Who Says Capitalism Works?

HBD Investor writes: Hbd’ers are for free markets because there is evidence for free markets. On the other hand there is almost no evidence to support socialism.

No, they like them because they are Social Darwinists and they think they won the genetic lottery. Not only that, they think everyone who lost the lottery shouldn’t even get a chance to play. Or maybe even not get a chance to live. That’s what it’s all about. All HBD’ers hate socialism because it requires people to share. HBD’ers are unbelievably selfish. They don’t want to share with even one other human being. Their motto is as Adam Smith wrote, “Everything for me, and nothing for anything else.” Capitalist fanboys who love Smith fail to note that that philosophy was also one of the most evil philosophies that exists.

You are proving every single point I make about HBD’ers in my article.

There is evidence for free markets. Yeah. Evidence that they don’t work. Look what the Chicago Boys did to Chile. Look how free market capitalism blew up the whole US economy in 2008 and took most of the world economy down with it. Love how capitalism starves to death 14 million people a year, mostly in South Asia.

There’s evidence that Communism saves lives. Stalin broke the world record for increasing life expectancy, doubling it from 1927-1953. Mao then broke Stalin’s record, doubling life expectancy in an even shorter time, 1949-1980. Where’s the evidence that free markets are good for public health or the health of any individual. How do free markets work if they don’t even give people enough food to live on? How do they work if they aren’t even able to provide shelter for all people? How do they work if they can’t even provide people with health care? Obviously in a lot of ways, free markets don’t even work at all.

20 Comments

Filed under Asia, Capitalism, Chile, Economics, Left, Marxism, Race Realism, Regional, Socialism, South America, South Asia, USA, USSR

20 responses to “Who Says Capitalism Works?

  1. Jason Y

    The are some dark sides to the Communist thing, even though they did improve life expectancy. Well, for one thing, the air, nuclear, and water pollution in Soviet Bloc and China has turned some heads. But then again, the US was quite polluted until recently, look at Pittsburgh.

  2. TJF

    To Rob:

    Who said:
    Their motto is as Adam Smith wrote, “Everything for me, and nothing for anything else.”

    I absolutely do not believe Smith wrote anything like that.. unless it is seriously taken out of context (and the quote certainly does not represent his somewhat turgid 18th century prose). Adam Smith is highly misquoted, misrepresented, or misunderstood by both capitalists and to some extent socialists. As with many 18th century thinkers, he was steeped in the ethics of Christianity as well as Greek and Roman philosophy. Anyone reading The Wealth of Nations should read a book preceding it:

    “The Theory of Moral Sentiments”

    Take a look at the quotes I have bolded below:

    http://quod.lib.umich.edu/e/eccodemo/K111361.0001.001/1:5.2.2?rgn=div3;view=fulltext

    Tho’ his own happiness may be of more importance to him than that of all the world besides, to every other person it is of no more consequence than that of any other man. Tho’ it may be true, therefore, that every individual, in his own breast, naturally prefers himself to all mankind, yet he dares not look mankind in the face, and avow that he acts according to this principle. He feels that in this preference they can never go along with him, and that how natural soever it may be to him, it must always appear excessive and extravagant to them. When he views himself in the light in which he is conscious that others will view him, he sees that to them he is but one of the multitude in no respect better than any other in it. If he would act so as that the impartial spectator may enter into the principles of his conduct, which is what of all things he has the greatest desire to do, he must, upon this, as upon all other occasions, humble the arrogance of his self-love, and bring it down to something which other men can go along with. They will indulge it so far as to allow him to be more anxious about, and to pursue with more earnest assiduity, his own happiness.

    THERE can be no proper motive for hurting our neighbour, there can be no incitement to do evil to another, which mankind will go along with, except just indignation for evil which that other has done to us. To disturb his happiness meerly because it stands in the way of our own, to take from him what is of real use to him meerly because it may be of equal or of more use to us, or to indulge, in this manner, at the expense of other people, the natural preference which every man has for his own happiness above that of.

    Seems pretty clear that he espouses a philosophical outlook that is the opposite of what his fanboys believe.

  3. iffen

    “All HBD’ers hate socialism because it requires people to share.

    It’s hard to find an HBD’er who is not some sort of deplorable. I hope I’m one of those rare breeds. Tulio is a great example of a Black HBD’er who has not gone nuts.

    Finding Left HBD’ers is quite uncommon.”

    OK, I am quite confused. You say that you are HBD then you say that “all” HBDers hate socialism.

    Are you just giving up on the term HBD? Are going to try some other terminology?

    • He refers to himself as a Librel Race realist, the term HBD’rs refer to the typical Alt right type.

    • I’m a soft HBDer. Yes there are a few liberal, leftwing and even socialist HBD’ers, but they are as rare as four leaf clovers. Just about every one you meet is as I described.

      I think even if they start out on the Left, the HBD is like some sort of brain corrosive that destroys most leftwing views that the person has. When liberals go HBD, they almost always go full reactionary. I believe it happens quite a bit.

  4. Proud squaw

    Crushing dissidents, authoritarian principles are certainly dark sides to communism. I also doubt if free speech in the sense you mentioned would be possiblee in any of the communist countries. Life expectancy is a positive but then when one gets killed simply for taking an opposite stand them it doesn’t make any sense. Pro socialist Policies in Canada and in Scandinavia are causing lots of problem despite initial prosperity.

    • Jason Y

      I see such a world as like the Jehovah’s Witnesses, except that you once you leave or become an enemy, your not shunned, but rather are imprisoned and killed. Such tyrannical worlds are great, as with JWs as long as you go along with the program.

      Same goes for some alt-right hell that Stalin Tonks would install as government.

  5. hbd investor

    They don’t want to share with even one other human being.

    Why do we have to share? Why can’t the other human being get a job to feed himself? Most bums are bums by choice, there was even a tv program and research experiments were they offered jobs to bums and all of them turned them down.

    There is evidence for free markets. Yeah. Evidence that they don’t work. Look what the Chicago Boys did to Chile.

    The Chicago boys turned Chile into the highest GDP per capita south american state after Argentina (Argentina is a mostly white country so this is very impressive)

    Look how free market capitalism blew up the whole US economy in 2008 and took most of the world economy down with it.

    You are cherry picking, none of this is actual capitalism the 2008 crash was caused by the government and leftists who decided to force banks to lend money to minorities at super low interest rates through the Community Reinvestment Act which caused banks to pursue riskier strategies since the government was essentially forcing them to lose money

    Love how capitalism starves to death 14 million people a year, mostly in South Asia.

    Wrong capitalism is feeding the world thanks to capitalism we are producing more food than ever. Farmers are encouraged to produce as much as possible as efficiently as possible while preserving resources for the future to get as much capital as possible.

    Stalin broke the world record for increasing life expectancy, doubling it from 1927-1953. Mao then broke Stalin’s record, doubling life expectancy in an even shorter time, 1949-1980.

    Every country improved after WW2 see image below

    Where’s the evidence that free markets are good for public health or the health of any individual

    Without the free market, most of your drugs and medical devices would not exist. Fact almost all biotech and drug innovations and research all come from the USA

    And the cuban medical system is a nightmare, look at some of the pictures of the hospitals. None of their hospitals even have modern medical equipment
    http://www.therealcuba.com/?page_id=77

    How do free markets work if they don’t even give people enough food to live on?

    Free markets work so well the so much food is produced that people throw away tons a year, and our homeless and poor are all overweight

    the USA is one of the most capitalistic countries

    How do they work if they aren’t even able to provide shelter for all people? >How do they work if they can’t even provide people with health care?

    You are putting the apple before the horse

    Economic growth is tied to TECHNOLOGY

    There is no such thing as a Technologically advanced country that is poor

    There are many poor people in wealthy countries, but that is because they have much higher populations and population densities. Many of the poor live very well in the USA. A Macdonalds worker could save up for a couple of years and then move to the filipines and live like a king.

    The key thing is that once the country can become technologically advanced people’s lives improve, the rising tide lifts all.

    It has not yet been demonstrated that people will innovate under a socialist system. Europe lags significantly behind the USA and East Asia in innovation arguably the most capitalistic countries and they are also the most technologically advanced countries!

  6. hbd investor

    http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2012/06/201265115527622647.html

    A great writeup healthcare in cuba sucks, you get a doctor but he is barely trained and has almost no equipment

  7. Ultra Cool

    Capitalism sucks because it’s based on selfishness, socialism rocks because it’s based on altruism.

  8. Erik Sieven

    Maybe many HBD people don´t like socialism because in their eyes it increasingly means supporting blacks and single mothers. Thus socialism is in their point of view used to make the position of the partner market for women and black males better, and make the situation for white and asian males worse. HBD people tend to such a view point because they obverse differences between different groups of people, concerning productivity on the one side and attractivity on the other side.
    The old, 20th century socialm of course had nothing to do with that kind of stuff. So there again is the difference between Alt Left and New (mainstream) Left as far as I understand it.

    • Or, the hbd folks are not fond of socialism due to the fact that a vast majority of are social programs have been abysmal failures. The list is vast. If those failures include a large amount of black folks, so be it.

      • Hello K. I., you’re not allowed to say that the vast majority of our social programs have been abysmal failures. It’s not even true anyway. In fact, they’ve been very successful. You’re not allowed to criticize the safety net on here – that’s called advocating rightwing economics, and that’s not allowed. This is a socialist blog, and that is one of the things that I ban on.

  9. Sam J.

    Capitalism does work quite frequently. It’s just that it always turns to monopoly and crony Capitalism which sucks and loots the people of the country.

    Communism is even worse as since it only has one seat of power the psychopaths rapidly move up into that position and abuse everyone.

    I think the best system is where you have capitalism but you DIRECTLY subsidize the citizens with cash. A living wage. In order to hold down the number of bastards you don’t subsidize for children of unwed mothers and they have to take birth control if their children are funded. This would incentivize people to form couples as two peoples living wage would be easier to live on. Also in divorce Women can never get any of the living wage portion of Men. This would end the benefit from divorce where Women can get paid and do nothing.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s