Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

New Zealand’s PM: Capitalism is a ‘blatant failure’ Watch

    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    New Zealand's government is to ban foreign investors buying houses. Instead preference and priority will be given to people trying to get on the housing ladder rather than billionaires buying up houses and keeping them empty.

    No doubt some will claim this policy which puts ordinary people first is Marxist though.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by zhog)
    Bless, weren't it for capitalism and everything would be so much better. No more stress or anxiety in the workplace, wages would travel in one direction only. With little to consume, we'd be free to do whatever we liked with the spare time. Your coveted share of the planet would be fulfilled somehow by someone else and you'd be free to live the life you're entitled to at last by birthright. Sweet dreams, Captain.
    The total refusal of people like you to ever accept any criticism of capitalism or even critique aspects of it yourself is a big part of the reason why more and more people are turning against free market capitalism.

    Countless times you accuse anyone who criticises capitalism as being Marxist.

    Lots and lots of people are unhappy with the current economic system. And these aren't just students. Labour won in the 34-44 age group. These are people paying mortgages and bringing up families and you continue to just dismiss any concerns they may have.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    The total refusal of people like you to ever accept any ciriticism of capitalism or even critique aspects of it yourself is a big part of the reason why more and more people are turning against free market capitalism.

    Countless times you accuse anyone who criticises capitalism as being Marxist.
    No I don't, that is a fundamental misrepresentation of reality. What I don't entertain is ludicrous attempts at portraying capitalism (that's free-marketeering, really) as a bad thing for this world and if they are not Marxists... what are they? Fair enough, you don't like capitalism so what is your economic plan then? Your turn.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by zhog)
    No I don't, that is a fundamental misrepresentation of reality. What I don't entertain is ludicrous attempts at portraying capitalism (that's free-marketeering, really) as a bad thing for this world and if they are not Marxists... what are they? Fair enough, you don't like capitalism so what is your economic plan then? Your turn.
    Okay, tell me what you think the drawbacks of capitalism are.
    In what respects is capitalism currently failing?

    Or is capitalism just absolutely perfect in every respect and anyone who criticises aspect of it, a Marxist?

    As for me, I don't support free market capitalism. I support a mixed economy, with the state running key industries and others being strongly regulated. In addition to substantial employment rights and protections and a greater role for trade unions in negotiating pay rises across lots of sectors.

    In other words, the Scandanavian model.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by zhog)
    Bless, weren't it for capitalism and everything would be so much better. No more stress or anxiety in the workplace, wages would travel in one direction only. With little to consume, we'd be free to do whatever we liked with the spare time. Your coveted share of the planet would be fulfilled somehow by someone else and you'd be free to live the life you're entitled to at last by birthright. Sweet dreams, Captain.
    You can't just rearrange the words I used into something less intelligible and have that be your response. D-.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    Okay, tell me what you think the drawbacks of capitalism are.
    In what respects is capitalism currently failing?

    Or is capitalism just absolutely perfect in every respect and anyone who criticises aspect of it, a Marxist?
    Too much is made of this 'capitalism' thing, it's as vague as God and for all I know it was Marx who coined it in Das Kapital. The Age of Discoveries was funded by capitalism, sea dogs going round royal houses or anybody else with money in order to raise capital for a business venture with profit in mind. The English canal network was a business project where people were free to raise capital and engage in free-trading, they issued shares. The Dutch and their liberalism made them remarkable achievers in this world for such a small country and population. The Agricultural and Industrial revolutions weren't in anyway government initiatives, the world we live in was entirely based upon those basic principles. We wouldn't have the net without capitalism. Is it really that bad?

    The big con by the Left and their cry for ever increasing State intervention and control in society, in such blatant contravention of what history has to teach us, is that it is because of capitalism that the world isn't perfect. They start off from that loaded premise, that if the streets aren't paved with gold we have a problem and proof that 'capitalism doesn't work'. They have no alternative plan other than to pursue Robin Hood politics, stuff the public sector and union ranks with as many people as possible and 'properly' fund street paving with gold. You guys misrepresent the question in very simplistic terms by conflating the economic model and the political one, two completely different things. There are several models of 'capitalist' countries, South Korea and Switzerland are two of them and the way they apply the concept of capitalism is quite different but still... capitalist. China have gone from Marxism to Capitalism on the economic front under a Communist political system, what is this 'capitalism doesn't work' thing? The Chinese are the most forceful argument for the worth of capitalism, arguably. Or the fall of the Soviet empire.

    Drawbacks? The streets aren't paved with gold but it is politicians and their management of the economic system who are responsible for it. Capitalism provides the gold but the State manages to soak up too much of it, that's the way I see it. We are taxed for virtually everything in this life, working, living somewhere, watching telly, owning a car, using gas, utilities, buying goods, travelling, indirect taxes alone form 43% of the projected £745 billion cake for next year. The State is absorbing that much from the capitalist dragon and Labour want to chase it to the hills. A mere halving of that would pump hundreds of billions into the economy in a single year.

    As for me, I don't support free market capitalism. I support a mixed economy, with the state running key industries and others being strongly regulated. In addition to substantial employment rights and protections and a greater role for trade unions in negotiating pay rises across lots of sectors.
    That is all too vague to really mean anything.

    In other words, the Scandanavian model.
    If Capitalism is to be defined as 'private ownership of the means of production' we find it everywhere where there is no Marxism, the economic model that pairs with Socialism. Scandinavia were always at the forefront of liberalism and democracy and you're talking about state control over everything. if you don't support free market capitalism you're a Marxist, that's the vision of a society where people aren't free to mind their own business. Cuba was like that under Castro, so was China under Mao and they were Marxists. If you have a problem with capitalism you can only offer Marxism as an alternative.

    It is all about how to redistribute the wealth created by capitalism, that is a political matter. I'm leaving if Labour get in under the Marxist tribe, it will be a decade of deconstruction of the economic system by them and probably two of austerity by the Tories to follow as an inevitable consequence. Too long to hang around, honestly.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by zhog)
    Too much is made of this 'capitalism' thing, it's as vague as God and for all I know it was Marx who coined it in Das Kapital. The Age of Discoveries was funded by capitalism, sea dogs going round royal houses or anybody else with money in order to raise capital for a business venture with profit in mind. The English canal network was a business project where people were free to raise capital and engage in free-trading, they issued shares. The Dutch and their liberalism made them remarkable achievers in this world for such a small country and population. The Agricultural and Industrial revolutions weren't in anyway government initiatives, the world we live in was entirely based upon those basic principles. We wouldn't have the net without capitalism. Is it really that bad?

    The big con by the Left and their cry for ever increasing State intervention and control in society, in such blatant contravention of what history has to teach us, is that it is because of capitalism that the world isn't perfect. They start off from that loaded premise, that if the streets aren't paved with gold we have a problem and proof that 'capitalism doesn't work'. They have no alternative plan other than to pursue Robin Hood politics, stuff the public sector and union ranks with as many people as possible and 'properly' fund street paving with gold. You guys misrepresent the question in very simplistic terms by conflating the economic model and the political one, two completely different things. There are several models of 'capitalist' countries, South Korea and Switzerland are two of them and the way they apply the concept of capitalism is quite different but still... capitalist. China have gone from Marxism to Capitalism on the economic front under a Communist political system, what is this 'capitalism doesn't work' thing? The Chinese are the most forceful argument for the worth of capitalism, arguably. Or the fall of the Soviet empire.

    Drawbacks? The streets aren't paved with gold but it is politicians and their management of the economic system who are responsible for it. Capitalism provides the gold but the State manages to soak up too much of it, that's the way I see it. We are taxed for virtually everything in this life, working, living somewhere, watching telly, owning a car, using gas, utilities, buying goods, travelling, indirect taxes alone form 43% of the projected £745 billion cake for next year. The State is absorbing that much from the capitalist dragon and Labour want to chase it to the hills. A mere halving of that would pump hundreds of billions into the economy in a single year.



    That is all too vague to really mean anything.



    If Capitalism is to be defined as 'private ownership of the means of production' we find it everywhere where there is no Marxism, the economic model that pairs with Socialism. Scandinavia were always at the forefront of liberalism and democracy and you're talking about state control over everything. if you don't support free market capitalism you're a Marxist, that's the vision of a society where people aren't free to mind their own business. Cuba was like that under Castro, so was China under Mao and they were Marxists. If you have a problem with capitalism you can only offer Marxism as an alternative.

    It is all about how to redistribute the wealth created by capitalism, that is a political matter. I'm leaving if Labour get in under the Marxist tribe, it will be a decade of deconstruction of the economic system by them and probably two of austerity by the Tories to follow as an inevitable consequence. Too long to hang around, honestly.
    Incredibly well put sir
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by zhog)
    Too much is made of this 'capitalism' thing, it's as vague as God and for all I know it was Marx who coined it in Das Kapital. The Age of Discoveries was funded by capitalism, sea dogs going round royal houses or anybody else with money in order to raise capital for a business venture with profit in mind. The English canal network was a business project where people were free to raise capital and engage in free-trading, they issued shares. The Dutch and their liberalism made them remarkable achievers in this world for such a small country and population. The Agricultural and Industrial revolutions weren't in anyway government initiatives, the world we live in was entirely based upon those basic principles. We wouldn't have the net without capitalism. Is it really that bad?

    The big con by the Left and their cry for ever increasing State intervention and control in society, in such blatant contravention of what history has to teach us, is that it is because of capitalism that the world isn't perfect. They start off from that loaded premise, that if the streets aren't paved with gold we have a problem and proof that 'capitalism doesn't work'. They have no alternative plan other than to pursue Robin Hood politics, stuff the public sector and union ranks with as many people as possible and 'properly' fund street paving with gold. You guys misrepresent the question in very simplistic terms by conflating the economic model and the political one, two completely different things. There are several models of 'capitalist' countries, South Korea and Switzerland are two of them and the way they apply the concept of capitalism is quite different but still... capitalist. China have gone from Marxism to Capitalism on the economic front under a Communist political system, what is this 'capitalism doesn't work' thing? The Chinese are the most forceful argument for the worth of capitalism, arguably. Or the fall of the Soviet empire.

    Drawbacks? The streets aren't paved with gold but it is politicians and their management of the economic system who are responsible for it. Capitalism provides the gold but the State manages to soak up too much of it, that's the way I see it. We are taxed for virtually everything in this life, working, living somewhere, watching telly, owning a car, using gas, utilities, buying goods, travelling, indirect taxes alone form 43% of the projected £745 billion cake for next year. The State is absorbing that much from the capitalist dragon and Labour want to chase it to the hills. A mere halving of that would pump hundreds of billions into the economy in a single year.



    That is all too vague to really mean anything.



    If Capitalism is to be defined as 'private ownership of the means of production' we find it everywhere where there is no Marxism, the economic model that pairs with Socialism. Scandinavia were always at the forefront of liberalism and democracy and you're talking about state control over everything. if you don't support free market capitalism you're a Marxist, that's the vision of a society where people aren't free to mind their own business. Cuba was like that under Castro, so was China under Mao and they were Marxists. If you have a problem with capitalism you can only offer Marxism as an alternative.

    It is all about how to redistribute the wealth created by capitalism, that is a political matter. I'm leaving if Labour get in under the Marxist tribe, it will be a decade of deconstruction of the economic system by them and probably two of austerity by the Tories to follow as an inevitable consequence. Too long to hang around, honestly.

    The biggest flaw in your argument is that you seem to have no real concept of what the terms 'socialism', 'capitalism' and 'Marxism' actually mean. Marxism is a socio-economic, class based analysis of power conflicts. Marxism is not an economic system. Socialism is not a political system, it's an economic one. Communism and Socialism are not the same.

    I also find it quite interesting that you don't mention how capitalism nearly brought down the world's economy in 2008 and needed to be bailed out by one of the biggest acts of socialism in terms of a bailout the world has ever seen. No doubt you'll claim the collapse of the free-market economic system was nothing to do with capitalism though. That's what people like you do though, whenever capitalism messes up, you claim it's not capitalism.

    So all that and you didn't actually answer the question. You're still no further on from your 'all those who criticise capitalism are Marxist' point. So i'll ask again. Tell me what you think the drawbacks of capitalism are, given that you've denied accusing anyone who criticises it of being Marxist. By the way, China is not free market capitalist. Over 60% of it's top performing companies are state owned.
    So is Scandanaiva capitalist to you? If so, why can we not be more like Scandanavia who beat us on just about every economic measure, despite having larger states and bigger trade union membership?

    Ps, I love when people on an internet forum start saying 'I'm leaving the country if Labour get in' as if I'm meant to go 'no, wait, stay'.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Calg_)
    Incredibly well put sir
    I mean, he wrote several paragraphs of pre scripted drivel, without actually answering the question that was asked.

    Maybe i'll ask you, what are capitalism's shortcomings? Or is it just absolutely perfect?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by zhog)
    Bless, weren't it for capitalism and everything would be so much better. No more stress or anxiety in the workplace, wages would travel in one direction only. With little to consume, we'd be free to do whatever we liked with the spare time. Your coveted share of the planet would be fulfilled somehow by someone else and you'd be free to live the life you're entitled to at last by birthright. Sweet dreams, Captain.
    maybe people are talking about having a little bit less capitalism and not having none at all.

    you are like one of the guys who always suggest just because one apple is bad we purge all of the apples.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    Meh its all just part of an economic cycle.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    And the edgy teen socialist revolutionaries rejoiced.

    Maybe people should ask themselves what system built New Zealand's successful economy in the first place. A few problems and homeless people and suddenly "CAPITALISM HAS FAILED, BURN IT DOWN, MARX WAS RIGHT ALL ALONG..."
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dandaman1)
    And the edgy teen socialist revolutionaries rejoiced.

    Maybe people should ask themselves what system built New Zealand's successful economy in the first place. A few problems and homeless people and suddenly "CAPITALISM HAS FAILED, BURN IT DOWN, MARX WAS RIGHT ALL ALONG..."
    Marx thought socialism can only come about after successful capitalism.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...-a8012656.html

    Are the Tories going to start threatening the UK will turn into New Zealand if we elect Corbyn?
    No, as New Zealand is a country that most people view favourably or have no strong opinion about.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by barnetlad)
    No, as New Zealand is a country that most people view favourably or have no strong opinion about.
    That;s the point of the thread
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dandaman1)
    And the edgy teen socialist revolutionaries rejoiced.

    Maybe people should ask themselves what system built New Zealand's successful economy in the first place. A few problems and homeless people and suddenly "CAPITALISM HAS FAILED, BURN IT DOWN, MARX WAS RIGHT ALL ALONG..."
    Perhaps if people like yourself were willing to accept criticisms of certain aspects of capitalism, people wouldn't be turning against it in the numbers they are.

    However for the last few decades, anyone who's critiqued capitalism in any way has been labelled far-left/communist/Marxist.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: October 29, 2017
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What newspaper do you read/prefer?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.