u/HikariNoWa

As jobs continue to be lost to AI and automation, capitalism simply does not have an answer to resolve this problem.

Proponents say that simply "new jobs will be created". Jenson Huang, for instance, describes one future job as creating clothing for personal robots...

Whether this is true or not, as AI and robotics continues to advance, will there not be a point where a computer/robot is simply more efficient than a human at every possible task?

We aren't even close to that, but the hype is everywhere. People in tech, such as Elon Musk, describe a utopia of abundance where money becomes useless.

However, capitalism does not have a mechanism to deal with such abundance. In fact, where there is abundance, companies are incentivised to eliminate it (e.g. supermarkets throwing away food, or artificial scarcity in the diamond industry).

Capitalism is a terrible way of organising a highly productive economy, therefore. How is capitalism able to benefit people as a whole (rather than a select few) in a potential state of abundance?

So the paw patrol movie is basically pro coloniser propaganda?! In the movie, they "discover" a dinosaur island. There is a pup already living there, but they basically colonise the place themselves. Just plop their ridiculous new HQ next to his tree house.

They decide who is able to visit and which scientists can carry out research. Mayor Humdinger has to mine the diamonds on the island in secret because apparently the paw patrol own all mining rights.

And, in the end, they all but force the pup who had been living on the island for several years before them to become part of the paw patrol.

They even decide on the appropriate punishment for Mayor Humdinger trying to "steal" the diamonds (without trial). Make him work off his punishment through forced labour making fertiliser out of Dino poo instead of going to prison.

The incessant desire to chase short-term profits while avoiding long-term consequences, under capitalism, will result in its self-destruction.

Just as machines destroyed the manual labour force, AI will eventually destroy cognitive labour.

Capitalism is unable to use these labour saving devices to benefit people (e.g. reduced work hours for the same pay). Instead, they eliminate jobs and further concentrate wealth.

Is this the beginning of the end?

This is more a critique of the right wing, rather than capitalism specifically, but capitalists tend to have right wing politics. There are a number of internal contradictions that capitalists are not able to resolve:

- government control is bad, but monopolistic control is OK

- government shouldn't do things FOR you (e.g. free healthcare and education), but they should do things TO you (e.g. weaponised police force)

- free markets are good, but loose immigration rules are bad

- a human being should be free to do what they want if they are not hurting others, unless they are trans

- a big government safety net would prevent people from wanting to work, but it also doesn't matter if you make your money through capital gains or earned income

Capitalism has led to a widening wealth gap which means fewer and fewer individuals with vast resources are able to influence government.

Additionally, the globalisation of businesses means that they have huge foreign and domestic influence.

How can this be compatible with democracy if the richer you are, the more outsized your political impact is?

Why do capitalists believe that government/single-payer healthcare is worse than private insurance?

Single-payer healthcare is cheaper because it doesn't need to account for the marketing, additional admin, and swathes of employees dedicated to figuring out how not to pay you, that is required by insurance companies. Additionally, government has better economies of scale than an insurer.

In terms of choice, the public sector decides on treatments and what will be covered. I don't understand how this is worse than in the case of private insurers who decide whether they will pay you out or not, which treatments you can get covered for, and which hospitals/doctors are eligible.

Capitalists are unable to demonstrate how externalities (e.g. wealth inequality, pollution) can be resolved under their system.

Externalities destroy the fundamental "voluntary exchange" principle which, while not limited to capitalism, is often ascribed to it. Exposure to pollution and climate change is not voluntary.

Usually, their response falls under:

- there isn't a better system

- the benefits outweigh the externalities

- capitalism is the best way to innovate our way out of these externalities

- climate change isn't real

- because Communism

Can any capitalists provide a satisfactory response for how externalities fit into "voluntary exchange"?