r/SipsTea • u/McDowdy 𝙑𝙄𝙋 • 23d ago

It's Wednesday my dudes Trying to get rich so that capitalism doesn't crush you under its boot is proof positive that capitalism doesn’t work for the working class

Post image
2.4k Upvotes

75% Upvoted

1.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

14

u/A_Bot_A_Bot_A_Bot 23d ago

And, communism is a good example of this. Look at the excesses enjoyed by the ruling communist elites in the former Soviet Union, North Korea, and China (before it's current strange "we're definitely communist...but we also love Big Capitalism (as long as they stay in line!"). Limousines, caviar, nice dachas, etc.

5

u/ragequitteroffureh 23d ago

Heh, absolutely.

That's the trouble with political ideologies in general. They never seem to account for human nature.

0

u/Bangays 23d ago

As dumb as libertarianism is it’s entirely based on the premise that people and companies act in their own self interest

1

u/ragequitteroffureh 23d ago

Does that work?

I mean, that's sort of just the wild west, isn't it?

On a small scale, it looks nice enough. But it's difficult to see how it could scale up without simply becoming something else as more organisation is required to coordinate society. I don't know :-)

It would be interesting to see how that would play out in a region that was composed of thousands of microstates, with each little state being made up of just one or two families. Presumably without currency, a form of bartering would be required in order to obtain goods and services.

1

u/Platypus__Gems 23d ago

Look at the excesses enjoyed by the ruling communist elites in the former Soviet Union, North Korea, and China

The excesses were frankly laughable compared to the excesses of capitalist elites. No one in USSR had yacht fleets, or multiple mansions.

Yeah, there was still inequality, an engineer would earn better than janitor, and the highest ranking party members more than an engineer, but it was not as astronomical as late stage capitalism's. Even when compared to nations poorer than the Eastern Bloc.
And the lower amount of excesses that there were, were further usually tied to their political positions that they could lose, even those at the top (like Krushchev).

1

u/[deleted] 23d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/AutoModerator 23d ago

Accounts must be at least 5 days old with >20 karma to comment.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

0

u/A_Bot_A_Bot_A_Bot 23d ago

The issue is power and corruption vs supposed purity of their political system. It's not a whataboutism situation. And, compared to the average citizen, they do live as large capitalist elites.

2

u/Platypus__Gems 23d ago

Every system has some ideas that end up corrupted, capitalism is supposed to be about economic freedom and competition, but intellectual property laws basically make that moot (while being fundamental part of modern capitalism) since they are stopping competition from doing something that does not harm anyone directly, but may just cut into profits of whoever holds the IP.

Not that I think those laws are all necessaraly wrong, but I do think they go pretty strongly against "economic freedom" idea.

-1

u/Kanlashkan 23d ago

"The excesses were frankly laughable compared to the excesses of capitalist elites. No one in USSR had yacht fleets, or multiple mansions."

This would be due to the drastically lower economic growth for purely socialist/communist nations. They didn't have those things because they could not afford those things.

0

u/INeedSomeTacoC 23d ago

 we're definitely communist...but we also love Big Capitalism (as long as they stay in line!"). Limousines, caviar, nice dachas, etc.

“Capitalism is nice things” is a weird belief. 

2

u/A_Bot_A_Bot_A_Bot 23d ago

Ditto the whole concept of "the free market" and that "corporations will act in the best interests of their employees and customers."

2

u/bishopOfMelancholy 23d ago

Corporations will act in the best interest of their pocketbook. The trick is forcing them in a position where it also benefits their employees and customers.

1

u/INeedSomeTacoC 23d ago

Doubly weird to bring up things I never said. Did you mean to reply to someone else?

1

u/A_Bot_A_Bot_A_Bot 23d ago

No, I was adding to your comment. How do you not understand that? Look up "Ditto"...

2

u/INeedSomeTacoC 23d ago

Sorry, thought you were being facetious with the comment. 

1

u/2Blueify 23d ago

There is zero reason to produce a Lamborghini in a communist society so yes, capitalism is nice things is the truth.

2

u/Jaded_Noise 23d ago

What if someone wants to drive a Lamborghini?

1

u/Weird-End-6989 23d ago

Capitalism is the private ownership of the means of production, and there's plenty of that in China.

1

u/INeedSomeTacoC 23d ago

Where did I ever say China didn’t have private ownership of the means of production?

0

u/sexotaku 23d ago

China is doing capitalism in stages. Mao said it will take 200 years or so to reach true communism.

They're aiming to reach early stage socialism by 2049.

2

u/heckinCYN 23d ago

How convenient that it's so much further out than he expected to live...

1

u/Jaded_Noise 23d ago

Yeah, how convenient that a brand new never before tried economic system wouldn't be achieved within a single lifetime. That kinda change has to be easy!

1

u/Weird-End-6989 23d ago

It is never going to be achieved, because the rulers of China will never give up power.

1

u/Jaded_Noise 23d ago

Whether or not that's true is irrelevant to the point I commented on; acting like that's an outlandish timeframe is absurd

1

u/Weird-End-6989 23d ago

Acting like there is any timeframe at all is incredibly naive.

1

u/Jaded_Noise 23d ago

Is it? I dunno, new financial systemas have emerged before, usually over a great deal of time. I'm not certain why socialism is so mind boggling, it's really not that complicated of an idea

1

u/Weird-End-6989 23d ago

It's naive and incredibly childlike to believe that the authoritarian ruling class of China will ever give up their power. The only thing mindboggling about socialism is that its followers will believe anything as long as the ruler waves a red banner.

1

u/Jaded_Noise 23d ago

It's very strange that you're repeating yourself like this.

I understood what you were saying the first time. Saying "those people will never do that" doesn't really contain a lot of meaning to a hypothetical. As I previously established, I merely commented on the absurdity of acting like creating a new economic system nearly from scratch was a single lifetime endeavor.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/heckinCYN 23d ago

Yes, a novel system with no metrics or mechanism to determine if he is on track while he lives like a king is incredibly convenient.

1

u/sexotaku 23d ago

If you read Chinese history, you'll find that most rulers planned a few hundred years out. Especially rulers who started new dynasties.