How can the purpose of capitalism be these two things at once?

[Jeremy]

How can you have a 'tide that raises all boats' and keep inflation down at the same time? If everyone who is making 20k a year suddenly made 30k a year, there would be inflation. If there is low inflation, it means that demand is stable, that no one is becoming capable of purchasing more, which means that class is stable and that there is no social mobility.

Then the question this leads to, how can Capitalism claim to be about what's best for anyone besides the upper classes? Why does anyone believe in something like 'trickle down' theory? Isn't it really 'crumbs from the table to ensure the fortunes of the wealthy?'

And if social mobility is on the decrease and the wealthy are rigging society for themselves, why aren't more people angry? Is it just that America is intellectually decadent and thus incapable of understanding what is happening to them, or do people not mind because of some other reason?
I can't pick any of the current answers as the best answer, I don't think any of them answer my questions and all of them contain at least one idea that I think is outright incorrect. The basis of this question, is why isn't it plainly stated that Capitalism has nothing to do with a 'rising tide'? Larry's accusation of my intellectual decadence, is interesting, but I think it is he that is missing the connection between inflation and class issues. Inflation is then just what the head capitalists call it when growth occurs too fast, when it's at a rate that doesn't threaten to expand demand too much that there are shortages and major price fluxuations. (so no social mobility for you!) And I'm not the one who is confusing trickle down with capitalism, it is the capitalists themselves, the most powerful and successful ones, who foist this obvious bs on the public. I am not about to see neo-cons as non-capitalist, they are it's culmination.
correction, subtracting a doesn't:

"Inflation is then just what the head capitalists call it when growth occurs too fast, when it's at a rate that threatens to expand demand too much that there are shortages and major price fluxuations."

In other words, as long as it's slow growth it's growth, but if it's a fast growth, it's inflation. Meaning that the money supply only can allow a handful of lower class people to move into the true middle class, a handful of middle class people move into the upper class, and like 5 people become millionaires to replace the 10 millionaires who died.

And then social mobility is almost non-existant in america, and social mobility is one of the main reasons this place was built in the first place. You are in a caste, just like in china or india, you will be looked down on by the aristocracy all your life, you will be chided if you try to escape the bounds of your station, your natural place in the order of things, which is out of your control.

[dude]

Every system is corrupt. Why was it in Communism that you had some elite? Isn't everyone supposed to be at the same level.

Capitalism sucks because it can only work if some peope are getting screwed. Why do you think the US has an aggressive foreign policy.

[martino]

HOLY CRAP! LOOKIT ALL THOSE THUMBS! WE HATE EACH OTHER. SOB...

[martino]

The great thing about capitalism, free enterprise, and the right to own property is that you get out of it exactly what you put in.

In a communist or socialist society, the government divvies out to each equally, no matter what effort is put in (in theory anyway), so that the more productive members of the society are carrying the less, and the quality of everyone's life tends to suffer.

Where in capitalism, the more effort you are willing to put into something, the greater reward you will reap. People take pride in what belongs to them, be it their property or their labors. If all property belongs to the state, and all labor is performed on behalf of the state with the same compensation going to all regardless of effort, where is any incentive to excel??

[Roadkill]

Intellectually decadent. do you believe what you are told. School trains people to believe the right answer, which is what they are told it is. This continues with the media, employment, the police, city hall, religion and all through life.
People hear and believe what they are told about capitalism and free markets, but find a true Free market that would allow capitalist economics to work. In the real world capitalism is the Idea of taking public money and putting it into private pockets.

[Larry Powers]

For your information, the "rising tide that lifts all boats" is an expanding economy, which is different from inflation. While it's true that inflation is a cancer on society, you don't have inflation if you don't increase the money supply.

Capitalism is the best system that's ever been devised, for humans to live under. Capitalism means that every man is entitled to the fruits of his own labor. Such a system allows people to choose their own course, in life, based on what is most important for them.

Capitalism is completely different from "trickle-down". "Trickle-down" is a nickname for "Supply Side Economics". It involves giving Government help to corporations and high-income people, in the hope that they will spend some portion of that help in expanding the economy. Capitalism is completely different from this practice, since capitalism doesn't call for any Government help to be given to ANYBODY, much less corporations and rich people.

If you're concerned about America being "intellectually decadent", perhaps you should examine your own question, so that you can see how wide-spread that decadence really is. You've confused inflation with economic expansion, and "trickle-down" with Capitalism, itself. Perhaps you might consider injecting a little more rigor into your own thinking, and maybe you can help to counteract the trend toward "intellectual decadence".

[leavemealone]

A capitalist society is one where money makes right. Therefore it is rigged in favor of the rich. However it couldn't be more fair because we all have access to the money we just have to have the inititive to go get it then we become the rich. Capitalism like all economic theories is limited by human nature at least with capatilism there is a freedom to pursue if your nature permits.

[Zak the Dog]

The purpose of Capitalism is none of that nonsense you mentioned. Capitalism (a simple definition) is individual freedom without coercion from government. No, not to the level of anarchy.

Let me present to you the most anti-Capitalist program ever created.
=============
In 1936, the federal government published an informational pamphlet on Social Security. It stated:

"…and finally, beginning in 1949, 12 years from now, you and your employer will each pay 3 cents on each dollar you earn, up to $3,000 a year. That is the most you will ever pay."

http://www.ssa.gov/history/ssn/ssb36.html
=============
In order to correct all those evils of Capitalism, all the government had to do was tell a multi-trillion dollar lie. Enron executives are jealous.
---
And by the way. A $2.7 trillion dollar government is NOT Capitalism. So people who complain about capitalism today are complaining about something that no longer exist.

[nigelbestpeace]

there might be a trickle down but there is certainly a gush up - 'the rich get richer' etc is true & contradicts trickle down - most of economics is the propaganda ministry for wealth - [exceptions bastiat, henry george - journalists who could think, rather than professional economists bought & sold by the plutocracy - suddenly u wd be unemployable if u said too many things the establ. didnt like] - economics is riddled with irrational rationalisations of the status quo without logic or sense

u may be interested to read my economics questions here at yahoo - which giv an overall impression of my point & plan for justice peace happiness survival - the answers to which prove that grasp of fundamentals of justice is near zero, the spell of custom & convention & accepted ideas is potent, & interest is seemingly slight

you ask an interesting question - i hav identified many legal thefts - but as u say, interest is slight - is it that half or more of the ppl are essentially yin, ie, they like being screwed? [notice female willingness to be unpaid homemakers - women hav done nothing with the vote towards getting paid for their work] - why has there been such tolerance of wealth/poverty all thru history? - why has there not been more outrage at the most obvious injustice? - why is it that u hav to push the ppl right down into the ground [grind the faces of the poor] before they get angry? - & apparently it is not until u start seriously robbing the middle class that a revolution gets steam - why is it that no one seems to hav thought: no one can work more than 2 times harder than the average [there are only 100 workable hrs/wk], so no one shd hav more than 2 times av income? - no one seems even to be interested in this point - or in the points that all the excuses for higher than av hrly payrates - if you pay tertiary students for studying [risk, responsibility, skill, experience, brains, talents, natural gifts, etc] are irrational

the stats disguise the enormous range of pays/unit of work by quoting averages, quintiles, etc - the ratio of highest to lowest pay/hr is around ONE BILLION - and this staggering fact does not arouse anyone to thought or concern

that one fact ought to be enough to galvanise everyone into reducing the injustice, but isnt

& yet everyone knows, on some level, that injustice is the cause of violence [war & crime] - bc everyone will grant that a govt taking 90% of income off 90% of ppl & giving it to 1% wd produce [extreme] violence - yet if u ask ppl the causes of war, they mention religion, race, never injustice [the world has more extreme injustice in pay than this extreme example] - & none of the peace organisations focusses on or even mentions justice

altho everyone has to grant that money is allimportant, since it supplies all needs & most desires - & that therefore theft of money is the greatest injustice

proof that religion & race are NOT causes of war: in every place in the world where there are religious & race differences WITHOUT economic injustice [& the consequent political power injustice], there are no wars

i wd be delighted by any interest in my ideas - any dispassionate impartial disinterested dialogue