What is the goal of capitalism?

[westwall]

china is a perfect example of crony capitalism,,,

So is the US.

 

[Mexicano]

So is the US.

I can almost prove that what is eroding the US is financialization and the growth of the FIRE sector.
The flow of capital toward financial instruments does not contribute to GDP ( by definition). The rise in the value of financial assets is fueled by private debt and supported by US efforts to avoid a financial collapse.
The problem is that such a monetary flow does not contribute to economic growth. By the current definition of GDP, only capital expenses count as investments. The problem is investing in crypto or derivatives has higher yields so economic investment (capex) is left as a second option.

China may have aspects of crony capitalism, but looking at how the CPC has reigned in tech firms, I feel there is an aspect of governance that is overlooked by the West. On the other hand, most big banks are state-controlled, so there is less room for "innovative" financial instruments.

 

[progressive hunter]

So is the US.

not as much as china,, but the dems and repubes are trying very hard to catch up to them

 

[progressive hunter]

I can almost prove that what is eroding the US is financialization and the growth of the FIRE sector.
The flow of capital toward financial instruments does not contribute to GDP ( by definition). The rise in the value of financial assets is fueled by private debt and supported by US efforts to avoid a financial collapse.
The problem is that such a monetary flow does not contribute to economic growth. By the current definition of GDP, only capital expenses count as investments. The problem is investing in crypto or derivatives has higher yields so economic investment (capex) is left as a second option.

China may have aspects of crony capitalism, but looking at how the CPC has reigned in tech firms, I feel there is an aspect of governance that is overlooked by the West. On the other hand, most big banks are state-controlled, so there is less room for "innovative" financial instruments.

you couldnt prove you took a shit this morning let alone anything about this topic,,

 

[task0778]

I can almost prove that what is eroding the US is financialization and the growth of the FIRE sector.
The flow of capital toward financial instruments does not contribute to GDP ( by definition). The rise in the value of financial assets is fueled by private debt and supported by US efforts to avoid a financial collapse.
The problem is that such a monetary flow does not contribute to economic growth. By the current definition of GDP, only capital expenses count as investments. The problem is investing in crypto or derivatives has higher yields so economic investment (capex) is left as a second option.

China may have aspects of crony capitalism, but looking at how the CPC has reigned in tech firms, I feel there is an aspect of governance that is overlooked by the West. On the other hand, most big banks are state-controlled, so there is less room for "innovative" financial instruments.

It seems to me that "innovative" financial instruments or any other financial instruments basically delays paying taxes, and that's it. That money doesn't sit in an account somewhere doing nothing, that ain't what rich people and big corps do. The money gets invested by them or the institution they stashed their money in, and that does contribute to economic growth. It might be used as collateral, but I have a hard time believing that those instruments are not productive one way or another. Perhaps tomorrow or whenever.

 

[Mexicano]

It seems to me that "innovative" financial instruments or any other financial instruments basically delays paying taxes, and that's it. That money doesn't sit in an account somewhere doing nothing, that ain't what rich people and big corps do. The money gets invested by them or the institution they stashed their money in, and that does contribute to economic growth. It might be used as collateral, but I have a hard time believing that those instruments are not productive one way or another. Perhaps tomorrow or whenever.

Let's go through the sequence of events for stocks
A startup issues 100,000 shares at $10 each. This is the IPO.
Several investors buy the shares.
The startup uses the money to buy equipment , hire people , rent an office.
--> Only the part used to buy equipment counts as capex, but so far so good, the money was invested adn goods were adquired.

The news breaks out that the startup has done a technological breakthrough.
People actively try to buy the shares and prices soar from $10 to $15
50,000 shares got sold at $15
Now the sellers have a total of $750,000 and the buyers have the shares.
If shares continue to go up more exchanges can happen but during this process nothing gets produced at all. Only the IPO was used for capex.
And ... that's the good case.
There are many other innovative financial instruments like crypto and derivatives that don't lead to the production of anything at all , they just shuffle the money around and while that shuffling is happening nothing is being produced with that money.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

What a stupid bellend reply. Can you not thunk better.

Ewe Eunuchs Love to Get Stepped on by the Plutes Who Wear the Boots

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

People are self serving. Capitalism is just one of many tools they employ to that end. So is socialism.

These Anti-Democratic Ideologies Ought to Be Called "Capitalistism and Socialistism"

Both Capitalism and Socialism are oligarchic cliques, indicating that they are alternative methods to tyranny from the same ruling class. Socialism was invented by the sons of the ruling class in an Oedipus Complex revenge on their fathers, though keeping the same Born to Rule attitude their fathers comforted them with.

 

[Orangecat]

Both Capitalism and Socialism are oligarchic cliques,

Life is an oligarchic clique. The people with money run the show, regardless of the political or economic framework of society.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Everything people do is self serving in one way or another.

Submitting to the Rule of the Right or the Left Is "Self-Serfing"

 

[Cellblock2429]

This is just a philosophical question. Is there a goal for capitalism at all? Is it to maximize personal liberty or production? or is it to maximize well being?

/----/ Both. Capitalism has improved the lives of more people than Communism ever could hope to do.

 

[Blues Man]

Submitting to the Rule of the Right or the Left Is "Self-Serfing"

Of course it is.

People think they will be better off with one side or the other.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Life is an oligarchic clique. The people with money run the show, regardless of the political or economic framework of society.

The Bigger They Come, the Harder They Fall

We don't have to put up with that. Besides, groups have more total money, no matter how little the individuals in the group have. Don't listen to ruling-class logic. Feeling that we can't do anything about it is an attitude they force on us for their own benefit. Sheep need someone posing as a Good Shepherd so he can fleece them and turn them into lamb chops.

 

[Mexicano]

you couldnt prove you took a shit this morning let alone anything about this topic,,

Hey laddie,
I've already told you: Insulting members in a forum is not polite and childish . Future comments will be ignored.

 

[progressive hunter]

Hey laddie,
I've already told you: Insulting members in a forum is not polite and childish . Future comments will be ignored.

so you can insult the whole country by lying about what the constitution say but I cant call you a dumbass,,

got it,,

why did you lie??

 

[Mexicano]

/----/ Both. Capitalism has improved the lives of more people than Communism ever could hope to do.

Communism is a concept barely sketched by Marx in the Communist Manifesto. There was no recipe and it was based on a flawed premise : from each according to his capacites to each according to his needs. So i will not deny what you have stated.

Socialism is a different matter: the concept that there should be collective ownership of the means of production and the rent they produce. That is a different matter. It is not absent of flaws, the main one being the tragedy of the commons.

 

[Orangecat]

Feeling that we can't do anything about it is an attitude they force on us for their own benefit.

I have no problem with the system.
The trick is to get yourself some money. If you want to run shit, you need money.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The problem is investing in crypto or derivatives has higher yields

All derivatives or only some of them?
Which ones? What is their yield?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Let's go through the sequence of events for stocks
A startup issues 100,000 shares at $10 each. This is the IPO.
Several investors buy the shares.
The startup uses the money to buy equipment , hire people , rent an office.
--> Only the part used to buy equipment counts as capex, but so far so good, the money was invested adn goods were adquired.

The news breaks out that the startup has done a technological breakthrough.
People actively try to buy the shares and prices soar from $10 to $15
50,000 shares got sold at $15
Now the sellers have a total of $750,000 and the buyers have the shares.
If shares continue to go up more exchanges can happen but during this process nothing gets produced at all. Only the IPO was used for capex.
And ... that's the good case.
There are many other innovative financial instruments like crypto and derivatives that don't lead to the production of anything at all , they just shuffle the money around and while that shuffling is happening nothing is being produced with that money.

Now the sellers have a total of $750,000 and the buyers have the shares.
If shares continue to go up more exchanges can happen but during this process nothing gets produced at all.

And no capital gets destroyed.

 

[ralfy]

Its goal is to use the means of production to produce.