Get rid of capitalism? Millennials are ready to talk about it
One of the hottest tickets in New York City this weekend was a discussion on whether to overthrow capitalism.
The first run of tickets to “Capitalism: A Debate” sold out in a day. So the organizers, a pair of magazines with clear ideological affiliations, socialist Jacobin and libertarian Reason, found a larger venue: Cooper Union’s 960-capacity Great Hall, the site of an 1860 antislavery speech by Abraham Lincoln. The event sold out once again, this time in eight hours .
The crowd waiting in a long line to get inside on Friday night was mostly young and mostly male. Asher Kaplan and Gabriel Gutierrez, both 24, hoped the event would be a real-life version of the humorous, anarchic political debates on social media. “So much of this stuff is a battle that’s waged online,” said Gutierrez, who identifies, along with Kaplan, as a “leftist,” if not quite a socialist.
These days, among young people, socialism is “both a political identity and a culture,” Kaplan said. And it looks increasingly attractive.
Young Americans have soured on capitalism. In a Harvard University poll conducted last year, 51 percent of 18-to-29 year-olds in the U.S. said they opposed capitalism; only 42 percent expressed support. Among Americans of all ages, by contrast, a Gallup survey last year found that 60 percent held positive views of capitalism.
A poll released last month found American millennials closely split on the question of what type of society they would prefer to live in: 44 percent picked a socialist country, 42 percent a capitalist one. The poll, conducted by YouGov and the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation, found that 59 percent of Americans across all age groups preferred to live under capitalism.
“I’ve seen the failings of modern-day capitalism,” said Grayson SussmanSquires, an 18-year-old student at Wesleyan University who had turned up for the capitalism debate. To him and many of his peers, he said, the notion of well-functioning capitalist order is something recounted only by older people. He was 10 when the financial crisis hit, old to enough to watch his older siblings struggle to get jobs out of college. In high school, SussmanSquires said, he volunteered for the presidential campaign of Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, a self-described socialist. “It spoke to me in a way nothing had before,” he said.
Although debate attendees leaned left, several expressed the desire to have their views challenged by the pro-capitalist side. “It’s very easy to exist in a social group where everyone has the same political vibe,” Kaplan said.
“I’m immersed in one side of the debate,” said Thomas Doscher, 26, a labor organizer who is studying for his LSATs. “I want to hear the other side.”
The debate pitted two socialist stalwarts, Jacobin founder Bhaskar Sunkara and New York University professor Vivek Chibber, against the defenders of capitalism, Katherine Mangu-Ward, Reason’s editor in chief, and Nick Gillespie, the editor in chief of Reason.com and Reason TV.
And it was the attempt to rebuff criticism of capitalism that mostly riled up the crowd.
Chibber argued that the problem with capitalism is the power it has over workers. With the weakening of U.S. labor unions, “we have a complete despotism of the employers,” he said, leading to stagnant wages. When Mangu-Ward countered that Americans aren’t coerced on the job, the crowd erupted in laughter. “Every morning you wake up and you have a decision about whether or not you’re going to go to work,” she insisted, and the audience laughed again.
Sunkara summed up his argument for socialism as a society that helped people tackle the necessities of life—food, housing, education, health care, childcare. “Wherever we end up, it won’t be a utopia,” he said. “It will still be a place where you might get your heart broken,” or feel lonely, or get indigestion.
Mangu-Ward replied: “Capitalism kind of [fixes] those things, actually.” There’s the app Tinder to find dates, and Pepto Bismol to cure your upset stomach. “Those are the gifts of capitalism,” she said.
The arguments stayed mostly abstract. Sunkara and Chibber insisted their idea of democratic socialism shouldn’t be confused with the communist dictatorships that killed millions of people in the 20th century. Mangu-Ward and Gillespie likewise insisted on defending a capitalist ideal, not the current, corrupt reality. “Neither Nick nor I are fans of big business,” she said. “We’re not fans of crony capitalism.”
Talking theory left little time to wrestle with concrete problems, such as inequality or climate change. That frustrated Nathaniel Granor, a 31-year-old from Brooklyn who said he was worried about millions of people being put out of work by automation such as driverless vehicles.
“It didn't touch on what I feel is the heart of the matter,” Granor said. Both capitalism and socialism might ideally be ways to improve the world, he concluded, but both can fall short when applied in the real world.
Tags
Who is online
50 visitors
Chibber argued that the problem with capitalism is the power it has over workers. With the weakening of U.S. labor unions, “we have a complete despotism of the employers,” he said, leading to stagnant wages.
...
Talking theory left little time to wrestle with concrete problems, such as inequality or climate change. That frustrated Nathaniel Granor, a 31-year-old from Brooklyn who said he was worried about millions of people being put out of work by automation such as driverless vehicles.
I, for one, am glad to see that they are taking the future seriously. There are logical conclusions that can be drawn from looking at the arc of technology and economics.
This is what handing out participation trophies/ribbons for everything will get you.
It is a moral issue. Capitalism is abused.
The working poor are thrown just enough crumbs ("entitlements") to keep them from rioting in the street and fomenting revolution.
Anything keeping poor from making better decisions, getting a better education, working longer hours, starting their own business, or not spending more than they make?
You apparently believe that if everyone improved themselves, no one would be poor, which is not the way capitalism works.
No, we will always have poor people, because of just the things I mentioned.
But someone else getting rich doesn't mean that someone had to be poor.
Many poor people have broke away from poverty.
And some rich people (in particular, lottery winners) have become poor. Because of poor decision-making and living above their means.
Everyone in America could have a master's degree, and there would still be poor people in America.
Capitalism requires that employers pay the lowest possible wages, not the highest.
True, education isn't always indicative of earning power. Many non-college people operate successful companies today.
Capitalism doesn't require paying the lowest possible wages. If so, then wages would be much lower than they are now.
And companies, especially similar models, wouldn't have vastly different pay scales.
In capitalism, wages are a race to the bottom. What is the least we can pay someone and still get them to take the job?
The reason for this is obvious. Less wages is more profit for the capitalist.
Then why do some fast food places start at minimum wage and others start at $10?
Why does Costco pay more than Sam's Club?
Bill Gates was born into more money than 95% of the US. He never wanted for anything, ever.
Please explain why companies pay their CEO's so much then? Do you honestly believe that they couldn't find someone who would take $3 million per year v. $5 million per year?
People who make the lowest wage are more likely to leave. Some companies may believe they can acquire more dedicated employees by paying them a little more. It is not the norm.
But that wasn't what he was talking about. He was talking about a college degree. Gates doesn't have one.
Any good business person will always tell you that turnover is extremely costly and a good thing to avoid.
Not paying employees enough results in turnover, which in turn costs the business even more than a raise would have for the employee.
Don't you think people are smart enough to figure that out on their own?
Lol, gotta love the internet - where you can tell people how wealthy and important you are, and expect them to believe it.
Wow, genius abounds here. So the son of a wealthy attorney is on a level playing field with the son of a plumber when it comes to forging a future without college? Gates had access to the most advanced computing systems in the tech world to learn his craft. He needed college like you need a bad attitude.
Again:
Gates had access to the most advanced computing systems in the tech world to learn his craft.
Gates is not the person you want to glorify in terms of pulling ones self up by the bootstraps.
Capitalism is a tool, like a hammer is a tool. It is neither good nor bad, intrinsically... like that hammer. And like that hammer, capitalism can build stuff... or kill people.
The purpose of capitalism is to maximize shareholder dividends. END OF STORY. There is nothing else. A "good manager" will do anything... anything at all... to maximize shareholder dividends. There's no question of legality or morality.
When a corporation is caught dumping toxic waste... the only surprise is that anyone is surprised. Penalties for dumping are peanuts next to the economies, so of course dumping is the "right" thing for a "good manager".
When a smart worker is using a tool that she knows can be dangerous, she takes care... she follows "safety rules". She doesn't let the tool do whatever it wishes.
Duh.
Perhaps you've never actually been a part of management. The vast majorities of companies do not ask employees to do anything unethical or immoral.
That is absolute nonsense. I have been ordered by management to do something immoral and even illegal to increase profits. We regularly denied legitimate warranty claims because of a known bad part because the company did not want to fix the part, even if the proper part cost less than $2.00 more.
Personal experiences aside, I don't believe that the vast majority of companies ask employees to act unethically or immorally. If they did, far more companies would be going out of business and the subject of more lawsuits.
Gratuitous ad hominum attack. Bravo !
"Anything"?! Seriously? Every company fiddles with safety/environment. They all diddle their taxes. Most companies avoid major crimes because of the risk. But minor crimes are everyday.
No attack, just trying to understand you better.
If you have been in management and asked employees to do something unethical or immoral, why did you do so?
For a great example of how untrue the notion of capitalist workplace ethics is, read Real Food Fake Food, by Larry Olmstead. Studies have concluded that most of what foods you buy are somewhere between partially fake and totally fake. Capitalism pushes false advertising on food products to gain an edge against the competitor, and this country does virtually nothing to stop it. It is likely that nobody on this board has ever had actual olive oil that wasn't deliberately diluted with cheaper oils or rancid olive oil. The food industry is awash in falsely labeled foods, some of which could trigger allergic reactions in the consumer. Think you've had red snapper? Think again. Think you've eaten kobe beef? Highly unlikely.
Yep. Every company I ever worked for was doing something unethical. Either toward their customers/clients or toward their employees.
In 2012 a Gallup survey showed that 60% of Americans believe that American businesses are corrupt.
Me? Oh!
Never! I am pure! (off topic [ph])
But I saw what my colleagues were doing... They were cutting lots of corners to improve their budgetary performance, to please the GM. You never noticed?
So you are the pure-as-the-driven-snow type, eh?
Bully for you!
Back in reality, the owner of the companies I have worked for would never risk their capital investment by being so foolish.
Maybe you worked for bad people. That makes them bad, not the capitalism.
Not responding to any more of your silly comments. No one is talking about paying the guy cleaning the toilets the same as the CEO.
Your faith is heartwarming... but I'm sorry to tell you that Santa Claus isn't real.
I was a consultant. I worked with dozens of companies. None were "evil", but every single one did as economics dictated. Morality and law were not a consideration. The only subject was cost/risk.
This is not a criticism of capitalism. Capitalism is a tool. Humans use tools. Some tools are dangerous, requiring careful surveillance...
Your innocence is charming...
Better to be innocent than guilty of not recognizing reality.
What is labeled Kobe beef in the US is crossbred Wagyu-Angus beef. The Waygu is the same breed of cattle as Kobe beef but the regulatiuons on its rasing is much less strict. You havent eaten sole in the US if you paid less than $15.00 per pound for it.
The quality of food in the US sucks and is often tainted. I once made the mistake of buying fresh catfish from a megamart, that even my cats wouldn't eat.
Only 60%? Where the other 40% ignorant or blind? Figures or specs are fudged at every job to save a few cents.
And your jaded attitude is not.
I've been in the workforce over 40 years now. I've worked for five companies starting as an apprentice plumber/pipefitter and have never been asked to do anything unethical. I've co-owned a company the last 25+ of those years and have never intentionally done or asked an employee to do anything considered "unethical."
Now i'm not saying there isn't people and companies out there that don't do that. There absolutely is but that is not the basis of capitalism for many, many more employees and business owners. I know just as many employees and business owners who strive to do the right thing no matter what. Sure some business sectors tend to be more dishonest than others but in all businesses it comes down to character. Either an individual has the character to do the right thing or they don't
If someone is a dishonest person the "ism" won't matter. They will still do dishonest things no matter the system.
Capitalism isn't "evil" per se and trying to assign human characteristics to forms of governments like Capitalism or Socialism is a fools errand IMO.
Good morning!
I don't believe we have had the opportunity to present ourselves. I'm someone who is fairly careful about what I write... and I get upset when another member takes a whack at me in blatant ignorance of something I have very recently written. For example, I wrote " This is not a criticism of capitalism. Capitalism is a tool. Humans use tools. Some tools are dangerous, requiring careful surveillance... " just a few steps up from your post.
So... you said the same thing that I said, but you added a gratuitous insult for me! Since we don't know each other yet, I will simply use this occasion to politely ask you to read more carefully in the future.
Good Afternoon
Interesting, what did you take as an insult?
My apologies if you took it that way. It wasn't meant as an insult but rather as an observation. Your experiences have made you much more jaded than i in that regard. Actually companies who operated in less than honorable fashion were quickly eliminated as companies i wanted to work for. So i guess i was lucky to have that option every time i was looking for employment.
And the last part was not really intended for you but more of a general statement
Interesting concept.
Comment removed for context [ph] *Do not do that again. quote a removed comment that was an insult.
That's not meant as an insult, but rather as an observation.
I see sincerity is lost on you.
Noted, i won't make the mistake of offering it to you again.
But Perrie!
It wasn't meant as an insult but rather as an observation. Just like "jaded attitude" which didn't bother you.
What's the difference?
WTF?
You called me "jaded", and then doubled down saying it was an observation.
And you are offended? Wow...
You can't be this obtuse can you?
Even though i clearly stated that i didn't intend it as an insult, i still apologized if you took it that way.
Not my problem you didn't accept the sincerity of the apology.
Now your trying to say you didn't intend to insult after the fact .....without an apology for doing so?
Hilarious!
This isn't NV. Good luck with using the same tude here that you got away with using there.
Keep digging!
"I apologize for calling you jaded... It's just that I observed you to be so". This is supposed to an apology? Seriously?
Now you're calling me "obtuse". Will you next apologize, while telling saying that "it was just an observation"?
I'd use the same method to tell you what I have observed about you... but Perrie would delete my post as a violation of the CoC. Kinda like an NBA ref whistling the second foul, after not noticing the first...
I didn't call you obtuse. Are you?
And the Mods were spot on for removing your comment since it directly violated COC. Personally, i think posts like that should be left up, always have. It tends to show the true character of the person who posted it or lack thereof.
Welcome to NT! You'll fit right in. What you've done here is called "skirting", short for "skirting the CoC". It's a very vague notion, allowing the Mods to delete anything they wish... or not, if they don't.
I'm not very good at it. Perrie deletes my Comments all the time. There are some specialists, though... and you appear to be a promising up-and-comer!
I don't agree but if the Mods consider it that then they will moderate it. I've got no problem if they do as they are infinitely more fair here than most of the mods and admins were on NV. I've got no complaints.
Interestingly not everyone posting here (including myself) does so with malevolent intent. It matters not whether you agree with that or not. It's true regardless.
I long ago learned not to worry about others' "intent". Deeds are more important.
First I was "jaded" and then I was "obtuse"... but you never "intended" insult... That's kinda sorta why I don't pay any attention to "intent". You used the words. If you didn't mean them, then you might have retracted them... which you did not do...
But hey! That how lots of members behave. you'll be right at home.
I learned it this way...
listen to their lips, but pay close attention to their feet.
Cheers
Well "Bob" this topic is not about me so i suggest you give it a rest.
Well "Sparty", as long as you keep going...
What, you keep going? Hilarious!
Go ahead and get the last word now. I know that is probably important to you.
LAST WORD!!!
Wouldn't selling tickets kind of go against what they are wanting to do?
There is a certain fact that one cannot deny......There will always be the poor!
We all can't have that special something that give us the ability to rise above one's circumstances.....circumstances, perhaps, since birth. Sometimes, it is a learned brain set. Living in poor conditions, going to school without proper clothes or lunch money, being teased about your shoes and no one caring at home whether you make good grades or not. No one to give you guidance out of the lifestyle that surrounds you everyday of your life.
When it comes to formal education it should not be given to you. If you want it, then, work for it.
It Is almost impossible for a single man or woman to make it in life on a minimum wage income. Housing, power, transportation, food chew it to pieces. Healthcare? Are you kidding? That is a luxury. Dental care? A luxury. Entertainment? A luxury unless you like looking at clouds rolling by. Two jobs? Not unless one of your employers are willing to work with you on scheduling.
IMO, there is nothing out of the way with capitalism. It is the manner in which it is applied.
I got mine ....tuff chit on you ain't gonna make a better Country!
Really, relatively few people actually just make minimum wage.
In 2011, 73.9 million American workers age 16 and over were paid at hourly rates, representing 59.1 percent of all wage and salary workers. Among those paid by the hour, 1.7 million earned exactly the prevailing Federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour.
Characteristics of Minimum Wage Workers: 2011
www.bls.gov/cps/minwage2011.htm
Characteristics of Minimum Wage Workers: 2012
$10.00 per hour is minimum wage to me. You can't make it to survive!
And if you read the links, a large part of minimum wage earners live in a household with over 100k earnings per year.
minimum wage wasn't designed to let someone with low education or a lack of job skills raise a family of four on it. that was never the intent.
A household! Not a single person making it on their own. A single person cannot do it unless they live in a box!
You know, a lot of young people are thrown out of their home by parents or the family is so toxic that the youngster tries to make it on their own.
Insofar as a family of four. If both parents work that is still $20.00 per hour plus who cares for the two children? Two more to feed and clothe. But, there is strength in numbers and I will put my money on the parents with two children.
A single person could work as a bartender or server and make far more than $10 per hour.
So two adults working full time making $15 an hour make $62,400 before taxes. That's not a "design" intended for Americans with little or no education to raise a family of four, that's barely survival wages living in any cities that have adopted a $15 minimum wage. And if both parents are working full time and have kids , they need day care from birth to public school age at least which often runs $8-$10 an hr. And if they don't get health insurance included in their employment there's another $10 - 15k chunked out of their income.
I'm not sure where you're getting this "$100k earnings per year" unless you have 4 full time workers in the household in your "family of four" example, otherwise I don't see what you're talking about.
The poverty rate in the United States has not been below 10% in at least the last 60 years.
Usually it has been somewhat higher than that.
We are talking about many millions of people (Appx 40 million today). Poverty is a feature of the economic system of the United States.
Which is why we need "entitlements".
Read the links.
here:
Minimum Wage: Who Makes It? - The New York Times
We don't "need" entitlements.
Poverty rates are not tied directly to capitalism.
it is quite possible for someone to become rich without making anyone poor.
Oh, sure if you are lucky enough to land one of those jobs.
For a fact.
The rich do not make poor.
The system guarantees that there will be poor people. There is no such thing as a capitalist system without the poor.
In exchange for a system that allows wealth, the wealthy need to pay to sustain the social safety net.
I'm so glad I don't know you.
Don't you think that is a bit over the top?
Ok, maybe, we do have the richest poor.....I see what you mean.
Our poor could just camp out and rather than live in a box they could have a tent. That way they aren't homeless and can go to work everyday. Gotcha!
In what specific way does capitalism guarantee poor?
We are guaranteed poor because of work ethic, knowledge, education, circumstances, luck, smart decisions, etc. are not guaranteed.
But, in our society, people who are poor sometimes become millionaires.
In other words, capitalism creates opportunity. What people do with it varies.
name an economic system that has worked better at raising the standard of living for all.
socialism is worse by far.... have you seen Venezuelaula lately? talk about poor...
what was one of the richest countries around before they went socialist, is now broke because of socialism.
socialism is a failed ideology. you will never see socialism in the USA
capitalism will protect itself with force if need be.. trust in that... civil war anyone? ya sure that's what you want?
I can't hire enough of them.
"About 12 percent of those who would gain from an increase to $10.10 live in households with incomes above $100,000. "
I don't see that as a "large part" as you claim.
nice coinage....any silver as well?
dude..that's awesome....you eclipse me by 10 fold.
Ten percent of the people I know deserve to be poor and put little to no effort in bettering their financial situation or made dumb decisions wasting their money rather than investing it. In fact I’d say the ten percent number is much lower than it should be.
I looked at the poverty rate for the US for every year for the past 60 years. 2016 is at the top and 159 is at the bottom
I counted 47 of the 57 years when it was 12% or higher. This is baked in the cake of the economy.
mental masturbation at best... a fun chat to have over a beer, but there is zero chance of implementation.
on even your best socialist or communist day.... simply not going to happen my friends, no way, no how.
but just for fun... tell me how this will happen without people being shot for treason, jailed, left dead in the street?
however it is done... better be ready to flip not just one federal govt... but 51 govts.
if push came to shove most states will never agree to any other system and will simply leave the union
Article is very misleading.
Capitalism is dead. Murdered by Reagan and Supply Side Economics.
You can not get rid of that which no longer exists.
dead? not so much. blue collar with some college, self employed my whole life, and now retired well enough.
the question I have always wondered is why do people who claim to be so smart have a problem getting ahead with capitalism??
I retired early and am not even all that bright... so why can't these so-called intelligent liberals do what I did or even better?
Answer: they have been convinced they will fail .... so they are stuck living that failure.
I feel sorry for millennials, what we have done to them is like some weird sadistic social experiment. we should repeal the no child left behind act ASAP and start giving kids a depth of education again instead of just glancing over the surface of things and teaching them only the answers to the upcoming test.
LOL... I hear ya
I think that is one key bit to the capitalist puzzle the youngsters struggle in understanding.
working 80-100 hrs a week is a foreign concept to some but I reckoned if I wanted twice as much it was as simple as working twice as much. basically, my strategy was work 8 hrs a day to pay the monthly bills and 8 hrs a day to pay for my retirement.
the youngsters today want to be the first generation in history to serve fries at McDonalds for 8hrs a day and be able to buy a house and a car... ha, those crazy kids crack me up