The fundamental problem with capitalism (as described by Bo Burnham

Author: secularmerlin

Posts

Total: 282
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@TheUnderdog
As an investor, I don't want to give my money to strangers.  That's like forcing you to give money to kids in Africa.
We already throw away more food than it would take to feed them and the waste product is rotting in landfills creating greenhouse gases. The cost of continuing on as we are is the possible extinction of the human race. I am talking about saving you far more than money. In any case an investor isn't actually producing anything and I'm not convinced he deserves as much of the profit as the workers that do, especially workers in dangerous or back breaking conditions. 
The wage is mutually consensual.  If you want more money, find a better job.
Who gets the better jobs is not up to the workers. It is insulting to both our intelligence to pretend it is. In any case I am unconvinced that the inability to find a better job should necessarily be grounds to consign people to perpetual poverty for generations. 
You need to contribute to society for society to give you something in return. 
I don't know where you get this idea but the people who earn the most do not produce anything for themselves. They only take from society. 
Jeff Bezos contributes way more to society than a nurse (nurse make a lot as well).  Jeff Bezos's company sells tens of millions of products to people every single day.  A nurse may help out 5 people in a day.
Not Jeff Bezos. Jeff Bezos company. Jeff himself only collects the profits. That is his contribution. Even the startup capital he "risked" was mostly in the form of loans. In other words everything was given to him. How does that make him more deserving than a nurse who gets their hands wrist deep in blood and shit to make people well and them go home and try to raise kids right?
Other people starving isn't my problem and it isn't yours. 
Is that the attitude you would like for others to have if you were in need? Please don't say "I could never!" Because without your money and privilege you certainly could be. If you were starving and cold and alone would that just be your own problem and you wouldn't ask for or accept help? 
irrespective of how rich they are.
They are only rich in the first place because of generations of colonialism and exploitation. The problem is in distribution. No one needs more money than they can reasonably spend in thirty lifetimes. F you think it would cost someone as much to go from being a billionaire to being merely a millionaire than for a person with a minimum wage job to give up all of their income then you clearly are a little out of touch with the consequences of being poor.
It's not arbitrary.  People that contribute more to others get more money from those others.  Jeff Bezos gets money from you when you buy something on Amazon at a cheaper price than what the store offers for the same product.
Most of the indicators of whether a child will grow up to be wealthy are arbitrary, as in beyond that child's control. Things like being white and a man and most importantly being born into wealth. 
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 3,096
3
4
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
4
10
-->
@secularmerlin
In any case an investor isn't actually producing anything and I'm not convinced he deserves as much of the profit as the workers that do, especially workers in dangerous or back breaking conditions. 
A worker in a company can also be an investor; they just need to buy stock.  I'm taking the risk.  I'm accepting the profits or losses that come with buying stock.  THe worker has a fixed salary.  Workers should invest more.

Who gets the better jobs is not up to the workers. 
The University of Georgetown found 13 million job openings that meet the following requirements:

1) No college degree required.
2) Pays over $55K/year.

Minimum wage workers who are perminately out of school should find better paying jobs like what the University of Georgetown found.

I don't know where you get this idea but the people who earn the most do not produce anything for themselves. They only take from society. 
They made the business.  If it wasn't for Jeff Bezos, Amazon wouldn't exist and now we can't get cheap goods from the convenience of our home.

Even the startup capital he "risked" was mostly in the form of loans. In other words everything was given to him. 
He had to pay back the loans and manage the loans well.  If you think this is easy, try copying Bezos.

If you were starving and cold and alone would that just be your own problem and you wouldn't ask for or accept help? 
I would get help from a church, not from the government.  The church operates using funds obtained through means as consensual as religion it's self.  The government forces you to pay money to them.  Homeless people can use private churches all they want; using the government is theft.

They are only rich in the first place because of generations of colonialism and exploitation.
Jeff Bezos never colonized.  He didn't exploit anyone, otherwise he couldn't get his business so successful.

No one needs more money than they can reasonably spend in thirty lifetimes.
There is a good chance that you make more than you need to live in this lifetime.  Are we going to take all your excess funds and give it to children in Africa?  I think your dodging the question.


 F you think it would cost someone as much to go from being a billionaire to being merely a millionaire than for a person with a minimum wage job to give up all of their income then you clearly are a little out of touch with the consequences of being poor.
Most people don't work minimum wage jobs.

Lets say you make $60/year (average US salary).  You need $30K/year to stay alive.  So that leaves you with $30K/year.  Are we going to force you to give all that money to strangers in Africa?  Of course not; that would be theft.

Lets say you make $100 million/year.  You need $30K/year to stay alive.  So that leaves you with $100M/year.  Are we going to force you to give all that money to strangers in Africa?  Of course not; that would be theft.

Most of the indicators of whether a child will grow up to be wealthy are arbitrary, as in beyond that child's control. Things like being white and a man and most importantly being born into wealth. 
If this was the case, then Jeff Bezos would have comparably rich sibilings.  After all, they are all white, Mark Bezos is a man.  They were all born into the same level of wealth.  Yet Bezos was richest because he contributed the most to society.

Blacks tend to be less sucessful because they aim for different things than whites.  Females tend to be less sucessful because they tend to aim for different things than men.  If a black woman wants to be sucessful, she can merely copy what Bezos did with a different industry and she can hopefully get there.

But different races and different genders want different things.  For instance, blacks and females tend to be more family oriented than white males, so white males tend to be more sucessful and blacks and females tend to have stronger family bonds.
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@TheUnderdog
I'm taking the risk.
How are you risking more than your workers? Should you go out of buisness you both face possible destitution, homelessness and starvation. I would actually wager you would be better able to recover than the workers actually. Sounds like it is more of a risk for them.
Workers should invest more.
If only they weren't bothered with things like buying food and paying rent and dealing with systemic oppression. More to the point if only their parents would be wealthy and loan them money.
I would get help from a church, not from the government.  The church operates using funds obtained through means as consensual as religion it's self.  The government forces you to pay money to them.  Homeless people can use private churches all they want; using the government is theft.
I am glad you are a member of the religious in group to such a degree you feel that is an option for you. Must be nice.
Jeff Bezos never colonized.  He didn't exploit anyone, otherwise he couldn't get his business so successful.
He didn't do the colonizing he is just the right sex/melatonin level and born into the right social class to benefit from it. All corperations must exploit workers or there would be no profit. 
Most people don't work minimum wage jobs.

Lets say you make $60/year
Most people also do not make 60000 a year. Let's say you need 30000 a year to live and you make 28000 because that is closer to the truth for most of us. If nothing goes wrong that is. 
If this was the case, then Jeff Bezos would have comparably rich sibilings
This is a non sequitur. One doesn't necessarily lead to the other. Any siblings he dies have are still more privileged than poor people of color.
Blacks tend to be less sucessful because they aim for different things than whites.  Females tend to be less sucessful because they tend to aim for different things than men.
I would be careful speaking for others and also making generalizations. 
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 3,096
3
4
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
4
10
-->
@secularmerlin
How are you risking more than your workers? Should you go out of buisness you both face possible destitution, homelessness and starvation. I would actually wager you would be better able to recover than the workers actually. Sounds like it is more of a risk for them.
Someone that owns $500K of stock is getting $50K/year from that stock.  A worker may earn $50K/year from their labor.  If the company goes bankrupt, I lose $500K and the worker loses their job and would have to find a new one (a process that usually takes about a year).  I lost $500K and the worker lost $50K.  I'm more at risk as an investor.

If only they weren't bothered with things like buying food and paying rent and dealing with systemic oppression. More to the point if only their parents would be wealthy and loan them money.
Workers aren't oppressed.  Food and rent are cheap for workers working 40 hours a week.  They use their excess funds to invest.  

I am glad you are a member of the religious in group to such a degree you feel that is an option for you. Must be nice.
Atheists can use the church for money as well if they need it.  Jesus made a former atheist the pope.  Christianity doesn't hate atheists.

Most people also do not make 60000 a year. Let's say you need 30000 a year to live and you make 28000 because that is closer to the truth for most of us. If nothing goes wrong that is. 
The median salary in the US is about $35K/year(median us salary - search results (bing.com)).  They live off $30K, and they invest the rest in the stock market.  People making less should find better jobs.

This is a non sequitur. One doesn't necessarily lead to the other. Any siblings he dies have are still more privileged than poor people of color.
I was saying that despite growing up in the same environment, Jeff Bezos ended up more successful that his siblings.  If America was a white supremist country, then minorities would be heading to the Bahamas instead of the US because the Bahamas are both rich and black majority.  But people are moving to the US because America's isn't racist.

Blacks tend to be less sucessful because they aim for different things than whites.  Females tend to be less sucessful because they tend to aim for different things than men.
I would be careful speaking for others and also making generalizations. 
I think Thomas Sowell wrote a book on why race groups end up in different places.  Blacks focus on certain things; whites focus on different things, and this produces different results.  Male and female brains are different that leads to different results for the genders.
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@TheUnderdog
Someone that owns $500K of stock is getting $50K/year from that stock.  A worker may earn $50K/year from their labor.  If the company goes bankrupt, I lose $500K and the worker loses their job and would have to find a new one (a process that usually takes about a year).  I lost $500K and the worker lost $50K.  I'm more at risk as an investor.

Incorrect. You are failing to take into account how much more of a loss is for someone who only has 50k. Also you are simply assuming that another job is available. Workers do not choose which jobs are available or when.
Workers aren't oppressed.  Food and rent are cheap for workers working 40 hours a week.  They use their excess funds to invest.  
Man you really don't know what it is like to not have enough money to live on do you? For many people there are no excess funds.
The median salary in the US is about $35K/year(median us salary - search results (bing.com)).  They live off $30K, and they invest the rest in the stock market.  People making less should find better jobs.
Half of all people make less than the average. That is what average means. That is a definitional truth. As for better jobs workers do not decide what jobs are available or when.
I was saying that despite growing up in the same environment, Jeff Bezos ended up more successful that his siblings.  If America was a white supremist country, then minorities would be heading to the Bahamas instead of the US because the Bahamas are both rich and black majority.  But people are moving to the US because America's isn't racist.
The racism is systemic and even I'd all traces of oppressive policy where removed the effect of that racism would continue. For example bank loans (a critical component of starting a small business) are statistically far more likely to be awarded to white men than to women or people of color. There is no law that specifically says that this should he the case. It is enough that no law prevents it. That allows the systemic oppression to continue. 

Jeff Bezos did end making more profit than any of his siblings but I think you will find that mathematically there must be a top earner in any family. 
I think Thomas Sowell wrote a book on why race groups end up in different places.  Blacks focus on certain things; whites focus on different things, and this produces different results.  Male and female brains are different that leads to different results for the genders.
You think black people being more likely to be impoverished is the fault of black people and you don't think some racism is going on? Maybe examine that for a moment. 
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 3,096
3
4
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
4
10
-->
@secularmerlin
You are failing to take into account how much more of a loss is for someone who only has 50k. 
If all I invested was $500K and that investment becomes worthless, I have lost much more.

Also you are simply assuming that another job is available. Workers do not choose which jobs are available or when.
In a free market, there are jobs available.

Man you really don't know what it is like to not have enough money to live on do you? For many people there are no excess funds.
I had a grand father who was poor, his dad didn't know much English and he made himself to be a lawyer through grit.  People are able to get out of poverty in a capitalist society.

Half of all people make less than the average. That is what average means. 
Half make less than the median, not the average.  The university of Georgetown found 13 million job openings in the US that only require a HS degree to complete that pay $55K a year or more.  But politicians on both sides have incentives to not help the poor out.  Some are curropt.  Even if your a non curropt democrat, you know that poor people tend to vote for democrats, so you have to tell your base, "I want to get you out of poverty", but you know if you actually did that, they would start to vote republican (and it costs you your job potentially).  So even AOC doesn't have an incentive to actually help the poor; she just has to pretend that she is.

For example bank loans (a critical component of starting a small business) are statistically far more likely to be awarded to white men than to women or people of color.
Do you have evidence for this?  Are you potentially ignoring lurking variables that are usually present in data?

There is no law that specifically says that this should he the case. It is enough that no law prevents it.
Below is the law that outlawed racial discrimination:


Jeff Bezos did end making more profit than any of his siblings but I think you will find that mathematically there must be a top earner in any family. 
Duh!  Every family has somebody from it who earned more than every other member.  But Bezos is more productive to society than all of his siblings combined.

You think black people being more likely to be impoverished is the fault of black people and you don't think some racism is going on? Maybe examine that for a moment.
I wouldn't say it's the fault of black people; it's just different priorities.

For example, lets say you have person A who wants to be a runner, and person B who wants to be a weightlifter.  The person As of the world tend to be faster than the person Bs of the world.  The person Bs of the world tend to be stronger than the Person As of the world.  This isn't bad; it's just because Person A and Person B have different goals in life.

Lets say you have white people and black people.  The whites of the world tend to want to earn more.  The blacks of the world tend to want stronger family values.  This is often due to the rampant single motherhood within the black community(R.85713f559ea8c2f40913d8fb86d24529 (1222×799) (bing.com)) and this tends to make blacks respect family more, since they know first hand the effects of single motherhood.  Often family values come at the expense of a higher salary (because if you focus on your family a lot, you tend to be less focused with your career and vice versa). 

Because of this, whites tend to earn more and blacks tend to have stronger family bonds.  This isn't wrong, and it's not like one is better than the other, it just shows that racial groups tend to have different goals in life.
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
If all I invested was $500K and that investment becomes worthless, I have lost much more.
You have made a one time risk that diminishes commensurate to your profits (stolen production). The worker is not rewarded for his risk which again is the same. The worst that can happen to either the worker or the investor is destitution, homelessness and starvation and in general investors who make a bad investment are not as likely to he even temporarily homeless as is a working class person who loses his job.
In a free market, there are jobs available.
In a capitalist state only those jobs which produce corperations wealth can exist. As automation becomes more common place fewer workers are necessary. It would be bad buisness to employ more people than you must. The average worker produces far more than ever before. Mathematically this means fewer jobs. 
I had a grand father who was poor, his dad didn't know much English and he made himself to be a lawyer through grit.  People are able to get out of poverty in a capitalist society.
This is the exception not the rule. The single biggest indicator of future wealth is the wealth of a child's parents. That occasionally an impoverished person does manage through a combination of hard work and luck to become wealthy. This doesn't mean that everyone has the opportunity to do so. In fact capitalism necessitates a working class. Capitalism guarantees that your argument cannot be taken at face value. The poor are not meant to become wealthy and most of them simply cannot.
politicians on both sides have incentives to not help the poor out.  Some are curropt.  Even if your a non curropt democrat, you know that poor people tend to vote for democrats, so you have to tell your base, "I want to get you out of poverty", but you know if you actually did that, they would start to vote republican (and it costs you your job potentially).  So even AOC doesn't have an incentive to actually help the poor; she just has to pretend that she is.

That sounds like a huge problem with the system. Someone should probably change that.
Below is the law that outlawed racial discrimination:
That's nice. Black people are still astronomically more likely to be imprisoned and/or impoverished than their white counterparts so the law, even if a good one which does prevent some oppression, is not doing enough to prevent systemic racism. 
Bezos is more productive to society than all of his siblings combined.
Jeff Bazos does not produce anything. He is not the most productive anything. Amazon workers are responsible for the productivity you are referencing. 
I wouldn't say it's the fault of black people; it's just different priorities.

For example, lets say you have person A who wants to be a runner, and person B who wants to be a weightlifter.  The person As of the world tend to be faster than the person Bs of the world.  The person Bs of the world tend to be stronger than the Person As of the world.  This isn't bad; it's just because Person A and Person B have different goals in life.

Lets say you have white people and black people.  The whites of the world tend to want to earn more.  The blacks of the world tend to want stronger family values.  This is often due to the rampant single motherhood within the black community(R.85713f559ea8c2f40913d8fb86d24529 (1222×799) (bing.com)) and this tends to make blacks respect family more, since they know first hand the effects of single motherhood.  Often family values come at the expense of a higher salary (because if you focus on your family a lot, you tend to be less focused with your career and vice versa). 

Because of this, whites tend to earn more and blacks tend to have stronger family bonds.  This isn't wrong, and it's not like one is better than the other, it just shows that racial groups tend to have different goals in life.
So now black people are poor because they are more likely to be single parent families? You think it isn't wrong to force people to choose between family bonds and financial security? You think black people are not denied raises and promotions and loans that their white contemporaries are not? You do understand that this is racist don't you? I only ask because implicit bias is easy to miss and if you must understand that problem before you can address it.

Black people are not biologically different enough to qualify as a seperate race only systemic racism separates us not biology. A black brain is functionally identical to a white one.
cristo71
cristo71's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,069
3
2
3
cristo71's avatar
cristo71
3
2
3
-->
@secularmerlin
I am not advocating for socialism or Marxism or any other isms by the way only pointing out the problems of capitalism and how it can be used to short circuit our survival instincts by tying those instincts artificially to the movements of little pieces of paper which are at there most basic actually divorced from our survival. 
In saying what you are NOT advocating for, it leads me to wonder what DO you advocate for as an economic system?

3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,282
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@cristo71
In saying what you are NOT advocating for, it leads me to wonder what DO you advocate for as an economic system?
"LESS-WRONG" is not a monolithic ideology
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@cristo71
My argument has evolved since that post. The older I get the more I find I do support socialist programs. More to the point the more I realize I always have. Programs like social security and child labor laws. These are socialist initiatives. 
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
Paid sick and child care leave. Free or low cost libraries and museum. An education system. Minimum wage. Civil rights. Essential services like fire fighters. Infrastructure.

Etc. Etc. Etc.
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,282
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@secularmerlin
Paid sick and child care leave. Free or low cost libraries and museum. An education system. Minimum wage. Civil rights. Essential services like fire fighters. Infrastructure.
Pretty much anything that is not purely profit motivated.