Asklemmy

Unchecked capitalism allows for the snowballing consolidation of wealth and power, and is therefore inherently authoritarian/exploitative of others. It is possible to have markets that encourage and reward creativity, novelty, and competition without allowing any person or entity to become too powerful (mind you, wealth and power are always the same thing - or more specifically - two sides of a single coin).

This is also why you will see leftists attacking liberals - because liberalism is simply an extension of capitalism: the allowance and encouragement of inequitable consolidation of wealth and power. An egalitarian ends must actively oppose, prevent, and even correct such consolidation. Capitalism and liberalism are the enemies of freedom, liberty, and justice.

I think people in this thread is generally see capitalism as the reason for inequity and people's misfortune with medical bills etc. As a resident of a Scandinavian country this strike me as odd. All Scandinavian countries are for sure capitalistic but we pay high taxes and get for instance free education, free healthcare, retirement pension etc. in return. The opposite to this is not capitalism, but liberalism, in the sense that society should stay out of people's business and "freedom above everything else". Countries where things goes to hell need to give up some freedom to benefit the greater good which I'm turn is going to help themselves.

Pure capitalism favors the wealthy and the unscrupulous. That is if there are no laws in place protecting peoples rights then the business owners have little incentive to treat there employees well (they will trade short term profits over long term stability.

On the flip side a pure communist system favors the lazy since there is little to no reward for doing more than the minimum. That is to say the status quo is unchanging.

This is why we have government, to correct the selfish nature of capitalism, while hopefully still retaining the innovation and drive that it produces (winner take all is a strong motivator).

This only works in the long term if government is fair and balanced, looking out both for the interests of business and society (the poor, the environment, the common spaces, etc). And where an idea like socialism actually strikes a good balance between both extremes.

The idea that the markets will sort themselves out is a fever dream thought up by the right. The markets will quickly consolidate into monopolies and then exploit there power. It is only fair competition that produces benefits. And that is an unstable balance that must be carefully maintained by outside forces (government).

People have different definitions of capitalism, and cound different side effects into that definition.

While you are correct in your claims, it does look like you are not seeing negative effects it has on society and economy.

Similar thing happens with the other side, they usually put criminal activities (like corporations poisoning people) into definition of capitalism or they directly blame it for that kind effect on humans.

I think that is just not really accepting the nature of humans.

Shit will happen in every *isam and each one will be good for something.

That doesn't mean we shouldn't challenge everything that we see as bad, and there is no need to make those classifications.

It is like politics, looks like you can not be for lower taxes and support same sex marriage at the same time, even thou there are people with those options.

Capitalism is built on the exploitation of others. Slavery, Homelessness, and Pollution are all side effects of a profit driven market without restrictions.

I have always believed that the majority of the world's problems stem from almost all of the world's countries rely on a private bank to print and regulate their money. Those banks aren't capitalistic, but I bet the people behind them are the richest in the world.

Capitalism is literally making our environment uninhabitable.