• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Does Your Social or Political Bias Override Your Reasoning Ability?

Trausti said:
Ah, you're right. The socialist economy that exists solely in your imagination is, no doubt, perfect. Free of all human frailty and self-interest. So comparing real-world experience with that imagined perfect system is a fool's errand. Such perfect socialism has not yet been achieved because you were not there to guide us.
Click to expand...
Me? I never claimed to have all the answers. Anyway, I'm not a socialist, I'm a democratic socialist, and I'm guessing you don't know the difference between them, either.
 
arthwollipot said:
Me? I never claimed to have all the answers. Anyway, I'm not a socialist, I'm a democratic socialist, and I'm guessing you don't know the difference between them, either.
Click to expand...
Doesn't matter what you might call yourself. Humans are humans. There is no way of organizing humans that removes human self-interest. The only way to organize economic affairs to harness that self interest for the benefit of the many is capitalism.
 
Last edited:
Darat said:
It's like how people seem to think poverty is a hard problem to solve - there is of course a very simple solution.
Click to expand...
It depends how you define poverty; it is often defined in relative terms, in which case it will never be solved. Even absolute definitions shift, what is absolute poverty now would not be poverty in mediaeval Europe.
 
Planigale said:
It depends how you define poverty; it is often defined in relative terms, in which case it will never be solved. Even absolute definitions shift, what is absolute poverty now would not be poverty in mediaeval Europe.
Click to expand...
That would be an even easier problem to solve.
 
Trausti said:
These sort of critiques of capitalism are befuddling. You're simply saying that some humans behave badly. That's true. But no human institution is free of badly behaving humans. It's part of human nature. You're not suggesting that the Soviet Union was free of bad human behavior, or Maoist China, or Canada, are you? So regardless of the economic system, you're going to have badly behaving humans. But with capitalism, you get those badly behaving humans plus fully stocked grocery stores.

ratio3x2_960.webp
Click to expand...
But it isn't bad behavior, it is following the tenants of capitalism. Greed is good so you have to expect a large percentage of people who get seriously sick should be financially ruined, because otherwise they would not be charging what the market would bear. The purpose of the health care industry is to make as much money as possible, providing care is the method they chose to do so.
 
Last edited:
theprestige said:
No they didn't. Ironically, the projected dollar value of part ownership of a corporation dissolves the moment you start trying to cash in on it. Insisting that someone voted to give Musk a trillion dollars is a textbook example of social or political bias overriding your reasoning ability.
Click to expand...
If you had read the article, you would have seen this:

1762992912765.png
 
Trausti said:
Actually, capitalism is the solution.
Click to expand...
The graph indicates 95% of the world was living in extreme poverty in 1820. What the graph does not indicate is that capitalism was the sole cause of the subsequent decline. Quantum leaps in technology and the industrial revolution are not limited to capitalists. They ran parallel.

ETA: The industrial revolution would likely have followed a similar arc if Democratic Socailism was driving it.

Also, why is this thread in SMM&T?
 
Last edited:
Opcode said:
All societies ever since societies first existed have had impoverished people. If the solution were simple, at least one of them should have solved it, I would think. So, what is this simple solution?
Click to expand...
The reason for this is about how the wealthy have far more to LOSE if they did not intentionally act to assure poverty exists. AND, given the fact that the wealth in the West has encouraged UNLIMITED 'right' to it, makes those powerfully able to become able to saturate some groups, like Jews with respect to recent issues in their more universal protection of Israel. That is, beneficial wealth is permitted to be PRIVATELY decided but non-beneficial wealth is passed on to the general society where the poor are the ones who 'gain' this as DEBT that locks them out of even the capacity to compete without accepting slavish wages and are forced to live where the rich crap on. But this is somewhat off the particular topic for me to dwell on in this particular topic I thought was about how people think with respect more to general politics within science (although it does have its influences on this topic for sure.)
 
The Great Zaganza said:
China's success in bringing a billion people out of poverty is because they are so capitalist?
Click to expand...
Actually, yes. China implemented a limited form of capitalism. I asked Google Gemini your exact question so I could copy its reply:

1. The Role of Market-Oriented Reforms​

The shift towards a more market-based economy, often associated with capitalist principles, was a primary driver of sustained economic growth, which in turn lifted people out of poverty:

  • Reform and Opening Up (Post-1978): Under Deng Xiaoping, China moved away from a centrally planned economy. Reforms like the Household Responsibility System in agriculture gave farmers incentives to increase production and sell surplus produce, leading to massive early gains in rural income.
  • Special Economic Zones (SEZs): These zones offered minimal regulations and free-market environments, attracting foreign investment and fostering rapid industrialization, job creation, and export growth.
  • Growth of the Non-State Sector: The rise of private enterprises and non-state-owned businesses became the main engine of growth, creating millions of better-paying jobs.
  • Integration with the Global Economy: Joining organizations like the World Trade Organization (WTO) fueled export-led growth, turning China into the "world's factory."
This process of economic growth created the wealth and job opportunities necessary for widespread poverty reduction, which is a common outcome of market liberalization.

2. The Role of State Planning and Intervention​

However, the success is not solely attributed to market forces. The Chinese government, led by the Communist Party (CCP), maintained a crucial, guiding role:

  • Massive Infrastructure Investment: The state has made sustained, large-scale public investments in roads, power grids, telecommunications, and other infrastructure, especially in poorer, remote regions. This lowered costs for businesses and connected poor areas to larger markets.
  • Targeted Poverty Alleviation (TPA): Especially since 2013, the government has pursued a strategy of "precision poverty alleviation." This involves:
    • Data-Driven Targeting: Identifying specific poor households and individuals using a national database.
    • Customized Aid: Implementing highly tailored projects, such as subsidized loans, job training, relocation from inhospitable areas, and industry development in poor villages.
    • Resource Mobilization: Mandating significant fiscal transfers from central to local governments and compelling state-owned enterprises (SOEs) and wealthier coastal provinces to partner with and invest in poorer areas.
  • Strategic Direction: The state controls key sectors and guides the overall direction of the economy, providing the political stability and long-term planning framework for the reforms.
In summary, China's model is often described as a "socialist market economy" or "state capitalism." The country utilized capitalist mechanisms (markets, competition, private incentives, foreign investment) to generate rapid wealth, while its socialist system (a one-party state with strong governance) provided the stability, massive infrastructure, and highly centralized, targeted policies necessary to distribute some of that wealth and directly address the remaining pockets of poverty.
 
ponderingturtle said:
But it isn't bad behavior, it is following the tenants of capitalism. Greed is good so you have to expect a large percentage of people who get seriously sick should be financially ruined, because otherwise they would not be charging what the market would bear. The purpose of the health care industry is to make as much money as possible, providing care is the method they chose to do so.
Click to expand...
Greed is not a tenet of capitalism. People may be greedy in capitalism, but it isn't a tenet or requirement. What are tenets are working for self-interest, and rewarding work with something of value (generally money).

In basketball, the primary goal is putting the basketball through the basket as many times as possible within the time limits of the game. That doesn't mean that one team can monopolize the ball and do nothing but shoot balls through their basket. The game has rules to make the play both fair and interesting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom