Problem with your model of capitalism, Tiberius, is that you assume gives consumers from all walks of life a fair chance.
But it doesn't.
If your parents make all the money such that you coast off of it like a socialite (the Hilton family comes to mind), is it your wealth because you worked hard through capitalism?
No. You won it by birthright.
There you go -- glaring fault with capitalism right there: does not factor in initial resources for any individual being disproportionately unequal (between the common plebe in America and the 1%'s kids, who get's to Harvard on a regular basis? Is it purely because those 'regular basis' people are endemically smarter, better? Or is it simply that they come from a moneyed class?)
Consider the example in the parenthesis -- ask yourself "Is it in anyway fair for competing in a Capitalist system if the stakes are endemically unfair?"
Because it is -- people with massive amounts of resources continue to win big while people with few/lesser resources continue to lose.
This is the problem of capitalism -- in a fair setting, businesses/individuals with the best ability to outmarket, outproduce, etc their opponent succeeds.
But in an unfair setting, businesses/individuals with the most money can:
- simply buy the better product/producer and make it theirs
- undersell their crappy product aka engage in a price war (Carnegie was notorious for driving people out of business because he could tolerate a price war longer)
- invest their resources into changing:
-- popular opinion (Hearst and Du Pont for getting cannabis criminalized through calling hemp 'marijuana' -- a term unfamiliar to Americans at the time -- and pushed propaganda through his newspaper)
-- buying off politicians (do I really need an example? Ok -- howbout SOPA/PIPA?)
The most egregious example of "being too successful" (really Tiberius, really? You claim there "is no such thing?)?
Let's replace "being too successful" with something else:
"being too powerful" -- you can buy off politicians and government. You can own a newspaper and work with your friend to induce a public panic and cause the criminalization of a goddamn plant that everyone liked.
Nope -- there is no such thing as being too successful. Gotcha. I trust you. ~
But it doesn't.
If your parents make all the money such that you coast off of it like a socialite (the Hilton family comes to mind), is it your wealth because you worked hard through capitalism?
No. You won it by birthright.
There you go -- glaring fault with capitalism right there: does not factor in initial resources for any individual being disproportionately unequal (between the common plebe in America and the 1%'s kids, who get's to Harvard on a regular basis? Is it purely because those 'regular basis' people are endemically smarter, better? Or is it simply that they come from a moneyed class?)
Consider the example in the parenthesis -- ask yourself "Is it in anyway fair for competing in a Capitalist system if the stakes are endemically unfair?"
Because it is -- people with massive amounts of resources continue to win big while people with few/lesser resources continue to lose.
This is the problem of capitalism -- in a fair setting, businesses/individuals with the best ability to outmarket, outproduce, etc their opponent succeeds.
But in an unfair setting, businesses/individuals with the most money can:
- simply buy the better product/producer and make it theirs
- undersell their crappy product aka engage in a price war (Carnegie was notorious for driving people out of business because he could tolerate a price war longer)
- invest their resources into changing:
-- popular opinion (Hearst and Du Pont for getting cannabis criminalized through calling hemp 'marijuana' -- a term unfamiliar to Americans at the time -- and pushed propaganda through his newspaper)
-- buying off politicians (do I really need an example? Ok -- howbout SOPA/PIPA?)
The most egregious example of "being too successful" (really Tiberius, really? You claim there "is no such thing?)?
Let's replace "being too successful" with something else:
"being too powerful" -- you can buy off politicians and government. You can own a newspaper and work with your friend to induce a public panic and cause the criminalization of a goddamn plant that everyone liked.
Nope -- there is no such thing as being too successful. Gotcha. I trust you. ~
Slave to the Patriarchy no more
