It is common thinking to blame the failure of Capitalism on 'greed' exhibited by some of the actors.
But that is like blaming the failure of an Operating System kernel (such as FreeDOS, Linux) on processes that attempt to hoard all or most of the CPU, RAM, Network throughput, Video Memory, etc.
We can't blame the failure of the system on any individual participants because the entire purpose of the system is to withstand processes or humans exhibiting 'bad' behavior so we all have a chance to 'win'.
I am trying to ask why Capitalism fails to inhibit the actions that eventually cause the system to become unstable and finally 'collapse'.
What 'rules' would a corrected system require and what would it disallow?
What causes excessive accumulation (what is the real cause of Profit), and how would a corrected system handle that value?
Since Profit only occurs during scarcity, treating it as a reward for the current owners tends to incent the withholding and even destruction of real solutions. For example, the US Farm Bill once again pays farmers to NOT grow for the purpose of keeping Price above Cost. Arable land is held out of production to increase scarcity because scarcity is the basis of Profit.
But the original purpose of production is *product*, not *profit*. We don't seek scarcity in small groups - we seek abundance. A family doesn't work against itself, it works together.
So what "flips this over"? Why are the goals of Capitalism inverted from our original goals of community? When and why do we switch gears from Freedom to Power?
Patrick Anderson
asked by Patrick Anderson
Alternative proposals, that emerged from last endorsing round
The different proposals do not represent the best proposals, nor the more popular.
Strictly speaking they are the pareto front of the set of proposals.
You can think of it as the smallest set of proposals such that every participant is represented.
Proposal
We are in danger of creating two meta-questions, which seems to suggest a meta-meta-question is required, which is getting a bit silly. Vilfredo is a system for people with different views to find agreement, so we should be able to do it with just one meta-question. Out of the two candidates, '...about the system used to govern global economic activity...' seems more open and with less assumptions than '...about capitalism...', so we should ask this question (or an even more open one).
Endorsed by:
mbarkhau vilfredo canderson Patrick Anderson Generation 8: Phase: Writing New Proposals
What should you do now? Write new proposals. How?
You can insert brand new ideas;
rewrite previous ideas (maybe trying to explain them better);
recover old ideas from the history of the question;
try to write a proposal that represent an acceptable compromise between different winning proposals. If you do this well, the new proposal will be endorsed by both the proponent of the first and of the second proposal, and you will have effectively joined those proposals.
Number of authors of new proposals: 0
Number of proposals written so far: 1
Propose an answer
Note: Proposals can be of any length and may include an abstract of up to 500 characters in length if you wish. When proposals are listed at the voting stage the abstract will be displayed if one exists, otherwise the full proposal will be displayed. For proposals longer than 1000 characters the abstract is mandatory.
Time since first proposal on this generation: 240 days, 8 hours and 37 minutes.
NOTE: 1 days must have passed between the first proposal and the moment when the questioner can move the question on.
View History of The Question. Here you can see who voted for what, what proposals were eliminated. You can recover past proposals that you think should not be lost. Maybe explaining them better.
