December 20, 2001
From the desk of Mindles H. Dreck:The Great Moral Case for Capitalism
Quiet and manly blogger Richard Bennett's makes an aside that reminds me of something important:
Now that NSI doesn't have a monopoly on domain registration, discount brokers are on the scene offering domain names for as little as $5 for a UK domain, or $9 for a American one (ending in .com, .org, .net). 123-reg and Domains for $10 offer basic registration services, and actual DNS management (the thing that directs web surfers and e-mail to tour server) is avaible anywhere from free to whatever you want to pay for it. ZoneEdit and My Domain offer it for free. Are any of these guys going to stay in business?See, that's just the thing about competition. We all like to make fun of competing companies if they price themselves out of business. Remember, however, its the consumer that gets the profits they don't earn.
Subroutine: Soap box
Ever wonder how so many things are cheaper, such as food, appliances, etc.? It hardly costs anything to deliver 1950-level healthcare now. It's 2001 level healthcare that's expensive. As it happens, the 2001-level fridge is less expensive than the 1950-level fridge. Guess which one's better? More energy efficient?
Another example is telecommunications. Investors dole out money based on business models that anticipated 17-cent a minute long distance. They doled out so much money Sprint is now offering 2.2 cents a minute. Go look at Qwest's stock price over the last year. Then look at your long distance bill.
In recessions, profit margins shrink. (8 to 6% in these last two business cycles). Know who gets the difference? You.
Capitalism is the best friend the little guy ever had. (a phrase I'm borrowing from Woody Brock) The only economies that grew consistently in the 20th century are capitalist economies. Lifespans doubled and income quadrupled as a result. Compare that to your average middle-eastern kleptocracy - growth averaging negative 1% for years on end. Where is the "inequality-bred" terrorism coming from?
Capitalism is the best friend the little guy ever had. People who don't see that are blind or delusional. People who impugn capitalism with fictitious evil motives are immoral.
End soap box. Return.
Posted by Mindles H. Dreck at December 20, 2001 04:38 PM | Technorati inbound links"Capitalism is the best friend the little guy ever had. People who don't see that are blind or delusional. People who impugn capitalism with fictitious evil motives are immoral."
This is being a little dogmatic and over the top.
No economic or political system devised by human beings is ever going to be perfect, so to claim that we have a flawless system and then to also brand critics of that system "immoral" is getting a wee bit carried away.
Different people will have different ideas about the metrics for measuring the best economic system also. Is the one that provides the highest average income, or the highest guaranteed minimum? (I would say the former). What average should you use - the median or the arithmetic mean? (Wealth redistribution can increase the median whilst lowering the mean)
Capitalism is the best system out there, but it has it's flaws and there's no harm done in recognising them.
Posted by: Chris Hayton on March 12, 2002 08:32 PMI don't mind being over the top every now and then. Hence the "soap box" tags.
I don't really disagree with you, becuase you have conveniently made up stuff I supposedly said and then criticized it:
1) I didn't say capitalism is perfect, I say it has created an enormous benefit for mankind. Likewise, I have no problem recognizing it's flaws. It is possible to do enormous good and be flawed simultaneously.
2)I don't call all capitalism's critics immoral, I call those who describe it's motivation as "evil" immoral because they obviously have good and evil mixed up.
That, perhaps, you might call over the top ("wee" or no) - maybe I should have just said "confused".
Posted by: "Mindles H. Dreck" on March 12, 2002 09:17 PMI think you are putting words into my mouth also, because I never said that you were calling ALL critics of capitalism immoral.
It's not that I have an issue with you labelling all critics of capitalism immoral (because you weren't), I have an issue with you labelling ANY critics as immoral and discounting their arguments on that basis.
How is it ever 'immoral' to criticise an economic system? Is God a capitalist?
As for your other point, I stand corrected. On re-reading of your post, your praise of capitalism wasn't as extreme as the I implied. However, dragging morality into it is what gave me the impression that you were arguing from a dogmatic and absolutist point of view
Posted by: Chris Hayton on March 13, 2002 05:46 PMWell, I was a little dogmatic, so let's call it a draw.
Morality does come into it. I think the consequences of capitalism make an argument for its morality. Other systems do not do as well for their citizens (and others), which, at some level, makes it immoral to pursue them.
You raise an interesting point that I discussed with my wife this evening:
1) is it possible for criticism to be immoral? (is this immoral? Was it immoral for Jackson to criticize the abolitionists using religious arguments? In criticizing abolitionists he advocated slavery, which raises the next question -
2) Is it immoral to advocate immoral acts if no action is taken?
Criticism is, by definition, advocacy of some alternative, so if the answer to 2) is yes, then I think the answer to one must be yes.
Then again, this sort of philosophizing is frustrating to me.
My point here is that capitalism has a moral defense, and I feel strongly about it (as strongly as I feel about democracy - I am cooking a post on that). So let me just amend my comment to say that people who think capitalism is immoral are confusing good and evil, as I suggested above.
Posted by: "Mindles H. Dreck" on March 13, 2002 09:35 PM"....(as strongly as I feel about democracy - I am cooking a post on that). "
I look forward to reading it
Cheers
Posted by: Chris Hayton on March 13, 2002 10:04 PMComments are Closed.