QUORA: 'Why doesn't capitalism work for everyone?'
I posted this answer:
The question is invalid, because it is based on an invalid premise. Capitalism doesn't "work" or “not work" for or against anyone, and is not intended to do so. That’s collectivist terminology. Capitalism, being individualist in ideological orientation, protects, through a government of limited powers, individual rights to freedom of action. That, in a nutshell, is the meaning of the unalienable individual rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
Capitalism leaves people free to work for themselves. Capitalism, of course, which entails wider freedoms, such as the rights to freedom of speech, freedom of religion (conscience), and right to counsel. In economics specifically, Capitalism means the freedom to work and trade with others, to mutual voluntary advantage, in pursuit of one's own individual flourishing, and to keep and use what property one earns.
How well this freedom “works” for any particular individual depends on individual moral character, skill, personal circumstances, productive ability, motivation, and a myriad of other factors unique to that individual. As to those few who fail to work even minimally successfully for themselves, that is an empirical question as to why the individual failed, not to why Capitalism didn’t “work” for him. Capitalism recognizes one’s freedom, and that’s it. Obviously, freedom will not “work” for individuals who don’t use their freedom productively. And people whose work is not valued by consumers will not do too well. There is no free lunch in nature, or under capitalism.
In general, virtually everyone does well under this freedom, but to widely varying degrees. Unmotivated people who resent the necessity of supporting themselves can usually find work, thanks to the entrepreneurial energy of business owners who flourish because of their freedom to do so. Motivated but handicapped people have better opportunities thanks to the advance of technology that Capitalist freedom facilitates. Even the people who are unable to work for themselves get along better. The history of leaving people free as individuals to work for themselves is a history of massive "excess" wealth creation--wealth beyond what an individual needs for personal consumption. This wealth can be and often is used for not just investment and innovation but for charity, as well. In the 19th Century, before the welfare state and when America was much less prosperous than today, private charity was exploding as general prosperity rose.
Of course, we don’t have Capitalism today, except in bits and pieces. Because Capitalism protects individuals’ rights to work for themselves, it is not endearing to moochers, powerlusters, or the envious who resent the need to work and thus resent those who do. This is why Capitalism is constantly under attack. But to the extent we have Capitalism, we have the freedom to pursue what works for us. So, stop waiting for Capitalism to work for you, and go to it. It’s up to you.
Related Reading:
QUORA: ‘Given that I live in a capitalist society, how can I avoid having my labor exploited?’
QUORA *: 'How is capitalism good despite the fact that it creates higher and lower classes?'
QUORA *: 'How is capitalism good despite the fact that it creates higher and lower classes?'
QUORA *: 'How is capitalism good despite the fact that it creates higher and lower classes?'
Inequality Has Surged Since 1989, but the Lifestyle Gap Has Shrunk by John Tamny for FEE
QUORA: ‘How is capitalism NOT a zero-sum game?’
5 comments:
We have only bits and pieces of capitalism today, yet we're lots more prosperous than in the 19th. century when we had nearly laissez-faire capitalism. So it must be that the advancement of technology has been enough to afford statists the ability to choke off lots of our rights but still leave us the ability to be more prosperous on our own with the freedom we still have. So if we had complete laissez-faire, it becomes easier to imagine we can actually have some of the seemingly fantastic things we've occasionally heard about or can each individually imagine on our own.
Your description of Capitalism is simply Libertarienism.
A system of no government. Just people doing as they wish free from any moral or legal encumbrance beyond self-interest.
bt1138, I equate Capitalism with a free society. What you describe is anarchy, which is obviously what I am NOT describing. A free society requires a system of proper, objective laws and a constitution. Obviously, a free society cannot exist under anarchy. But rather than quibble over a label, here’s an exercise you can do. Read my answer again, but remove the word “Capitalism” from the question and answer, and substitute “a free society.” Maybe that will clarify things for you.
bt1138: My only description of capitalism was laissez-faire, not anarchy or libertarianism. Laissez-faire is just another word for free society, meaning, free by law from crime by private entities and also from government itself. So, under laissez-faire or free society, there is law and government, limited strictly to prohibiting crime, resolving disputes in criminal and civil courts, and deterring foreign aggression. So, it's not just doing whatever you want, no holds barred, as in anarchy or libertarianism.
Here's another way to answer the question of why capitalism doesn't work for everybody.
Capitalism doesn't actually work for anybody. It's really just a system of laws respecting unalienable individual rights, and a government to enforce those laws. That leaves everybody free to work for themselves and make things work for themselves. Capitalism doesn't work for OR against anybody. Some people can just work better than others, and those who just can't make it can get all the charity they need. But, capitalism (the law and government) just sits there and does nothing until somebody forcibly stops, or tries to stop, somebody. THEN it works for the person forcibly stopped or threatened. When the incident is resolved, it stops and sits there again until needed when another such incident occurs. Of course, such incidents are always occurring, so law and government is always working, but it does only THAT work.
Post a Comment