Capitalism is killing our morals, our future (link included)

[Guest]

I may be shot for this, but I do think it's true to some extent.

 

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/capitalism-is-killing-our-morals-our-future-2013-04-27?siteid=yhoof2

[rogermunibond]

Don't blame Adam Smith.  He laid out good thinking on society and morality in "The Theory of Moral Sentiments."  Too bad more capitalists don't read that in addition to "Wealth of Nations."

[Palantir]

If anything, it's because of lack of capitalism that many of the world's billions of poor are suffering. Places like India and China went fully into ridiculous notions of socialism that let hundreds of millions in poverty. Real free market capitalism is quite rare.

[constructive]

I've read just enough history to realize that our morals sucked pretty bad, pre-capitalism.

[Liberty]

I've read just enough history to realize that our morals sucked pretty bad, pre-capitalism.

 

For those interested in getting a good idea of how bad things used to be:

 

http://www.amazon.com/The-Better-Angels-Our-Nature/dp/0143122010/

 

 

[Guest]

Ohh, I'm gonna check that out. Thanks, Liberty!

[tyska]

Is Capitalism the problem, or the Corporatism that we appear to have grown now, the problem.

[rkbabang]

Is Capitalism the problem, or the Corporatism that we appear to have grown now, the problem.

 

I would agree with that. The mixed systems we have today could be described as a mix of corporatism, socialism, mercantilism,and even fascism.  I'm a supporter of free markets, but if you want to use the term capitalism for what we currently have, then I'm against it 100%.

[Valuehunter7]

If anything, it's because of lack of capitalism that many of the world's billions of poor are suffering. Places like India and China went fully into ridiculous notions of socialism that let hundreds of millions in poverty. Real free market capitalism is quite rare.

 

As a matter of historical fact, communism lifted many Chinese out of abject poverty and removed a ruthless 'capitalist' despot (Jiang Kaichek) from power. You might enjoy exploring that history a bit.

[turar]

Well, communism turned Russia from a capitalist dull backwater country with mostly poor illiterate population into a world superpower with almost 100% literacy rate, good free healthcare, modern living conditions, etc. And all that on top of a devastating WW2 which killed millions and destroyed most of the country's infrastructure. So there are always two sides to any story.

[Packer16]

I think a better way to think about Russia and China is in terms of totalitarianism versus democracy.  In Russia and China you had one despot replaced by another.  I don't know if it was worth the slaughter perpetrated by the despots (Mao and Stalin) to provide some financial benefit to a few.  Once the despots were gone there was some improvement but the real strides took place once the market (i.e. capitalism) was allowed to exist as the real winner in the capitalist system in the consumer. 

 

I think the real in inequality that no one is talking about is the knowledge inequality which I believe leads to income inequality.  This is further complicated by the fact that for the most part knowledge marries and associates with knowledge which leads to a virtuous increase in wealth amongst the "knowledge" class.     

 

Packer

[giofranchi]

"I'm like the gunfighter you hire to save the town. That gunfighter is there to do good...but he'll only do what he does if he knows he'll get paid for it."

—Carl Icahn

 

There is really nothing more that I would add to the topic of capitalism… And I really don’t understand how countries like Italy or France still don’t get such an obvious statement and still embrace communist policies…  ::)

 

giofranchi

[giofranchi]

"I'm like the gunfighter you hire to save the town. That gunfighter is there to do good...but he'll only do what he does if he knows he'll get paid for it."

—Carl Icahn

 

There is really nothing more that I would add to the topic of capitalism… And I really don’t understand how countries like Italy or France still don’t get such an obvious statement and still embrace communist policies…  ::)

 

giofranchi

 

Now that I think about it, the reason might be very simple indeed: almost nobody in Italy or France has read the book in attachment yet!! Well, they really should!!  ;D ;D ;D

 

giofranchi

1993-King-Icahn.pdf

book-review-king-icahn.pdf

[Shane]

I've always been confused by the notion that one system or another is destroying our morals.  Looking back at history I don't understand how anyone can say things are getting worse not better...

[Guest]

I've always been confused by the notion that one system or another is destroying our morals.  Looking back at history I don't understand how anyone can say things are getting worse not better...

 

Have you looked at what's on TV? Divorce rates? Single and unwed parents? Acceptable drug use?

 

A book that talks a bit about the change in culture is "Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World that Can't Stop Talking." She goes in some depth about how, at one time, we were a culture of character (Buffett's generation and prior). Doing the "right" thing was championed.  Now, we are more of a culture of personality (people like Kim Kardashian). Where we value what gets are attention compared to what's intrinsically motivating.

[rmitz]

I've always been confused by the notion that one system or another is destroying our morals.  Looking back at history I don't understand how anyone can say things are getting worse not better...

 

Have you looked at what's on TV? Divorce rates? Single and unwed parents? Acceptable drug use?

 

A book that talks a bit about the change in culture is "Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World that Can't Stop Talking." She goes in some depth about how, at one time, we were a culture of character (Buffett's generation and prior). Doing the "right" thing was championed.  Now, we are more of a culture of personality (people like Kim Kardashian). Where we value what gets are attention compared to what's intrinsically motivating.

 

I don't see a lot of value in unhappy marriages.  Divorce rates in the past would have been much higher if it weren't for two things: 1) a huge stigma against it, and 2) marriage having far different purposes than it does now (i.e. economic rather than a relationship). Single and unwed parents have much the same cause.

 

TV may in fact be a moral decline, but a different one than you may think; I think it's the willingness of the corporations and producers to make whatever crap that sells to make money.  The almighty dollar rules above all.  In our recent past, the evils were simply different; let's not whitewash things.  It wasn't that long ago, historically, that women were nothing but accessories to men, with few rights as people.  Do I need to go into slavery, racism, and so on?  Look back at chicken and dog fighting being much more common.  Not that these things are gone now, but the areas, the emphasis was different. 

 

The main reason people think things are so awful is sensationalism, and a rose-tinted glasses look at the past.  Drug use--depends on the drug.  Alcohol has always been a hugely popular drug in this country, and it has much more harm than does something like cannabis.  We tried prohibition before and it failed, we were just a bit slower this time since it isn't *quite* as huge a section of the country that uses weed.

 

Harder drugs do have bigger negative effects, but we have gone about solving the problem with guns and prisons rather than trying to rehabilitate and remove the need for the drug.  Guess which one would be cheaper and more effective?

 

Overall though, crime is in a multi-decade downtrend, though you wouldn't think that if you watched the news.  There are real problems in this country, but we *have* come a long way, in fits and starts.

[yp]

I've always been confused by the notion that one system or another is destroying our morals.  Looking back at history I don't understand how anyone can say things are getting worse not better...

 

Have you looked at what's on TV? Divorce rates? Single and unwed parents? Acceptable drug use?

 

A book that talks a bit about the change in culture is "Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World that Can't Stop Talking." She goes in some depth about how, at one time, we were a culture of character (Buffett's generation and prior). Doing the "right" thing was championed.  Now, we are more of a culture of personality (people like Kim Kardashian). Where we value what gets are attention compared to what's intrinsically motivating.

 

I totally agree that what's on tv is scary, but as Peter Diamandis explores in the following video, maybe it's a bit of an over representation. I mean I totally agree things are bad (and I do agree that the likes of Kim kardashian are rotting at the morals of our society) but I think things haven't really gotten worse, if anything there's a lot that's gotten better. As the video shows, majority of the people living under the poverty line still have access to things that were a luxury even 10 to 20 years ago.

 

I think the world requires a great deal of work, for sure, I'm right with you on that, but maybe the media isn't the best representation for the current state of affairs. Just my two cents(in collaboration with Mr. Diamandis) :)

 

Here's the video:

 

P.s. even things like the Sandy Hook shootings and the Boston Marathon Bombing, as bad as they are (with much respect to the departed), I think they made to seem much worse because of what is over coverage by the media in my view. Constant coverage of such things by the media, I think, just promotes fear and leads to increased anxiety and other issues among people.

[yp]

I've always been confused by the notion that one system or another is destroying our morals.  Looking back at history I don't understand how anyone can say things are getting worse not better...

 

Have you looked at what's on TV? Divorce rates? Single and unwed parents? Acceptable drug use?

 

A book that talks a bit about the change in culture is "Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World that Can't Stop Talking." She goes in some depth about how, at one time, we were a culture of character (Buffett's generation and prior). Doing the "right" thing was championed.  Now, we are more of a culture of personality (people like Kim Kardashian). Where we value what gets are attention compared to what's intrinsically motivating.

 

I totally agree that what's on tv is scary, but as Peter Diamandis explores in the following video, maybe it's a bit of an over representation. I mean I totally agree things are bad (and I do agree that the likes of Kim kardashian are rotting at the morals of our society) but I think things haven't really gotten worse, if anything there's a lot that's gotten better. As the video shows, majority of the people living under the poverty line still have access to things that were a luxury even 10 to 20 years ago.

 

I think the world requires a great deal of work, for sure, I'm right with you on that, but maybe the media isn't the best representation for the current state of affairs. Just my two cents(in collaboration with Mr. Diamandis) :)

 

Here's the video:

 

P.s. even things like the Sandy Hook shootings and the Boston Marathon Bombing, as bad as they are (with much respect to the departed), I think they made to seem much worse because of what is over coverage by the media in my view. Constant coverage of such things by the media, I think, just promotes fear and leads to increased anxiety and other issues among people.

 

Also, speaking of Kim Kardashian, haven't the masses always wanted a means to get a glimpse into the life of superstars and royalty (in exchange further enriching and idolizing such people). I mean I love this sorta discussion (on society and morals) but I feel like a lot of people just would much rather read about the new poodle Kim Kardashian just bought or something.

 

Question: Do you have any sort of ideas as to how the morals of society can be "improved"? (Improved in the general sense I guess meaning toward less greed, selfishness, doing the "right" thing, etc.) I love thinking about this question.

 

Btw, I haven't read that Susan Cain book, but I've seen the TED talk, definitely a good one!

[premfan]

As long as our society ( western civilization) is ego based it will never "improve". Attachment to profit and a sense of entitlement is all ego based behavior and creates a feeling of always wanting "more". If your self worth is attached to your stock quote then you're playing a losing game its all an illusion. Even if you're net worth keeps increasing you will always want "more". So is capitalism killing our society? In the end i would say no if you're aware that its all an illusion and ego based. The sheer awareness ( consicousness) will create change and create conscious capitalism. John Mackey the founder of whole foods wrote a book about this. Capitalism with the intention to connect the world, change lives, and show compassion over profits will bring what i call capitalism 2.0. Paradoxically, capitalism focused on connecting the world and creating real change will equate to more profits.  Step one is always awareness. With awareness you know nothing is tangible in this world. We all are going to pass and this game we play should be played cause its fun not for profit. And our goal as humans is to try to end suffering for our fellow humans cause we all are connected. Capitalism is on the right track cause companies out their do focus more on connecting the world over profits. We are in the beginning stages of the refinement of capitalism. Capitalism works so well cause us humans are hardwired to be ego based until the ego destroys the world. Being aware of how dangerous ego based behavior is we can change capitalism to end suffering. I think people understand this better now since 2008-2009. Or maybe not . Maybe we are doomed to repeat the same mistakes over and over again. I hope not. Capitalism 2.0 seems like a better game to play.

[Guest]

I've always been confused by the notion that one system or another is destroying our morals.  Looking back at history I don't understand how anyone can say things are getting worse not better...

 

Have you looked at what's on TV? Divorce rates? Single and unwed parents? Acceptable drug use?

 

A book that talks a bit about the change in culture is "Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World that Can't Stop Talking." She goes in some depth about how, at one time, we were a culture of character (Buffett's generation and prior). Doing the "right" thing was championed.  Now, we are more of a culture of personality (people like Kim Kardashian). Where we value what gets are attention compared to what's intrinsically motivating.

 

I don't see a lot of value in unhappy marriages.  Divorce rates in the past would have been much higher if it weren't for two things: 1) a huge stigma against it, and 2) marriage having far different purposes than it does now (i.e. economic rather than a relationship). Single and unwed parents have much the same cause.

 

TV may in fact be a moral decline, but a different one than you may think; I think it's the willingness of the corporations and producers to make whatever crap that sells to make money.  The almighty dollar rules above all.  In our recent past, the evils were simply different; let's not whitewash things.  It wasn't that long ago, historically, that women were nothing but accessories to men, with few rights as people.  Do I need to go into slavery, racism, and so on?  Look back at chicken and dog fighting being much more common.  Not that these things are gone now, but the areas, the emphasis was different. 

 

The main reason people think things are so awful is sensationalism, and a rose-tinted glasses look at the past.  Drug use--depends on the drug.  Alcohol has always been a hugely popular drug in this country, and it has much more harm than does something like cannabis.  We tried prohibition before and it failed, we were just a bit slower this time since it isn't *quite* as huge a section of the country that uses weed.

 

Harder drugs do have bigger negative effects, but we have gone about solving the problem with guns and prisons rather than trying to rehabilitate and remove the need for the drug.  Guess which one would be cheaper and more effective?

 

Overall though, crime is in a multi-decade downtrend, though you wouldn't think that if you watched the news.  There are real problems in this country, but we *have* come a long way, in fits and starts.

 

Thanks for the thoughtful response, rmitz. You bring up valid points.

 

I will respectfully disagree about marriages though. I feel that people give up way easier now. Perhaps it's my rose tinted glass (and perhaps because I didn't live in the time), but it seems to me that people use to try a lot harder to keep their marriages intact. Happiness is a choice. It takes sacrifice from both parties. Now, it's so socially acceptable that people, many times, aren't willing to sacrifice when they can simply trade in their spouse for a new one...kind of like a car.

 

 

[rkbabang]

Premfan, I couldn't possibly disagree more with everything you've just said.  The reason our lives are not that of hunters and gatherers is because we want, (and more importantly our ancestors wanted) more.  The day everyone decides that their situation is good enough is the day we stagnate and progress no more.

 

I've never bought into the nonsensical theory that "money can't buy happiness".  That's just crap. Everyone wants more and that is what makes us human.

 

You Can Never Have Too Much Money, New Research Shows

 

 

[Guest]

I've always been confused by the notion that one system or another is destroying our morals.  Looking back at history I don't understand how anyone can say things are getting worse not better...

 

Have you looked at what's on TV? Divorce rates? Single and unwed parents? Acceptable drug use?

 

A book that talks a bit about the change in culture is "Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World that Can't Stop Talking." She goes in some depth about how, at one time, we were a culture of character (Buffett's generation and prior). Doing the "right" thing was championed.  Now, we are more of a culture of personality (people like Kim Kardashian). Where we value what gets are attention compared to what's intrinsically motivating.

 

I totally agree that what's on tv is scary, but as Peter Diamandis explores in the following video, maybe it's a bit of an over representation. I mean I totally agree things are bad (and I do agree that the likes of Kim kardashian are rotting at the morals of our society) but I think things haven't really gotten worse, if anything there's a lot that's gotten better. As the video shows, majority of the people living under the poverty line still have access to things that were a luxury even 10 to 20 years ago.

 

I think the world requires a great deal of work, for sure, I'm right with you on that, but maybe the media isn't the best representation for the current state of affairs. Just my two cents(in collaboration with Mr. Diamandis) :)

 

Here's the video:

 

P.s. even things like the Sandy Hook shootings and the Boston Marathon Bombing, as bad as they are (with much respect to the departed), I think they made to seem much worse because of what is over coverage by the media in my view. Constant coverage of such things by the media, I think, just promotes fear and leads to increased anxiety and other issues among people.

 

Also, speaking of Kim Kardashian, haven't the masses always wanted a means to get a glimpse into the life of superstars and royalty (in exchange further enriching and idolizing such people). I mean I love this sorta discussion (on society and morals) but I feel like a lot of people just would much rather read about the new poodle Kim Kardashian just bought or something.

 

Question: Do you have any sort of ideas as to how the morals of society can be "improved"? (Improved in the general sense I guess meaning toward less greed, selfishness, doing the "right" thing, etc.) I love thinking about this question.

 

Btw, I haven't read that Susan Cain book, but I've seen the TED talk, definitely a good one!

 

yp, thanks for the video. I'll try to check it out in a bit. I'd suggest Cain's book. It's certainly a worthwhile read. She goes a bit into how things used to be versus how they are now. Popular books then included topics about improving ones character and the like. I think the only real way to improve morality is to value it. Unfortunately, there isn't a lot of money or fame to be made on that.  :P

[premfan]

Rkbabang,

 

People can want "more" as long as that are aware they are attached to something that is not tangible and is an illusion. The wanting "more" is ego based behavior and is intrinsically human. The wanting "more" ultimately creates destruction due to ego behavior. People can want "more" by creating a win-win instead of zero sum. The win-win creates less suffering for people. The zero sum creates a negative or positive feedback loop that feeds the ego until destruction happens. Capitalism can be refined ( i think it is) to create more win-win's with communities, the earth, and everyone involved. Yes money can buy happiness. If happiness is attached to not tangible and things of illusion. Happiness is a state of mind that views the future greater than the present moment. So buying a car yes will make you happy. This fades away fast . Real happiness as cliche as it seems is within the body. The consicous awareness that we are all connected. The practice of being in the moment and connecting with the enivornment.

[rmitz]

Thanks for the thoughtful response, rmitz. You bring up valid points.

 

I will respectfully disagree about marriages though. I feel that people give up way easier now. Perhaps it's my rose tinted glass (and perhaps because I didn't live in the time), but it seems to me that people use to try a lot harder to keep their marriages intact. Happiness is a choice. It takes sacrifice from both parties. Now, it's so socially acceptable that people, many times, aren't willing to sacrifice when they can simply trade in their spouse for a new one...kind of like a car.

 

There is an element of that, particularly what we see in some politicians and movie stars.  Liz Taylor had been rotating marriages for how long, though?  Henry VIII?  I'd say getting into new marriages is always something people have wanted to do, but most couldn't, for a variety of reasons, starting with the ones I previously mentioned (economics, or not strong enough to deal with societal pressures).

 

Happiness *is* a choice, definitely agree with you there.  With the right compatibility it shouldn't feel like sacrifice very often, and I am personally very lucky in that area.  I also had the luxury to not get married for a while.  I don't think moral problems are the core of the issue--or maybe it's exactly the opposite of what people think.  If you date a number of people, practice safe sex, never think you "need" to get married, then you learn what you can and can't live with, and your chances of a good marriage goes way up.  Be well educated, your chances go up again, and so on.

 

I don't like the "old" viewpoint on marriage because I have seen too many cases of marriages where at least one of the parties is abusive and/or unstable, where it is damaging to the other person (and/or their children), and it's hard enough for them to get away even when they *can* get a divorce, because of emotional abuse and baggage.  This issue has a very long history as well. 

 

Our culture would be better of if most people didn't feel that getting married and having kids is just "the thing you do."

[premfan]

I've always been confused by the notion that one system or another is destroying our morals.  Looking back at history I don't understand how anyone can say things are getting worse not better...

 

Have you looked at what's on TV? Divorce rates? Single and unwed parents? Acceptable drug use?

 

A book that talks a bit about the change in culture is "Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World that Can't Stop Talking." She goes in some depth about how, at one time, we were a culture of character (Buffett's generation and prior). Doing the "right" thing was championed.  Now, we are more of a culture of personality (people like Kim Kardashian). Where we value what gets are attention compared to what's intrinsically motivating.

 

I totally agree that what's on tv is scary, but as Peter Diamandis explores in the following video, maybe it's a bit of an over representation. I mean I totally agree things are bad (and I do agree that the likes of Kim kardashian are rotting at the morals of our society) but I think things haven't really gotten worse, if anything there's a lot that's gotten better. As the video shows, majority of the people living under the poverty line still have access to things that were a luxury even 10 to 20 years ago.

 

I think the world requires a great deal of work, for sure, I'm right with you on that, but maybe the media isn't the best representation for the current state of affairs. Just my two cents(in collaboration with Mr. Diamandis) :)

 

Here's the video:

 

P.s. even things like the Sandy Hook shootings and the Boston Marathon Bombing, as bad as they are (with much respect to the departed), I think they made to seem much worse because of what is over coverage by the media in my view. Constant coverage of such things by the media, I think, just promotes fear and leads to increased anxiety and other issues among people.

 

Also, speaking of Kim Kardashian, haven't the masses always wanted a means to get a glimpse into the life of superstars and royalty (in exchange further enriching and idolizing such people). I mean I love this sorta discussion (on society and morals) but I feel like a lot of people just would much rather read about the new poodle Kim Kardashian just bought or something.

 

Question: Do you have any sort of ideas as to how the morals of society can be "improved"? (Improved in the general sense I guess meaning toward less greed, selfishness, doing the "right" thing, etc.) I love thinking about this question.

 

Btw, I haven't read that Susan Cain book, but I've seen the TED talk, definitely a good one!

 

yp, thanks for the video. I'll try to check it out in a bit. I'd suggest Cain's book. It's certainly a worthwhile read. She goes a bit into how things used to be versus how they are now. Popular books then included topics about improving ones character and the like. I think the only real way to improve morality is to value it. Unfortunately, there isn't a lot of money or fame to be made on that.  :P

 

Good point. Morality is undervalued and money/fame is overvalued.