Breaking the back of capitalism

FatherOfTwo · Posted: Fri Jun 17, 2005 11:36 am Post subject: Breaking the back of capitalism

What is it going to take to break the back of capitalism? Or is it possible? I’m not talking about ending free enterprise, but rather the never ending growth required by capitalism.

Does the entire system (capitalism, free enterprise, money) need to completely fall apart, and ruin society as we know it, or can there be “significant enough” events to allow capitalism to be excised before killing the patient?
_________________
Do not underestimate the difficulties of surviving the transition of peak oil, nor the dangers of global warming. We must embrace nuclear energy and renewables.

ubercrap · Heavy Crude Joined: Apr 27, 2005 Posts: 318

So you mean the collapse of fractional reserve banking and fiat currency, etc... I see no way to put the brakes on these things, once they are started, they must operate indefinitely or collapse eventually. When or why collapse? Who knows exactly. In my mind, a permanent global energy crisis stands a very good chance of being able to take those things down.

MacG · Light Sweet Crude Joined: Jun 04, 2005 Posts: 1169

JoeW · Posted: Fri Jun 17, 2005 1:49 pm Post subject:

The money system will break without growth, which has been discussed in detail many times. But if you can take a step back for a moment, you will realize that money is a man-made concept. It only exists in our minds, and has value because we believe in it. If you took money away from our society entirely, it is possible that products could continue to be made and people could continue to have the things that they need. But it wouldn't likely happen that way, would it? There would probably be a lot of trouble, and then, perhaps some different (bankless?) monetary system could emerge.
There's no reason to believe that capitalism can't exist without growth, especially in an evironment of stagnant (or declining) population. The result of declining population would be more capital per capita, which could be a good thing.

jdmartin · Posted: Fri Jun 17, 2005 11:29 pm Post subject:

I'm not sure that in the long run the base concept of capitalism - making a profit - can survive. I suppose it depends to some extent what manner of living we all have. If people are still living comfortably, I think it survives in some form. As the previous poster said, money is simply a concept in our minds, so it could still be worth something. However, if people are living in caves (a figure of speech), I doubt that capitalism will have a future. Maybe in limited levels, i.e. I'll trade you five shovels for 2 day's worth of food, where a person only needs one shovel. The big thing about capitalism is that it thrives on non-necessities. If you're only talking about food, clothing, and basic shelter, there's really nothing to continually move.
_________________
After fueling up their cars, Twyman says they bowed their heads and asked God for cheaper gas.There was no immediate answer, but he says other motorists joined in and the service station owner didn't run them off.

I_Like_Plants · Posted: Sat Jun 18, 2005 2:32 am Post subject:

I've just re-read Heinberg's Powerdown, and he says in several places that our economic/financial system only knows how to grow, how it has to grow or collapse, etc.

I'm beginning to think that this kind of system is what's meant by "Capitalism" or "Free Enterprise" when the ruling class talks about this, or even the semi-ruling class.

To me, "capitalism" is, I go out and find some electronics junk, buy it for one price, sell it for a higher price, and in effect I'm earning money for the service of going out and finding the stuff and putting the effort into selling it, shipping it, describing it, advertising it, etc. If I find less junk one year than another and my income is lower, so what? But if I ran a corporation that did what I do, and it doesn't grow from year to year, the stock will go down, no one will want to hold the stock, and it will die. That's grow or die.

I'm not sure what I do is even "Capitalism" at all. I own a job, I don't get to sit on my ass and collect the money, I work as hard as most people who make the level of pay I do.

This is something the Soviets etc had to wrestle with, since they needed the small shopkeepers, the traveling salesmen, the advertisers, etc to allocate goods and services. They were forced to admit that you needed those guys. What they did NOT need, were the sit-back-and-exploit-the-workers types.

Heinberg and others talk about our debt-based monetary system as a big problem too, that's also set up on the grow-or-die plan. Only it's inflate-or-die.

The best way to say F.U. to the current system is to be self-sufficient as much as possible, and actually not need "cash money" that much. Make too little an income to tax, like Jim Merkel, the "Radical Simplicity" guy decided to do, and you're not supporting the present military/economic system much if at all. Barter and trade in your community and you're not using debt-money.

Peak Oil and learning about this stuff is great! I actually dream about making LESS money in the future!

Ludi · Posted: Sat Jun 18, 2005 5:40 am Post subject:

Self-sufficiency/interdependency and a sharing economy could eventually take the place of capitalism, but only if people work together to do it. This doesn't seem to be the trend.

linlithgowoil · Posted: Sat Jun 18, 2005 10:09 am Post subject:

you'll always have some people who want to acquire more 'capital' than others, so i dont see capitalism ever ceasing to exist so long as humans are around. when one of your basest instincts is greed, then capitalism will exist even in places of economic depression. im fairly sure pockets of capitalism existed in communist russia - some people had more 'stuff' than others, and under communism that wasnt meant to happen, so man's natural state of capitalism could not be curtailed.

capitalism is the natural state of mankind unfortunately.

Raxozanne · Posted: Sat Jun 18, 2005 11:13 am Post subject:

agni · Tar Sands Joined: Jun 14, 2005 Posts: 93

Ludi · Posted: Sat Jun 18, 2005 3:08 pm Post subject:

I_Like_Plants · Posted: Sat Jun 18, 2005 3:53 pm Post subject:

Yeah among Native Americans there were people who were obsessed with having the nicest clothes, who'd put more emphasis into getting those, either by making them or trading for them etc., but that activity didn't take food out of say, the poorest kids in the tribes' mouths.

Some people had more skills, and could make the best bows or the best arrowheads etc., so they had the power to trade for stuff, but I don't think it was minutely accounted for like we do with our money system, it was more like, loose and informal, "Oh, you're going off on a hunt? Here, I just made some great arrowheads, here you go, good luck!" then the good arrowhead maker got to share well in the feast afterward etc. Imagine the informal network of sharing and favors we have in a few neighborhoods in the USA and that should give an idea.

"Gift economies" are another good example. Those are found among "primitive" peoples and they also exist on the Net. In fact I think the sociologists who study such things consider forums like this to be a gift economy.

It was trading goods for services but it was not the system we have in place now, where money and material goods matter more than people, especially the people who make the things.

Tyler_JC · Posted: Sat Jun 18, 2005 5:40 pm Post subject:

JohnDenver · Light Sweet Crude Joined: Aug 29, 2004 Posts: 1844

turmoil · Posted: Sat Jun 18, 2005 8:50 pm Post subject: