to marvel at the success of capitalism?

[longfingernails]

Capitalism has spurred innovations innumerate, lifted billions upon billions out of poverty, and made societies entrepreneurial and free - and it continues to do so to this day! Especially when combined with democracy, capitalism is surely the greatest force for social improvement the world has ever known. The most marvellous thing of all is it it goes with the natural instinct of humans to do the best for themselves and their loved ones.

Contrast socialism. It has left a legacy of bankruptcy, inefficient public sector bureaucracy, and welfare scroungers in this country (and countless others).

All hail Adam Smith and the invisible hand.

I used to be a member of the SWP, that should have been.

The left is reduced to talking about 'relative poverty' because they know they have lost the argument on actual poverty. Capitalism lifts people out of poverty; relative poverty is a ridiculous measure.

Fifty years ago, working class people couldn't afford foreign holidays; now, thanks to the effects of capitalism both on their own wages, and innovation driving down fares; they can. The left is reduced to arguing that it is unfair that the working class can only go to Benidorm while the rich can afford Barbados. They would rather Easyjet didn't exist; that the government (aka union barons) ran British Airways, and that everybody went to Margate.

Today I was given a bag of hand-me-downs for my DC by my neighbour who is working his socks off and living in a tiny room shared house to make life better for his own family back home. I doubt he is earning much more than the minimum wage and I was humbled by his generosity. By the standards of his own country in Central Europe, we are considerably better off (though we drive humble car and I have holes in my jeans) and yet he brought those clothes back from his wife when he went home. So our capitalism system may be benefiting him but perhaps the socialist values he grew up with still mean something.

For him it wasn't all about the money.

of course capitalism works ffs

it works, in practice, a great deal better than the alternatives

I am in agreement with MrsTerryPratchett actually, it needs to be tempered by compassion and can no way be described as perfect but unless you are actually fighting for the revolution I see no need for the assumption of superiority showed by many people on this thread. All the 'Oh I am so MORAL I hate capitalism' stuff is pretty unconvincing from folk who are probably happy to buy clothes, own businesses, go on a nasty profit making, employing people type sites like Mumsnet.

I work in a large british town - I see real actual poverty daily

Marvel all you want to - I wont join you if that's okay

here in the real world we see the downside

and Thatcher - yeh she was a peach

Changelenom What is socialist about handing down clothes? You are making the mistake of confusing 'compassionate' with socialist.

By contrast, I believe that capitalists are more effective with their compassion than socialists, because they are not afraid of being seen as nasty. For example, welfare must be reformed, not only for fiscal reasons, but more importantly, moral ones - the culture of dependency that out-of-work benefits creates is an easy, predictable, and frankly cruel outcome of the socialist policy of giving out money like no tomorrow.

Note I am not talking about any particular measure, or the adequacy of its implementation - for which IDS in particular has fallen far short - but rather the principle.

I live in the real world, I own a business that employs a fair amount of people. I believe that this is a good thing. Or am I just an evil, capitalist bastard?

Capitalism is a system, not the product of Thatcher, or even the Tory party. No government has ever tried to reverse capitalism in this country.

"What is socialist about handing down clothes?"

True, I get hand-me-downs from friends and family. But I don't generally get people I hardly know doing this just because I live a few doors down and exchange pleasantries. It may be a cultural thing but England is a much more individualist society and the nuclear family rather than the community is its focus.

I know East Germans and West Germans felt culturally divided and they were the same race.

Humphrey owning a business doesn't make you better or worse than anyone else - my ex husband owns his own very successful firm - employs a fair few people and does very well. Is happy to pay tax, doesn't judge people worse off than himself or begrudge them benefits, and still classes himself as a 'leftie'

I work in a face face service within the public sector - I work daily with care leavers, homeless teens, families facing eviction and people reliant on food banks - so I see daily in my work what he doesn't - hence I have more insight them him into actual poverty - that's just my life

and look what happened in germany. Everyone here was happy when the wall went down. Hurrah for capitalism...

There is often an issue with confounding variables. You seem to find more people who are left-wing, or identify as such, volunteering in soup kitchens, collecting for charities, arguing for more aid for disasters. You seem to find more people who identify as right wing poo-pooing people's needs, assuming people are 'scroungers', starting wars, telling people what to do with their ovaries. There is no real reason that should be the case.

Capitalism theoretically could include charity, philanthropy and so on. The problem is that Thatcherism and it's evil cousin Reaganomics, celebrate greed and power and force and right. Real, classic, laissez-faire politics shouldn't see capitalists telling women what to do with their reproductive rights or abortion.

Or something like that, I'm tired and my brain hurts.

MrsTerryPratchett I am speaking only about economic issues in this post.

I can only own a business because of capitalism though. That is my point.

being compassionate to the poor is NOT only a product of socialist states. It is certainly possible to be left wing in a capitalist society. I think I am arguing that capitalism is good because it is better than socialism or communism and you are arguing that it is bad because there are poor people. Our points are not mutually exclusive. I would argue that communism and socialism have worse outcomes for the population.

I will admit that my own outlook is prejudiced by the fact that as an unhappy teenager I visited a socialist country and felt happier and more accepted than at any time in my life before. But maybe you are right longfingernails, capitalists are not afraid of being nasty.

also there is charity and 'charity' the victorian idea of helping the poor seems to have come back into fashion - the rather patronising and sanctioning view that they don't know how to behave properly and need to be shown the way

My idea of charity is just helping people - not judging or making them conform to my standards

I like kittens and puppies are shit.

...charity as social control rather than aid without rules

"Everyone here was happy when the wall went down"

True it was an abomination to divide a country. But 25 years later East and West were still divided at some level psychologically.

www.dw.de/germans-still-have-walls-in-heads/a-17131880

If Maggie were still alive and still PM, I'd be pretty worried. She had, ahem, lost it a fair bit by the time she shuffled off this mortal coil I was going to say even Cameron is better than senile dementia in charge of a country, but tbh I'm not always entirely sure about that....

I would seriously doubt the idea that capitalism does bring out the best in everyone for themselves and their loved ones - I think it is fair to say that the human experience doesn't really bear that out. Also, capitalism is an economic and political system, not a moral one. A lot of the claims made for capitalism "it brings us freedom" it's the most moral system possible, it's inherent in human nature etc don't really make sense. Capitalism is a few hundred years old, were humans immoral for all of history beforehand? If it was inherent in human nature, why did it take us so bloody long to get around to it?

I admit to doing my fair bit of lefty paper-selling in my time, mind

This is the funniest thread I have read on here in ages.

Thank you, longfingernails. You had me there for a minute!

Changelenom You have not only changed toi nom, but also ma sentence. I didn't say capitalists weren't afraid of being nasty. I said capitalists weren't afraid of being seen to be nasty in their quest to be compassionate. There is an extremely important difference.

MrsTerryPratchett, I couldn't agree more actually. I have known someone who was part of a right wing think tank on ending global poverty, people sometimes thought that was a contradiction in terms, but not all ALL if you think about it.

Also, it is the really rich people I know who have giventhe largest sums to charity. I also know of several charities that lend money to women in South Africa to start businesses, thus enabling them to support themselves for ever - this is surely a good thing about capitalism

'The deserving poor' as was. i agree. The rich would decide who was 'worthy' of aid.

The OP thread police can sod right off BTW. You're talking about capitalism and want to tell people which aspects of it to discuss. Rather prescriptive of you, no? Not very laissez-faire...

yes I lived in Germany at the time and visited many times since - not everyone was 'happy' or still is - people in the east where poorer and suffered from unemployment and poorer social conditions for years after the wall came down

I dislike oppression in the name of any ideal but I think it's very naive to view capitalism as without oppression, control, harm or inequality

The last post was to gordy and the OP BTW.

I do think the Bill Gates' of the world have something to offer. However, the Conservatives are NOT representatives of anything approaching compassionate Conservatism. The opposite.