Describe capitalism in one sentence

[Anonymous]

We’ll sell you the solutions to the problems we create.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“The worst economic system available, except for every other economic system ever devised”.

This. It sucks sometimes - but it’s still better than literally everything else.

The Nordic System- capitalism paired with a welfare state and heavy regulation- seems to have resulted in better outcomes by just about every measure than pure capitalism

That’s all well and good when you have a monolithic society in terms of race, culture and ideology, and a Teutonic work ethic that necessitates discipline and preparation for survival of the long winters with a short growing season.

When you have a bunch of people who are all alike and have a societally ingrained predisposition to really hard work, it’s easy to understand how such nations made their respective systems work.


We don’t have a monoculture like the Scandinavians do. We’re composed of people from all over the world. And many of them are from places where the growing season is year-round and doesn’t require the advanced planning mentality of the high latitudes. Good luck using a Scandinavian economic model here. It won’t work. Americans are too different and divergent.

So diversity is overrated, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The rich get richer and the poor get poorer

Everybody likes Darwinism until their neighbor gets a better car than they have.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The rich get richer and the poor get poorer

Everybody likes Darwinism until their neighbor gets a better car than they have.

Someone doesn’t understand what Darwinism means

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“The worst economic system available, except for every other economic system ever devised”.

This. It sucks sometimes - but it’s still better than literally everything else.

The Nordic System- capitalism paired with a welfare state and heavy regulation- seems to have resulted in better outcomes by just about every measure than pure capitalism

That’s all well and good when you have a monolithic society in terms of race, culture and ideology, and a Teutonic work ethic that necessitates discipline and preparation for survival of the long winters with a short growing season.

When you have a bunch of people who are all alike and have a societally ingrained predisposition to really hard work, it’s easy to understand how such nations made their respective systems work.


We don’t have a monoculture like the Scandinavians do. We’re composed of people from all over the world. And many of them are from places where the growing season is year-round and doesn’t require the advanced planning mentality of the high latitudes. Good luck using a Scandinavian economic model here. It won’t work. Americans are too different and divergent.

So diversity is overrated, right?

No, but if different people & groups are playing with different rules & priorities, don’t be shocked when some individuals & groups get ahead of other individuals & groups. In fact, with the amount of diversity in the US, it would be weird if everybody had equal outcomes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Bill, Steve, Jeff: only in America.

Larry, Moe, Curly: also only in America. Coincidence? I think not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Capitalism: when your poor are obese and watch cable tv.

Obese and tv are not good things. Why do you act like they are anything but an indicator of poverty?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bill, Steve, Jeff: only in America.

Larry, Moe, Curly: also only in America. Coincidence? I think not.

Hey, that's "joincidence" with a C!

[Anonymous]

The disdain of profit is due to ignorance, and to an attitude that we may if we wish admire in the ascetic who has chosen to be content with a small share of the riches of this world, but which, when actualized in the form of restrictions on profits of others, is selfish to the extent that it imposes asceticism, and indeed deprivations of all sorts, on others.

[Anonymous]

All people, however fanatical they may be in their zeal to disparage and to fight capitalism, implicitly pay homage to it by passionately clamoring for the products it turns out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:All people, however fanatical they may be in their zeal to disparage and to fight capitalism, implicitly pay homage to it by passionately clamoring for the products it turns out.

So then it’s the same as heroin. Sounds great!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“The worst economic system available, except for every other economic system ever devised”.

This. It sucks sometimes - but it’s still better than literally everything else.

The Nordic System- capitalism paired with a welfare state and heavy regulation- seems to have resulted in better outcomes by just about every measure than pure capitalism

That’s all well and good when you have a monolithic society in terms of race, culture and ideology, and a Teutonic work ethic that necessitates discipline and preparation for survival of the long winters with a short growing season.

When you have a bunch of people who are all alike and have a societally ingrained predisposition to really hard work, it’s easy to understand how such nations made their respective systems work.


We don’t have a monoculture like the Scandinavians do. We’re composed of people from all over the world. And many of them are from places where the growing season is year-round and doesn’t require the advanced planning mentality of the high latitudes. Good luck using a Scandinavian economic model here. It won’t work. Americans are too different and divergent.

Your dog whistle is showing

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:All people, however fanatical they may be in their zeal to disparage and to fight capitalism, implicitly pay homage to it by passionately clamoring for the products it turns out.

Then why not allow monopolies?

[Anonymous]

The great danger to the consumer is the monopoly— whether private or governmental. His most effective protection is free competition at home and free trade throughout the world. The consumer is protected from being exploited by one seller by the existence of another seller from whom he can buy and who is eager to sell to him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

The great danger to the consumer is the monopoly— whether private or governmental. His most effective protection is free competition at home and free trade throughout the world. The consumer is protected from being exploited by one seller by the existence of another seller from whom he can buy and who is eager to sell to him.

That is not capitalism.

What about bankruptcy laws and bailing out banks when they are about to fail?

That’s not capitalism either