Talk:Capitalism/Archive 33

Capitalism: proposal for an edit
Hello. One of my edits got rejected and I've been proposed to write a post to talk about what's wrong about my edit, moreover I got asked what I mean by an international taxation system on capital: basically every countries which abide by this system have the same taxation rate on the capital. MDCCCC (talk) 21:46, 20 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Is the replacement of capitalist to free-market warranted? Does Piketty actually argue that even if the means of production are not in private hands, rampant wealth inequality is inevitable under free markets? Bart Terpstra (talk) 21:53, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Piketty explains that capitalism seemed to have been overcome in the 2nd half of the 20th century, but that it never disappeared (although inequalities decreased), which demonstrates that inequalities may be fight over in a capitalist system according to him ; furthermore free-market economies are more keen to blame because they have low taxation rates which will raise inequalities in one's economy (note: the PDF file basically shows the rich (top one) and the average's (bottom one) growth of gross income (therefore leading to a rise in inequalities), whereas this may be counter-striken thanks to taxation (he prospects a decrease in tax progressivity over the XXIst century)).
 * Moreover I don't understand what do you mean in your 2nd sentence, to me an economy cannot be a free-market if means of production aren't in private hands in the first place. MDCCCC (talk) 22:53, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is literal, he has to actually mean capitalist OR mean free-market.
 * for non-capitalist free market, see Market socialism or "markets in the name of socialism" (a book) or imagine public means of production but private producers bringing private goods to market.
 * capitalism is defined by private ownership of the means of production and their operation for profit.
 * free market is defined by an economy where the price of goods and services are governed by supply and demand with little or no regulations, in contrast to a regulated market. Bart Terpstra (talk) 23:20, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Ok I'm sorry I was stuck with Piketty's definition of capitalism, with that definition you are right, however I argue it would be better to replace "capitalism" by "privacy of capital" to be more precise MDCCCC (talk) 15:10, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
 * secrecy of capital ownership?
 * doesn't society at large need to know who owns the land and factories for a person to own it?
 * if you mean private ownership, isn't that just capitalism?
 * could you link to something giving an explanation of what "privacy of capital" is? Bart Terpstra (talk) 15:14, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Sorry I'm not native; by "privacy" I meant owernship for one's pivate interests.
 * Piketty defines "private capital" as the goods possessed by someone for an extended period of time (as opposed to "temporary capital"), which goes well along capitalism but it doesn't seem to be capitalism's core (although they are linked) (he wrote at some point "private capitalism", which shows that capital isn't necessarily owned for a very long period of time in capitalist systems).
 * Piketty's definition of capitalism is confusing and never really stated, it seems to be because of cultural differences between French and American economics ; however he clearly states that capitalist economies managed to reduce inequalities, therefore the rise in inequalities isn't caused by capitalism but by private capital, which got obliterated thanks to very high taxation progressivity and nationalizations in the XXth century and thus transformed private capital to temporary capital. MDCCCC (talk) 16:16, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
 * But, your opinion might not be that important in the larger scale of things. A free market is one in which exchange is unfettered. It is blind to the nature or circumstances of either the seller or the buyer. So, if the seller is a government and the buyer is some private citizen, does the exchange cease to be free, especially if the sale is by bid, like a treasury bond? I doubt it. The only condition is that the exchange be voluntary and at a reasonable, agreed price. 102.135.172.106 (talk) 23:06, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

Capitalism does not mean private ownership at all, but corporate ownership!
In the very first sentence it currently says, as I quote: "Capitalism is an economic system based on the private ownership of the means of production and their operation for profit (...)" ... But private ownership is a mom and pop shop or a family business, whereas corporate ownership such as in a publicly traded company is a totally different concept. This is not a private business. It is a corporation. The lack of intellectual ability to differentiate between these two concepts seems appalling to me. Capitalism or Corporatism is actually much more similar to Communism than it is to a private economy based upon small-sized family businesses. -- Alexey Topol (talk) 16:35, 24 July 2023 (UTC)


 * Do you have any reliable sources that make that point? Without them we will have to follow what our current sources say. TFD (talk) 16:48, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
 * IMO "private" in this context means not owned by the government North8000 (talk) 17:54, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
 * This kind of definition is academic and nonsensical. Government is only assumed to be a "local country authority." Yet, some 'private enterprises' in foreign countries are actually sovereign wealth funds of other countries, for example Norway, Saudi Arabia or Singapore.
 * Private hands, therefore, correctly, only refers to ownership that is not vested in or controlled by the local national authorities. Boeing Corporation (for example, or Lockheed Martin or Northrop Grumman may be private companies with regard to a country like Sudan, but they definitely aren't private companies in respect to the United States. Because they are strictly restricted in terms of who they can sell whatever they produce to, under the various national security frameworks of the United States. They are state-controlled capitalist corporations. 102.135.172.106 (talk) 23:15, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
 * My understanding of "private" in this context is the same as North8000's. Corporations of any size privately owned by individuals. That might be just one person, or it might be by thousands of shareholders, or it might even be by other companies (who have their own owners/shareholders). Ultimately, they are all owned by identifiable private individuals. Public ownership is when the state owns something - you can't trace ownership back to a private individual. We've got a funky version of that here in the UK called Crown Estate, which is stuff owned by the crown - not individually by Charles himself, but by the office he holds. I expect there are other weird forms of ownership in other countries, but yeah - just because a corporation is very big doesn't mean it isn't owned by private individuals.  Girth Summit  (blether)  18:13, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
 * You did a pretty good job at original research here, unfortunately, Wikipedia is based on reliable sources. –Vipz (talk) 03:16, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
 * They essentially went beyond even that, redefining terms in a way that is very different than their technical and common meanings. North8000 (talk) 13:51, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Capitalism is the antithesis of Democracy
It is amazing that some folks think capitalism and democracy go hand in hand. Capitalism, in its essence, is effected in single transactions between anonymous buyers and sellers. It just happens that the decisions and numbers of participants are so numerous that the whole tapestry appears coordinated - when in truth, it isn't. And that is why Adam Smith describes the market system as working through "an invisible hand." Market based decisions are not democratic, but purely based on merit, capacity or ability (to supply or pay for supplies). Those without these abilities are unable to participate, nor are they invited to. No committee sits down to decide what to produce or even to fundraise for what to buy.

Indeed, democracy requires, at its core, that the primary decision-makers (of asset allocation, production and pricing) be many and equal in stature. That their choices be coordinated, and their outcomes be applicable to everyone. Democratic choices for reasons of legitimacy, essentially, are public and instantly visible (no invisible hands, here). Socialists, therefore, would be the natural creators of democracy. They are the co-operators and unionists who claim to own their labor in common, who share their outputs equally according to their need, and who own resources together as the public. They are more likely to vote for specified choices and to consider themselves 'equal' in solidarity and brotherhood.

Intuition, therefore, would ascribe democracy to socialists more than to capitalists. Even voting for a government to "own and control public resources" is based on the equality of the vote (irrespective of whether people are poor or rich). In a capitalist system, that vote would only be available to property owners, or those who have the means to purchase property. 102.135.172.106 (talk) 23:36, 3 December 2023 (UTC) 102.135.172.106 (talk) 23:43, 3 December 2023 (UTC)@geonal

which countries are considered capitalist?
Since there are only 5 counries now that are communist, is it safe to assume that other 190 are capitalist? Ilya-42 (talk) 17:50, 6 December 2023 (UTC)


 * How does this pertain to this article? (Talk pages are WP:NOTFORUM) --- Avatar317 (talk) 01:15, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
 * It's more accurate to say that five countries are governed under Communist Party principles. It's safe to say that the other countries aren't, unless you watch Fox. TFD (talk) 02:02, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

"Encyclopedia entries for Capitalism" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Encyclopedia_entries_for_Capitalism&redirect=no Encyclopedia entries for Capitalism] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. Steel1943 (talk) 22:45, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

"Industrial labour" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Industrial_labour&redirect=no Industrial labour] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. Steel1943 (talk) 22:49, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

"Ultra-capitalism" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ultra-capitalism&redirect=no Ultra-capitalism] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. Steel1943 (talk) 22:58, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

"Greedalism" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Greedalism&redirect=no Greedalism] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. Steel1943 (talk) 23:26, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

"Buyers market" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Buyers_market&redirect=no Buyers market] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. Steel1943 (talk) 23:52, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

"Marcianoism" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Marcianoism&redirect=no Marcianoism] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. Steel1943 (talk) 20:47, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

"Wage labor and slavery" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wage_labor_and_slavery&redirect=no Wage labor and slavery] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. Steel1943 (talk) 20:50, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

"Potential competition" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Potential_competition&redirect=no Potential competition] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. Steel1943 (talk) 20:53, 28 February 2024 (UTC)