Capitalism is the most efficient system possible for concentrating the wealth in hands of as few people as possible.
@yogthos Scandinavian one, really?
@kravietz Sweden is an interesting case study https://tribunemag.co.uk/2019/08/the-social-democratic-road-to-socialism
I think capitalism has a fundamental problem that it accumulates the wealth in the upper class. Then this class starts using this wealth to influence policy in their favor creating a downward spiral. So the setup seems like it's inherently fragile.
@yogthos If both USA and Sweden have capitalist economy, and in one the accumulation happens, and in the other it doesn't, then the capitalist economy isn't the root cause. Let's just apply some scientific thinking here.
@kravietz the article shows that the more capitalist Sweden gets the worse life becomes for the average person though. Socialism and democracy keep capitalism in check, but the capitalists continuously work to undermine socialist policies. And it's an inherently asymmetric relationship because capitalists are the ones with the wealth.
@yogthos Because market economy generates wealth in general. Then it's only matter of redistribution. US does it poorly, Scandinavian countries - much better.
Marxian economy is economics of shortages, for everyone and arbitrary redistribution by the ruling party.
@kravietz the distribution of wealth is precisely the problem, and I think it's an inherent problem. Scandinavian countries are in a fragile balance right now, and Sweden example that I linked shows that the balance is eroding.
And I don't really understand what you mean by this to be honest:
Marxian economy is economics of shortages, for everyone and arbitrary redistribution by the ruling party.
@yogthos Marxian economy is by its very core principles economy of shortage (as opposed to surplus is capitalism). And is less effective due to constructs such as central planning and prices based on labour value theory.
@kravietz so you're saying it's less effective, but clearly the opposite is the case. USSR achieved stunning economic growth that's simply unmatched by any capitalist economy.
Capitalist economy is inherently inefficient because competition is always more wasteful than cooperation.
On top of that, majority of work done in a capitalist society adds zero value to society. It's simply done to make somebody profit.
@yogthos USSR achieved unprecedented *growth* and only *over some period* because it started from very low pre-revolutionary level. Later its economy stagnated and eventually bankrupted. At peak, GDP per capita in USSR was 1/3-1/2 of Western. Its economy was also extremely unbalanced, with absurd overgrowth of heavy industry over light industry and services. And for most of the time it depended on loans from the West, ending with $76 billion debt in 1991.
@kravietz Plenty of other countries failed to do that, meanwhile GDP doesn't really measure anything useful. If you look at physical quality of life measures, it's a very different picture https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.2190/AD12-7RYT-XVAR-3R2U
What USSR managed to achieve was to life millions out of poverty, provide universal service like education and healthcare, create gender equality, and eliminate homelessness. These are huge achievements.