50
51

Unless It Changes, Capitalism Will Starve Humanity By 2050 (forbes.com)

Permacyclists が 投稿

全 103 件のコメント
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]xasper8 22ポイント23ポイント  (39子コメント)

I'm self-employed and therefore "capitalist" by definition, but I kind of feel that we have reached the zenith of capitalism as we know it.

Certain companies have reached a level that is just disproportionate and are starting to eclipse democracy and national governments as a whole.

When a company reaches a point where it can easily manipulate global commodities and create artificial scarcity just for the sake of profits... the system is broken.

[–]diet_coke_with_lime 27ポイント28ポイント  (2子コメント)

Certain companies have reached a level that is just disproportionate and are starting to eclipse democracy and national governments as a whole.

Starting to? We're just repeating the past. Look at Dutch East India Company who was so powerful they could wage war and execute prisoners.

[–]thedylanackerman 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

The Dutch East India company, even if it acted like a corporation it was built by the United provinces, they were the worst being a mixed of corporation behaviour with a state ability to wage war, because they were fully allowed by the Dutch to do so.

But I think he's talking about compagnies who have now enough power to hugely influence any kind of government, even democratic ones, and it just asks the question what is worth in a democratic capitalism society between money or your voice.

Edit: missing words

[–]Koskap 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Literally all corporations are false people created by governments in order to limit the liability of the owners.

This isnt considered remotely controversial

[–]Imapopulistnow 4ポイント5ポイント  (9子コメント)

What is this manipulated scarce commodity that you speak of?

[–]Skiffbug 1ポイント2ポイント  (6子コメント)

De Beers with diamonds is one example.

[–]Raccoonpuncher 4ポイント5ポイント  (5子コメント)

Should I post the bestof from recently that debunks this?

Edit: Surprise! It was actually Depthhub! Forgive me, I was on mobile. And drunk.

[–]SrraHtlTngoFxtrt 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

Goldman Sachs rigged the copper futures market in the wake of the 2008 housing bubble, similar to how Bunker and Hunt rigged the Silver futures market in 1973.

[–]Imapopulistnow -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

Now first of all, I despise the investment banks who are most responsible for the great recession. Further, while i have not heard of their controlling copper, they did control aluminum, prolly manipulated the oil markets, etc.

But, today, their is no control of any commodity market and hopefully the actions of Dodd Frank and greater regulation has lessened their ability to manipulate going forward. So, perhaps the answer is fixing the system when it gets broken rather than changing to a system that historically has been demonstrated to not function as well and leads to lower living standards for most.

[–]Dugen 5ポイント6ポイント  (2子コメント)

zenith of capitalism as we know it.

We just need to remove all the rent sources we've allowed to creep in over the years. The proper way to do that is to tax them, but taxing those things that the wealthy own that earn them money is not politically feasible today. If we want to fix capitalism, we need to fix politics.

[–]Skiffbug 6ポイント7ポイント  (1子コメント)

So chicken and egg? Because politics is unduly influenced by the wealthy individuals and large corporations...

[–]Dugen 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

There is definitely a cycle there of investing wealth into political influence which yields more wealth, but we still have a democracy where the votes have the power and as we're seeing now, that cycle can be broken because voters don't necessarily follow the money. I think the key is political organization around the idea of changing the political rules to break the cycle. We need a system of choosing viable candidates which eliminates the part of the process where the rich vote with their wallets.

[–]SarahC 3ポイント4ポイント  (4子コメント)

Capitalism works in a growing economy - when it shrinks, capitalism suffers.. and when it's dying - capitalism kills lots of people. =(

I feel we're on the tip end of the very slow decades long downward shrinking...

[–]bold_facts 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Capitalism is the reason why the economy grows at all.

[–]rammingparu2 -1ポイント0ポイント  (2子コメント)

Oh SarahCommunist, Communism/Socialism has killed way more people. Strong governments have killed way more people than restricted govt.

[–]Speculum -1ポイント0ポイント  (1子コメント)

Strong companies have killed way more people than restricted companies.

[–]rammingparu2 -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

Yep, nobody likes Crony Capitalism, even Libertarians.

The British and Dutch East India Companies could've been considered to be governments.

[–]lan_kimsin_sen 0ポイント1ポイント  (5子コメント)

system has always been broken. look at the world. majority of humanity starves while a select few sucks on their blood and land.

[–]kerouacrimbaud 7ポイント8ポイント  (3子コメント)

The majority? Hyperbole much? Less than 800 million people are now living in hunger. That's about 13%. Very high, too high in fact. But 25 years ago, that number was over 23%. Source.

Maybe you're talking about poverty? Well, the standards of living have been rising across the board all around the world since the mid 1970s. Source

[–]SrraHtlTngoFxtrt -2ポイント-1ポイント  (2子コメント)

That's thanks to food aid and advances in crop sciences though. Progress on crop yields has stalled thanks to global warming, and there isn't any money to be made off of the 13% because they, quite literally, have nothing that can be taken other than their lives.

[–]Cockdieselallthetime 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

Source?

I'm basically telling you you're wrong and you should just stop making up bullshit that suits your ideology.

Also where do you think this science comes from? Magic science land or investment done by private firms under capitalism.

[–]SrraHtlTngoFxtrt 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Here's the global outlook on wheat.

I could keep going, but you're trolling. The advances in wheat cultivation that won Norman Borlaugh a Novel Prize and kept a billion people from starving to death in the 1980s will not be repeated, and especially not by private industry. That sort of technological leap is what will be needed to keep the poorest quintile of the globe from starving to death as a result of global warming. You assume the free market will fix things, but you also forget that there's no money to be made off of those too poor to purchase Monsanto or ADM commodities.

[–]SarahC -2ポイント-1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Vampires are people too!

[–]ChaosMotor 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

This is not capitalism, this is monetarism.

[–]Moimoi328 -1ポイント0ポイント  (7子コメント)

When a company reaches a point where it can easily manipulate global commodities and create artificial scarcity just for the sake of profits... the system is broken.

Citation needed. Which companies are manipulating which commodities? Which commodity / cyclical companies are making economic profits?

Surely you can't be talking about crude oil given the hundreds of thousands of layoffs being conducted, even among the most powerful oil firms, and oil prices falling to sub $30 bbl (a predictable response to a glut of supply).

[–]subshophero 3ポイント4ポイント  (3子コメント)

Enron manipulated California's electric grid.

(I don't know the company or where) but back in the 90s a water company managed to get water de-regulated to the point that most people couldn't afford it at all.

Nestle is a big culprit now of manipulating water supplies around the world to drive up costs.

There's the textbook industry that is rife with corruption and price gauging/fixing.

Big Tobacco.

Pharma.

The list goes on man. Come on.

Edit: How did I forget cable companies completely manipulating internet speeds AND price fixing?

[–]PlayerDeus 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

And there is government involved in everyone of those. Who has the monopoly on land use and grants the privilege to cable companies to provide you service, and has monopoly on maintenance costs charged to those companies?

It's all government cronyism with a mix of fascism, its not an open market where people can invest in alternatives, and if they try they are unwelcomed by the state and it's cronies. Look at a business like Uber, providing better service than state regulated taxis and several cities around the world attack them for it, Germany required them to wait 20 minutes because they were responding faster than their taxis, and other places ban them. Similarly there was a bus line in New York that would cover areas other buses would not, they got shutdown for competing. That isn't capitalism at play, owning a means of production is not the same as owning access to customers, these are mafia rackets, gangs drug dealers and pimps fighting over territories not business trying to win customers over with good prices and good service.

[–]Cockdieselallthetime -1ポイント0ポイント  (1子コメント)

Government caused every single one of these.

[–]subshophero 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

By being lobbied. That was literally the god damn point.

[–]SarahC 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Oil, diamonds, cocaine...

[–]oxygenak 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

The Great American Bubble Machine

[–]SrraHtlTngoFxtrt -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

Goldman Sachs rigged the copper futures market in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis. The last time any American entity manipulated the market in such a way, Jimmy Carter released the US silver stockpile onto the open market to counteract the financial manipulation caused by Bunker and Hunt.

[–][削除されました]  (1子コメント)

[deleted]

    [–]Cockdieselallthetime -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Standard Oil.

    The shining example of capitalism gone wrong for liberals who have no idea what actually happened to Standard Oil.

    Standard Oil had lost 30% of it's market share by the time government broke it up. The free market had already completely fixed the problem. Free market monopolies can only exist when a company is providing the absolute best possible service at the best possible price. When companies start to lose either, competition begins to eat market share.

    When standard Oil began raising prices, other smaller firms stopped selling out to them.

    [–]NathanDickson 6ポイント7ポイント  (0子コメント)

    I have no idea whether the claims of this article are true or not, but let's not forget that Forbes has become yet another online magazine which has lowered the bar on the quality and authenticity of its articles, preferring "click bait" headlines and subjects to traditional journalism.

    [–]poseidonoftea 33ポイント34ポイント  (5子コメント)

    This sub is fucking joke if this is kind of article is upvoted.

    [–]gamercer 20ポイント21ポイント  (0子コメント)

    It's really just /r/politics money edition.

    [–]jaypaulstrong 6ポイント7ポイント  (2子コメント)

    It is good to see at least one comment I can agree with here. This post and these comments in economics sub are depressing the shirt out of me. It would be one thing if this was r/politics or r/news, but here? Its just sad.

    [–]weeglos -2ポイント-1ポイント  (1子コメント)

    Try /r/economics instead. They're a bit less.... Alarmist.

    [–]LithiumEnergy 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Post better ones if you don't like it.

    [–]Drift3r 11ポイント12ポイント  (11子コメント)

    So the communist system in the Soviet era never misused or mistreated the environment? Chernobyl anyone?

    Can someone show me a major centralized and statist government that did better than say the US in land usage, reduction and concern about waste, etc??

    Now I'm not saying that there is nothing to improve upon or that there are not very important concerns to address but this article sounds more like alarmist, "POPULATION BOMB, PEAK OIL!!" hysteria.

    Also embracing GMO crops would go a long way toward global reduction of water consumption and arable usage required to grow crops if they became the standard. No, GMO crops won't give you cancer or force you to grow a 5th limb.

    [–]Dugen 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Communism was, and will always be a disaster. Marx got the problem right, but his solution was horrendous.

    [–]paleontologist1 -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Agreed! It's especially sad that gmos get such a bad rap even though it has the potential to save many lives in the long run

    [–]Skepticism4all 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

    You mean Crony capitalism. Pure capitalism does not exist in this world.

    [–]Bman409 0ポイント1ポイント  (8子コメント)

    I'm against Wall Street and the reckless pursuit of money...that said, there is MORE than enough food...Americans throw away probably HALF of all food put in front of them....if not more.... Individuals, restaurants, etc....millions of TONS per day

    [–]Moimoi328 5ポイント6ポイント  (1子コメント)

    So you would be for the complete abolition of agriculture subsidies then?

    [–]Bman409 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

    I probably would, yes. I'd have to look in to the specifics, however.

    [–]Johnny_Horsecock 3ポイント4ポイント  (5子コメント)

    What does "against Wall Street" even mean?

    [–]poseidonoftea 2ポイント3ポイント  (2子コメント)

    Shh, read him a bedtime story about Bernie Sanders.

    [–]Bman409 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

    It means I'm against putting profits first. Its pretty much that simple. I oppose the pursuit of constant "quarterly growth" at the expense of ethics and even more importantly, "morals".

    "Wall Street" is my euphemism for that culture of greed.. the kind of culture that leads to 5000% price increases in drugs, or auto emission devices that are designed to cheat.. etc.

    [–]Cockdieselallthetime 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

    This is just a bunch of words that don't mean fucking anything.

    The 5000% increase in that drug led to another drug making making it for $1 in less than 3 months.

    TIL greed is when you risk a ton of money in investment, get super lucky and make a return, then don't give it all away!

    [–]sangjmoon 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Then it's a good thing that we really don't have capitalism.

    [–]Contorted_By_Dubstep 1ポイント2ポイント  (25子コメント)

    Capitalism or it's misuse? It is ridiculous to even think in this type of way. What happened to Mao, how many did he starve with his ways? Or how about the USSR, what happened with all of their socialistically beautiful grocery stores? Seriously, we should meet up in person and discuss this like real human beings. Where do you live? Please I would love to so you may be educated correctly.

    [–]FiscalCliffHuxtable 4ポイント5ポイント  (4子コメント)

    The USSR was state capitalist. After the revolution and they kicked out all the private capitalists from their factories, they sent state officials to take over the means of production and invited back the workers to do what they always had been doing.

    The state owned the factories. The state ran the factories. The state hired and fired. The state paid the rations. The state distributed goods and services. The state became the capitalist.

    The state capitalism, which is one of the principal aspects of the New Economic Policy, is, under Soviet power, a form of capitalism that is deliberately permitted and restricted by the working class. Our state capitalism differs essentially from the state capitalism in countries that have bourgeois governments in that the state with us is represented not by the bourgeoisie, but by the proletariat, who has succeeded in winning the full confidence of the peasantry.

    • Lenin

    So, supposedly, the revolutionary socialists were supposed to transition away from capitalism, dismantle the state apparatus, institute what they envisioned as a stateless, socialist society, and that would be that.

    Stalin, such the kidder, comes to power, looks upon the situation and says, "We did it! This is socialism!"

    It wasn't. It was more of the same. We never transitioned past the capitalist state. It's powerful like that. Lenin couldn't finish the job, Stalin maintained the status quo, and Marx would roll over in his grave if he saw what became of it all. The anarchists just say "I told you so."

    [–]gamercer 4ポイント5ポイント  (3子コメント)

    What's the material difference between "state capitalism" and communism?

    How is it possible that everyone owns the means of production, if there's no central governing body to centralize and execute the will of 'the people'?

    [–]FiscalCliffHuxtable -1ポイント0ポイント  (2子コメント)

    What's the material difference between "state capitalism" and communism?

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_capitalism

    How is it possible that everyone owns the means of production, if there's no central governing body to centralize and execute the will of 'the people'?

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_socialism

    I don't have time to do your research for you so I'll just drop you off here.

    [–]gamercer 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

    How is the body that makes decisions in a communist society not the government?

    What governing body or group will confiscate a factory that someone attempts to privately own, for instance?

    What governing body or group will confiscate items that people are attempting to use as a means of exchange, or currency?

    [–]Cockdieselallthetime 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Lol. Libertarian socialism. What a fucking bastardization of actual libertarian principles.

    [–]Nathaenel 3ポイント4ポイント  (18子コメント)

    Before I get misunderstood: There was never ever communism in this world. Never. Not how marx defined it.

    Stalin killed around 60million,was that communism?

    China is another form of hyper capitalism. You can literally buy everything in china officially, from organs to your own personal slaves.

    I dont know in which book the chinese looked up communism, but the author must have been very satirical.

    North korea? Yeah. Fat Emperor and his impertinent line is being the bourgeoisie, the same as the UDSSR party and the chinese Party.

    Capitalism isnt working because there is no incentive to care about corporate responsibility. I talk about china and NA, europa being really progressive in this topic.

    Is there a way out of this? Probably not. The average joe is simply living like a peasant in the medieval age. Democracy also doesn't favor intellect, just see these walking jokes in the presidential campaign. Bush Jr. won against Al Gore because of corrupt republican judges in the year 2000 and was reelected.

    Sincerely, a transhumanist and engineer.

    Feel free to response,since I always love a good discussion.

    [–]poseidonoftea 8ポイント9ポイント  (9子コメント)

    Before I get misunderstood: There was never ever communism in this world. Never. Not how marx defined it.

    Yes there was. Marx's communism was tribalism. This has been tried for 200,000 years. We know how it works.

    Capitalism isnt working

    According to who? A Forbes shitposter?

    The average joe is simply living like a peasant in the medieval age.

    I didn't know peasants had clean housing, clean water, indoor plumbing, indoor climate control, a choice of worldwide cuisine everyday, the ability to communicate around the world in milliseconds, little computing devices that put every 5+ year old piece of machinery to shame, infinitely large quantities of books, journals, magazines, music, movies, operas, plays available for nearly free, the ability to travel throughout the world extremely fast for relatively cheap, etc. I could go on.

    [–]Nathaenel 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Yes there was. Marx's communism was tribalism. This has been tried for 200,000 years. We know how it works. Tribalism only works on small isolated social groups,I dont get your point. It was despotism in that time,which is not even close to communism(the stronger hunter gets more..)

    Capitalism isnt working According to who? A Forbes shitposter?

    If the current situation is fine, I wont like to see when its not "fine". The biggest industries in this world besides europe still deny climate change. What the heck is europe supposed to do when we reduce or co2 output by 2-5% p.a. If the main polluters are deaf and blind?

    The average joe is simply living like a peasant in the medieval age.

    I think you misunderstood in which context I meant that, it was directed at the democracy topic. The average joe has the political knowledge of a redneck potato. Or the intellect of a redneck potato.

    But while youre talking about the good things the 21th century has to offer.. You described how western middle class lives.

    You excluded everybody from asia and africa,also south america, some social minorities in the us and the poor in every western country. Basically,80% isnt included in what you meant(just a guess, since this isnt a discussion for the sake of science).

    Also, the bourgeoisie's fortune grows exponentially , just look at distribution data all over the world. Reagans trickle down economy my ass.

    [–]sushisection 2ポイント3ポイント  (7子コメント)

    Uhhh yeah go visit a third world country and then tell me about the "average joe".

    Us citizens in the developed world are part of the 1%

    [–]poseidonoftea 4ポイント5ポイント  (6子コメント)

    Name some countries with free trade, free religion, free press, free speech, etc where the same isn't true. Any country that adopts Western values prospers. It's changed a lot in the past 100 years, and it's only going to keep changing.

    [–]appcodr 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

    I wonder what's your definition of freedom, you think you are free in the land of the free? It's amazing how some people are unaware of reality.

    [–]poseidonoftea 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

    I wonder what's your definition of freedom

    Rights

    you think you are free in the land of the free?

    Yes

    It's amazing how some people are unaware of reality.

    I know

    [–]sushisection -1ポイント0ポイント  (3子コメント)

    I wouldnt say that. China isnt a very "free" country yet it is the epicenter of industrial trade.

    [–]poseidonoftea 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

    I did not make an "if and only if" statement.

    [–]sushisection 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

    They don't have a free press nor free speech, yet they are what you would consider, "average joe". The same could be said about parts of the Arab World, Russia, Eastern Europe, the upper class of developing nations like India and Pakistan.

    [–]poseidonoftea 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

    And that has nothing to do with capitalism or any type of economy. They have not adopted Western values.

    [–]Imapopulistnow 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

    I'll jump in. Learn some about human nature and why communism never was or ever will be practiced as prescribed by Karl. (Hint: evolutionary driven greed for self survival) While engaging in this learning process understand also how and why ppl are motivated to work hard, be creative, contribute at a level higher than they individually need at the moment (hint: same as above). Then, learn how ppl tend , again for evolutionary purposes, this time of energy conservation, to disengage and become very lazy when needs are satisfied with no incentives for added gains. Then observe behaviors when ppl operate in an organization that must continuously improve to survive and compare to an organization that will survive and continue regardless of performance (hint: private business and government agency). And then, actually experience the real world of work and of ppl from all walks of life. Then reconcile what you observed which btw will be entirely in contrast to the abstract ideals of how the system can function so perfectly were it not dependent on real ppl, and then get back with me in a couple of decades and we will have that good discussion of what in reality can and cannot be done.

    [–]Nathaenel 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

    I never said communism is possible. I just said it was never done how it was meant to be. It requires a supercomputer at least to evaluate right and no human organization corrupting the system.

    In other hands, you would need a supreme being organizing. And with supreme being I mean everything except humans.

    With other words, communism would be possible in a new planets colony, where the people have a shared goal(surviving) and technology to direct them for the highest survival chance.

    Human greed is good, the problem is to utilize greed for the system. Because that is hard, and only the person itself can choose that. In example, a scientist is also driven by greed but this greed is utilized to favor the system too.

    [–]orangepeel 0ポイント1ポイント  (5子コメント)

    define capitalism

    [–]poseidonoftea 1ポイント2ポイント  (4子コメント)

    Private ownership of capital.

    [–]orangepeel -1ポイント0ポイント  (1子コメント)

    capital is also somewhat ambiguous. sorry, not trying to be a pedant

    [–]Cockdieselallthetime 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

    capital is also somewhat ambiguous

    Wat?

    No it isn't.

    [–]Scottmk4 -1ポイント0ポイント  (1子コメント)

    That's a hopelessly broad definition. Nearly every system that has ever been would qualify as capitalist according to this definition.

    Feudalism = capitalism Nazi Germany's = capitalism Mercantilism = capitalism.

    Your definition is bad and you should feel bad.

    [–]poseidonoftea 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Maybe capitalism has some similarities with feudalism and mercantilism.... gasp

    I guess I could tack on "pursuit of said capital for personal gains" to the definition, but it doesn't get much less vague. These other economic systems that you mention had differences primarily due to technology and wealth distribution. I promise that if modern people attempted a mercantile economy, it would look just like capitalist economy.

    People make the definition mistake all the time. For instance, there's no such thing as a communist country. There's socialist country, but a communist country would be a country without government, which is no different than an anarchist or tribalist philosophy.

    Another example is democracy. People are afraid that we don't have a democracy any time that something doesn't fit the populist view. Yet, democracy can take many forms. It can be direct or representative, for instance. Either way, it's still democracy because democracy means voting. That's all it means. And furthermore, democracy and socialism are not contradictory. One is about voting, one is about ownership of capital.

    Capitalism and socialism are very simply contradictory. Private vs public ownership of capital.

    [–]jaypaulstrong -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Hah, you are being downloaded for speaking the truth.

    [–]TotesMessenger 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

    I'm a bot, bleep, bloop. Someone has linked to this thread from another place on reddit:

    If you follow any of the above links, please respect the rules of reddit and don't vote in the other threads. (Info / Contact)

    [–]joedonut 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Content-free web site - nothing is displayed. And we know Forbes cannot be trusted.

    [–]Gmk2006 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

    This blog is full of management theory bs speak. A great deal of the bad things he pointed out stem from central Goverment partnering with corporations to either boost a economy or make money for connected politicians. Yes capitalism can wreck things, but given boundaries an oversight (not political partnering like Venezuala or China), it is a far better system overall.

    [–]neoprophet -3ポイント-2ポイント  (2子コメント)

    Unfortunately an article like this, no matter how important will never make headway on Reddit. Too many Redditors who roll around in /new are way too willing to challenge they comforting complacence.

    [–]JSmith666 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

    have you seen /r/politics lately?

    [–]mouth4war 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

    I'm just sitting around waiting for a revolution to take part in.

    [–]cdnets -3ポイント-2ポイント  (0子コメント)

    I'm surprised more people aren't comparing this to pre-progressive era United States. Lots of similarities, like monopolistic corporations and high wealth disparity. Hopefully there will be a second progressive era which will start to correct these issues

    [–]entumba -4ポイント-3ポイント  (2子コメント)

    Ignoring all of this, capitalism is set to destroy ITSELF, globally in the next 50 years. Imagine autonomous robots mining resources, transporting raw materials, manufacturing and packaging goods, distributing goods, selling goods, performing all financial transactions, and delivering goods.
    Now wrap your mind around the fact that complete automation has to happen, based on the need to compete on price, and become as cost-efficient as possible.
    Once autonomous machines are designed, built, and maintained by other fleets of autonomous machines, all vertical good streams and competition therein will be reduced to the price or property (raw resources) and electricity (to power the machines).

    So far, so good. But here is the problem... if almost no humans are working, how will they pay for anything? When the distribution of goods cannot be facilitated by an exchange of currency, because consumers can't actually exchange anything to get the currency in the first place, capitalism ends. Ignoring the riots and political unrest, if dollars/yuan/rminbi are useless, then they are worthless and the global system will literally disintegrate.

    [–]Moimoi328 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

    The exact same argument could have been used right at the start of the industrial revolution, when something like 97% of people were employed in agriculture. People couldn't fathom how the destruction of the status quo would end in anything but mass poverty.

    You would have been wrong then, and you are wrong now. You simply can't know what the future holds. What if fusion reactors become a reality and space exploration becomes a major part of economic growth? There are a thousand "what if's" I could pose.

    People are, by almost any measure you can think of, richer, healthier, more productive, live longer, have more purchasing power, and enjoy fuller lives than they did before the industrial revolution. There is no reason to think that the past few thousand years of advancement won't continue into the future.

    [–]sushisection 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Autonomous machines will only impact developed countries. There won't be any robots in Bangladesh