Matt_W
3375
Sure, and if the whole story was U.S. workers holding steady while the rest of the world catches up, that would be fine. But it’s not the whole story. The top 10% of wealthy households in the United States control 70% of aggregate wealth. That’s the problem.
Yeah, to be clear, I’m in favor of well-regulated markets. I’m just in disfavor of allocating the lion’s share of prosperity gains to owners of capital, and would like to see a more equitable distribution of economic gains.
I very much agree. Though I’ll admit that, on occasion, I find myself wishing that lamp posts were being put to better use.
I always find these discussions of work vs productivity from a US perspective frustrating, because the debate in US politics has a tendency to ignore the findings from every other country in the world whom the US should be comparing itself with.
That is the norm. Like - people in Norway and Denmark work significantly less hours hours per person per week on average and yet still maintain equivalent or better productivity. Internationally that is the norm - fewer working hours + higher standard of living = higher productivity. See, e.g., the results from this experiment they’ve been conducting over several years in Iceland: https://en.alda.is/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/ICELAND_4DW.pdf
All my experience in the workforce reinforces the conclusions of that paper. Particularly enjoyed the commentary on the place were they focused on shorter, more focused meetings. I don’t think it’s coincidence that the managers I’ve known who were the least flexible on working hours (and who would have sworn - prior to the pandemic - that home office would be terrible for productivity) are also the managers who have wasted my worklife the most with rambling, lengthy pointless meetings.
Does makes me feel a little guilty, though. I am very good at telling my teams that they should take time off, avoid overwork, etc; not quite as good at practicing what I preach. I’m a firm believer in giving people flexibility and free-time; especially in IT, time spent on work <> productivity and most data I’ve seen at this point suggest the same is the case for many other industries.
Of course, moving in that direction requires politicians who work in service of the people who elect them, rather than the 0,01% and… that’s not generally the case in the USA.
Nesrie
3378
Both Norway and Denmark are occasionally described as collaboration of capitalistic ideals with socialist visions. The reality is they have free markets, public and private enterprises, planned economies… all the same thing we do… but the emphasis is notably different as are which markets are which. It’s still very much a capitalistic market economy with regulatory oversights. The USA is also a mixed economy.
Banzai
3379
We should be more like them, is what most everyone here has been saying, not that capitalism itself needs to be abolished entirely.
Unfettered capitalism is very efficient for the owners and very bad for the workers. You need more than just a free market to have a happy country, and having a happy country really ought to be what government does for the people who made it. Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, not insane wealth for the 0.01%
Banzai
3381
And that would be unfettered capitalism, which is not a good system foir anyone who isn’t an owner. Just ask the gilded age how that worked out. Let the buyer beware, sweat shops, rivers on fire, etc. That’s the end game of capitalism that has no purpose other than making wealth for the owners.
I mean, China is also a mixed economy. Even the USSR was for most of its existence.
You are right it’s all an sliding scale. Capitalism per se can’t be completely excised from a system, nor can socialism (a lot of economic transactions in the US are done without profit in mind, specially within families).
I think there’s a lot of confusion on the terms, when people say they oppose capitalism a lot of the times is not Capitalism per se, but a certain version of it (which is I think what you are pointing out?).
Going back to the thread subject, it looks to me that capitalism and meritocracy don’t necessarily imply the huge income differentials you see in the US. My personal viewpoint comes from a capitalist country that still maintains a very flat income distribution. If you make 10 times the median you are in the 0.5% of top income earners here (or better), while in the US you would be at 5%. The difference is a full order of magnitude.
Nesrie
3383
Uh uhh. We’re really worried about the thing we don’t actually have right now. We’ve been a mixed economy system for a very, very long time.
Right. And the thing that slides the scale, it’s not different versions of capitalism. It’s the politics, the priorities. Norway doesn’t have some different version of capitalism than we do. They prioritize their markets, their taxes… their goals differently. The focus should not be on capitalism. The focus needs to be on what we do with the resources from those markets, and yes, sometimes that means changing those very markets.
Banzai
3384
But we see backsliding into the extreme income differentials of the gilded age right now. That’s the direction we are going and I’d sure like it to stop. And yes, that’s why we are saying to tax those who have amassed untold wealth with the current system. Not to replace all capitalism and markets.
Now I’m going to watch Loki with my family, so someone else will have to eco 101 with nesrie.
Nesrie
3385
Well taxes were very different when we actually built and maintained our infrastructure. We don’t even need to look at other countries to see that. We have a couple of very specific presidents that gutted our sources of income to maintain the things they knew people took for granted.
The sense is that they have no time or capacity (or believe they don’t) to discover an alternative, and if capitalism is equated with neoliberalism (and everything else is some shade of red), then they use the same equivalency. Including the idea that the only thing you can measure is efficiency, which isn’t that well measured anyway. I mean, how many arguments about productivity ignore that it’s (usually) GDP/hours_of_labour and make stupid points about working hours? (YMMV up there)
But I agree that gets them/us nowhere, good critique is important… and I think that’s actually improving, as people look elsewhere than megacorp owned media.
It’s almost like there are different systems in play.
Perhaps we should, although that’s not a universally held view even by Scandinavians. I know a Norwegian couple, in their early 30s both with PhDs in computer science. Even though the company they started failed pretty miserably they have no intention of going back to Norway (actually if Trump was re-elected they would have but that just demonstrates they are smart). Their, view is Norway is a lovely place to live, but if you want to make difference in the world you come to the US. A view that was common among Silicon Valley immigrants.
The underlying assumption here is the reason that these countries are such happy places because of the social safety net, and while I’m sure that factor, I think homogeneity is also a factor. Norway is 83% Norway is 83% Norweigan 8% European and only 8% minorities. The decision to allow refugees into the country has resulted in some bitter division in the happiest place on earth. Look at P&R, this forum is a happier place now that we’ve purged or converted all the Republicans. :-)
If you look at the happiest state in the US Hawaii is #1 for pretty obvious reasons. Utah is #2 again a fairly homogenous state (70% Morman) and #3 is Minnesota. It seems like a strange choice since it is the coldest state, other than Alaska. I think the fact that it was founded by Scandinavians and they are proud of the reputation for Minnesota nice is actually a big factor.
The US isn’t place where everyone just gets along, we are an argumentative bunch, and pretty much 1/2 the people are always going to be upset by what the government does. I don’t think this is formula for happiness in a society.
“I can find a Norwegian couple who think American capitalism is better” is a compelling argument that really ends all debate. Maybe we should just archive the thread now?
There is probably a bit of selection bias there. It stands to reason immigrants to the US would think the US is the place to be. Perhaps those that did not leave Norway don’t have the same opinion.
Seems to run counter to your narrative; homogeneity is not a word that springs to mind when talking about the people of hawaii.
Well, it’s certainly comfortable if you picked and have the skills for the right jobs, as well as actually like having your work define your life, and be in constant competition. Studies point out that isn’t really what the majority is comfortable with, though, including Americans. Without getting into what “changing the world” even is, and what part of it is good.
There is an uncomfortable truth in homogeneity seemingly correlating to a more peaceful society, that’s true; I’m just not sure yet how much both sides of the relation influence each other.
Timex
3393
You say this a lot like it’s bad.
What do you want to have define your life?
