Robber Baron? Or capitalism in action?

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

If you have a cellphone, I call bull. Do you look into every product and ensure it contains no components made in china?

And another one who needs to keep up.

[Mountain Man]

Not in every economic system utilised by human beings.

Are really naive enough to think there are economic systems that are immune to greed and exploitation?

You're starting to sound suspiciously like one of those Occupy Wall Street nuts who insisted they were poor because the people who worked weren't giving them money. Meanwhile, they idled their time away in tent cities instead of doing something productive to improve their lives, like getting a job.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

So, how am I talking "Abstract"

Your comment to me did not tally with the definition of capitalism.

You wrote "You can't expect Capitalism to deal with pollution in the same way you can't expect modern medicine to figure out how many computers to sell and for what price.

Economic systems aren't really designed, on their own, to handle pollution. That requires intervention into the market, to do. Also, recognize that Capitalism is not the same as a laissez faire free market"

We agree that capitalism is an economic system but it is also the basis by which goods and services are produced based on supply and demand. Capitalism therefore depends on a practical enterprise and cannot exist without a market and a product or a product and a market [depending on what you consider comes first].

It therefore can and should be expected to deal with pollution because pollution is invariably a by-product of the industries that provide the product/wealth by which the capitalist system profits.

And you were mistaken when you stated that "Capitalism is not the same as a laissez faire free market". According to Investopedia in its purest form that is precisely what Capitalism is.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

Are really naive enough to think there are economic systems that are immune to greed and exploitation?

There are some. Usually small scale and often tribal.

[CivilDiscourse]

Your comment to me did not tally with the definition of capitalism.

You wrote "You can't expect Capitalism to deal with pollution in the same way you can't expect modern medicine to figure out how many computers to sell and for what price.

Economic systems aren't really designed, on their own, to handle pollution. That requires intervention into the market, to do. Also, recognize that Capitalism is not the same as a laissez faire free market"

We agree that capitalism is an economic system but it is also the basis by which goods and services are produced based on supply and demand. Capitalism therefore depends on a practical enterprise and cannot exist without a market and a product or a product and a market [depending on what you consider comes first].

It therefore can and should be expected to deal with pollution because pollution is invariably a by-product of the industries that provide the product/wealth by which the capitalist system profits.

And you were mistaken when you stated that "Capitalism is not the same as a laissez faire free market". According to Investopedia in its purest form that is precisely what Capitalism is.

Pure capitalism, which pretty much nobody practices.

As for that, pollution isn't the buying or selling of goods,. You yourself called it a byproduct (i.e. it's tangential).The only way to expect the economic system of capitalism deal with pollution would be to make the market care about pollution.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

Pure capitalism, which pretty much nobody practices.

That does not alter the fact that The purest form of capitalism is free market or laissez-faire capitalism.

As for that, pollution isn't the buying or selling of goods,. You yourself called it a byproduct (i.e. it's tangential).

A by-product is not necessarily tangential.

The only way to expect the economic system of capitalism deal with pollution would be to make the market care about pollution.

The way to make the economic system of capitalism deal with pollution is to make it pay for polluting [and make those fines huge and universal] and if it won't pay then close it down and/or take that industry into public ownership.

[CivilDiscourse]

The way to make the economic system of capitalism deal with pollution is to make it pay for polluting [and make those fines huge and universal] and if it won't pay then close it down and/or take that industry into public ownership.

You mean regulation, like I already said?

Rein in? Not the right phrase to me. You have to have regulations in place to manage those things that companies touch that are not actually related to the buying/selling of goods.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

You mean regulation, like I already said?

Regulation requires capitalism being subject to legislation, penalties etc. Therefore it is reined in because it is prevented from operating in its purest form.

[Mountain Man]

There are some. Usually small scale and often tribal.

I can't think of a single one that isn't affected to some degree by greed and exploitation. Even Jesus' small band had an embezzler.

[tabibito]

Under any economic system, you'll find people charging as much as they can while paying as little as they can. That's just human nature. The issue at hand is how each system deals with this universal problem. Traditionally, capitalism requires the least invasive checks and balances while socialism and communism require the most oppressive.

And those checks and balances, including democracy itself, have their foundations in socialistic philosophy.
_______________________________________

Oh please - pointing to Venezuela, Cuba, Russia, China as examples of failed socialism - really - those are military dictatorships, no more socialist than they are democratic: if I remember rightly Russia also styles itself "democratic" in its self-proclaimed title. It is no less valid to call Russia an example of democracy than it is to call it an example of socialism. Try looking at the Scandinavian countries that are in fact socialist - tempered enough with capitalism that people are not actively prevented from becoming rich.

[NorrinRadd]

Any system -- economic, justice, whatever -- not directly and personally run by an omniscient, omnibenevolent being will ultimately suck.

[tabibito]

Any system -- economic, justice, whatever -- not directly and personally run by an omniscient, omnibenevolent being will ultimately suck.

Benevolent (or at least non-malevolent) dictatorships tend to have a long shelf life; the problem being that the societies tend to be stable to the point of stagnation.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

I can't think of a single one that isn't affected to some degree by greed and exploitation. Even Jesus' small band had an embezzler.

Perhaps you need to read up on some social anthropology, especially dealing with hunter gatherer societies.

[Mountain Man]

Perhaps you need to read up on some social anthropology, especially dealing with hunter gatherer societies.

Perhaps you need to actually defend your claims instead of asking others to do your legwork.

[Mountain Man]

And those checks and balances, including democracy itself, have their foundations in socialistic philosophy.
_______________________________________

Oh please - pointing to Venezuela, Cuba, Russia, China as examples of failed socialism - really - those are military dictatorships, no more socialist than they are democratic: if I remember rightly Russia also styles itself "democratic" in its self-proclaimed title. It is no less valid to call Russia an example of democracy than it is to call it an example of socialism. Try looking at the Scandinavian countries that are in fact socialist - tempered enough with capitalism that people are not actively prevented from becoming rich.

Interesting that the only example of a successful "socialist" economy you can think of is one "tempered with capitalism", which is to say not actually socialist.