• CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      5 days ago

      It has indeed, but you could, for instance, have said that poverty was a result of feudalism, when that was the primary economic system. The sentiment here isn’t that capitalism alone causes poverty so much as that it’s a result of the design of our social order rather than the individuals experiencing it, with the implication that solving it requires adopting some system that doesn’t inheritly promote it.

      • MoonManKipper@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 days ago

        Accepting the ambiguity you point out, saying that capitalism inherently promotes poverty is a stretch. It’s demonstrably the spread of liberal free market capitalism over the last 50 years has been the key to dragging more people out of poverty than ever before. It sure ain’t perfect, and needs to be moderated with appropriate democratic oversight and regulation, but it’s worked better than anything else we’ve tried

        • CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          5 days ago

          its difficult to say that that has been the key to that in my view, because the primary mechanism by which this has happened has been a spread of industrial infrastructure (and thus both automation and the capacity to trade more things with other places) into areas where it was previously lacking, which has a tendency to reduce the amount of labor needed to produce many common goods and thus their relative price. Making more things and for cheaper is likely to reduce poverty under just about any economic system, and theres nothing about industrial development that implies that it must be done under capitalism, so I dont think we can say that it was key so much as one of the options, which most places have gone with.

          That being said, say for the sake of argument that I accept this, that capitalism has been the key to driving a lot of people out of poverty. Would that actually change anything that I had said previously? The notion that a transition to capitalism has lowered poverty, and that capitalism inherently promotes poverty arent contradictory, if the conditions that the capitalism replaced trend towards an even higher level of poverty than capitalism does. Under that circumstance, you would expect to see a dramatic drop in poverty when first adopted, but then for that progress to stall without poverty’s elimination once the level that capitalism trends to under the circumstances is reached. Were the question something like “would you prefer to live under capitalism, or something like feudalism or an authoritarian command economy?” then sure, it’d be the least bad among these. But its still not good enough, and if nothing else we’ve tried has got there, then if we want the actual elimination of poverty, which I think we should, we’re going to need to experiment with new ways of doing things.

        • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          5 days ago

          but it’s worked better than anything else we’ve tried

          I am not a fan of the CCP at all, but the amount of people they’ve lifted out of abject poverty in the past 30+ years has been staggering.

          So no.

      • Diplomjodler@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        5 days ago

        Correct. But blaming absolutely everything on some vague bogeyman called “capitalism” isn’t helpful.

        • Seefra 1@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 days ago

          Capitalism isn’t a “vague boogyman”, capitalism is an obsolete system, that is implemented globally and is the cause of most world problems such as inequality, poverty, climate change, overwork, lack of individually and nearly all misery in the world.

  • DebatableRaccoon@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 days ago

    Poverty is a choice. One made by the leeches to soak up the money from circulation, preventing anyone else from having any.

    • Seefra 1@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 days ago

      I don’t think the meme is implying feudalism as a modern alternative to capitalism…