[flagged]
I don't even know where to start with this, but let's take things that have come up here, like the Boeing MCAS, or WV Diesel-scandal, etc. These were due to lack of regulation. They certainly wouldn't have been avoided by laissez-faire capitalism.
> The point is that this behavior is a bad human problem, not a capitalism problem. And historically, capitalism has lead to a massive reduction in bad human behavior on an unprecedented scale, largely due to the economic and moral foundations upon which it is built.
Sure, I actually agree with that. The point is that capitalism doesn't solve any of those human problems. You mention in passing that they do, due to "moral foundations". Please elaborate on these.
Without "bad human" problems, any economic system ever tested in history would work fine, including the ones you don't like.
The only reason modern "capitalist states" work is because they have a functioning state enforcing the playing field so game is fair.
Can it be abused? Yes, exactly like every other system. Is capitalism abused when no rules or referees are present? Of course, just like any other system.
Both of these are explicit examples of regulatory capture.
The FAA is heavily dependent on aircraft manufacturers to self certify. EU members met in Brussels to discuss the exact metrics VW was spoofing, but failed to implement a measurement strategy that would have easily detected this manipulation due to pressure from companies regarding the expense and time of tests.
>They certainly wouldn't have been avoided by laissez-faire capitalism.
You cannot substantiate this assertion. If the state did not have easily captured, monopolistic, and absolute authority over the certification and other confidence-instilling industries, then it's highly likely trustworthy, neutral third parties would exist and compete to assess and verify the safety and other metrics of various industry. In the restaurant industry, ServSafe and its competitors are a great example. There's also tons of nongovernmental safety and quality certifications in plenty of other fields with the potential for catastrophic failure and loss of human life.
>Please elaborate on these.
I've already cited Smith's books. Derivative and subsequent works regarding the rise and proliferation of the economic philosophy of capitalism are consistent in their message.
>Without "bad human" problems, any economic system ever tested in history would work fine, including the ones you don't like.
No they wouldn't, but that's completely unrelated to what's being discussed. The entire point I'm making is that capitalism's economic and moral foundations minimize the impact and scale of individual bad actors, to a degree unseen by any other system, while simultaneously enabling the common man to participate in innovation. It's an an objective fact consistently observable across time and space.
>The only reason modern "capitalist states" work is because they have a functioning state enforcing the playing field so game is fair.
That's a bold and completely unsubstantiated assertion.
Please actually read some of the foundational literature. Pretty much everything you've said is explicitly addressed.
> The FAA is heavily dependent on aircraft manufacturers to self certify. EU members met in Brussels to discuss the exact metrics VW was spoofing, but failed to implement a measurement strategy that would have easily detected this manipulation due to pressure from companies regarding the expense and time of tests.
Furthering this line of thought, are you suggesting that these companies complaining about expense and time of tests would volunteer into a trade organization (and pay for it no less, which is how they exist), that of course would still require the same tests to be effective? Otherwise the end result would just be another certification that consumers would want before buying, but wouldn't mean anything unless they entail stringent tests.
> You cannot substantiate this assertion. If the state did not have easily captured, monopolistic, and absolute authority over the certification and other confidence-instilling industries, then it's highly likely trustworthy, neutral third parties would exist and compete to assess and verify the safety and other metrics of various industry. In the restaurant industry, ServSafe and its competitors are a great example.
Not to knock the service industry, but airplanes and cars are a bit more complicated to evaluate.
> There's also tons of nongovernmental safety and quality certifications in plenty of other fields with the potential for catastrophic failure and loss of human life.
I would be much more interested in examples here.
> Please actually read some of the foundational literature. Pretty much everything you've said is explicitly addressed.
So please address it using your already obtained knowledge instead of dodging.