Anti-Capitalism... what does it mean?

[CogitoErgoSometimes]

It can't be just me that keeps seeing 'anti-capitalism' referenced but doesn't understand what it means in practice. To me, any system that involves individuals buying and selling goods is capitalism so, short of going back to a system of barter and exchange, I'm not sure that's what's being proposed. Is it the socialist model of placing all businesses and utilities in public ownership perhaps ... a sort of Chinese style state-sponsored capitalism rather than no capitalism? If it's the kind of capitalism of international financiers buying and selling money that's the bete noire is the proposal that, to prevent speculation, we deposit our money (assuming we still have money, that is) in a bank and they keep it in a nice box, never touch it and give it back when we ask? The end of loans? Interest? Investments?

So that's the discussion point. Please... no links to great long internet passages by way of explanation. Laymans terms thanks. :)

Change to what give a realistic alternative, you can't scream "change" but not give a credible example of a workable solution.

'the Government runs the system'

do you think so? What about the Murdoch affair?

There is corruption, but that's not capitalism's fault. Do you think there was no corruption in the Soviet Union? You need a Freedom of Information Act and accountability and transparency and minutes of meetings and a free press, which is competitive, to counter corruption.

Change what?

Like I said earlier. What change do they want to see? The protestor's have so far utterly failed to define any realistic goals. Just some vague nonsense about a fair system.

Fair is a relative concept.

"
It's interesting that the 'happiest' countries seem to be the Nordic ones AFAIK you pay high taxes and the state provides excellent service"

take a map of the UK. delete every city larger than Stockholm (851k population). Then evaluate how happy everyone left on the map is....and you will have a basis for comparison. otherwise you are massively comparing apples and oranges.

indeed the Occupy business seems remarkably solutions-lite.

How about a "regulated" capitalism with enforced rules such as:

The highest paid person in a company can only earn a multiple of the lowest paid persons wage, say 20X with no loop holes.

A percentage of the profits must be paid to the workforce as a bonus and not just the greedy few.

A percentage of the share dividend to be paid to the workforce after all the workforce made the profits to pay the dividends.

Very very draconian laws to stop tax evasion.

Worker reps in the boardroom voted for by the workforce.

ah, correction, Oslo is larger at 912k....not much odds though.

'you can't scream "change"

there is nothing wrong with screaming change. It is a first step. Nobody has all the answers, but the answers will develop organically after change has been screamed.

Once people screamed "Liberte Egalite Fraternite" and slowly, slowly they moved towards it.

If you don't realise you are in chains, then you will never be free.

BTW

everybodies tax affairs to be available on the net so we can see who needs a good slap for being a greedy scum bag

It's clear to see that no one has an answer, but the voices are clear, many groups with many different roots have joined on that one issue, and I think something will come of that, protests and riots will continue, change will happen of some kind.

newwave

many CEOs take minimum wage anyway, but make money via their stockholdings...

this is legal, and therefore is not tax evasion (it is avoidance though)

many workers do own shares in the companies they work for already.

and many companies have bonus schemes rolled out to all employees.

some companies don't, but for good reasons (eg, they aren't profit making!)

I've lived in America. There is much to love about the country. The relative lack of crime. Ok, inner cities like LA can be a bit dodgy but go to a more normal part of America and everyone is incredibly law abiding.

I love their work ethic, the fact successful people are admired and others seek to emulate them. Rather than the UK attitude where successful people are vilified and told they only got rich through cheating or exploiting others then told to pay more & more taxes.

But there's also a side to America which leaves a lot to be desired. Their medical system is crap if you can't afford insurance and millions can't. A trip to the doctors for flu will cost you hundreds literally.

Their welfare system is incredibly basic compared to ours. Not good in the current climate at all.

Economically, I'd rather live in the UK than in America. At least I know if I fell ill or upon hard times I'd be looked after rather than be thrown to the wolves.

newwave company accounts are matters of public record already...you just have to pay something like £3 to obtain them...

If JK Rowling writes a great book that sells millions worldwide, then why should her earnings be limited? She will pay tax on her earnings anyway? I don't like the idea of controllers deciding how much ordinary people are allowed to earn.

niceguy2 and a country where 'freedom of the press' is an idea paid lipservice only....damn i love the Beeb.

EAP

many CEOs take minimum wage anyway, but make money via their stockholdings...

If share awards are part of their package then that perk should apply to all employees

this is legal, and therefore is not tax evasion (it is avoidance though)

All loopholes should be tightend up and the penalty for tax evasion over, say £10,00, should be 12 months inside with an additional year for every, say 25,000.

many workers do own shares in the companies they work for already.

I do and I get them at a well reduced price that shuld be avaiable to all employees in all quoted companies.

and many companies have bonus schemes rolled out to all employees.

Bonus schemmes often only apply to certain grades or only salaried staff again they should apply to all.

some companies don't, but for good reasons (eg, they aren't profit making!)

No problem, tell the staff that the goodies will come when the company starts making money.

All personal tax records for every individual not just company tax records.

All loopholes should be tightend up and the penalty for tax evasion over, say £10,00, should be 12 months inside with an additional year for every, say 25,000.

this isn't a loophole..any board member that chooses to take their salary this way takes the risk that their company won't be profit making.

ultimately the UK tax system is hugely complex already, and every effort to close loopholes usually results in opening others. the reason tax evasion can be looked on kindly is it is really easy for companies to pay more/less tax than they should purely by accident/ misreading the rules and in genuinely good faith. of course, many companies abuse this.

Rather than the UK attitude where successful people are vilified and told they only got rich through cheating or exploiting others.

The problem is that it is often the case where those at the top are earning in excess of 200X the rate of pay of those at the bottom.

As for admiring success fair enough if it was through the dint of hard work but how about the scum who ran Enron or maybe Tyco or WorldCom or maybe we should admire Fred Goodwin or James Murdoch.

How about successful rich filth like Gideon or Cameron after all they worked really hard for their money did they not, oh sorry they didn't.

How many people earn 200x what the bottom earn? Probably less than 50,000 out of 60 odd million. It's not a big deal.

Why shouldn't children be allowed to inherit wealth from their parents? Why shouldn't JK Rowling's children inherit what she created?

this isn't a loophole..any board member that chooses to take their salary this way takes the risk that their company won't be profit making.

I know i was talking about tax evasion in general.

The reason tax evasion can be looked on kindly is it is really easy for companies to pay more/less tax than they should purely by accident/ misreading the rules and in genuinely good faith. of course, many companies abuse this.

No the reason is that those who evade tax tend to be those with the most money and are so called pillars of the establishment with friends in government and power. They get treated with kid gloves, anyway i thought ignorance of the law was no excuse or does that not apply to the well connected.

How many people earn 200x what the bottom earn? Probably less than 50,000 out of 60 odd million. It's not a big deal.

Only a moron with no sense of morality would think that was acceptable no matter how many people it was.

Why shouldn't children be allowed to inherit wealth from their parents? Why shouldn't JK Rowling's children inherit what she created?

No one said they shouldn?t however over a certain amount of inheritance the tax should kick in big style and I speak as one who inherited 50% of a near £700K house from my Grandmother some years ago.

'Only a moron with no sense of morality would think that was acceptable'

OK, so you think it is acceptable.

When it comes to social issues I have a very well developed sense of right and wrong.

Newsnight is showing what the anticapitalists want us to eat in the future. Environmentally friendly food - ants, bees, beetles, locusts. They are starting to ramp up the green propaganda for it. Do you think the leading green aristocrats will stop eating chicken and beef and start to nosh on ants?

'When it comes to social issues I have a very well developed sense of right and wrong.'

Yes, I've noticed.