even a car. 

But as for the minimum wage bit, I'll put it this way. The woman at the local video store told me her pay has been cut to $11 per hour and lost sick pay etc too. It was either that or loss of job. And this is from a company that's clearly done VERY well over the years paying higher wages. No doubt the manager's pay hasn't been similarly reduced...   

And don't get me started on the catalogue delivery people getting paid 33% less now than they were 25 years ago. That's ridiculous to say the least.

Capitalism fails miserably if people can't afford to consume. At this rate it would seem to be ensuring its own demise through outright greed on the part of those with power.


----------



## Rafa (6 April 2007)

That’s a very good point you make smurf...

It was one of my arguments ages ago against the work choices legislations and the reducing in wages, increasing worker uncertainty...

The more people that have more money, AND are happy to spend it, the better off for the corporations...
Driving wages down and turning people back into slaves will actually reduce the amount they can spend on the corporations products, 99% of which are simply 'wants' not needs...

Unfortunately, when it comes to the environment, its actually better for the 99% of the people to be poor!

Just look at the average plebs who now can travel all over the place and the pollution that is causing! Not the mention the level of consumption and the pollution that is causing. When the poor start living like the rich, the Earth is in big big trouble.

Like all systems, capitalism works best when there are say 20% haves, 80% have nots, when there was plenty of resources, and new lands to conquer to get those resources, plenty of cheap labour and all was good...

Could it be we are reaching the tipping point of this system that has survived the centuries... Is capitalism in trouble?

This is a very interesting, fascinating topic... I look forward to other people thoughts on this matter.


----------



## Sean K (6 April 2007)

Good thread Wayne. I do not think the system is perfect, but it's the best we have at the moment. I need to think about it a bit more to test my own ideas and will be back at you. 

A question I do have at the moment is 'has Capitalism had time to work yet?'


----------



## macca (6 April 2007)

Hi Smurf,

I was of the impression that a basic wage was still set by the gov't and that was the minimum.

I am surprised and disappointed if it is $11 an hour for an adult person.

Can we find out, I shall Google


----------



## numbercruncher (6 April 2007)

Minimum adult wage is 25188 p/a or 429 p/w after tax, they'll eventually have people living third world here (close already)! US Minimum is 5.15 an hour!

429 a week lets see what that will get you .....

Rent                                                               300
Tank of Petrol                                                    60 
Water and Vegemite, Bread for family for a week       69
----------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      429 (wage gone) Put power and emergencies on credit card ......


Seriously I dont see how the system is working. Our grocery bill is 300 before we start on anything else! How are people doing it?

I have a feeling folks are waking up and Johnny and Co are gone this election.


----------



## constable (6 April 2007)

numbercruncher said:


> Minimum adult wage is 25188 p/a or 429 p/w after tax, they'll eventually have people living third world here (close already)! US Minimum is 5.15 an hour!
> 
> 429 a week lets see what that will get you .....
> 
> ...




Great points ......there is no point trying to compete with third world wages while we are trying to provide the high life.


----------



## Kimosabi (6 April 2007)

numbercruncher said:


> Minimum adult wage is 25188 p/a or 429 p/w after tax, they'll eventually have people living third world here (close already)! US Minimum is 5.15 an hour!
> 
> 429 a week lets see what that will get you .....
> 
> ...




  $429/week  

Thats just over 4 hours work for me.


----------



## numbercruncher (6 April 2007)

Kimosabi said:


> $429/week
> 
> Thats just over 4 hours work for me.




I want your job!


----------



## Kimosabi (6 April 2007)

numbercruncher said:


> I want your job!




Any good at computers?


----------



## numbercruncher (6 April 2007)

Kimosabi said:


> Any good at computers?





Not bad but i seriously doubt anyone would be willing to pay me 800 a day for my level of computer expertise


----------



## Mousie (7 April 2007)

There're always unsolved problems in society, and capitalism is the best way to solve it in the hands of the right people; in the hands of the wrong ones.....


----------



## Sean K (7 April 2007)

I think that before we can answer this question we need to actually understand what the goal of Capitalism is? 

So, what is the goal of any political/financial/social system?


----------



## Julia (7 April 2007)

kennas said:


> I think that before we can answer this question we need to actually understand what the goal of Capitalism is?
> 
> So, what is the goal of any political/financial/social system?




I suppose a naive, innocent, trusting person would say that it's to act on the wishes of the people for the benefit of the people.

Such delicious simplicity seems rather silly in view of how our society actually does function, doesn't it!
(Maybe I should have said "fail to function".)


----------



## GreatPig (7 April 2007)

Read about it here.

GP


----------



## chops_a_must (7 April 2007)

Julia said:


> I suppose a naive, innocent, trusting person would say that it's to act on the wishes of the people for the benefit of the people.



That's democracy I would have thought.


----------



## Sean K (8 April 2007)

chops_a_must said:


> That's democracy I would have thought.



Would a measure of people's happiness be a test of how successful a system ultimately was?


----------



## Sean K (8 April 2007)

kennas said:


> Would a measure of people's happiness be a test of how successful a system ultimately was?



What if we are not as happy now, compared to when Capitalism first started? And this is due to the system? Can it be linked? 

For eg in the Fin this weekend there's an article in the Review section discussing this very issue.

Over the past 40 years, GDP per head has risen sharply in Western countries; but the average level of happiness reported by individuals has shown little or no increase. 

The article goes on....

Interesting way of measuring the success of an economic system. I'm on it.


----------



## chops_a_must (8 April 2007)

kennas said:


> Would a measure of people's happiness be a test of how successful a system ultimately was?



If you look at it that way, capitalism probably has failed.

Scandinavian countries continually rate the highest in this regard. So, a system that has links to a democratic socialist system and some capitalist leanings would appear to be the way to go.


----------



## SirRumpole (17 January 2022)

Time for a re-think on current models of Capitalism ?









						An 'utterly inaccurate model of capitalism': Has conventional economics failed us?
					

Economics hasn't had a major shake-up since the 1970s, but the global financial crisis and COVID pandemic have exposed some glaring flaws in the conventional wisdom about how to run an economy.




					www.abc.net.au


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (17 January 2022)

SirRumpole said:


> Time for a re-think on current models of Capitalism ?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Thanks @SirRumpole .

A moot point. 

I do not think capitalism per se is in trouble, but a redistribution of capital usually occurs after plagues, wars and tempest. There will also be a pushback against this via inflation/deflation, wage inflation, housing and food costs and political manoeuvring. 

Unfortunately in Australia the predictability of response presently by the two major parties will imo make stasis a more likely result with the lack of imagination of the Hawke/Keating and Howard/Costello eras lacking here presently.

gg


----------

