For the thousandth time - you're describing an ideal capitalism which is not possible. Just like an ideal communism is not. If they were both systems would work.
No we are describing capitalism that until the 1920's and the interference of progressives in the market, was very real, and very possible. It was and is the socialistic-elements (things normally alien to capitalism) that poison/destroy free market economies, as theu do in all markets in ALL economic systems socialistic elements are introduced into. Socialistic elements will/do destroy capitalist economies and enable cronyism (a hallmark of socialism, and especially of hybrid socialist/capitalist systems - a la China). Socialism's inherent nature is that of corruption, and is largely why communism fails (among many, many other reasons).
If you keep government/"public" ownership (socialism) out of capitalism; than Capitalism has, does, and continues to be the system that brings greatest amount of prosperity & innovation to the greatest amount of the population. The cost of freedom is that some will fail. But they can also try again thanks to these same freedoms.
You cannot have social freedom without economic freedom. This is an undeniable fact.
I would also posit you cannot have "public" control or ownership of any part of the economy, without having horrible corruption in that segment of the economy.
The governments role in free market capitalism was to prevent trusts/monopolies from acting to stifle competition. Such as how the system largely was before amending the constitution to allow a federal income tax, and before FDR used court-stacking to blackmail the Supreme Court into reinterpreting interstate-commerce to mean ANYTHING (after they first ruled against him), we indeed had a very sincere capitalist society in the USA.
The progressives and socialists of the early 20th century sowed the seeds of the corruption we see today. They likely would not have been able to do this without one other horrible ammendment: the 17th ammendment.
Senators are no longer beholden to the states interest, but more so to the populace via promises towards their self-interest. This dissolution of states-power and republicanism via the 17th's appeal towards mob-control democracy has also destroyed much of the separation of state and federal power that enabled us to have a thriving capitalistic system. The founders should have made so that the tenants of our republic, such as thr state's legislatures choosing the senators, not the mob, could never he destroyed via amendment. The sins of the founders is that they faiped to protect the greatness that is/was the constitution and the original bill of rights. Granting more freedoms via ammendments was fine and an acceptable thing but destroying the foundations of system of republicanism, via amendments, should never have been possible.
The creation of Prohibition, the federal Income tax, and the 17th ammendments enablement of mob-rule should all never have been possible. That is one failing our system encountered that enabled creeping socialism to embed itself, like a parasite, within our economy/government - and like an unchecked parasite in the wrong host, it will grow and grow until its inherent corruption and bloat destroys our system.
Can you admit that there have been many many failures in the application of progressive ideology? If you cannot, then there is really no point in arguing. And no, capitalism is not perfect.
But if you prefer free people to domesticated ones, the choice is clear and progressivism will fail then, without force.
You're making the mistake of most Americans: you're confusing capitalism, an economic system, with "freedom," the outcome of a political system. We have been taught and brainwashed to confuse economics with politics. They aren't the same. You CAN have capitalism with totalitarianism. It's been done before.
For the thousandth time - you're describing an ideal capitalism which is not possible. Just like an ideal communism is not. If they were both systems would work.
No we are describing capitalism that until the 1920's and the interference of progressives in the market, was very real, and very possible. It was and is the socialistic-elements (things normally alien to capitalism) that poison/destroy free market economies, as theu do in all markets in ALL economic systems socialistic elements are introduced into. Socialistic elements will/do destroy capitalist economies and enable cronyism (a hallmark of socialism, and especially of hybrid socialist/capitalist systems - a la China). Socialism's inherent nature is that of corruption, and is largely why communism fails (among many, many other reasons).
If you keep government/"public" ownership (socialism) out of capitalism; than Capitalism has, does, and continues to be the system that brings greatest amount of prosperity & innovation to the greatest amount of the population. The cost of freedom is that some will fail. But they can also try again thanks to these same freedoms.
You cannot have social freedom without economic freedom. This is an undeniable fact.
I would also posit you cannot have "public" control or ownership of any part of the economy, without having horrible corruption in that segment of the economy.
The governments role in free market capitalism was to prevent trusts/monopolies from acting to stifle competition. Such as how the system largely was before amending the constitution to allow a federal income tax, and before FDR used court-stacking to blackmail the Supreme Court into reinterpreting interstate-commerce to mean ANYTHING (after they first ruled against him), we indeed had a very sincere capitalist society in the USA.
The progressives and socialists of the early 20th century sowed the seeds of the corruption we see today. They likely would not have been able to do this without one other horrible ammendment: the 17th ammendment.
Senators are no longer beholden to the states interest, but more so to the populace via promises towards their self-interest. This dissolution of states-power and republicanism via the 17th's appeal towards mob-control democracy has also destroyed much of the separation of state and federal power that enabled us to have a thriving capitalistic system. The founders should have made so that the tenants of our republic, such as thr state's legislatures choosing the senators, not the mob, could never he destroyed via amendment. The sins of the founders is that they faiped to protect the greatness that is/was the constitution and the original bill of rights. Granting more freedoms via ammendments was fine and an acceptable thing but destroying the foundations of system of republicanism, via amendments, should never have been possible.
The creation of Prohibition, the federal Income tax, and the 17th ammendments enablement of mob-rule should all never have been possible. That is one failing our system encountered that enabled creeping socialism to embed itself, like a parasite, within our economy/government - and like an unchecked parasite in the wrong host, it will grow and grow until its inherent corruption and bloat destroys our system.
Oh, right, it was those "dirty progressives" who are to blame for all of the ills of our otherwise perfect world!
Can you admit that there have been many many failures in the application of progressive ideology? If you cannot, then there is really no point in arguing. And no, capitalism is not perfect.
But if you prefer free people to domesticated ones, the choice is clear and progressivism will fail then, without force.
You're making the mistake of most Americans: you're confusing capitalism, an economic system, with "freedom," the outcome of a political system. We have been taught and brainwashed to confuse economics with politics. They aren't the same. You CAN have capitalism with totalitarianism. It's been done before.
Where was that done?
Where was communism and "freedom" done together?