No it doesn't in my opinion. If you look at all sports people as if they are (or possibly) cheating...you do them a diservice. For every one cheat you name I could name 10 that have not. Be fair.
more than you think but cheating is such a broad word - the word cheating is a word that gives them more disservice than thinking they all use some sort of drug
*Gardener* good point on the Amish hybrid economy. Excellent point! Capitalism isn't the problem, it's the MIND. Socialism would work perfectly if people had a hive mind. Capitalism would work wonders if Charity was the #1 goal in America. If every time a person did a good thing it was on the front of the newspaper, we'd have a culture that rewarded giving. If people value'd McDonalds kid's meals collectibles the most, our world would shift overnight to accomodate the sale, trade, and collection of these toys. Our economics isn't the problem, it's people's decisions. Self-interest cannot ever be gotten rid of because it is the prime motive of all living beings. There is nothing wrong with self-motive either. But what can be done is help broaden what one's sense of self is. Families often include the unit in a sense of self, and the happiness of the family equates your wellbeing. But this isn't an economic problem, it's concerns the walls that people put up emotionally barring humans from others. And dude, I'm not talkin "Wall street" or just what I hear on the news. And aggregate supply and demand DO change!!!! I don't know why you keep saying they stay the same. First of all, our population changes. That alone increases aggregate supply and demand. And CONTROLLING supply and demand? You don't realize how dangerous of a road this is buddy. When you manipulate something, it's always a question of WHO? The "Economy"? You guess the person at the top making the policies (who has NO oversight) has no alternative agenda when making policies? If not, you're a fool. You can't control supply and demand. That's like saying "Ohhhh we're closing down your business to control aggregate supply of X commodity. Sorry!!! Work at Mcdonalds." "Ohh sorry Family of 6. But you can't buy any more rice. You see, we hit our aggregate demand quota, and you can't get your rice until next year. Sorry." "You know, aggregate demand is gettin a little too high. Let's kill about a million citizens, then we'll get to the equilibrium point!". WHat you do when you IMPOSE laws or manipulations is that you GIVE freedom by TAKING freedom. You don't seem to understand this no matter how much I say it. All LIFE is a giant equation, and you cannot take from one side without subtracting from the other. This is ur ideal society. People working and doing things that are good for the general society. Maybe gvt. should help the people get on the right track, so that their economic health and long term-well being is guaranteed. Maybe the government can start beneficial industries and give the people jobs!! A job for everyone, guaranteed survival in the social jungle, provided by our caring government!! Wouldn't you love to work in Communist Russia? I'll tell you this. Whether political or economic, the higher levels of organization (government, or the "economy) must STEM from the lower (The people). What patriotism does try to help broaden sense of self to include the country (or the economy). And nothing's wrong with that. But Nazi's also had great pride of "self", and look how they got manipulated. So before talking "patriotism" you gotta deal with proper checks of balances of those who spit this propaganda. When dealing with mega corporations that have the power of countries, I would say that *maybe* a gvt. could have the right to enforce a rule or two. But we have a system that allows me and my neighbor do make an arrangement that best suits us. Then him and his neighbor, onto infinity. And THAT'S what an economy is. But you can't start treating the economy like it's some being that the people are servants too. The economy is a servant of the people. It's just like how the U.S. government had turned from a tool of the people to our master.
it's not the overriding influencing factor. it's what capitalism is based upon. john locke, the father of capitalism's theory: "people tend to do what's in their own self interest." i don't see how greed would change my theory at all.
There's a difference between outright greed and a desire to prosper and be rewarded for one's efforts within the confines of the laws of a society. One has to remember Locke was the son of a wealthy family.
Actually I own very little and have never been part of that. But more and more I see our young people choose their fields of interest based not on their passions or talents but on how much they can earn after college. I see a pervasive mentality that equates wealth and excess with what constitutes a successful person with no consideration for how that wealth and excess was gained. Those that do it illegally and immorally are lionized sometimes more than those that do it through honest hardwork.
Excellent point gardener on the difference between greed and the desire to prosper. I'm picking a job not based on interest (nursing), but I'll use the income from that job to pursue my passions. Of course no job bores me (I am naturally curious) but I figure either do what you love or gain the means to do what you love. Most people live their whole lives thinking of how to pay the bills, what kind of car they want, and how to afford house payments. I plan on making an environment where there are few bills, no need for far transit, and no debt. Creating a world which gives to YOU seems like a much better goal than participating in a world that drains you.
I think that's the part the Amish and other closed societies get right. If a mixed and open society could harness that it just might work. There was a time right after World War II when it looked like the western world was on to something. But then we lost that vision. I am sure you are going to get jumped for the gives to you part.
Ohhhh I agree 100%. Most people become victims of society. THey'll pay 90% of their income in taxes and still work 50 hours a week to "pay the bills". They have the victim mentality instead of the wealth mentality (The people who invest and make money work for them). Like me? Having my tailor made ponds which I could electro-shock fish instead of fishing. You simply dole out shares of fish per day at a sustainable level, and you don't have to waste time sitting at a pond with hook line and sinker. Wild caught healthy fish with ease ^^. And of course many projects to reduce utilities, turning yards into giant wild edible gardens (ramps + dandelion kimchi???). Not living off the land necessarily, but consciously utilizing nature's balance to give you most of what you need.
i dunno man. i'd still say capitalism works off the idea of greed. saying anything else is just splitting hairs. you work for that dollar in your own pocket. i'm not anti-capitalism by the way. and it's pretty irrelevant what his background is. his theories are still accepted by economists today, so i have a tendency to agree with them.
So why did you say 'we'? Yet you incessantly whine about your own lack of wealth. If money was never important to you, why do we have to hear you complain about it so much? Personally, I would advise anyone to find out what they enjoy in life, and then try to make lots of money doing it. The two things are not mutually exclusive.
What's greedy about wanting things, or working for things? If you cultivate plants you raise them for you to eat, not rabbits. I work so I can put food on my table. There's a difference between self-interest and greed. If you equate the two then why don't you just work your life off so you can make my dreams come true? There's a difference between free trade for mutual benefit and running an unsustainable empire at the cost of nations. Don't blame the system, blame the people. Free trade in a monestary could lead to the benefit of all. Free trade among heartless murderers may not.
I used we because it's what I've observed from the media as an American. I complain only when the rules I am used to operating under change. I operate on very little, small changes affect my life, much like lobbyists complain when business may be forced to pay up. No they are not. But when government establishes a tiered system that rewards wealth before the entire societal good then it becomes a problem. When wealth and business becomes more worthy of bailout and consideration than individual well being then you have to ask what function is government serving? Is it soley to perserve wealth or to provide for a society?
Not sure I am with you on shocking an entire pond to retrieve one or two fish. I prefer the sitting on the bank version. I never consider that a waste of time. Instead I consider it time spent in reflection of the fishes life and environment and my own many times. What I catch I eat. What get's away hasn't been harmed. I don't even fish much today. $40.00 for a fishing license is outside my budget.
I never said capitalism works off greed. I said excessive greed is the element you left out of your premise. Capitalism works on the premise of being rewarded for your efforts. When it get's screwed up is when those that don't exert any effort seek to profit and want their profits protected from all scrutiny and exempt from any societal resposibility. They wish to profit from the infrastructure but they don't want to contribute to it. And they wish to minimize any consideration for the effort that labor contributes to their wealth. Locke's background like Ayn Rand's is very relevant. I revise my previous statement: You are definitely not an idealist, you are looking for a simple calculation to insure wealth to the wealthy without personal sacrifice and effort. And that will always be a flawed premise. For those that labor will at some point sit back and take a breath and realize something isn't quite fair. And the rich will never be willing to adequately provide to the extent that their workers remain happy morons. But they will never be willing to actually labor. They wish to profit without effort.
