Top products from r/Capitalism

Haha, your perception is pretty spot on. Minus the bad gaming habit; I simply don't have the time for it. It's much more towards I fantasize about having a bad gaming habit. And yes, I'm a big fan of the Socratic method; Have you read Plato's Allegory of the Cave?

Yes, I am somewhat similar to a moderately successful small-business owner, and somewhat not.... And someone who has otherwise benefited from the capitalist system. And yes, I am a software engineer. I'm 25 if you are curious, and I'm married to the most beautiful & wonderful woman in the world (who does have a bad gaming habit.)

My name is Martin by the way, its a pleasure to meet you.

As for your question; the truth is it is rather difficult for me to put into words why it is I believe a wealth redistribution like you suggested is a bad deal not just for the wealthy, but for the poor too. My belief is based on many other beliefs, and the knowledge that there are many negative effects that will often outweigh the benefits of a well-meaning policy (such as doubling everyone's income, halves everyone's wealth.)

The reason it is difficult for me to put it into words directly is simply because I am not skilled enough at this kind of discourse to do so. I am trying my best to lead you to your answer. I did not find the answer myself until I had gone through many pages of many books, conversed many hours with opposite thinkers, endured a few years of great hardships, and enjoyed hard earned success. I do not think I am completely capable of giving your question the justice it deserves.

If you are still interested in having your question answered, let me get you a list of resources that helped me change my answer.

Free To Choose - TV Series from the 80's-90's originally hosted on PBS, its a good overview for the general principles of the capitalist system.

If you are not the type of person who likes to watch media, and more of a reader, I can make a few recommendations for starters.

The Road to Serfdom - written by Fredrick A. Hayek in the early 1940's. This book is a bit dry and a difficult read, but is a very interesting adventure into history and the ideas of capitalism. I HIGHLY recommend reading at least the foreword of this version. You might see some parallels between it and what is happening today.

Money Mischief: Episodes in Monetary History - If you like history, a good story teller, and truly have a desire to learn more about the funny effects of money, this is your book. This doesn't go over the capitalist system exactly, but explores man-kinds relationship with money. This book is a beautiful work of art which forces you to contemplate the nature of those little pieces of paper in our wallets.

Freakonomics is a goodie that makes you think about the nature of our own personal beliefs, and the beliefs our society has taken for granted.

By the way, my personal transition from socialist to capitalist started with me arguing against a (as she would have me describe her) 'big, fat, old, and alcoholic jewish lady'. We were arguing over legalization of heroin, she was for, I was staunchly against. Life is very strange sometimes.

I'm not saying you must or even should transition from what seems likely communist (based on word choice) to capitalist. Diversity of Ideas is the only thing that matters in a world where all people are equal.

One last thing, remember, if you never try to do more than you can, you'll never be more than you are.

>Nah, not really though . Maybe you should read .

The link doesn't work, but I think we can throw studies, books, and essays at each other forever, we both obviously have an established opinion on the matter. I might tell you to read Richard Dawkins, but what use is it?

>There isn’t a human nature and science supports that fact

**sharp exhale through my nose signifying disagreement**

>Humans are a product of their environment as much as their genes.

Eh? Yes, humans are shaped by our environment, which only sometimes encourages true altruism. (Which I don't believe exists, but that's beside the point).

>The “modern denial” is actually the advancement of our understanding, not some conspiracy to undermine white male hegemony. I’m sure that’s terrifying for you, but that’s how it is.

We may understand better, but that doesn't change to underlying truths that evolution has ingrained into our genes. Whatever you may do, it's motivated by what evolution has spent millennia sculpting. Human Nature.

>What you have in your brain is a delusion that you were raised with to help you succeed in the specific conditions you were born in.

And I might say what you have in yours is a delusion to justify yourself. I'd love to be able to just blame the 1% for my shortcomings instead of acknowledging them and working towards bettering myself but doing so would be utter lunacy, regardless of how good it feels to validate yourself. No, people like me aren't stealing from the poor or oppressing anyone.

>It’s no different than the divine right of kings, or sacrificing villagers to a volcano god

Very good argument, very good, indeed. What makes you think your beliefs are any different?

>Capitalism isn’t some natural state of humanity, and it certainly is not the final form society will take.

Sure, I'll give you that. Would you suggest not having a system at all then?

> That idea is just your faith.

I'm open to new ideas. Ex. I used to be a Christian. I am an Atheist now. I try to keep as open a mind as possible.

> We work together for selfish reasons. We are altruistic for selfish reasons. Read.

Nah, not really though . Maybe you should read .

>You are the epitome of the modern denial of human nature.

There isn’t a human nature and science supports that fact. Humans are a product of their environment as much as their genes. The “modern denial” is actually the advancement of our understanding, not some conspiracy to undermine white male hegemony. I’m sure that’s terrifying for you, but that’s how it is.

What you have in your brain is a delusion that you were raised with to help you succeed in the specific conditions you were born in. It’s no different than the divine right of kings, or sacrificing villagers to a volcano god. It seems so real and obvious, but any kind of actual object look shows the holes instantly. Capitalism isn’t some natural state of humanity, and it certainly is not the final form society will take. That idea is just your faith.

> Didn't listen to the whole thing

\
>I also thought his proposed solution was interesting;
>
it was…
>
It was…
>
Oh, he didn't have one.


Wolff has written multiple books about a solution, and his lectures all delve into a bit of the ideas of democratic workplaces etc

What you've asked is an incredibly deep question that likely has no right answer. Having said that, there are probably wrong answers - one of those is assuming that all individuals are absolutely logical decision makers that will always try to make the most objective decision.

Rational choice theory is the fundamental underlying thought behind economics (and capitalism by extension). However, moral psychologists are starting to believe that human do not make judgments based on rationality, but instead run off of intuition and then use logic post hoc in order to explain why their gut was right. This may be the type of thought that you've stumbled upon, and if you'd like to read more on the idea, Haidt's book The Righteous Mind is a good place to start.

Surfdom sounds pretty great. The Road to Serfdom by F.A. Hayek This link is the abridged edition. Agreed it is a must read but not what OP is looking for.

This would be a good start.

See Ben Powell's book about Sweatshops. Factories create wealth. There's no exploitation, it's mutually beneficial exchange.

Out of Poverty: Sweatshops In The Global Economy (Cambridge Studies in Economics, Choice, and Society) https://www.amazon.com/dp/1107688930/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_w9zVDbHMEMQY1

Capital, Volume 1: A Critique of Political Economy by Karl Marx

I recommend the Penguin Classics edition, since it's widely available and unabridged. Check the link above.

Also, for a general overview of the text, see the book's Wikipedia page.

It's apparently supposed to link to a page showing this book: American Entrepreneur, for anyone not finding anything.

When I first saw this article from bloomberg.com, its title was:
> Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

Here are some other articles about this story:

• arstechnica.com: Apple CEO Tim Cook calls on Bloomberg to retract its Chinese spy story
  
• foxbusiness.com: Apple CEO Tim Cook calls on Bloomberg to retract spy chip story
  
• pcmag.com: Tim Cook Demands Bloomberg Retract Chinese Spy Chip Story
  
• zdnet.com: Tim Cook calls for Bloomberg to retract controversial chip story | ZDNet
  
• bbc.com: Apple boss calls for chip story retraction
  
• bgr.com: Tim Cook calls on Bloomberg to retract story of alleged Supermicro hack
  
• cnbc.com: Apple's Tim Cook calls for retraction on Chinese spy chip story: 'There's no truth to this'
  
• cyberscoop.com: Coats: ODNI has seen 'no evidence' of supply chain hack detailed in Bloomberg story - CyberScoop
  
• appleinsider.com: Tim Cook lambastes Bloomberg for iCloud spy chip report, calls for retraction
  
• newsweek.com: Has China been conducting a mass spying campaign on the U.S.?
  
• cnet.com: Tim Cook wants Bloomberg to retract its spy chip story
  
• marketwatch.com: Apple CEO Tim Cook calls for retraction of hacking story
  
• buzzfeednews.com: Apple CEO Tim Cook Is Calling For Bloomberg To Retract Its Chinese Spy Chip Story
  
• thehill.com: Apple's Tim Cook asks Bloomberg to retract Chinese hacking story
  
• wfaa.com: Apple CEO Tim Cook calls for Bloomberg to retract its Chinese spy chip story
  
• apple.com: What Businessweek got wrong about Apple
  
• businessinsider.com: Apple CEO Tim Cook demands Bloomberg retract its report on Chinese chip hacking: 'There is no truth in their story'
  
• nasdaq.com: Apple CEO urges Bloomberg to retract spy chip story
  
• postbulletin.com: Tim Cook wants retraction of Chinese spy-chip story that named Apple, Supermicro
  
• azcentral.com: Apple CEO Tim Cook calls for Bloomberg to retract its Chinese spy chip story
  
• qz.com: Tim Cook publicly denies Apple was hacked by China’s military
  
• engadget.com: Apple CEO calls on 'Bloomberg' to retract China surveillance report
  
• seattletimes.com: Tim Cook wants retraction of Chinese spy-chip story that named Apple, Amazon, Supermicro
  
• usatoday.com: Apple, Amazon deny Chinese spy chips found in server hardware
  
  -----
  
  I am a bot trying to encourage a balanced news diet.
  
  These are all of the articles I think are about this story. I do not select or
  sort articles based on any opinions or perceived biases, and neither I nor my
  creator advocate for or against any of these sources or articles. It is your
  responsibility to determine what is factually correct.
  

We're told that the old crop of government agents were trying hard enough. Or that they didn't have the right intentions. While it's true that there are plenty of incompetent and ill-intentioned people in government, we can't always blame the people involved. Often, the likelihood of failure is simply built in to the institution of government itself. In other words, politicians and bureaucrats don't succeed because they can't succeed. The very nature of government administration is weighted against success.

Here are ten reasons why:

I. Knowledge

Government policies suffer from the pretense of knowledge . In order to perform a successful market intervention, politicians need to know more than they can. Market knowledge is not centralized, systematic, organized and general, but dispersed, heterogeneous, specific, and individual. Different from a market economy where there are many operators and a constant process of trial and error, the correction of government errors is limited because the government is a monopoly. For the politician, to admit an error is often worse than sticking with a wrong decision - even against own insight.

II. Information Asymmetries

While there are also information asymmetries in the market, for example between the insurer and the insured, or between the seller of a used car and its buyer, the information asymmetry is more profound in the public sector than in the private economy. While there are, for example, several insurance companies and many car dealers, there is only one government. The politicians as the representatives of the state have no skin in the game and because they are not stakeholders, they will not spend much efforts to investigate and avoid information asymmetries. On the contrary, politicians are typically eager to provide funds not to those who need them most but to those who are most relevant in the political power game.

III. Crowding out of the Private Sector

Government intervention does not eliminate what seem market deficiencies but creates them by crowding outthe private supply. If there were not a public dominance in the areas of schooling and social assistance, private supply and private charity would fill the gap as it was the case before government usurped these activities. Crowding-out of the private sector through government policies is constantly at work because politicians can get votes by offering additional public services although the public administration will not improve but deteriorate the matter.

IV. Time Lags

Government policies suffer from extended lags between diagnosis and effect. The governmental process is concerned with power and has its antenna captures those signals that are relevant for the power game. Only when an issue is sufficiently politicized will it find the attention of the government. After the lag, until an issue finds attention and gets diagnosed, another lag emerges until the authorities have found a consensus on how to tackle the political problem. From there it takes a further time span until the appropriate political means have found the necessary political support. After the measures get implemented, a further time elapses until they show their effects. The lapse of time between the articulation of a problem and the effect is so long that the nature of the problem and its context have changed - often fundamentally. It comes as no surprise that results of state interventions, including monetary policy , do not only deviate from the original goal but may produce the opposite of the intentions.

V. Rent Seeking and Rent Creation

Government intervention attracts rent-seekers. Rent seeking is the endeavor of gaining privileges through government policies. In a voter democracy, there is a constant pressure to add new rents to the existing rents in order to gain support and votes. This rent creation expands the number of rent-seekers and over time the distinction between corruption and a decent and legal conduct gets blurred. The more a government gives in to rent-seeking and rent creation, the more the country will fall victim to clientelism, corruption, and the misallocation of resources.