Market-driven economy is totally fine as long as we're talking about choice in clothing styles and car models. When it comes to things that people depend on, like energy, markets fail. They have done so currently in Texas where its private energy providers were not ready for an emergency: https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/texas-energy-system-faces-a-winter-reckoning
It never makes business sense to invest resources into managing emergencies. It's much cheaper to just shrug and say "shit happens", as customers have nowhere to go anyway.
"Capitalism" isn't a single closed political system (as opposed to Marxism for example). Sweden, USA, Russia and China are all capitalist, yet totally different.
https://write.as/arcadian/pragmatism-and-dogmatism-in-economy-capitalism-versus-socialism
The reason why I'm talking about it all the time is that if we can't get semantics right, then we can't diagnose problems, and then our solutions (aka "get rid of capitalism") will be ineffective.
Same here. And we might also have the same shared experience historically of an *actual* "socialist" economy 😂
@kravietz
It was mostly a jab at the self-proclaimed libertarians that swear by a free, unregulated market to solve any problem regardless of nature but yeah, of course capitalism isn't all terribleness, just like socialism isn't the end-all-be-all. It's about striking a balance for the benefit of real, living people, and not an investment firm on Wall Street.
@isagalaev
@kravietz @ScumbagDog agreed. Unfortunately, tribalism and absolutism are easy, while nuances is hard. Which is why I don't expect meaningless "capitalism" vs. "socialism" arguments to go away any time soon.
(Disclosure: I myself broadly fall into "social democratic" category.)