Quote:
|
Originally Posted by milo
I'm not i just disagree with it, hes not going to change his opinion and neither am i.
|
I wouldn't be that fatalistic dude, I'm more interested in hearing the arguments. I oppose private ownership of property as a general rule, but as to whether Capitalism V1 is better than Capitalism V2 I'm pretty agnostic so convince me.
Quote:
|
Theres only so many ways i can put it, but a lack of ability for the wealth to be 'shared' and ultimately 'traded' and speculated upon.
|
There is no lack of
ability to share wealth in any enterprise. Don't be silly by suggesting that there isn't.
As for the trading/speculating - well that is a difference, but as I say, there are many other methods of speculation available (and will be so many more). I speculated on the Dow Jones the other day, but of course I owned not a jot of it.
Quote:
|
To me had those transformations not occured and had everything remained private we would have been poorer today and the wealth would have been more unevenly distributed.
|
Well given that large swathes of the economy were nationalised I don't think it's sensible to say "if everything had remained private" since we're in a completely different parallel universe then. But I'm not sure that's relevent.
Saying "regressing fifty years" (or whatever) is a useful rhetorical device, but isn't really straight forward. If we reintroduced chattel slavery we wouldn't be travelling 170 years back in time, we would have an entirely different scenario which would be appalling but would not mean Britain (or anywhere) suddenly became like the 1850's.