Hacker News Reader

Comment by anon808 | Hacker News Reader

Capitalism simply means assets are owned by individuals and operated for profit. The implementation details depend on the individuals (and their values). Nothing about capitalism says anyone or thing needs to be exploited, cheated or monopolized.

View on HN

Thank you for presenting a reasonable and realistic viewpoint. Too much lately, anytime capitalism comes up on this site, we get a deluge of people just spouting left'ish wing propaganda and disparaging capitalism and capitalists.

I think the problem is that there are a lot of practicing capitalists that also happen to be massive assholes. It's not the capitalism that's the problem, it's the asshole part.

Agreed.

But the assholes insist that they're _required_ to be that way, by the rules of capitalism, and almost no one seems to argue with them (except those "spouting left'ish wing propaganda").

"don't hate the player, hate the game"?

It shouldn't be so taboo to discuss flaws in the capitalist system.. The article itself is a very raw exposition of a characteristic of it that I imagine is understood by people on both ends of the political alignment spectrum as a damaging thing, not that it couldn't not be.. I think the discussion matters because reality matters.

I don't mind a few massive assholes; what I fear are the non-human capitalists, mandated to be sociopathic by law: http://omniorthogonal.blogspot.com/2013/02/hostile-ai-youre-...

That would include say a totalitarian state where everything is owned by the God King (and operated for profit). Capitalism usually means some variant of "laissez faire" capitalism, where stuff is privately held, the state doesn't interfere with day-to-day business (too much, for some value of too much), and there is enforcement of contracts. The enforcement of contracts bit is where you end up with big debate, because ultimately it means you might need courts, policemen, taxes, the national guard, the EPA, the FBI, and the Department of Agriculture.

You've described free market and private property. While they typically are bundled with capitalism, they're separate concepts.

Go look up a definition of capitalism.

Thank you for pointing this out, I agree with your comments further down in this thread about that it is the jerks who ruin it.

However, I do want to strongly note that "profit" here often gets re-invested into the company to develop new and better products (or use the money to damage others, aka the "jerk" behavior). This no longer is "profit" then, by definition, but now has become overhead in the company.

Meaning, "for profit" does not equate to "for filthy riches".

I believe that the need for profit drives certain values over others. Do you think this need for profit has no affect on values? Also, what values do you suppose motivated a system that requires a drive for profit?

The need for profit is a value (it determines sustainability). But it doesn't have to be the primary value. You get to pick that.

Need for profit is not just a value but a requirement for doing business. However, you did not answer any of my questio ns. what values do you think profit motivates if any? And what values motivated profit value?

But as Thiel is demonstrating, the best way to profit from any means of production is to seek a monopoly, so that you can exploit the market.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com