User:Bgreen29/sandbox

Casino capitalism
Casino capitalism refers to the high risk-taking and financial instability associated with financial institutions becoming too large and mostly self-regulated, while also taking on high-risked financial investment dealings. This has been a driving motive by investors in the quest for profits without production, as it provides a speculation aspect that offers prospects for a quicker and more speculator returns for people, wealth, and inside assumptions of the factors likely to affect asset price movements. Typically, this does not add to the collective wealth of an economy, as it can instead create economic instability. Casino capitalism falls alongside the idea of a speculation based economy where entrepreneurial activities turn to more paper games of speculative trading then actually producing economic goods and services.

It is believed by people such as economists Frank Stilwell that casino capitalism was one of the leading causes of the Global Financial Crisis in 2008; risky investors sought out a get rich quick motive they found through speculative activities that offered a particular individual gain or loss depending on the assets future movements. Other Economists like Hans-Werner Sinn, have written books on Casino capitalism with commentary outside the Anglo-Saxon Bubble.

Fascism
Fascism as an economic system takes the middle ground between capitalism and socialism in that it promotes the pursuit of individual profit while promoting corporations through government subsidies as the primary tool of economic progress as long as their activities are in line with the goals of the state. In fascist economies profits or gains are individualized while losses are socialized, and these economies are often compared to the third way due to being heavily corporatized. Fascist economies of the mid 20th century such as Italy and Germany often used bilateral trade agreements, with heavy tariffs on imports and government subsidized exports to developing nations around the world. While economically fascism is oriented towards self sufficiency, politically fascist countries of the mid 20th century were oriented to war and expansion, two seemingly contradictory motives. This means that the goal of fascist nations was to create a closed economic system, self-reliant, but also ready to make war and expand. Fascist economies can then be seen as a sort of capitalist economy, with little state intervention usually in the form of business subsidies.

Neo-capitalism
Neo-capitalism is an economic ideology that blends elements of capitalism with other systems and emphasizes government intervention in the economy to save and reconstruct companies that are deemed a risk to the nation. The ideology's prime years are considered by some economists to be the 10 years leading up to 1964 after the Great Economic Crisis and World War II. After World War II, countries were destroyed and needed to rebuild and since capitalism thrives in industrializing countries, these countries most affected by the war saw a growth in capitalism. Neo-capitalism differs from regular capitalism, in that while capitalism highlights private owners, neo-capitalism emphasizes the role of the state in sustaining the country as a provider and a producer and condemns private companies for lacking in their role as a provider and producer for their country.

Critics of neo-capitalism claim that it tends to suppress the reserve army of labor which may lead to full employment, as this can undermine one of the main basics that make capitalism work. Other critics of the neo-capitalism state that if neo-capitalism was put into place, it would become immediately corrupt.

Anarcho-primitivism
Anarcho-primitivism strives to return humans to a pre-industrialized and pre-civilization state. From an economic standpoint advocates of this model argue the non-necessity of economic systems for human existence. Proponents of this ideology believe that the entire history of human civilization took a wrong turn from hunter gatherer systems into an agricultural system and has led to human dependence on technology to support increasing populations, government control, and culture. Population growth and the institutions created to support and control it are exploitative of the not only humans but also the environment. They argue the fact that the more people you have living in a society the more resources they will need. These resources must be taken from the earth and therefore lead to environmental exploitation. However, they claim that materialist exploitation can be seen throughout almost every society in the world today. This materialism creates inequalities and exploitation such as class structure, the exploitation of humans in the name of labor and profit, and most importantly environmental destruction and deterioration. This exploitation has lead to the increase in human population growth, activity, and development which they argue is destroying the Earths ecosystems. They emphasize coexisting with the natural world instead of destroying it “a world order on our planet where human civilization is brought into harmony with nature”. Where they differ from other anarchist and green ideologies is that they oppose technological and industrial advancement as it further propagates the exploitation of humans “Technology is not a simple tool which can be used in any way we like. It is a form of social organization, a set of social relations. It has its own laws. If we are to engage in its use, we must accept its authority. The enormous size, complex interconnections and stratification of tasks which make up modern technological systems make authoritarian command necessary and independent, individual decision-making impossible”. Anarcho-primitivist seek to revert the economic and government institutions of civilization which they argue are authoritarian, exploitative, and abstract and return humanity to a way of living which is harmonious with the natural world in which technology used mostly individually to create tools for survival much like in primitive cultures and tribes where they argue their is little need for abstract things such as an economy or government.