The fall of Capitalism. Is it getting close?

Great Debates
61

Relative scarcity. In one sense, there would be enough cars for everyone in the US to get one. Some people have no cars, some people have one car, some people have two, some people have dozens. Simply take one car from the people with two, and x-1 from the people with x, and give those cars to the people with 0. Everyone would have a car. So, cars are not scarce.

But, what are the unintended consequences if we do this? Ah! Why would anyone buy a car, if all they have to do is get one from someone who has two? Why would anyone have more than one, if they have to give it away to someone who has none? Obviously, no one is going to buy a car in this scenario. No one buys cars, and why would anyone make cars? After all, if you make cars you would be obligated to give away all of them except one, right? So, people stop making cars, except as a hobby. Pretty soon the existing cars start to break down. But there are no new cars made. Pretty soon, no one has a car.

Ah well, how about we simply create government factories…cars will be manufactured with tax money, and distributed to everyone for free. Sure, we can do that. Except experience has shown that these cars are going to be three or four times as expensive, and are going to be junk. We can get into all the reasons for this, if need be. And where does the tax money come from? You cannot generate tax money, since no one has any income. Why work at making cars when you are going to get one for free anyway? So the government car factory fails unless we use force to compell the people to work there.

So, everyone gets everything for free, so no one works, so nothing is produced, so there is nothing to get for free, and everyone dies. Now, jmullaney, you don’t want everyone to die now, do you? So you can see how your plan might be impractical absent robots who work for free without complaint, right?

62

In other words, Joel, your philosophy has not been approved for use on humans.

63

I don’t believe jmull said anything of the sort. Not in this post.

64

And where the f**k are these apples? Looking out my window, I don’t see any. None underneath my desk, either. On the subway this morning, I didn’t see a single freaking apple. I may also point out to you that where I am, it’s winter, so there aren’t going to be a new apples in the area for several months.
Nor did I see any bread, milk, etc.
I would submit to you that if you are seeing apples everywhere: 1) adjust your medication; and 2) DON’T EAT THEM!! I don’t know what they are, but they ain’t apples, and you might get sick.

And if you take one of them, you have denied it to whoever had it in the first place, thus making a car scarce for that person.
It’s time I leave this thread, before I do something that gets me banned.

Sua

65

LOL! Remind me to freak out like this next time someone asks me a hypothetical question. Where are these dogs really spelled cat?!?

Well, believe it or not, they have these new fangled places called “stores.” They call them “stores” on account of things being “stored” there? Get it? Yeah, I thought it was a little corny the first time I heard it too, but I guess the name has caught on.

So, exactly how many feet away does something have to be from you before it becomes “scarce.” Ten feet? A hundred? A mile or two?

No, no. There’s plenty more. Besides, in an hour I will take one of them and not do any such thing. Maybe I’ll even go get an apple… :stuck_out_tongue:

66

So anyway, I was at this auction bidding on breaths of air. I bid four cars, but the guy next to me bid five cars. Eventuially it went to the guy in the fron row with the bad toupee for 80 cars. I only had twenty cars and 5 houses because the crop hadn’t been that good on my infinite plot of land.

So after I left and shoveled the food off my car, I drove past the store that sells light to fill up my headlights. a gallon of light only costs about 2 airplanes nowadays because the airplane crop was bad and the light crop was good this year. Of course, the food was coming down so heavy it was hard to see and it made the gold roads slippery.

I went to my billion square foot house where my 250 million kids were working an infinite amount of time in the endless fields–just for the heck of it. I bought the house for nothing because everyone had one so they weren’t worth anything. Or maybe It cost a billion dollars because the amount of a good available doesn’t affect price. I can’t tell the difference because I never bothered to go to any of the infinite number of universities due to the fact that everybody has everything they want ever since the Legal System was outlawed by a non-existent legal authority which doesn’t exists because of its own laws.

So I watched the nicks game on one of my million big screen TV’s. The score was 1,000,000,0001 to 1,000,000,0001 because all atheltes are equally talented under the new illegal law that no one can have more than another. Thank god there are an infinite number of minutes in the game. It was horrible when one team had to lose to the other.

Anyway, my point was that this guy had a really nice toupee which I would like to have, but I can’t seem to find one. I think I will find him and steal it. After all, there is nothing I can offer him that would make him give it to me willingly since everyone has everything they want. Maybe they should pass a law so that everyone has such a nice toupee.

67

Thanks ARL. I think my opponents are clearly taking the insanity high-ground on this one. :wink:

68

ARL, you can’t, you really can’t, know the horror in store. Try nosing around for some old threads on economics…but be prepared to have your mind and soul shriveled by Secrets Man Was Not Meant to Know. We’re not just reacting to what Joel is saying in this thread, but in all the [shudder]…other threads…

69

Lemur

Yeah, maybe, but I’ve been that unpopular guy in oh-so-many econ threads too. I don’t see problems in a lot of things that people take for granted as a problem like, say, public education or socialized medicine. Free market economy and all of that.

As well, jmull has been amusing the living shit out of me lately and I just wanted to jump to his defense because, in this thread at least, he is being misrepresented.

If I may speak for him again, I would say that the point he is trying to make IMO is that the fall of capitalism s nowhere near to close. No even within sight. People discuss things like “the poor are being segregated” and “the wealth divide increases” and so on, and as he is pointing out, all the stuff the poor people want is right there in front of them. For the taking. It is merely a matter of what one is willing to do to get the stuff. There isn’t really any scarcity in that sense, unless you mean scarcity of effort.
But, I may be proved wrong yet :wink:

70

If he is right its in spite of himself :D. Its all semantics really though. To a person who wont break the law apples that arent his and are 2 feet away might as well be a million feet away.

71

Scarcity exist in every economic system known to man it isn’t artifically created. Only so much lumber can be produced per year, only so much steel can be manufactured, and only so much labor is available. There’s no distribution problem inherent in capitalism. If there were we’d be waiting 2 hours in line for a loaf of bread.

Marc

72

I just wanted to thank Mr.Zambezi for that post. Very entertaining.

Carry on.

73

No. Share of assets owned by richest 1% of population:
In 1929: 44%
In 1976: 20%
In 1998: 36%
Share of net worth owned by Forbes 400 in 1998: 2.6%

Source: 2/01 Scientific American: Federal Reserve’s Survey of Consumer Finance, Forbes 400.

Furthermore, IRRC, the richest 400 or so individuals around the turn of the century owned more that 2.6% of the country’s assets. (Probable source: A. Chandler or Drucker??)

While I am not particularly happy about the growing income inequality in the US (or wealth inequality, as indicated above), I see no signs of imminent revolution.

To those who believe that a rising tide invariably lifts all boats:

Average Hourly and Weekly Wages of Production and Nonsupervisory workers, inflation adjusted 1982 dollars:

Date…Hourly…Weekly
1980… 7.78…275
1985… 7.77…271
1990… 7.52…259
1995… 7.40…255

Source: Statistical Abstract

Total per capita output in the economy rose over this period. Alas, blue collar workers did not share the benefits of this growth. Conditions are particularly dismal for those whose primary labor skills involve a strong back. The rich get richer and…

My understanding, though, is that real blue collar wages have turned up over the past 5 years. OTOH, the 1973-1980 period was even uglier.

74

Well, I wouldn’t say that. Just because something is limited in quantity doesn’t make it scarce.

75

is there a scarcity of clothes if women have 3 closets full and won’t wear it because they let someone tell them it is out of style? $57 billion spent on TV advertising last year. what effect does that have on scarcity?

Dal Timgar

76

Uh…well…Actually that’s exactly what it means!

The definition of scarcity (according to the rest of the world) is that peoples needs and wants for a particular product are greater than the amount of that product available. That describes just about EVERY product! That is also why you can afford some thigs and not others.

77

jmullaney,

Scarcity…

I think it might helps matters a bit by clarifying what is meant by scarcity. Most economists address the issue of scarcity not in terms of how much “stuff” there is, but in terms of making choices.

78

Hardly exactly what it means. There is a limited number of hydrogen atoms in the universe. Think that’s scarce? Is ocean water scarce?

Dal Timgar again precedes me in his brief posts. Clothes aren’t scarce. Cars aren’t scarce. Food isn’t scarce. This stuff is all over the place. Its there for the taking with minimal effort. This is a limited quantity good that is not scarce.

Are molecules scarce because there’s only a limited number of elements, or a limited number of forces to combine those elements together?

Or, perhaps, is the scarce thing really only the effort required to get these “scarce” goods?

jmull and I have the dubious pleasure of living in the greater Boston area where housing is “scarce.” That is, it is limited in quantity. There is 98% housing. In other words, there is 2% available housing that is not currently being rented or lived in. Doesn’t sound scarce to me. So long as there is a surplus, right? Exactly?

I am not saying, of course, that there are no scarce goods, merely that most of the goods that are required to live a very comfortable life are right out there waiting to be taken, purchased, whatever. Doesn’t sound very scarce to me.

79

Your absolutely right, but its like arguing with small children. They just don’t get it.

They go to the store and see aisle after aisle of some product. Lets use “bread” as an example. “Well, theres enough bread here for everyone! Bread can’t be scarce! The evil supermarket is hording all the bread and keeping it from the masses. They should just share all their bread!”

Anyone who knows anything about economics knows that every loaf of bread, widget, BMW, nut, bolt, or apple results from an investment in time, labor and capital. People just don’t “give stuff away” because they could spend that time and effort doing something else.

That jmullaney guy who said that

obviously has no clue. First of all if you are implying that cars aren’t scarce because you can steal them, then that is a very bizare statement. It is also false because economics still applies.

Most people don’t just go out and steal stuff they like because the personal risk outweighs the benefit. It’s not worth it for me to lose a $70k job and spend the next 5 years of my life in jail for stealing a $40,000 Lexus that I can’t drive in public anyway. A dirt port crackhead has nothing to lose but can gain some crack money if he steals and sells that same car. Even in the criminal world, economics still apply.

In any event, there is still scarcity because there are not enough Lexuses (Lexi?) on my block for all the crackheads in Roxbury to steal.

80

Maybe the oxygen will get the brain working properly because no one has said anything of the sort that would cause you to post this:

Anyone who thinks so

We “get” it, guys. What you think we’re saying is not what we are saying.

Allow me to bold it to make it clear. **No one is implying that people should give their stuff away. No one is impling that people should steal. No one is implying that money serves no purpose.

All that has been implied is that until there is a true scarcity of necessary goods capitalism will do just fine. We do not have a true scarcity of necessary goods. Thus, capitalism isn’t going anywhere.**

Thanks.