- Joined
- Oct 15, 2020
- Messages
- 37,056
- Reaction score
- 18,261
- Location
- Greater Boston Area
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Source here.The 20th-century economist Joseph Schumpeter famously wrote that capitalism sows its own destruction by creating a knowledge class who despise its success. Behold the Hewlett Foundation and Omidyar Network’s $40 million gift to the paupers at Harvard and MIT to “reimagine capitalism.” Bill Hewlett and David Packard founded Hewlett-Packard in a one-car garage in Palo Alto and made it one of the world’s storied companies. Its capitalist success created wealth for shareholders and stakeholders alike, and Hewlett established his foundation to share even more of it. But his philanthropic legacy has become one more sad example of how the wealth of capitalist donors is hijacked by future generations of knowledge-class progressives.
“For more than 40 years, neoliberalism has dominated economic and political debates, both in the U.S. and globally, with its free-market fundamentalism and growth-at-all-costs approach to economic and social policy,” the press release says. It “offers no solutions for the biggest challenges of our time, such as the climate crisis, systemic racism, and rampant wealth inequality—and in many ways, it has made those problems even worse.”
Actually, capitalism offers solutions to all of those challenges. The largest reductions in carbon emissions have come from natural gas, thanks to the market innovation of shale fracking. Competitive labor markets have helped minorities rise despite residual racism because bigotry is too expensive. The wealth created by free markets and innovation, along with global trade, has lifted billions out of poverty. Extreme global poverty has plunged to less than 10% from 45% in 1980 while world GDP has more than tripled. We now have fast broadband and smartphones that connect with others anywhere, anytime; 24-hour home delivery of almost anything we want; breakthrough medical treatments and vaccines; genetically engineered crops that have increased farm yields and global nutrition; cheap energy thanks to an oil and gas shale boom; and a rising standard of living for most of the world. Socialism didn’t build that.
Yet as Schumpeter predicted, people in the comfortable West, including many tech entrepreneurs, now take this prosperity for granted. “Neoliberalism’s anti-government, free-market fundamentalism is simply not suited for today’s economy and society,” says Larry Kramer, president of the Hewlett Foundation.
Just a terrific set of observations from an op ed in today's WSJ (sorry, paywall). Wish I could copy the entire piece, but here are the key passages:
Source here.
If our friends on the left lack anything, it's perspective.
Must be an Op-ED. Gotta' love those op-edsJust a terrific set of observations from an op ed in today's WSJ (sorry, paywall). Wish I could copy the entire piece, but here are the key passages:
Source here.
If our friends on the left lack anything, it's perspective.
Just a terrific set of observations from an op ed in today's WSJ (sorry, paywall). Wish I could copy the entire piece, but here are the key passages:
Source here.
If our friends on the left lack anything, it's perspective.
The WSJ has the best opinion pages in the country, and it's not even close.Ya know Nat, I can remember a time when the Wall Street Journal was actually a valued and respected publication instead of a right wing loon tabloidesque asswipe utensil.
No, I'm totally serious, I speak the truth. I used to read it myself.
An Op Ed in todays WSJ....LMAO. Oh my.
What does the Daily Crawler say?
The WSJ has the best opinion pages in the country, and it's not even close.
Name a better one.BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAYAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
The WSJ is no longer fit to wipe ones derrière Nat, and the OpEds are just SHAMELESS gqp and Crooked donnietrump ass smooching....EWWWWW!!!!!!!!! Similar to the laughable FOX "news" owned by gqp propagandist Rupert Murdoch.
Now back in the 70s and 80s....it was actually a respected publication as I said. You maybe weren't around back then, but yeah its true. I wouldn't try to mislead you Nat. You know that...don't you?
I rest my case.Honestly?
The National Enquirer
What you lack perspective on is that unfettered capitalism will certainly bring about its demise. As fewer and fewer people own more and more of the country's wealth, the ability to buy the goods and services is diminished. THe USA once bought 25% of all the goods and services produced in the world. That is no longer true because more of the money went into the pockets of the wealthy and less into wages and benefits as wage growth ceased over the past thirty years. Even now, when wages have increased, so have corporation profits because they are more than recouping those wage increase by the huge profits they are gaining by increasing prices far more than increase in wages require. Something over 60% of inflation is caused by those price and profit increases. Economists have been warning that a time will come when the whole thing will come tumbling down without some intervention. Wealth distribution in this country over the past thirty years, the top 10% have increased their percentage of the nations wealth from about 80% to almost 90%.Just a terrific set of observations from an op ed in today's WSJ (sorry, paywall). Wish I could copy the entire piece, but here are the key passages:
Source here.
If our friends on the left lack anything, it's perspective.
Wealth distribution in this country over the past thirty years, the top 10% have increased their percentage of the nations wealth from about 80% to almost 90%.
First, "unfettered capitalism" exists nowhere but in the heads of those who don't understand capitalism or how it's actually practiced in the real world.What you lack perspective on is that unfettered capitalism will certainly bring about its demise. As fewer and fewer people own more and more of the country's wealth, the ability to buy the goods and services is diminished. THe USA once bought 25% of all the goods and services produced in the world. That is no longer true because more of the money went into the pockets of the wealthy and less into wages and benefits as wage growth ceased over the past thirty years. Even now, when wages have increased, so have corporation profits because they are more than recouping those wage increase by the huge profits they are gaining by increasing prices far more than increase in wages require. Something over 60% of inflation is caused by those price and profit increases. Economists have been warning that a time will come when the whole thing will come tumbling down without some intervention. Wealth distribution in this country over the past thirty years, the top 10% have increased their percentage of the nations wealth from about 80% to almost 90%.
Never assume. I may be one already.Nat won't care, he likes that.
Because....he's gonna be a BIG TIME CEO someday....and when he gets there he doesnt want to have to pay tax!
Nobody gotta rob Nat! He's too cunning for that.
Middle class people who want to keep more of what they earn should feel the same way.Wealthy elites who benefit from current system want to maintain current system? I'm shocked.
First, "unfettered capitalism" exists nowhere but in the heads of those who don't understand capitalism or how it's actually practiced in the real world.
This is gibberish. We have more regulation than we have ever had.First, capitalism, being hardly “fettered”, is ever widening the wealth gap by taking more profit by paying less for the worker productivity of the goods and services that beget that profit. Capitalism in America is the least “fettered” it’s been in modern times.
How is this relevant to today?Yes. The closest we came to "unfettered capitalism" was back in the Gilded Age- with the ever increasing exploitation of child labor and the rise of massive monopolies. Sure you had a lot of wealth being generated- but it was all going into the pockets of a handful of factory owners and industrialists. There was no trickle down. They were hiring kids as young as 8 to work on the factory floor for 80 hour weeks, with dangerous equipment and chemicals, or working in dangerous mines, with no liability for their safety. Of course these kids were not getting an education. They still weren't even making enough money to eat.
View attachment 67376782
But even back then, the free market capitalists were telling everyone that if they wait a little longer and leave the free market completely free and without regulations, all that wealth was going to trickle down eventually. It never did, even after several decades. It was only getting worse.
The only way it got better was by "reimagining capitalism", and some common sense regulations and laws on the free market: child labor laws, antitrust laws, workplace safety laws, minimum wage laws, unions, etc...
It has become clear, after extensive experience, that things don't just work out for the best if left completely free and alone. Things don't work like that anywhere else in life. Why would this be different?
How is this relevant to today?
And those who only prepare for the last war tend to lose the next one. 21st century capitalism in the United States is nothing like the industrial revolution era. To pretend there is a similarity is foolish in the extreme.Those who do not learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat them.
The only reason capitalism works a little better today than back then is because today there are some common sense regulations, leashes, and muzzles on it. If you remove those, why should there be any difference between today and yesterday?
Unchecked and unregulated free corporations are every bit as dangerous as unchecked government. I am surprised you are so skeptical of one, and yet express such naive idealism and faith in the other. Any student of economic history would know things don't work out for the best if the free market is just left completely free.
And those who only prepare for the last war tend to lose the next one. 21st century capitalism in the United States is nothing like the industrial revolution era. To pretend there is a similarity is foolish in the extreme.
Why can't the left ever debate modern capitalism for what is and not reflexively cast it as some Dickensian fantasy?
Yes. The closest we came to "unfettered capitalism" was back in the Gilded Age- with the ever increasing exploitation of child labor and the rise of massive monopolies. Sure you had a lot of wealth being generated- but it was all going into the pockets of a handful of factory owners and industrialists. There was no trickle down. They were hiring kids as young as 8 to work on the factory floor for 80 hour weeks, with dangerous equipment and chemicals, or working in dangerous mines, with no liability for their safety. Of course these kids were not getting an education. They still weren't even making enough money to eat.
View attachment 67376782
But even back then, the free market capitalists were telling everyone that if they wait a little longer and leave the free market completely free and without regulations, all that wealth was going to trickle down eventually. It never did, even after several decades. It was only getting worse.
The only way it got better was by "reimagining capitalism", and some common sense regulations and laws on the free market: child labor laws, antitrust laws, workplace safety laws, minimum wage laws, unions, etc...
It has become clear, after extensive experience, that things don't just work out for the best if left completely free and alone. Things don't work like that anywhere else in life. Why would this be different?
Yep spot onJust a terrific set of observations from an op ed in today's WSJ (sorry, paywall). Wish I could copy the entire piece, but here are the key passages:
Source here.
If our friends on the left lack anything, it's perspective.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?