Economy
Masaki Shibutani
Apr 23 · Last update 4 mo. ago.
What do you think is “post-capitalism” to replace capitalism?
What do you think is “post-capitalism” to replace capitalism?
Stats of Viewpoints
Technologies enable changes to economics that can only be defined retrospectively
0 agrees
0 disagrees
Capitalism should be integrated and adapted to suit future economic climates
0 agrees
0 disagrees
Technology will enable a social economy
0 agrees
0 disagrees
Viewpoints
Add New Viewpoint
Technologies enable changes to economics that can only be defined retrospectively

Naming or preemptively designing an economic system doesn’t work. People often define systems after they are somewhat established naturally, other people will play with the boundaries of that system constantly (as can be seen in banks and trading now). Any actual change will rely on some real technological change first, to be able to define what is possible in this new reality.

Capitalism in its purest form if it were played out would fail, as would a purely socialist, libertarian or communist system. These ideas make sense as ideas but in the real world something in between is being utilised by all countries, and systems that have strayed too far in one direction have failed. To offer theories on solutions to economics without knowing what the future landscape will be is a waste of time, it would take some kind of disaster to overhaul an economic system completely to fall in line with such a theory. For example, cryptocurrencies could change the face of money and trade, but without some experimentation with it actually happening first, it is difficult to form a economic theory around cryptocurrencies in its infancy.

We can’t define a new system without knowing what we are going to be actually dealing with the future (environmentally, technologically, and socially). Individual innovations towards a better fairer world are more important then a whole defined system. The system will define itself following said changes.

Agree
Disagree
Latest conversation
Daniel Halliday
Jul 31
Approved
DH edited this paragraph
Capitalism in its purest form if it were played out would fail, as would a purely socialist, libertarian or communist system. These ideas make sense as ideas but in the real world something in between is being utilised by all countries, and systems that have strayed too far in one direction have failed. To offer theories on solutions to economics without knowing what the future landscape will be is a waste of time, it would take some kind of disaster to overhaul an economic system completely to fall in line with such a theory. For example, cryptocurrencies could change the face of money and trade, but without some experimentation with it actually happening first, it is difficult to form a economic theory around cryptocurrencies in its infancy.
Capitalism should be integrated and adapted to suit future economic climates

It is dangerous to just overhaul an economic system and forcibly remove capitalism, as has been seen throughout the 20th Century. Capitalism has become part of the logical structure of trade and commerce worldwide, and when it is violently removed we have seen not only the loss of a market economy, but the loss of logic and the onslaught of literal violence. The Stalinist Soviet Union, Maoist China and Pol Pot’s Khmer Rouge are all examples of brutal anti-Capitalist movements of the 20th Century, and are responsible for some of the worst genocides in history.

Moving forward in time technology, especially AI, will no doubt change the face of Capitalism. But abandonment or heavy handed policy has proved time and time again to cause nothing but economic instability. Economics need to be looked at progressively and scientifically and not ideologically. Social issues should not always be conflated with the economy and should be looked at objectively. The positive aspects of an open market need to stay in place, even as technology becomes more sophisticated, as you will always need price to self determine if you want the coherent allocation of limited resources that have an alternative use.

Agree
Disagree
Latest conversation
Daniel Halliday
Jul 11
Approved
DH edited this paragraph
It is dangerous to just overhaul an economic system and forcibly remove capitalism, as has been seen throughout the 20th Century. Capitalism has become part of the logical structure of trade and commerce worldwide, and when it is violently removed we have seen not only the loss of a market economy, but the loss of logic and the onslaught of literal violence. The Stalinist Soviet Union, Maoist China and Pol Pot’s Khmer Rouge are all examples of brutal anti-Capitalist movements of the 20th Century, and are responsible for some of the worst genocides in history.
Technology will enable a social economy

As we begin to incorporate AI technology and automation becomes more integrated into society, problems like unemployment in a capitalist system will likely escalate. But today we also face bigger ethical questions that capitalism cannot address effectively, such as climate change. The open market does not take into account big moral or environmental issues such as this. Capitalism cannot offer effective solutions to this as the idea of not using certain resources in the name of a greater good is completely beyond the scope of capitalisms law of supply and demand. Capitalism cannot continue on the path of endless growth on a planet of limited resources.

Where conflicts such as these have come into play in the past, some form of Socialist policy has been used to bridge the gap. This patchwork capitalism is becoming increasingly redundant as we move forward technologically, and seems superfluous when we consider social change. Throughout the developed world we can see a decline in birthrate as society is less constrained by mortality and individuals have become more focused on their careers and personal goals. This trend could potentially reduce the amount of overall consumers and cause a recession. But on a large enough scale, with the rest of the world developing to a similar point, a declining global birthrate threatens to break capitalism completely.

Another difficulty is capitalism’s clash with ethics as industries are formed around harmful technologies such as weapons. Capitalism has no moral compass, so where money can be made it is within an industries best interest to boost revenues by any means necessary. In a world so steeped in political lobbying, this has lead to a situation where arms companies seek to influence political parties in order to serve their own interests. This is not just limited to the arms industry and has be seen with the pharmaceutical, tobacco, and oil and gas industries also. It is argued then, that this practice encourages imperialism and war, and has a tendency to promote government oligarchy.

These institutions are looking increasingly obsolete as we progress to become more open and informed, thanks to advances in communication and the dissemination of information through the internet. As a result industry is actively evolving in a similar way, and we are seeing the proliferation of open sourcing, and crowdsourcing of funds and skills. So we are already seeing movements that promote social good rather than monetary gain, and the popularity of blogging and social networks is aiding this shift and changing the way in which we communicate.

When technology advances to the point of allowing innovations such as AI and automation to bring production costs near zero, peer to peer trade could become a reality without needing a regulating body. Trading money for goods or services would be mainly to accommodate the amount of human time invested into production and the amount of currency traded would reduce. We have needed monetary institutions for hundreds of years to maintain trust in a currency when trading. But if trust can be supplied through the currency itself, as can be seen with cryptocurrencies, and transactions are smaller, and between individuals, trust would no longer be an issue. A more open and functional, however smaller, economic environment could then emerge, with no need for a regulatory authority.

As a global society flourishes people will be less tolerant of capitalisms ills and will ultimately move towards a more social economy. Social good will become more valuable than money or commodities, and people will realise that collective sharing of ideas and resources is of a greater good than private ownership.

forbes.com/sites/haydnshaughnessy/2012/01/23/the-emergence-of-social-capitalism-adaptation-or-threat/#22f394f221bd

Agree
Disagree
Translate