04-12-2004 04:41									#31
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by Agathon quote: If i'm not wrong, then most anti capitalists stiil se capitalism as it was implemented in british factories in the 18`enth century, and taht has nothing to do with todays capitalism Been to a third-world sweatshop lately?

You have a serious point, but i also belives that it will change for two reasons. One is that consumers will make choices of what they buy (Before flaming me, i agree that it's not that big, but it is there), second, it will be better in the future.

The main reason for this is the movement of western production sites to those areas. One thing is that in some kind they will take their empolyee policy with them (sometimes even through origin country legislation), but more through the growth in the current TW country.

	04-12-2004 04:45									#32
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: I'm interested in this post, but I can't grasp the central meaning.

Basically I am saying that capitalism operates independent of effectiveness and efficiency.

Socialist economies, and to a wider sense communist, are intimately tied to effectiveness and efficiency as a key for changes or policies.

A good example is how health care is managed and works.

Capitalist - pay for what you get; you can't pay you get Emergency room visits only to specialist if you are rich

Socialist - everyone pays the same, and everyone gets the same treatment... get in line

The goal of an economy, as Vel stated, is to supply wealth and independence. Which one does a better job, as far as health care is concerned?

	04-12-2004 04:56									#33
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by Kidicious Because there is no cost to poluting (embodied in the product)

There is only no cost embodied in the product for consumers who are too lazy/greedy/apathetic to understand the companies and processes that goes into making the product. It is not the system. It is the people in it.

Once we recognize that people make the systems we can work on designing a system that promotes what we want while discouraging what we don't want.

	04-12-2004 05:00									#34
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by pchang There is only no cost embodied in the product for consumers who are too lazy/greedy/apathetic to understand the companies and processes that goes into making the product. It is not the system. It is the people in it. Once we recognize that people make the systems we can work on designing a system that promotes what we want while discouraging what we don't want.

No. It is the system. The capitalist system places the decision making with the consumer. A mixed system adds a tax imposed on the govt to prevent over consumption, and a centrally planned system decides how much will be produced.

	04-12-2004 05:05									#35
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by Kidicious The capitalist system places the decision making with the consumer.

So, any faults are the responsibility of the consumer. What you are saying is that consumers are too stupid/lazy/greedy to be trusted to make such decisions.

	04-12-2004 05:06									#36
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by Japher Basically I am saying that capitalism operates independent of effectiveness and efficiency. Socialist economies, and to a wider sense communist, are intimately tied to effectiveness and efficiency as a key for changes or policies. A good example is how health care is managed and works. Capitalist - pay for what you get; you can't pay you get Emergency room visits only to specialist if you are rich Socialist - everyone pays the same, and everyone gets the same treatment... get in line The goal of an economy, as Vel stated, is to supply wealth and independence. Which one does a better job, as far as health care is concerned?

But the goal of a socialist economy is not to create weath an independence. It's to supply goods and services to people that a capitalist system would not provide. For the health care example, the socialist sytem would be evaluated according to it's own goals - on how well it produced health care for those who might otherwise not be able to afford it. Such a system would probably not generate as much wealth or financial independence though.

	04-12-2004 05:09									#37
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by pchang So, any faults are the responsibility of the consumer. What you are saying is that consumers are too stupid/lazy/greedy to be trusted to make such decisions.

They make decisions in their own interest. When they consume a product, and the production resulted in pollution that they company didn't have to pay for, the consumers only care about the price they pay for the product. So they overconsume. This makes them unhappy actually, if they have to pay for the polution in taxes, health care costs, or they just don't like smog. As individuals they can't really make a difference by altering their consumption, although many do try.

	04-12-2004 05:12									#38
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Did you read what you just wrote? You just said that consumers will do things that make them less happy. You are clearly stating that consumers are too stupid/lazy/selfish to be trusted with such decisions.

	04-12-2004 05:15									#39
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by pchang Did you read what you just wrote? You just said that consumers will do things that make them less happy. You are clearly stating that consumers are too stupid/lazy/selfish to be trusted with such decisions.

But there's a moral hazard. You really can't blame the consumers. You have to blame the system.

	04-12-2004 05:19									#40
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

So, I had 7 children out of wedlock and am trying to get out of paying child support. Don't hate the playa, hate the game.

Nothing will ever really get solved if you keep shifting responsibility away from the truly responsible parties.

	04-12-2004 05:29									#41
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by pchang Did you read what you just wrote? You just said that consumers will do things that make them less happy. Y ou are clearly stating that consumers are too stupid/lazy/selfish to be trusted with such decisions.

You are quite right. Consumers can only for a short period be coerced to buy anything than the cheapest. I agree that a few percents of the consumers due to political reasons will buy certain products, but the majority will go for the best bargain.

	04-12-2004 05:32									#42
	Got spare money?

A ha! So, the masses are too stupid to be entrusted with making their own decisions. They must be guided by a benign, more enlightened elite.

	04-12-2004 05:48									#43
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by pchang A ha! So, the masses are too stupid to be entrusted with making their own decisions. They must be guided by a benign, more enlightened elite.

You are not that wrong. Very few "mass" customers make any kind of sensible choiches, they think with their money and what they can get for that.

I would say that the "masses" choice are even worse than any raw capitalistic company. The last will in some kind try to maintain their source of wealth, where the mass consumer don't care a bit.


About the guidance, well, that's a political problem, not a "elite" problem. It's a simple matter on who is elected.

	04-12-2004 06:16									#44
	Full PM-box? Change here!

not an 'elite' problem?

What would you call a small sub-group that is given the power to make decisions for the larger group?

	04-12-2004 06:20									#45
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by pchang not an 'elite' problem? What would you call a small sub-group that is given the power to make decisions for the larger group?

Please name this sub-group that has this power - otherwise it's a little problematic to answer your question.

	04-12-2004 06:21									#46
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by pchang So, I had 7 children out of wedlock and am trying to get out of paying child support. Don't hate the playa, hate the game. Nothing will ever really get solved if you keep shifting responsibility away from the truly responsible parties.

I don't mean that people shouldn't be held responsible, but you have to solve the problem.

	04-12-2004 06:24									#47
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Did you read what you just wrote? You just said that consumers will do things that make them less happy.

Like competitive consumption?

	04-12-2004 07:05									#48
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by pchang So, any faults are the responsibility of the consumer. What you are saying is that consumers are too [QUOTE] Originally posted by pchang So, any faults are the responsibility of the consumer. What you are saying is that consumers are too stupid/lazy/greedy to be trusted to make such decisions.

Late answer. Consumers are certainly stupid/lazy/greedy - especially when we are talking about the last two points. They goes for the cheapiest bargain that they can get with the lowest movement possible.

One thing though : it's a natural thing, so don't blame people for doing what comes natural.

	04-12-2004 07:08									#49
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Kidicious I don't mean that people shouldn't be held responsible, but you have to solve the problem.

Witch is ?

It might be easier to solve the problem if it's known.

	04-12-2004 07:11									#50
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by BlackCat Witch is ? It might be easier to solve the problem if it's known.

To limit polution to a socially acceptable level.

	04-12-2004 07:22									#51
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by Kidicious To limit polution to a socially acceptable level.

I don't know what to say except

	04-12-2004 08:25									#52
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Agathon The obvious solution is for the state to step in and enact punitive anti-pollution laws. Of course, it is then in the interest of corporations to bypass those laws as best they can and spend money on lobby groups so as to defend themselves against losses to other businesses in other sectors who don't need to pollute as much. That is how pollution is created, by the market mechanism.

I dissent.

The obvious solution is to create incentive not to pollute. Tax breaks etc. for finding ways to curtail pollution. Emissions credits for trading to allow free market forces to incent pollution reduction if society really wants it.

Course as we all should know pollution is mostly created by the consumer and not the industry as a function of production perse. In any event, the market and soceity have by and large already decided the 'need' for pollution reduction. OTOH, if big old all seeing governement who knows best for all us wants to incent consumers to buy greener alternatives again the best mehtod is the carrot approach as opposed to the punitive stick approach IMO via tax breaks, credits, etc.

	04-12-2004 08:45									#53
	Support Apolyton

quote: The obvious solution is to create incentive not to pollute. Tax breaks etc. for finding ways to curtail pollution.

How dare the state interfere in the market!!!

But if you'll allow that, I can think of lots of other areas we can take out of private hands for the public good.

	04-12-2004 22:24									#54
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe OTOH, if big old all seeing governement who knows best for all us wants to incent consumers to buy greener alternatives again the best mehtod is the carrot approach as opposed to the punitive stick approach IMO via tax breaks, credits, etc.

How about tax credits? For all the people who don't buy SUVs.

	04-12-2004 22:43									#55
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by Japher I have recently become aware that many people use the words efficient and effective interchangably; saying one when they mean the other.

Exactly! Further, people supporting one side or the other make an unstated assumption about what is being measured.

quote: Originally posted by pchang But why is there a competitive advantage in polluting in the first place? It is because of the short sightedness and greed/laziness of the consumers. Consumers (with their choices) can just as easily punish polluters as the government. Corporations could bypass this by covering up their polluting activities, but then investigative reporters from the free press might expose this and cause even greater punishment from consumers.

There is a competitive advantage because it costs money to enact pollution controls. If you don't sepnd that money then it can be invested in other ways, increasing productivity, for example.

I'm not sure shortsightedness and greed of consumers is accurate. Most consumers polled say they would prefer to buy products that don't damage the environment, treat workers fairly, etc. The problem is, they do not get accurate information. The other problem is limited means. Organic food, fore example, costs signifigantly more than non-organic, and with most people spending 105% of their income these days, people make short-term decisions. After all, if you don't surive the short-term, the long term isn't part of the equation.

As far as investigative reporters go, it's very rare that they do this kind of real journalism. Large corporations are well stocked with lawyers to make media companies lives miserable, even if they win. Remember what happened to Oprah. In Florida in the mid-90s, an investigative couple working for Fox News was fired when they reported on bovine growth hormone. Industry feeds the media, via advertizing. You don't bite the hand that feeds you, which is why most "investigative" reporting these days is about billy bob's dog shed and how he makes his dog stay outside in the rain.

Finally, people are the product of their system. A short-sighted, greedy system (capitalism) will produce short-sighted, greedy people. People are not naturally this way. People have not always been this way. People don't have to be this way. In a system where it is disadvantageous to be short-sighted and greedy, people will not be short-sighted and greedy.

	04-12-2004 23:33									#56
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara Finally, people are the product of their system. A short-sighted, greedy system (capitalism) will produce short-sighted, greedy people. People are not naturally this way. People have not always been this way. People don't have to be this way. In a system where it is disadvantageous to be short-sighted and greedy, people will not be short-sighted and greedy.

I cannot think of any significant periods in history where people have not behaved in short-sighted or greedy ways.

	05-12-2004 01:35									#57
	Suffering from ads?

no one has mentioned why pollution doesnt work with a free market - because it is an externality

you can tax it to get rid of this externality so that the company will reduce pollution to a level that doesnt affect other industries around it in a negative way

there is also the free market system, where you give a target year (2010) and give you credits to each firm. by trading these credits, it gives incentives for some companies to invest in greener alternatives and the buyers will keep polluting at the same rate. by 2010, the industry collectively will produce less pollution, but some individual firms will still produce the same as in 2005. either way, it works, and this is how the free market can reduce pollution

	07-12-2004 17:14									#58
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Kidicious How about tax credits? For all the people who don't buy SUVs.

Actually incentirves work great despite your little tongue in cheek comments. For example, incentives to go for fuel cell cars and/or hybrids would work fine. It worked very well back in the 70's during the oil shortages.

LoA,

Your point is what Aggie and I have discussed in the past . He adamantly asusmes the only effective means at curtailing pollution is via punitive state action. I think that naivete as that simply causes the global pollution shell game to ensue such that pollution is simply shifted to the areas of the world least ikely to do squat about it. Instead as you indicate there are more meaningful ways to incent industry via some form of profit incentive to curtail pollution. Pollution credits are one very valid form.

This of course assumes that society as whole feels it is worth doing.

	07-12-2004 22:48									#59
	Tired of ads?

by taxing, you arnt giving them incentive to get more efficient at producing, in other words, the ratio of GDP:Pollution will stay the same.

to break this, you need incentives to invest, and the system i proposed works best because some firms will invest and make money off of selling their credits and others will simply buy credits, and in the end, total pollution goes down and you break the gdpollution ratio.

	07-12-2004 22:54									#60
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by pchang I cannot think of any significant periods in history where people have not behaved in short-sighted or greedy ways.

Most people under feudalism did not. The Hopi Indians did not. Many American Indian tribes did not.