Atheists & Believers: can "free market" capitalism be just, stable, & ecologically sane, given human nature?

[WellTraveledProg]

It can never be "just" -- its entire premise is that some will win and some will lose, in fact it *requires* that some win and some lose. That's not just.

It also can't ever be "stable." Again, the entire premise requires processes that cause and reinforce market fluctuations, and it requires taking advantage of those fluctuations. That's not "stable."

Ecologically sane? I'd have to say it's possible under free market capitalism, but not likely. There's nothing in capitalism that requires destruction of the environment, but there's little to encourage ecologic conservation, either.

There aren't actually any totally "free-market" capitalist nations in the world now, though. The US certainly isn't one. What I usually find most amusing, though, are the large number of people in the US that claim we ARE a free-market capitalist country, while they're busy paying and collecting social security, taking government farm subsidies, driving on government-built roads, using socialized police and fire protection, etc. Oh, the irony...

Peace.

[Galaxie Girl]

"chronic injustice, repeated economic depressions, repeated surges in unemployment, seemingly endless wars, and the ongoing destruction of the environment."

Those things are far worse in countries with communism or socialism in place. Look to how the USSR and China were at the height of their communism (and even today they aren't that much better), look at Cuba and North Korea today. Socialism leads to a perpetual depression - no one will do much work if there is no reward for it.

You act as if economic instability is bad. We need the cycles of up and down for people to get ahead in life. For example, you invest when values are down (real estate, stocks, etc.), so that you can reap the profits later in an up economy. That's what responsible people do. So the capitalist system already IS fair to the rich and the poor - it's just that the poor aren't willing to put in the hard work and sacrifice that the rich are.

[BOOM shakalaka]

The system works well in scandinavia.

The US allows far too much corporate influence in politics.

The US is too diverse to elect many serious politicians because US politicians need mass appeal.

Adam Smith also believed in regulation, if i remember correctly.

In the US it's not possible. In smaller, homogenous countries it is.

[baseballkrba_10]

I am a practicing Catholic, and I would answer no to all your questions. Although Capitalism is an economic powerhouse, by nature it gets people wealth at the expense of the lower classes. The economically powerful western nations are not wealthy independently of the third world, but at the expense of the third world.

The reason this is so, is competition. Ideally, competition should mean that the best product rises to the top, but that is not the case. In reality, the most profitable product rises to the top. So, you can make in inferior product, but sell it for a very reasonable price and still make billions. Often, in order to sell it at a reasonable price, a company needs to employ cheap labor or exploit the environment, or both.

Because of the role of merciless competition and lack of social responsibility in Capitalism, countless Catholic theologians have been very critical, sometimes down right hostile, to its implementation. Really, five hundred years before Capitalism was even a though in the Western mind, St. Thomas Aquinas envisioned what we can now call a staunchly anti-capitalistic view of society. He thought that every monarch should be virtuous and Christ-like, every common person should be both socially and economically equal, and that every government should be deeply representative. In fact, he flat out wrote that selling any item for more that it is worth, meaning in accordance to supply and demand economics, was deeply sinful. In short, he had a purely egalitarian view of the world.

Now I am no idealist. I really don’t think I have any answers regarding how to build a better, more fair, or more compassionate economy. Not that any of my ideas would make much of a difference anyway. But because of the inherent immorality in our system and guided by my faith, I refuse to take part in government. I refuse to vote. The truth is, I find it deeply troubling that within our system, we do not choose to serve mankind in love, compassion, and equality, but no matter what, you are simply choosing the least evil option. So, until I can truly get behind a political movement here in the United States, I will give my taxes to Caesar and my heart and soul to God.

[Misty Blue]

Demonic-Nail on the head .The illuminati are Satanists.Check out Albert Pike.

[tehabwa]

No, I don't.

Uh, there was no capitalism in Biblical times; it's a much more recent thing.

The Smith notion that everyone always behaves in their own best interest has been pretty well discredited. And clearly, completely unbridled capitalism is disasterous.

We DID have a 50 year period of NO economic crises -- it was after the Depression, and before Reagan, when we had the following things:

A progressive income tax;
A strong regulatory system
Strong unions;
and the fastest-growing, comfy, thriving middle class the world had ever known.

This is what "trickle down" and other mantras of the wing-nuts have been destroying. And this is what Obama and progressive Dems want back -- well, a somewhat beefed up version, really.

If you consider all the CIVILIZED countries on Earth, yes, it IS possible to have systems where no one goes hungry, no one is homeless, everyone gets a quality education, and everyone has access to health care.

Thus, the Biblical quote "the poor will always be with us" COULD be made false. We need a strong regulatory system, progressive taxes, and a better safety net.

Oh, and I'm godless.