• HubertManne@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Capitalism is great for handling things that are relatively unimportant. So you don’t want it for medical, education, infrastructure (including utilities), etc. Its fine for things like fashion or the various things might have around the house. Even then it must be highly regulated.

    • Badass_panda@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Agreed, although I’d reframe it; capitalism is a solid default, and does a good job of innovating … but it tends to operate like gravity, the more capital you have the more you get.

      So, you need a mechanism to redistribute that capital, and you need to make sure that the things everyone is supposed to have enough of, don’t get distributed that way in the first place.

        • metaStatic@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          people mistake cronyism for capitalism all the time. the free market can’t be said to have failed if it was never free in the first place. it’s like saying a tree has failed after it’s been cut down and turned into an unstable table.

    • Mongostein@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Taxing rich people to pay for good paying jobs in healthcare, education, and utility/infrastructure maintenance would help everyone.

      Economies need to be a cycle. If the rich just hoard and don’t spend then we can’t spend either.

      So if they won’t pay a liveable wage, tax them heavily and start paying liveable wages with the money.