Individualism Is Stupid ( Or Why Libertarianism And Objectivism Is Stupid)

[The Grand Nudger]

We can at least agree that all institutions are not created equal. A casual stroll through yelp confirms this. And I think the invisible hand does exist-- the problem is that an oligarchy of shady individuals have got their hands on a remote control which makes it do their bidding. 

Certainly the case in some examples..but the oligarchy doesn't explain why the "invisible hand" doesn't appear where the oligarchy doesn't have theirs.  Notice we're talking about a novel interpretation of the invisible hand in the first place..something which no economist believes is actually thing that exists and effects markets (because the fundamental assumptions that must be made to reach such a conclusion are counterfactual), nor was it intended to mean as much by Smith.  It was a backhand reference made once in the context of how a person, seeking their own gain, might contribute to the wealth of their state.  

Capitalism is not self correcting in any non trivial way.  It may correct an inefficient flow of capital....may......but that means nothing at all beyond the confines of the system itself.  It's not necessarily connected to any real world tangible that you or I or any decent human being would consider a correction.  A "self correction" of capitalism could be, for example..moving production away from a cure and into treatment..because there's more opportunity to move money in the latter ergo the means of production are best put to that end.  

Look at the USSR. Those faulty institutions were broken, and they remained broken for the 70-ish years that the regime remained in power. China became so broken that it began sucking corporate dick (hard!) just to make ends meet. I'm not trying to undermine Marxism by referencing Adam Smith, but one must recognize that certain  elements of capitalism work. And if including those elements into a Marxist society helps that society achieve its ideals, then we ought to revise the theory accordingly.

Sure, capitalism works at moving capital.  It works as a means, but means have become ends and those with both have not so much tilted the table as they've flipped it over in the rest of the publics face and shat on it for good measure.  This is "the problem with capitalism", not that it "doesn't work".  It works -very- well for oligarchs. I could comment on the quality of that work, but ultimately my comments will reduce to a comment on means as ends.  In truth, and n reality, there's no such thing as an invisible hand or a free market...so if that's what people take "some parts of capitalism work" to mean, then they're just flat out wrong.

Private ownership and some sort of commerce between individuals is a great thing. It's a powerful inducement to produce, but only when the ends are realistically achievable. If they aren't, at some point, people realize they've been turned into mules and decide to stay home or phone it in on the job. This happens regardless of whether a society is operating on a capitalist or communist model. I also think, like we all think, that some combination of ideologies is the best way forward. I don;t thik people want to see things like national defense, police services, roads, or local government to become for profit entities under private ownership, and I assume that most of us would like to add to the list of things we already realize need to derive from or cater to public ownership and enfranchisement.

---

Here a favorite example of mine, it happens all over appalachia at present.  A county will spend an exorbitant amount of money creating an industrial complex, they will then lure in some business, say a toyota subsidiary..by offering them a tax free agreement for a period of x years.  They have even been known to facilitate said company in charging it's employees for the electricity the factory uses.  Sometimes they flat out hand them cash.  Ignore all of the handouts to preferred contractors inherent to this process..because I don't even need it.

In effect, the city (and it's citizens) have built and now maintain an industrial facility on their own dime.  They're simply asking the subsidiary to bring their product licensing and purchasing agreements to the building.  All too often, before the tax holiday wears off, the subsidiary suddenly realizes that they;re just not hitting their numbers..and they relocate to begin this scam all over again.  Migratory manufacturing.  Now, people say "why not put a lengthy clause in the initial agreement" - it's been done..the next county over decides not to include it and guess where the sub goes?  "Well, it boosts the local economy right?" No, not so much.  They aren't paying taxes and most of the wages go to franchised businesses with even lower wages.  The money leaves, and when the factory leaves the low wage capital exporting bubble bursts.  

So..if a county or ity was going to go through all that trouble anyway, and fuck themselves that hard anyway..maybe they should do what they were always going to do but use it for public access manufacturing?  Sure, sure..keep luring an endless procession of toyota subs in if we want...but there's always a park sitting idle due to the revolving door.  Even a small public space for rapid prototyping would be more useful and a much better longterm strategy.  It just sounds too much like communism for city managers to sell it in the kinds of places where predatory manufacturing is really digging in. Theres always somebody who wants to build something..and who knows, a local might have a good idea and simply lack the capital to set up their own shop. If a local guy or girl makes good on a limited prototype run...it would seem that they have a far stronger inducement to either remain loyal to the place they call home and set up a permanent line there..or hell, sell out the rights and come up with another idea. The only viable alternative for most wih the knowledge and idea but not the means..is to be complicit in the predatory manufacturing cycle and, most likely, leave when the company leaves (or simply be un/underemployed again). That's -exactly- what I did for as long as it took me to realize that I wasn't making upward progress as I was contributing to the downward spiral.

It's difficult, imo, to assert that the way we do things now doesn't leave a mountain of underutilized potential and wasted productivity to rot in favor of stuffing a select few assholes coffers. That is, however, capitalism working as intended. As most ideas (even good one..sometimes I think -especially the good ones-) will fail..and any profits, if any profits, are not as immediately realizable. The money moves more efficiently when we do things the way we've been them, even if the tangible goods we use to justify our actions in that regard commonly fail to materialize.