What are
/r/Capitalism's
favorite Products & Services?
From 3.5 billion Reddit comments
The most popular Products mentioned in /r/Capitalism:
The most popular Services mentioned in /r/Capitalism:
SemanticScholar
Disqus
Parler
Ecosia
MasterClass
Google Podcasts
Buzzsprout
PeerTube
Odysee
Zero-K
WebMD
The Motley Fool
Steemit
Yahoo! Search
The most popular reviews in /r/Capitalism:
The Black Book of Communism estimates it at 94 million.
https://www.amazon.com/Black-Book-Communism-Crimes-Repression/dp/0674076087
Here is an article about the death toll:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/100-years-of-communismand-100-million-dead-1510011810
The question of the death toll is still up for debate
A few of the easier to read options have been taken already, so I'll suggest two harder ones if you want something more in depth or to continue your reading after the ones that have already been suggested. I'll also include an easier one for the third book.
1) Principles of Economics by Carl Menger. Make sure it's the one by Carl Menger and not the one by Alfred Marshall.
2) Human Action by Ludwig von Mises. This is the more important one but it's a tough, 800 page read. If you've read Das Kapital, though, you should be fine.
3) Economics in One Lesson by Henry Hazzlit. This is more of a criticism of government intervention in the economy so it's a bit different to what you asked for but it's an easy to understand, clear cut book about Capitalism that everyone should read in their lifetime.
"Capitalism and Freedom" by Milton Friedman "The Problem with Socialism" by Thomas DiLorenzo
These are quick and easy to read. I would also suggest doing some research on pure economics. My coversations with a friend who studies economics gives a lot of interesting insight. I yet have to find some "easy to read" primers on economics though.
That is a myth. Charities are more efficient than government welfare.
He'll never read that monster (too much work.) 'The Law' by Bastiat is brief and engaging. 'Economics in One Lesson by Hazlitt. Most likely he will read nothing longer than a few pages. Youtube vids will work best for short attention span types. Search for vids on communism by or related to Praeger Univ, Mises, Thomas Sowell, Milton Friedman, or Hayek.
As a science major myself, I knew that I had little understanding of economics, so I started by reading The Shock Doctrine as it was recommended by goodreads under economics, which is actually quite strongly against free markets and focused on ethics and regulation. I did not honestly find most of the ethics approach very convincing but I did think it was wrong for the US to swoop into middle eastern countries and replace their system with mcdonalds venues.
My dad pointed out to me frequently that government programs are useless, but I could not see any reason to get rid of them, and I don't think he ever explained why they are useless. He told me about all of the cushy government jobs in the city, but didn't realise that I had no accurate concept of taxation, and I thought it was great that people could have jobs like that. I also thought Bernie Sanders and Jill Stein's idea of free university was the way to go, I mean why would you oppose more education?... and then I saw Friedman's argument against it on youtube and slowly realised how ridiculous it actually is, and the more I listened to friedman the more naive I felt. I'm reading Free to Choose now and I find I agree with it substantially more than Klein's book.
You could read The Wealth of Nations from Adam Smith, but it can be a little bit too dry as a first read. If you're interested in political opinions, you should read memoirs or biographies from great politicians such as William Gladstone, Winston Churchill, etc.
I think Milton Friedman describes capitalism both simply and eloquently here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8p8IVKFB25Q.
In public policy, there is not much difference between state capitalism and state socialism. Both hold that the state is necessary for providing certain goods or services to the people; they differ primarily in rhetoric.
Economic systems are, themselves, amoral. They are ways to allocate resources among a population, nothing more. Capitalism acknowledges that these resources are scarce (i.e. not infinite) and that the population's desires are not scarce (i.e. infinite). This makes sense intuitively, doesn't it? Whenever someone says, "There's not enough to go around," or "I'd be happier if I had ____", they recognize this. It doesn't always need to be tangible. A good example is time; we always want more time to get things done, but since our lives are limited we have to make choices. Capitalism is a toolkit for making decisions in a limited world.
Some critical assumptions behind capitalism are: (1) businesses try to maximize profit, (2) consumers try to maximize happiness, and (3) when they come together, the result is socially optimal. This condition, social optimality, is frequently challenged and is the main argument for why a state is needed to restrain capitalism. But this assumes that there is some agency who knows best for society. If billions of interactions between self-interested people don't produce a socially optimal outcome, and property rights are well defined and enforceable (not always true), then why would small group from government know better?
For some good introductory readings, I highly recommend the following works:
Leonard E. Read -- "I, Pencil"
Henry Hazlitt -- Economics in One Lesson
Ludwig von Mises -- The Anti-Capitalistic Mentality
>Ok, what was the regulatory scheme that applied to OTC derivatives leading up to the crisis? Which agency was in charge of OTC derivatives regulation?
I do not know. But there is an implicit assumption that whatever is not tightly regulated by its own agency immediately devolves into a huge problem. There are many industries that are still not regulated and there is no problem. Indeed these industries see rapid innovation. Many of the alphabet agencies did not exist just a couple decades ago and the markets (or other industries) were just fine.
On the other side you see many examples where regulatory pressure (which is systemic by design) can throw whole industry in chaos. I do not see a reason why it would be different in finance industry.
Dodd Frank in my opinion will be at the core of the next government created issue.
>Also, investors had become too reliant on rating agencies for credit evaluation. If it has a AAA rating, that was all portfolio managers needed. If course it only got a AAA because the rating agencies were using the same flawed Gaussian copula model.
Isn't it the case that that the rating agencies are tightly regulated and have to be licensed? Why don't these regulations work?
I do not deny that CDO might have played a role but it can hardly be a cause. The question is why would banks even start provide subprime loans. Because it seem to me pretty unlikely that they knew they will be able to bamboozle everyone and eventually be bailed out. Indeed you can read for example in this book that not everyone wanted to provide subprime loans and how government agencies pressured banks who did not want to go along.
Let us not forget that the word capitalism was created by socialists [ Proudhon, Louis, etc .. ) in the middle 1800s to describe the big government, leftist, economic framework known as Mercantilism which was practiced by nations in the West at that time to include Russia
Today, no nation practices Mercantilism, capitalism, today as defined by socialists. The vast majority practice Democratic Socialism with a few outliers still practicing communism. Democratic Socialism has much in common with Mercantilism especially in terms of the GOVERNMENT SACTIONED institutions known as corporations and the State getting a cut of the profits and controlling said institution though regulations instead of charters back in the day of Mercantilism
The problems we have today are problems created by the ideology of Democratic Socialism and not free markets, an economy, which is composed of the currency, labor, trade, and industry, which is free from government meddling
https://www.amazon.com/Wheels-Commerce-Civilization-Capitalism-15Th-18th/dp/0520081153
Your attempt to MISLABEL Democratic Socialism as Mercantilism ( Capitalism ), which no nation practices today, is noted
Let us not forget that the word capitalism was created by socialists in the middle 1800s to describe the big government, leftist, economic framework known as Mercantilism which was practiced by nations in the West at that time to include Russia
Today, no nation practices Mercantilism, capitalism, today as defined by socialists. The vast majority practice Democratic Socialism with a few outliers still practicing communism. Democratic Socialism has much in common with Mercantilism especially in terms of the GOVERNMENT SACTIONED institutions known as corporations and the State getting a cut of the profits and controlling said institution though regulations instead of charters back in the day of Mercantilism
The problems we have today are problems created by the ideology of Democratic Socialism and not free markets, an economy, which is composed of the currency, labor, trade, and industry, which is free from government meddling
https://www.amazon.com/Wheels-Commerce-Civilization-Capitalism-15Th-18th/dp/0520081153
Your attempt to MISLABEL Democratic Socialism as Mercantilism ( Capitalism ), which no nation practices today, is noted
120 kg is an exaggeration, but still 75 % of American males are overweight or obese, half of the food produced in the US is thrown away, it boggles my mind how there can still be hunger in the US.
Let us not forget that the word capitalism was created by socialists in the middle 1800s to describe the big government, leftist, economic framework known as Mercantilism which was practiced by nations in the West at that time to include Russia
Today, no nation practices Mercantilism, capitalism, today as defined by socialists. The vast majority practice Democratic Socialism with a few outliers still practicing communism. Democratic Socialism has much in common with Mercantilism especially in terms of the GOVERNMENT SACTIONED institutions known as corporations and the State getting a cut of the profits and controlling said institution though regulations instead of charters back in the day of Mercantilism
The problems we have today are problems created by the ideology of Democratic Socialism and not free markets, an economy, which is composed of the currency, labor, trade, and industry, which is free from government meddling
https://www.amazon.com/Wheels-Commerce-Civilization-Capitalism-15Th-18th/dp/0520081153
Your attempt to MISLABEL Democratic Socialism as Mercantilism ( Capitalism ), which no nation practices today is noted
No it’s free markets
Let us not forget that the word capitalism was created by socialists in the middle 1800s to describe the big government, leftist, economic framework known as Mercantilism which was practiced by nations in the West at that time to include Russia
Today, no nation practices Mercantilism, capitalism, today as defined by socialists. The vast majority practice Democratic Socialism with a few outliers still practicing communism. Democratic Socialism has much in common with Mercantilism especially in terms of the GOVERNMENT SACTIONED institutions known as corporations and the State getting a cut of the profits and controlling said institution though regulations instead of charters back in the day of Mercantilism
The problems we have today are problems created by the ideology of Democratic Socialism and not free markets, an economy, which is composed of the currency, labor, trade, and industry, which is free from government meddling
https://www.amazon.com/Wheels-Commerce-Civilization-Capitalism-15Th-18th/dp/0520081153
State legislative action <> Free Markets
Let us not forget that the word capitalism was created by socialists in the middle 1800s to describe the big government, leftist, economic framework known as Mercantilism which was practiced by nations in the West at that time to include Russia
Today, no nation practices Mercantilism, capitalism, today as defined by socialists. The vast majority practice Democratic Socialism with a few outliers still practicing communism. Democratic Socialism has much in common with Mercantilism especially in terms of the GOVERNMENT SACTIONED institutions known as corporations and the State getting a cut of the profits and controlling said institution though regulations instead of charters back in the day of Mercantilism
The problems we have today are problems created by the ideology of Democratic Socialism and not free markets, an economy, which is composed of the currency, labor, trade, and industry, which is free from government meddling
https://www.amazon.com/Wheels-Commerce-Civilization-Capitalism-15Th-18th/dp/0520081153
/u/TheTrendwithRtlfaith's attempt to MISLABEL Democratic Socialism as Mercantilism ( Capitalism ), which no nation practices today, is noted
Let us not forget that the word capitalism was created by socialists in the middle 1800s to describe the big government, leftist, economic framework known as Mercantilism which was practiced by nations in the West at that time to include Russia
Today, no nation practices Mercantilism, capitalism, today as defined by socialists. The vast majority practice Democratic Socialism with a few outliers still practicing communism. Democratic Socialism has much in common with Mercantilism especially in terms of the GOVERNMENT SACTIONED institutions known as corporations and the State getting a cut of the profits and controlling said institution though regulations instead of charters back in the day of Mercantilism
The problems we have today are problems created by the ideology of Democratic Socialism and not free markets, an economy, which is composed of the currency, labor, trade, and industry, which is free from government meddling
https://www.amazon.com/Wheels-Commerce-Civilization-Capitalism-15Th-18th/dp/0520081153
/u/fatsausigeboi's attempt to MISLABEL Democratic Socialism as Mercantilism ( Capitalism ), which no nation practices today, is noted
Read this https://www.amazon.com/Invisible-Women-Data-World-Designed/dp/1419729071 It’s free to download on libgen.is
It explains the discrimination within society where men is seen as default and superior.
The question comes down to why there is a disparity in the first place based on something so arbitrary like genital shape. Something in society was built to create an imbalance
Of course i have lol. Would you like a good primer? Check out Terry Eagletons book “why marx was right”. Pretty straight forward read. Each chapter addresses different critiques of marx’s work.
https://www.amazon.com/Why-Marx-Right-Terry-Eagleton/dp/0300181531
Your vimment made me think of this documentary about Dr Burzynski. Basically he has a cure for cancer but because of cronyism and politics he can't get approval. We should be fight for doctors like him over advocating for burning things down and giving these bureaucrats even more power.
https://www.amazon.com/Burzynski-Cancer-Cure-Cover-Up/dp/B01M2V84O7
Liberals and socialists have long been talking about ways whereby what economists consider "voluntary" exchanges may be "coercive" or "exploitative" due to difference in bargaining power or dire circumstances, a point made by Harvard professor Michael Sandel, hence Munger coined the term "euvoluntary" and explained the ethics of such transactions.
> Typical leftists sees most of transactions that people take on a daily basis as exactly this one (although it is erroneous) and thus most transaction they will perceive as non-evoluntary. "You have to sell your work or die".
True, which is why I think it's useful to argue the way Munger did, by pointing out that even non-euvoluntary exchanges benefit both parties and are therefore justified.
Also, why do you consider their point erroneous? For workers living paycheck to paycheck, couldn't it be argued that working is equivalent to the desert water scenario?
> Why even open the argument to this? It is impossible to argue they have a choice now we should argue that BATNAs are similar?
Some leftists would bring up the transaction cost of moving jobs, or cases where a town is dominated by one employer in a monopsony position, thus the right to work for a different employer does not mean the capability to work for a different employer. And the BATNA in these scenarios could very well be hunger, homelessness, and death.
They might also claim that capitalism is itself a forced labor regime, and that all capitalist labor is equally exploitative and alienating, which is a claim Marxists, anarchists, and work abolitionists all make.
Let us not forget that the word capitalism was created by socialists in the middle 1800s to describe the big government, leftist, economic framework known as Mercantilism which was practiced by nations in the West at that time to include Russia
Today, no nation practices Mercantilism, capitalism, today as defined by socialists. The vast majority practice Democratic Socialism with a few outliers still practicing communism. Democratic Socialism has much in common with Mercantilism especially in terms of the GOVERNMENT SACTIONED institutions known as corporations and the State getting a cut of the profits and controlling said institution though regulations instead of charters back in the day of Mercantilism
The problems we have today are problems created by the ideology of Democratic Socialism and not free markets, an economy, which is composed of the currency, labor, trade, and industry, which is free from government meddling
https://www.amazon.com/Wheels-Commerce-Civilization-Capitalism-15Th-18th/dp/0520081153
/u/Limp-Sherbet4338's attempt to MISLABEL Free Markets as Mercantilism ( Capitalism ) is noted
Let us not forget that the word capitalism was created by socialists in the middle 1800s to describe the big government, leftist, economic framework known as Mercantilism which was practiced by nations in the West at that time to include Russia
Today, no nation practices Mercantilism, capitalism, today as defined by socialists. The vast majority practice Democratic Socialism with a few outliers still practicing communism. Democratic Socialism has much in common with Mercantilism especially in terms of the GOVERNMENT SACTIONED institutions known as corporations and the State getting a cut of the profits and controlling said institution though regulations instead of charters back in the day of Mercantilism
The problems we have today are problems created by the ideology of Democratic Socialism and not free markets, an economy, which is composed of the currency, labor, trade, and industry, which is free from government meddling
https://www.amazon.com/Wheels-Commerce-Civilization-Capitalism-15Th-18th/dp/0520081153
/u/hanannorth's attempt to MISLABEL Democratic Socialism as Mercantilism ( Capitalism ) is noted
Let us not forget that the word capitalism was created by socialists in the middle 1800s to describe the big government, leftist, economic framework known as Mercantilism which was practiced by nations in the West at that time to include Russia
Today, no nation practices Mercantilism, capitalism, today as defined by socialists. The vast majority practice Democratic Socialism with a few outliers still practicing communism. Democratic Socialism has much in common with Mercantilism especially in terms of the GOVERNMENT SACTIONED institutions known as corporations and the State getting a cut of the profits and controlling said institution though regulations instead of charters back in the day of Mercantilism
The problems we have today are problems created by the ideology of Democratic Socialism and not free markets, an economy, which is composed of the currency, labor, trade, and industry, which is free from government meddling
https://www.amazon.com/Wheels-Commerce-Civilization-Capitalism-15Th-18th/dp/0520081153
/u/Tathorn's attempt to MISLABEL Democratic Socialism as Mercantilism ( Capitalism ) is noted
Let us not forget that the word capitalism was created by socialists in the middle 1800s to describe the big government, leftist, economic framework known as Mercantilism which was practiced by nations in the West at that time to include Russia
Today, no nation practices Mercantilism, capitalism, today as defined by socialists. The vast majority practice Democratic Socialism with a few outliers still practicing communism. Democratic Socialism has much in common with Mercantilism especially in terms of the GOVERNMENT SACTIONED institutions known as corporations and the State getting a cut of the profits and controlling said institution though regulations instead of charters back in the day of Mercantilism
The problems we have today are problems created by the ideology of Democratic Socialism and not free markets, an economy, which is composed of the currency, labor, trade, and industry, which is free from government meddling
https://www.amazon.com/Wheels-Commerce-Civilization-Capitalism-15Th-18th/dp/0520081153
/u/leopheard's attempt to MISLABEL Democratic Socialism as Mercantilism ( Capitalism ) is noted and shows how ignorant the left is when it comes to political theory and how biased their posting is
<> it does not make people poor.
yes it does per the UN OECD - https://mises.org/wire/if-sweden-and-germany-became-us-states-they-would-be-among-poorest-states
> it actually makes you more free
No it doesn't as the history of genocides ( Yugoslavia and Rwanda being 2 good examples ) shows
>I'm not sure where you got your "suppression of rights" from,
Suppression of speech, of being armed, of choice, of property as we see in the laws and policies that are a matter of public record
> no one person has the right to control land
yes they do as the word homesteading proves. What does not exist is public property as the State has no rights since its not a person and therefore anything is possesses it does so by force ( immoral )
>but capitalism
Let us not forget that the word capitalism was created by socialists in the middle 1800s to describe the big government, leftist, economic framework known as Mercantilism which was practiced by nations in the West at that time to include Russia
Today, no nation practices Mercantilism, capitalism, today as defined by socialists. The vast majority practice Democratic Socialism with a few outliers still practicing communism. Democratic Socialism has much in common with Mercantilism especially in terms of the GOVERNMENT SACTIONED institutions known as corporations and the State getting a cut of the profits and controlling said institution though regulations instead of charters back in the day of Mercantilism
The problems we have today are problems created by the ideology of Democratic Socialism and not free markets, an economy, which is composed of the currency, labor, trade, and industry, which is free from government meddling
https://www.amazon.com/Wheels-Commerce-Civilization-Capitalism-15Th-18th/dp/0520081153
Your attempt to MISLABEL Democratic Socialism with Mercantilism ( Capitalism ) is noted
There is only one economics. I assume you are looking for accessible and reasonable authors.
I always recommend "economics in one lesson" since I think that basics economics is pretty simple. What is imho challenging is that you have to think in a bit different way compared to physics. This book tries to get you into that mode of thinking. It is short. There are chapters on inflation later in the book.
Yes, we do extract stuff that is finite so what? We will find another resources as long as we can use our minds which the government is constantly try to limit. There are several books on the topic that argue that resources are in fact infinite like (I think) this one
I personally do not care about circular economy. What does it even mean?
Let us not forget that the word capitalism was created by socialists in the middle 1800s to describe the big government, leftist, economic framework known as Mercantilism which was practiced by nations in the West at that time to include Russia
Today, no nation practices Mercantilism, capitalism, today as defined by socialists. The vast majority practice Democratic Socialism with a few outliers still practicing communism. Democratic Socialism has much in common with Mercantilism especially in terms of the GOVERNMENT SACTIONED institutions known as corporations and the State getting a cut of the profits and controlling said institution though regulations instead of charters back in the day of Mercantilism
The problems we have today are problems created by the ideology of Democratic Socialism and not free markets, an economy, which is composed of the currency, labor, trade, and industry, which is free from government meddling
https://www.amazon.com/Wheels-Commerce-Civilization-Capitalism-15Th-18th/dp/0520081153
So /u/Motor-Ad-8858 is MISLABELLING Democratic Socialism as Mercantilism ( capitalism )
I formed that opinion over the years. I think the person who first nudged me into this direction was Milton Friedman so I do not have it from a book. But recently I was recommended this. I did not read it myself but supposedly it is very good.
That is not a very good argument.
US Constitution, despite being good is not a holy document and can clearly be improved. Even the founding fathers knew it that is why we have amendments.
I doubt I will persuade you but maybe someone else reads this the reason why it is their job is that is it is government's job to arbitrate disputes. To be able to do that law abstraction must be created to support the interaction in the society. I do not have a hundreds of examples but there are imho three points where this happened.
- When we were hunter gatherers term of property (in terms of land) was likely not important. But once people started to tend to their fields and build buildings someone needs to define what it is.
- the corporation and we already covered that
- dawn of intellectual property. It probably started with music but it evolved more and more and maybe even majority of property is intellectual in the age of internet. You can look at the 230 without which the internet would not look like it does.
There is actually an interesting book that documents what happens to countries that failed evolve law to support human interaction. Most of the creation of values moves to illegality and many values are just not created.
Let us not forget that the word capitalism was created by socialists in the middle 1800s to describe the big government, leftist, economic framework known as Mercantilism which was practiced by nations in the West at that time to include Russia
Today, no nation practices Mercantilism, capitalism, today as defined by socialists. The vast majority practice Democratic Socialism with a few outliers still practicing communism. Democratic Socialism has much in common with Mercantilism especially in terms of the GOVERNMENT SACTIONED institutions known as corporations and the State getting a cut of the profits and controlling said institution though regulations instead of charters back in the day of Mercantilism
The problems we have today are problems created by the ideology of Democratic Socialism and not free markets, an economy, which is composed of the currency, labor, trade, and industry, which is free from government meddling
https://www.amazon.com/Wheels-Commerce-Civilization-Capitalism-15Th-18th/dp/0520081153
Let us not forget that the word capitalism was created by socialists in the middle 1800s to describe the big government, leftist, economic framework known as Mercantilism which was practiced by nations in the West at that time to include Russia
Today, no nation practices Mercantilism, capitalism, today as defined by socialists. The vast majority practice Democratic Socialism with a few outliers still practicing communism. Democratic Socialism has much in common with Mercantilism especially in terms of the GOVERNMENT SACTIONED institutions known as corporations and the State getting a cut of the profits and controlling said institution though regulations instead of charters back in the day of Mercantilism
The problems we have today are problems created by the ideology of Democratic Socialism and not free markets, an economy, which is composed of the currency, labor, trade, and industry, which is free from government meddling
https://www.amazon.com/Wheels-Commerce-Civilization-Capitalism-15Th-18th/dp/0520081153
Wasn't the big scare of 70s the population bomb? The darling of the eco movement even wrote a book about it
Let us not forget that the word capitalism was created by socialists in the middle 1800s to describe the big government, leftist, economic framework known as Mercantilism which was practiced by nations in the West at that time to include Russia
Today, no nation practices Mercantilism, capitalism, today as defined by socialists. The vast majority practice Democratic Socialism with a few outliers still practicing communism. Democratic Socialism has much in common with Mercantilism especially in terms of the GOVERNMENT SACTIONED institutions known as corporations and the State getting a cut of the profits and controlling said institution though regulations instead of charters back in the day of Mercantilism
The problems we have today are problems created by the ideology of Democratic Socialism and not free markets, an economy, which is composed of the currency, labor, trade, and industry, which is free from government meddling
https://www.amazon.com/Wheels-Commerce-Civilization-Capitalism-15Th-18th/dp/0520081153
I am making it succinct for the sake of discussion but I think this is pretty typical definition of laissez faire capitalism. You can certainly find the definition and justification in writings of Ayn Rand (specifically I think Capitalism: unknown ideal) or some writings of Milton Friedman (I think the Free to choose videos are good).
>Obviously bankers like to make money and the other statement that the government forced banks with a gun to their heads I think is spreading misinformation.
You keep reading stuff no one has said. I did not say guns. I seat threats. You can read it from one of the CEOs that did that in his book.
>here may have been some kind of pressure but again not to the extent you are claiming and the government didn’t fully step in until after the damage was already done. Remember this was 8 years into a Bush presidency. This wasn’t immediately following Clinton’s reign and trust me I’m not much of a fan of him either. The deregulation before the crisis is what contributed to the collapse. You guys are claiming it’s the other way around.
I personally do not care if it was D or GOP. They are the same might have been either. But no, they are the cause so no "stepping in when damage was done happened".
If you think there was deregulation that caused it then state what law was passed and what effect it had?
You can read the predictions that were made in the 70s about people starving from one of the founders of the eco movements in the book population bomb from Ehrlich himself. As far as I know millions were sterilized based on his theories. I think he still teaches at Stanford. You probably see yourself that nothing that predicted has happened quite the opposite.
Google e5 tornadoes and find they happen every 8 to 10 years and rate of tornadoes has not increased. Do the same for hurricanes over the last 100 years. Then read a book that challenges your understanding and you might learn something Unsettled: What Climate Science... https://www.amazon.com/dp/1950665798?ref=ppx_pop_mob_ap_share
It is much too big a historical change of direction to explain in a few sentences. But I can direct you to resources and Google key words.
First do a search on the Glass Seagull Act of 1933. It is the sentinel moment in history that reverses the economic direction of America's economic thinking after the disaster of embracing Laissez Faire Capitalism for several decades.
Then get the cheap used book The World in Depression, 1929-1939 (History of the World Economy in the Twentieth Century). Unfortunately it is not digital. It is considered the seminal work on the economics of the Great Depression when the living could still partake in recording their own history, as they experienced it, with no modern day agendas. https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0520055926/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o07_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1#customerReviews
The author Charles Kindleberger also wrote Manias, Panics, and Crashes: A History of Financial Crises, Seventh Edition 7th Edition, Kindle Edition. This book is a focused on the study of economic periods of failures on a massive scale. History just keeps repeating itself. Mancal speculation seems to be an economic certainty, eventually, unless it is regulated into oblivion.
Hey,
You did not mention how wealthy your parents are but if it is really significant it is quite possible that you will not be able to keep the same level of income just from a job. That is not an issue though you can chart your own way in life.
As for job you should pick what you like. Of the three you offered CS will give you best career options. I think studying econ is very useful but I personally think you can get proficient in the basics without really going to college. There is not much use for economists in the market and most of them end up working for gov (which might be what you want). Finance might be something you could consider too.
As for wealth. Do not feel guilty for the wealth your parents made. They likely worked hard for it to help you succeed and it is a badge of honor not shame. Talk to them about what they can offer and find a plan that you are both comfortable with.
As for the shame. I think it is normal to get confused in these times but there is nothing to be ashamed of. Your family being wealthy is not preventing others to be wealthy too. If you are interested I recommend this book which is short and gives thoughts on many questions you are asking.
This is certainly a journey since there is so many sources out there and you will have find your own path. Here are two books that helped me.
I personally can really recommend Economics in one lesson to get you primed up in how to think economically and explains how economics affect every day things.
For investing I think Intelligent investor is good to show you how to think about investing and what to expect.
If you want to get some videos on how stuff works with calculations, have a look at Khan's academy. They do have several videos explaining the concepts of taxation and inflation with calculations. Just beware their political views are mostly on the left (I think) so this might play out in some of the videos.
Hate to break it to you but Elinor Ostrom got a Nobel prize in economics for solving this tragedy. Governing the Commons
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2674671
Here's a paper about how much more expensive healthcare is in the US
Here's a paper on why specifically drugs are much more expensive in the US.
I'm just quoting facts, saying something is inaccurate with no evidence is not very productive. The idea is that paying with taxes for healthcare would lead to more government control of the sector generally, and hence lower prices, as outlined by the studies above, I didn't have a "knee jerk reaction" like you said.
I am trained in IT up to the point where I have an AS in it as well as 5 years of professional experience at a MSP. I specialized as a GNU/Linux Systems Administrator. A Systems Administrator is a kind of computer programmer that setup and maintained infrastructure with mostly already written packages with some glue code to make things easier and more consistent. I built and patched servers. I compiled software, wrote scripts, did backups, and mediated disputes between business units before the company restructured.
I used to a maker at a local maker space, but now I am independent because of cultural changes I didn't like including one that put me in a path of a false allegation. I didn't get a fair trial or an apology so I took all my toys and went home before the accuser got a second shot at me. I picked up the ability to work with things electrical mechanical there. I built my own CNC Router after I left so I can still make what ever I wanted even though it would take a little longer now. I also did some wood working and metal working in High School.
I am a community organizer and I organized for the local Republican party for 8 years now. I did some protesting this year and I designed a series of signs such as this one https://steemit.com/cartoon/@oflameo/insurance-company-shills-enslave-america I am uploading as a series. I am working on building a municipal database of representatives, public officials and businesses, but I am feeling that I either trying to attack the problem too much at a time and getting the progress I need.
"So you're saying that a collectively owned industry produces better results than private" Did I say that? You are being a severely illogical person. Stop jumping to conclusions and making up false arguments that I am not implying nor saying outright.
"IQ is a massively flawed measure" See these two papers/books that are widely cited as important on this topic: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Intelligence%3A-Knowns-and-Unknowns-Neisser-Boykin/40191c2be7133dcb920cf5d549e4810d35bee067
Mackintosh, N. J. (1998), IQ and Human Intelligence, Oxford University Press, ISBN 019852367X
I come from the social sciences department at a top university in the US and I can promise you that the clear consensus in the field of psychology is that IQ is a valid measure of intelligence. You are entitled to your own opinion about their validity, but the top experts in the field of clinical psychology agree that it is valid.
"IQ is influenced by environmental factors provided to those born to money" Yes, but it is also partly due to genetics. The field of clinical psychology also agrees universally that IQ is partly genetic regardless of environmental influence.
See this entire Wikipedia page dedicated to nullifying your argument: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritability_of_IQ
Please read more before you engage in arguments about these things!
>Russia has always been a superpower
What? no. try to find some evidence for that, you won't. here is a political map from 1800. Note that Russia's only foreign territory was Alaska, which they sold incredibly cheap because they desperately needed money because they were losing too many wars. The land area is large but the vast majority is too cold to be useful. Maybe Russia always had the potential ( i disagree ) but even then it took communism to unlock it.
>countries like USA have always prospered and countries like UK, Switzerland, Hong Kong, China, New Zealand or Irland were always doing great when they tried more capitalism. And why did Venezuela, Cuba, communist Czechoslovakia or India (when it was protectionist) fail?
If you separate the world between those which had colonies and those which were colonized and compare communist nations in the second group to capitalist nations in the second group the communist nations are doing better. Why is Cuba so much better off then Haiti or Jamaica? This is despite ~60 years of sanctions and CIA fuckery. I don't know what you are talking about regarding India, it currently has some of the poorest people in the world ( also Myanmar, which is also a former British colony...). The Indian per capita income did not improve from 1900 to 1947. Venezuela's economy has always been based on Oil, given international sanctions and low prices due to fracking it is doing well and the recent CIA coup attempt failed miserably because the people wouldn't have it.
> I don't think it would be worse off it had implanted some real capitalism and be more economy-friendly because they still suck at it until this very day.
What does this even mean?
It's actually hard to find solid numbers this early in the year.
Facts are facts though, unemployment goes up, so do suicides.
IT and Political are actually my stronger suits. I was planning to sell Zero-K action figures, but they aren't designed yet and the market isn't built yet. There is always room to design something else.
IT is by far my strongest suit, but the market seems shaky in the local bench work. I saw some places close down with in the past five years. The places that seem open seem to have a very awkward business model. One of my business consultants say to focus on programming for people online first because I can get clients from anywhere.
To me the economic theory of specialization always explained why hippie communes always fail. But I'm not sure if this is what you're talking about.
Sounds like a book I read a long time ago. It was also based on on a pretty extensive study of millionaires, their habits, and their lifestyles.
Excellent information...like where do most millionaires shop for clothes (at leas way back then)?
JC Penny. Good clothes and value for their $.
The Millionaire Next Door: The Surprising Secrets of America's Wealthy
Pricing will be what saves us, as long as we allow the market to function reasonably freely.
As the price of aluminum rose, manufacturers figured out how to redesign beverage cans to use 1/6th of the aluminum they originally used. There are many examples of increased prices driving efficiency without impacting quality of life (see book linked below).
On the flip side, we still grow almonds (it takes 15 gallons of water to produce 16 almonds) in dry areas of California because we charge farmers a different price for water than residential customers. China has similar subsidies, and they have to end.
Eliminating subsidies and price controls would let the market decide how to limit the use of scarce resources. For less scarce products with big negative externalities (fossil fuels), we can artificially increase the price via taxation (carbon tax, etc.).
https://www.amazon.com/More-Less-Surprising-Learned-Resources\_and/dp/1982103574
You are so wrong. The people who advocate for these types of ideas are the elite. The people who want want us to have less freedoms and less liberties are those very people who want more power and cobtrol. The elute, the 1% percent. Just look what the WEF founder klaus schwaab thinks:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/COVID-19-Great-Reset-Klaus-Schwab/dp/2940631123
As far as I recall that is an unproven allegation from John Bolton's book that is not very trustworthy. John Bolton is also the guy that wanted to bomb pretty much every nation in the middle east for no reason (bit of an exaggeration but you get the point). I'd put more stock in Sarah Huckabee Sander's book because she is less of a military industrial complex person...but she doesn't cover those events. She did say John Bolton was a pompous asshole and didn't travel with everyone else as was custom oversees though 🤷🤷
Anyway. Yeah Trump's administration was not hard enough on and deserves to be bashed a bit when it comes to human rights issues particularly in Yemen and China. At least Trump stood up economically a bit to China and set things in motion across the world against China. There's a great little book covering what he did and what still needs to be done (link: https://smile.amazon.com/dp/173542854X/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_fabc_K0XA5JRS8PZHXR4WCH05).
Ultimately I'm surprised by how little Biden has changed in relation to China so far. Waiting for him to loosen up and make his nickname ring true. And considering what he said during the CNN town hall I am not at all hopeful of solving the situation... what is acceptable for us as a culture to condone and profit off of should not stop caring if the other culture is harvesting organs, forcing rape, abortions, and sterilization. That's a toke too far over the line.
First link I found to what Joe said that gives me pause: https://youtu.be/uLtz_maLkKA
Edit: I do agree, we will see what he does. I am not holding my breathe though.
Hmm, I never encountered what you are describing, which does not necessarily mean you are not correct.
But my experience is much more connected with the fact that USA for many has its history connected with racism and slavery. But it is not capitalism that should be blamed but government. There is an interesting book that documents many excesses of US gov. I did not read it whole but what I read so far was interesting.
Just read a light book on economic history such as: https://www.amazon.com/Economics-Book-Ideas-Simply-Explained/dp/0756698278. It's an easy read and It will give you an idea on why economic ideas came to be.
https://books.google.com/books/about/Marxism.html?id=TVkVAAAAIAAJ
If you can find a copy you can never go wrong with Thomas Sowell.
Does is have to be specifically about Marx and the or is it a discredit to communism and socialism? Heres another good one by Mises.
Does it have to be an academic article also, or can it be from a non peer reviewed source?
You'll find more organized thoughts from him (and most people) in a researched, organized, and edited format. Consider withholding you're judgement until after reading more into Mackey's ideas. I am, of course, assuming you haven't read this book yet.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0593083628/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_fabc_bgrXFbBVC17X9
Innovation isn't guaranteed either. Regression is.
Here is a book on innovation for you, if you are genuinely interested.
But I am glad you agree that capitalism reduces (and will end) poverty. Or at least, you changed the subject without acknowledging it.
>So you’re insistent on humiliating yourself by claiming that someone calling someone else who goes around calling people “triggered” an edgelord is a schoolboy taunt.
So you're insistent on humiliating yourself by attempting to futilely argue that edgelord isn't a schoolboy taunt.
This must be really fucking embarrassing. But I'm sure you're used to taking logically indefensible positions, given your political leanings.
I don't agree with OP's use of the word "triggered," and I do happen to think that he's an edgelord, but I also take issue with the other guy being a hypocrite and calling someone out for using a schoolboy taunt when he did the exact same thing.
Regardless of why the guy was calling OP an edgelord, the word still counts as a taunt.
Seriously, I can recommend you some elementary school grammar books on Amazon, if you want. I think they'll help you quite a bit.
It's interesting to see that this has 5-star reviews when you actually read the reviews... They are overwhelmingly negative. I don't understand why this book is so popular. It's disturbing on many different levels.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/1558580093/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_wDYIFbTEYP6QS
I believe in military because I believe Rite of Conquest exists and does happen if you allow it. I also believe in Rite of Defense and I believe it also has a big play in why you should have a military. I don't necessarily disagree with military expansion, if the reasoning is actually good. I don't necessarily agree in universal healthcare because of how healthcare pools exist, if I did agree with universal healthcare I would extend that the healthcare pool should be provided to everyone. I believe with the access of private healthcare: I have a better chance at getting into a more exclusive healthcare pool. I don't think you shouldn't make people pay for things twice, unless the taxes are used for people who really can not pay for things themselves, but I do believe that its often hard to judge whether someone is abusing a system. I would much rather have a social welfare system that promotes someone's own glory; something like what Mauricio Miller describes in his book: The Alternative.
It is wrong to sacrifice for others. In the original example Galt would not be sacrificing for Dagny, he would end his life for his own sake. As in the euthanasia example, if presented with a choice between death or a tortured existence, it is perfectly proper to choose death. No sacrifice to anyone is involved.
Rand wrote an entire article on the subject of accepting government welfare. You're right that social security is plain redistribution of wealth, however her point applies to all welfare. If the government steals from you, you have a right to take your wealth back (like how Ragnar Danneskjöld reclaims the wealth stolen from Rearden). For more detail read the article; agree or disagree, she is quite clear.
If you have any more questions/objections, I refer you to Leonard Peikoff's OPAR, a bottom-up explanation of Rand's philosophy. It is clear and systematic and there you will find all her major points discussed in great detail.
Nope. 1/3 of my income would be 63x times more expensive than the normal price for ALL major services in a medium city according to the math done in this book: police, fire fighters, administration, infrastructure and legal works.
In a metropolis, like I currently live, this price should be even lower as it would be divided by even more people.
The present trend is certainly not very encouraging. But in order to understand what is causing it, one must realize that politics is not a primary. One cannot say what is wrong or right in politics without defining what is wrong or right to begin with - that's the philosophical branch of ethics. And one cannot define what is wrong or right without a theory of knowledge more broadly - the philosophical branch of epistemology. A culture's political trends are ultimately downstream of its philosophy - politics is the final effect, not the cause.
It's no coincidence that those who denounce capitalism most vehemently argue in epistemology that objectivity is a myth and in ethics that self-interest is evil. Hatred of capitalism is simply a consequence of those views. Our age is defined by a philosophical battle - and the only thing that can defeat the subjectivist nihilistic philosophy of the left is a rational, pro-freedom alternative.
If you're interested in where this country is headed and why I cannot recommend enough the amazingly prescient The Ominous Parallels: The End of Freedom in America by Leonard Peikoff which details the cultural similarities between the US and pre-Nazi Weimar Germany. I would also recommend this talk which outlines the critical importance of philosophy.
Yeah, competition is one incentive, if you don’t do better you’ll go out of business, but there’s also the money you’ll get and there’s also the desire to produce a product according to how you think is best. Resources are scarce? Which ones? Man has only scratched the surface of the Earth from what I understand and there’s the whole solar system out there. https://www.amazon.com/Smaller-Faster-Lighter-Denser-Cheaper/dp/B01LTHXIJM/ref=nodl_
Unfortunately, I think it is all but inevitable unless there is broad systemic change, cultural change in our society.
What ultimately charts the course of any society is ideas. It was intellectual forces that allowed for the glory of Greece and Rome, intellectual forces that destroyed it in favor of the Dark Ages, then intellectual forces again which ushered in the Renaissance and Age of Enlightenment which, of course, produced capitalism and the prosperity we enjoy today.
If you want to know where society is headed, look to the thought leaders. There you will see respected tenured professors arguing that objective reality does not exist, knowledge is subjective, self-sacrifice is moral and that the state ought to control every aspect of our lives.
Capitalism was birthed by the opposite premises: that reality is objective, man can know it, and he ought to use this knowledge to pursue his own happiness, and that the only purpose of government was to protect his rights to do so. With every one of those ideas undergoing centuries of assault by Kant, Hegel, Marx and their ilk, capitalism's days have been numbered for some time. And if the rioting in the streets has shown anything, the end may be far sooner than we have thought.
By far the best account I've read to make sense of where we are culturally is Leonard Peikoff's amazingly prescient The Ominous Parallels. It details the similarities of our society and that of Weimar Germany just before the rise of the National Socialists. While frightening, it powerfully elucidates just what is necessary to save our civilization before it's too late - a philosophy of objective reality, reason, egoism, and capitalism. For more see this brief introduction.
I was taught the same thing you believe in public school. Stock market crash caused by rampant speculation sparking a national depression and the great socialist savior FDR saving the nation. Looking back now decades later with lots more knowledge that was pure balderdash propaganda. Read this book for an intro to the failures of the New Deal and National Recovery Act. Amazing true stories about FDR.
Quoting Federal Reserve Governor Ben Bernanke in 2002, "I would like to say to Milton [Friedman] and Anna[Schwartz]: Regarding the Great Depression. You're right, we did it. We're very sorry. But thanks to you, we won't do it again."
Read what the Federal Reserve did leading up to and during the recession. Catastrophic decisions that pillaged the economy and transferred vast fortunes to central banks. It was an entirely Fed caused catastrophe though lots of government incompetence made it even worse.
devastating impact of Federal Reserve Bank monetary policy artificially lowering then jacking up interest rates, then drying up cash and lending in the face of already serious deflation
'The Law' by Frederic Bastiat is a short essential read, about 70 pages. Start with this one to give yourself clear understanding of the real fundamental issues and why capitalism is the natural state of man and the only moral economic system.
Once you've got that moral and logical foundation build upon it with understanding of economics. 'Economics in One Lesson' by Hazlitt is a good start. In broad terms I think about capitalism vs socialism/communism as market economics vs planned economics. Economics will teach you why markets work best at allocating scarce goods and services for greatest benefit to society and show you the impossibility of socialist/communist planned economies. Without market pricing central planners lack the essential information required to make rational economic decisions. There are plenty of other reasons planned economies are so dysfunctional but lack of price information is easy to understand and less emotionally charged. The more complex and more specialized an economy becomes the more essential price information becomes.
This is a pretty impressive display of mental gymnastics.
‘The parent who leaves his son enormous wealth generally deadens the talents and energies of the son and tempts him to lead a less useful and less worthy life than he otherwise would.’ - Andrew Carnegie
Inherited wealth is inherently noncompetitive, and the benefits of capitalism broadly stem from the competition it inspires. Adam Smith wrote about this in "The Wealth of Nations", and Thomas Jefferson also wrote about it in his letters to the other founders while working on the constitution.
Actually, more than 40 years before Adam Smith wrote "The Wealth of Nations," Richard Cantillon authored the "Essai sur la Nature du Commerce en General." See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Cantillon. Hang in there buddy. I'm sure one day you'll enlighten us with a consistent and upvoteable comment.
If you want to read a good book that isn't too technical and let's you get the jist, I suggest Hazlitt's book Economics in One Lesson.
There are two ways to get things in the world, taking and trading. The former is when someone removes something from one person without their consent, and the latter is when two people agree to exchange things, with consent from both parties.
One is a social and courteous method, the other is one that is parasitic in nature.
Capitalists prefer to trade things, rather than take things.
When two people trade, both end up richer, because people are unique and different. If I had a burger, but was a vegetarian, and you had a salad, but didn't like salad, neither of us would have any edible food. We might as well not have the salad and the burger.
But if we trade what we have, suddenly I've got my salad, and you've got your burger. Both of us are way richer now, without anything needing to be added to the equation.
That's capitalism. Sure, it gets a bad reputation from people who often prefer taking to trading, and yeah, we are demonized for being "greedy" (although I can't imagine how we are greedy when we trade for our things, while others simply want to take, not trade. It seems to me that they're the greedy ones), capitalism is a tour de force in improving the lives of regular people, ending poverty, and making a happier, more peaceful world.
> No, there is more to it that simply producing something that others are willing to trade for. It has to be something that people with money are willing to trade for.
Not really. You could just as easily barter, thus producing and trading without money. Money just enables a barter that separated in time and space through the translation with a third commodity that everyone will take.
> Basically, you have to serve the wealthy to make money. There is no money in serving the poor.
o_O the masses have much more demand for products than the wealthy. The great fortunes and businesses of the world are oriented at the masses, not the rich.
>I like that line you have there: > > > >>You can consume to the degree that you create a product others are willing to buy.
Or trade with, but there's literally no difference between a barter and a trade for money. Money is just a translator between products.
> > > > In principle I'm probably not opposed. But the system is rigged so that large incomes flow through many channels to form large rivers of money into the pockets of people who are not producing anything of value. Those people get to make others serve them.
They can only do this when allied with the state. When they can only trade on the market voluntarily, then they are always producing value, else no one would voluntarily trade with them.
I think you still have some economic fallacies you're relying on. You seem to be echoing the leftist concept of money lenders and businessmen and managers as not doing anything for the wealth they receive. This is actually false.
Suggest "Economics in One Lesson" by Hazlitt.
Read The Commanding Heights. Also, watch the video, found here: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/commandingheights/
It gives a history on economic policy of the 20th century, focusing on Keynesian vs. Austrian schools of economic thought. You will learn a fuckton.
Also, Capitalism and Freedom by Milton Friedman is really good.
Although this is focused on network marketing, the principles are generally applicable. I found it to be the best book on selling I've ever read, and Michael Oliver has a very ethical approach.
Surfdom sounds pretty great. The Road to Serfdom by F.A. Hayek This link is the abridged edition. Agreed it is a must read but not what OP is looking for.