Would the anti-capitalists here find a capitalist welfare state to be an acceptable system?

[Tammuz]

My understanding is that quite a few members here are opposed to a capitalist economic system. On some level I can understand the reaction, as the US has a very poor social safety net, and in some parts of that country, you'd wonder if you are still in the developed world.

However, what would those members think about the type of capitalism that exists in European countries? With a capitalist basis for the economic system, but which also guarantees healthcare, education, etc, for all in society? Think of for example the Nordic countries, the German-speaking countries, the Benelux countries. They all have somewhat different domestic systems, and it could be argued, with evidence and logic, which country that has the most superior system in any given area. But the basic system is the same, a capitalist welfare state.

Would the anti-capitalist members of this forum find a capitalist welfare state an acceptable system?

Based on empirical observation of the 200+ countries, unrecognized countries, and autonomous territories of the world, I think such a system is the best one on offer right now. IMO, that is what the US should strive to become.

Speaking from my personal life, I have met very, very few people who want to destroy capitalism. Most people here are pretty pragmatic most of the time, seeing that capitalism is the least bad economic system, but certainly not perfect, needing various laws and rules to function in the interest of the wider society.

 

[J842P]

My understanding is that quite a few members here are opposed to a capitalist economic system. On some level I can understand the reaction, as the US has a very poor social safety net, and in some parts of that country, you'd wonder if you are still in the developed world.

However, what would those members think about the type of capitalism that exists in European countries? With a capitalist basis for the economic system, but which also guarantees healthcare, education, etc, for all in society? Think of for example the Nordic countries, the German-speaking countries, the Benelux countries. They all have somewhat different domestic systems, and it could be argued, with evidence and logic, which country that has the most superior system in any given area. But the basic system is the same, a capitalist welfare state.

Would the anti-capitalist members of this forum find a capitalist welfare state an acceptable system?

Based on empirical observation of the 200+ countries, unrecognized countries, and autonomous territories of the world, I think such a system is the best one on offer right now. IMO, that is what the US should strive to become.

Speaking from my personal life, I have met very, very few people who want to destroy capitalism. Most people here are pretty pragmatic most of the time, seeing that capitalism is the least bad economic system, but certainly not perfect, needing various laws and rules to function in the interest of the wider society.

Generally speaking, because the political spectrum in the US is shifted so far-right with respect to the rest of the developed world, most people who are "anti-capitalist" aren't actually anti-capitalist or socialist. Most people who say they want "socialism" are actually speaking about the capitalist welfare system akin to the Nordic Model.

Sure, there are some people, mostly academics in the humanities, who are actually anti-capitalist / socialist. But that isn't mainstream at all.

The right wing has decried the sort of welfare capitalism as socialism for so long and now they are surprised that young people aren't afraid of this, since it is plain as day that it seems to work well at least in parts of Europe.The right wing has played chicken-little on this for so long that they may have really have opened the door for a more extreme left to get in. But that's what you get when you imply that universal healthcare will inevitably lead to the gulags.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

On the political compass, I score about -9.75, -9.75.

I am open-minded. At the moment, I'd say let's try what works like in Sweden. Let's see afterward based on observation if that was satisfactory or not.

A big improvement is needed.

 

[DBT]

The Nordic model is a good start to a more reasonable society.

 

[4321lynx]

Even when it is warped and twisted by immigrants, it is better than what exists in the USA today.

 

[steve_bank]

Semantics IMO. We have a corporate welfare system. The idea being what is good for business is good for everyone.

The question is going forward what is purpose of our society and is the system s is sustainable. Trump's tax cuts and risng deficit will come due sooner or later.

Should our collective welfare as food and housing be dependent on boom-bust economic cycles? I don't think so. There is no reason to other than sticking with 19th century economics.

I have seen the positive aspects of free market capitalism. New technology with lower costs. New beneficial medical technology. But our basic welfare and security should not be based on the free market.

The capitaslist socialist dichotomy to me is just slogans for politics.

If you want real Laisse Fare Freemarket Capitalisms then take away the safety nets for business. No bankruptcy, no chapter 112. You raise money from investors. If you fail your are out on the street looking for food.

The thing is we really do not have unvarnished real capitalism.

 

[J842P]

Semantics IMO. We have a corporate welfare system. The idea being what is good for business is good for everyone.

The question is going forward what is purpose of our society and is the system s is sustainable. Trump's tax cuts and risng deficit will come due sooner or later.

Should our collective welfare as food and housing be dependent on boom-bust economic cycles? I don't think so. There is no reason to other than sticking with 19th century economics.

I have seen the positive aspects of free market capitalism. New technology with lower costs. New beneficial medical technology. But our basic welfare and security should not be based on the free market.

The capitaslist socialist dichotomy to me is just slogans for politics.

If you want real Laisse Fare Freemarket Capitalisms then take away the safety nets for business. No bankruptcy, no chapter 112. You raise money from investors. If you fail your are out on the street looking for food.

The thing is we really do not have unvarnished real capitalism.

A wise man once said, we have socialism for the rich and rugged individualism for the poor.

 

[steve_bank]

Semantics IMO. We have a corporate welfare system. The idea being what is good for business is good for everyone.

The question is going forward what is purpose of our society and is the system s is sustainable. Trump's tax cuts and risng deficit will come due sooner or later.

Should our collective welfare as food and housing be dependent on boom-bust economic cycles? I don't think so. There is no reason to other than sticking with 19th century economics.

I have seen the positive aspects of free market capitalism. New technology with lower costs. New beneficial medical technology. But our basic welfare and security should not be based on the free market.

The capitaslist socialist dichotomy to me is just slogans for politics.

If you want real Laisse Fare Freemarket Capitalisms then take away the safety nets for business. No bankruptcy, no chapter 112. You raise money from investors. If you fail your are out on the street looking for food.

The thing is we really do not have unvarnished real capitalism.

A wise man once said, we have socialism for the rich and rugged individualism for the poor.

Yea good thought. I'd like to put a few thousand libertarians on an island all well armed with limited resources. and see how long voluntary cooperation turns to kill or be killed.

Marx looking at the conditions of the workers thought there would be spontaneous rebellion.

As I heard it put the Industrial Revolution created a new workers middles class with upward mobility from the bottom. Mrx could not have foreseen a construction steel worker sending his daughter to ballet school, paraphrasing.

I wouldn't get rid of pitchforks yet, the coronavirus shows how fragile the world economy is. Along with the Boeing 737 problems which has a big effect in Washington nd elsewhere.

 

[PyramidHead]

My understanding is that quite a few members here are opposed to a capitalist economic system. On some level I can understand the reaction, as the US has a very poor social safety net, and in some parts of that country, you'd wonder if you are still in the developed world.

However, what would those members think about the type of capitalism that exists in European countries? With a capitalist basis for the economic system, but which also guarantees healthcare, education, etc, for all in society? Think of for example the Nordic countries, the German-speaking countries, the Benelux countries. They all have somewhat different domestic systems, and it could be argued, with evidence and logic, which country that has the most superior system in any given area. But the basic system is the same, a capitalist welfare state.

Would the anti-capitalist members of this forum find a capitalist welfare state an acceptable system?

Based on empirical observation of the 200+ countries, unrecognized countries, and autonomous territories of the world, I think such a system is the best one on offer right now. IMO, that is what the US should strive to become.

Speaking from my personal life, I have met very, very few people who want to destroy capitalism. Most people here are pretty pragmatic most of the time, seeing that capitalism is the least bad economic system, but certainly not perfect, needing various laws and rules to function in the interest of the wider society.

The European nations you speak of are parasites that depend on extracting labor and resources from the global south to provide the welfare services they do, and still maintain an organization of production that depends on further extraction from their own workers. It still produces goods that humans need to survive by forcing the people who subsist on them to sell their time and energy to a small minority who owns the ability to make them. It is still propped up by the influx of capital from less friendly capitalist states. It is still just one election away from descending into reactionary fascism. Social democracy is no substitute for socialism, and will always betray the working class in the end.

 

[steve_bank]

Sounds like 19th century Markist paradigms.

Regardless of the system work and resources have to be allocated in some way, and assignment of compensation.

Invariably power structures evolve. Given on served human nature as it is, what system other than the we tern systems would be more just and equitable without debating what justice means in detail. Or more fair.