you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 11 points 2 days ago (4 children)

so, not capitalism, because it can't compete?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] -5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

    That's not how that works.

    Capitalism does not require universal free trade. That's not viable under any system.

    Edit:

    capitalism/kăp′ĭ-tl-ĭz″əm/

    noun

    An economic system in which the means of production and distribution are privately or corporately owned and development occurs through the accumulation and reinvestment of profits gained in a free market.

    An economic system based on predominantly private (individual or corporate) investment in and ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange of goods and wealth; contrasted with socialism or especially communism, in which the state has the predominant role in the economy. Similar: capitalist economy

    A socio-economic system based on private property rights, including the private ownership of resources or capital, with economic decisions made largely through the operation of a market unregulated by the state.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 1 day ago (2 children)

    Capitalism assumes that everyone can compete and the best and cheapest product wins. Everything else are regulations we invented to keep capitalism in check, since its a pretty self destructive system.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 1 day ago (1 child)

    Within borders it does. Internationally, no.

    People can downvote with their emotions all they want. Doesn't make you right.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 day ago

    Your own explanation of the word works against you.

    A socio-economic system based on private property rights, including the private ownership of resources or capital, with economic decisions made largely through the operation of a market unregulated by the state.

    What exactly counts as a market has changed over the last few centuries due to the industrialisation and globalisation, but by now with all the trade agreements and the ease of access, its fair to say that we have a global market.

    Tariffs as a form to counter the heavy subsidization that China has within its car market could still be considered pure capitalism, but even then their cars would be 50% cheaper than EU/US models. Everything on top of that is blatant market manipulation done by countries or groups of interest (EU) to keep their domestic market relevant in a system that's fundamentally designed to do the opposite.

    Now that doesn't exactly mean that these regulations are a bad thing, I don't think we should give Chinese companies sole control over the global market just cause they have cheap labor. But it does show that capitalism is a failing system that needs increasingly more guardrails the bigger the market gets.

  • source
  • parent