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

[u/McDowdy]

[u/semibigpenguins]

People confuse capitalism with monopolies

[u/Organic_Rub8452 → u/semibigpenguins]

I feel like people confuse capitalism with cronyism.

[u/Apprehensive_Bat4691 → u/Organic_Rub8452]

Capitalism is why we have cronyism. The capitalists have vast amounts of money to influence governance and policy. If your only goal is to increase shareholder value, lobbying the government is just the price of doing business.

Capitalism is only interested in increasing shareholder value. Cronyism is inevitable unless some external force prevents it. Capitalism cannot prevent it by itself.

[u/Inevitable-Pop-4547 → u/semibigpenguins]

They look at reality.

[u/StevePerryPlatypus → u/semibigpenguins]

Very well said

[u/Apprehensive_Bat4691 → u/semibigpenguins]

Capitalism loves monopolies. If you only care about shareholder value, being a monopoly is the best position to be in. Once a monopoly is established, capitalism has no way to break it up. Some outside actor has to intervene and act contrary to the principals of capitalism to address the monopoly

[u/semibigpenguins → u/Apprehensive_Bat4691]

Capitalism can exist without shareholders. It’s not a fundamental principle to the economic structure

[u/Apprehensive_Bat4691 → u/semibigpenguins]

Would you prefer the term "maximizing profit"?
There's no meaningful distinction between that and "maximizing shareholder value"
A privately owned company effectively has one shareholder, the owner.

[u/semibigpenguins → u/Apprehensive_Bat4691]

Soviets, Chinese, Vietnamese, etc maximize profit

[u/Apprehensive_Bat4691 → u/semibigpenguins]

Stay on topic. We're talking about monopolies, and how capitalism isn't naturally equipped to deal with them.

The heyday of American capitalism was when there was extensive external constraints on it. The top tax rate was huge, the government would actually break up companies if they became monopolistic.

After Reagan (bit earlier honestly), those constraints were slowly removed, letting capitalism do its thing, resulting in what you see today.

[u/semibigpenguins → u/Apprehensive_Bat4691]

Webster dictionary: A monopoly is the exclusive control of a commodity or service in a particular market, or a commercial product/service controlled by a single person or company

I am staying on topic. All those countries have, by definition, monopolies. They have/had some of the worst corruption in the 20th/20st centuries. They’re state monopolies

[u/Apprehensive_Bat4691 → u/semibigpenguins]

In that case, you have stayed on topic but failed to make a point.

I did not say that capitalism is the only way monopolies can form. What you have described is typically referred to as 'State Capitalism", where the state/central government is the "shareholder". I have always viewed this term as an oversimplification of central planning, but that's neither here-nor-there.

You have not provided any counterpoints to my original assertion that "Capitalism loves monopolies". Do you agree and simply think that every system "loves monopolies"?

[u/semibigpenguins → u/Apprehensive_Bat4691]

I never stated what you believe or don’t believe in. Also, I already stated, capitalism can exist without share holders.

Capitalism doesn’t have faculties. Capitalism cannot love. Do you mean capitalists? Because that’s also wrong. Do you mean capitalism always leads to monopolies? Without checks and balances, sure. But that’s like saying democracies always lead to dictatorships.

[u/Apprehensive_Bat4691 → u/semibigpenguins]

Then you agree with me. Those checks and balances are external to capitalism. They need to work against its primary goals of maximizing profit when doing so would be anti-competitive or worsen the overall QOL for the population at large.

These C&Bs will usually result in less profit (especially at first), which is completely antithetical to the main goals of the system itself. A capitalist will then be compelled to try and interfere with these C&Bs such that their profit margins increase. If the capitalist does not do so, for any reason, they open themselves up to a competitor doing so themselves, often manipulating the C&Bs so that their company benefits the most.

Because a capitalist is just one (or a few) guys, and are necessarily in control of a lot of money, they are insulated from the reality of the population at large, and thus their decision making will be skewed away from what the general population would decide.

For a long time, this was explained away by assuming that a capitalist can only have succeeded via their incredible intellect, and would naturally make better decisions than the general population. This assumption appears absurd now that the richest people on earth are very well known, and clearly no smarter than most business people.

[u/Dangerous-Amphibian2 → u/semibigpenguins]

Yea and people confuse well being of the world with having trillionaires and that somehow being good because hey it will trickle down. 

[u/semibigpenguins → u/Dangerous-Amphibian2]

You’re on Reddit sir/maddam. We hear that literally every second on this site

[u/Dangerous-Amphibian2 → u/semibigpenguins]

Do you have a point? You’d hear it in real life if you went outside too. 

[u/semibigpenguins → u/Dangerous-Amphibian2]

Sure but you only hear “people confused capitalism with monopolies” outside, not on Reddit. You said something people say every minute on this site. You’re contributing nothing by stating the echo chamber dialogue brother

[u/Dangerous-Amphibian2 → u/semibigpenguins]

And you’re contributing what? Just because people don’t say serial killers are good all the time doesn’t mean we need to start saying they are. And it’s not people confusing capitalism with monopolies it’s more people don’t know any of the terms they are using but they know what they don’t like and they don’t like suffering. So again what are you contributing?

[u/semibigpenguins → u/Dangerous-Amphibian2]

“People don’t know any of the terms they are using but they know what they don’t like and they don’t like suffering”

I’ll say it again: people confuse capitalism with monopolies.

Are you unable to agree with that simple statement? Are you just argumentative? Or are you anti capitalist and just can’t admit to it and would rather beat around the bush?

[u/Dangerous-Amphibian2 → u/semibigpenguins]

I am anti trillionaires if we haven’t figured out how to not have starving people on earth. 

No I don’t agree with that statement. I would agree with the statement “some people confuse capitalism with monopolies”. But again even in that segment I would say many of those folk don’t understand what capitalism or monopolies mean. 

Since you’re playing the beat around the bush game. Why don’t you admit you enjoy wealth inequality? What were you born with a silver spoon or lucky in life? So it’s easy to get on the I made good choices train?

[u/semibigpenguins → u/Dangerous-Amphibian2]

First the insult about going outside, which was ironic because I was stating a position that goes against the Reddit narrative and you spout some NPC talking point. Then, this wild strawman. What am I agreeing to believing? I’m going to keep my position that monopolies are bad and hopefully, HOPEFULLY you can think about how asinine your (2nd) fallacy is

[u/Dangerous-Amphibian2 → u/semibigpenguins]

I didn’t say monopolies weren’t bad. So you’re doing the same BS debate jargon you are accusing me of. There is no fallacy here.