Comments by "Jason Dashney" (@jasondashney) on "Capitalism is good. Let me explain." video.

Credit where credit is due.
18
Exactly. I've never encountered a free-market capitalist who didn't use every form of patent protection and lawyer and lobbying possible. Not only do they use these things, they think they should exist. I think it's fine to use them even if you don't like them if you have no choice because everyone else is using them, but you never ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever see a hard-core free-market capitalist lobbying to get rid of copyrights and patents and exclusivity contracts, etc. They all want things enforced by the courts for protection.
3
It depends on what your definition of a small return. A capitalist mega corporation like Procter and Gamble, or Exxonmobil earn a profit margin that is much smaller than you might think. They make tremendous amounts of money because of sheer volume. The stock market is the same. Stocks on average appreciate between five and 10% annually. If you could figure out how to make a 50% profit year after year, you would be the richest person in the history of the world in extremely short order. The bond market is much larger than the stock market and bonds traditionally don't even come close to a 10% return. There are tons of giant corporations that profit 5% or less. That means the company has to spend more than nine dollars to make one dollar. I would say that qualifies as a small return.
2
Interesting. Well, then you are much closer to being a literal free-market capitalist than the vast majority of those who make that claim. I'm curious though, why do you not like patents yet you do like copyright for writers and photographers? Is it because of an individual versus a business thing? @StarMan_2018
1
That's how they got 90 year patents in America? That's so gross. Find me a system and I'll show you a way to beat it. @StarMan_2018
1
It's a sad state of affairs that we are now in an environment where you have to have a little disclaimer like "now let me explain" to say that you like the system that has delivered more people out of poverty and increase the standard of living of everybody more than anything, that's ever been tried by a country mile.
1
@utoobeizkaka2737 "rare earth and precious metals, phosphorous, helium. Things that you can't just innovate around. " If you figure out a way to perform the same task without the rare, earth, minerals, etc., then you've solved the problem with innovation. There are countless examples of people figuring out simpler methods for performing the same function. "We just need to produce what we need and screw growing the wealth of greedy rich people." It's interesting to read that comment which was written on an extremely complicated and unnecessary piece of communications technology that contains rare earths and plastics and all sorts of things that your comment would suggest would mean we wouldn't even produce in the first place. What does it mean to produce what we need? We only need food, shelter and clothing and we can get that living in the forest or in a cave. But we also "need" healthcare in medice so now where does that leave us? This is not something that can be distilled down to a bumper sticker. It's an extremely nuanced issue, full of perspectives and hypocrisy.
1
@VeteranVandal every single example where it's been tried in every corner of the globe. Misery and industrial level, and death that can only make capitalism blush. The standard of living in communist countries has never even come within a country mile to the standard of living in capitalist countries. End of story. It's radical because it requires extreme authoritarianism, and literally always ends up with its citizens desperately envying the capitalist countries.
1