[dmitriid]

The data you linked isn't about unrestricted unlimited capitalism. Everywhere "capitalism" lifted people out of poverty you'll find it only happened after limitations, checks and balances, and regulations were placed on capitalism.

[CryptoPunk]

If you read the articles linked, and look at the other studies done on global development, you see that the places that did the most to lift those limitations and regulations, that disrupt the natural checks and balances of the market, saw the greatest improvement in quality of life.

That is why there is a strong and persistent negative correlation between government spending, as a percentage of GDP, and the rate of economic growth:

https://web.archive.org/web/20170821004405/http://ime.bg/upl...

The government limiting its role to vigorously defending people's security of person and private property, and enforcing contracts, is the best way we have come up with to facilitate economic development.

[dmitriid]

You're confusing authoritarian governments with limitations on capitalism.

We already had unlimited capitalism. It had child labor, literally poison as "medicine" [1] etc.

In modern times unrestricted capitalism keeps doing the same: from sweatshops all over Asia to things like Nestle literally dissuading mothers from breastfeeding in developing nations which led to widespread problems like, you know, children dying.

[1] See, for example, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_(horse)?wprov=sfti1

[CryptoPunk]

>>You're confusing authoritarian governments with limitations on capitalism.

I am not. Economists specifically cite the liberalization of the economy as a major contributor to the decline in poverty, through its positive impact on the rate of economic development.

>>In modern times unrestricted capitalism keeps doing the same: from sweatshops all over Asia

Before sweatshops, the quality of life in those countries was much worse.

>>Nestle literally dissuading mothers from breastfeeding in developing nations which led to widespread problems like, you know, children dying

That can be dealt with perfectly well within the rules of capitalism, which encourages prosecution of fraud, and impartial civil courts where bad actors can be sued.

This is also an anecdote, and says nothing about the broader impact on capitalism, which is captured by statistical evidence like the rate of poverty.

[dmitriid]

> I am not. Economists specifically cite the liberalization of the economy

Yes. Yes, you are. There's nothing more liberal than no regulations and no state involvement at all, see 19th century as an example. Nothing more liberal than the government turning a blind eye on child labor, or poisoning water supplies, or company stores, or literally all the examples of unfettered capitalism we literally had many, many, many examples of in history.

> That can be dealt with perfectly well within the rules of capitalism, which encourages prosecution of fraud, and impartial civil courts where bad actors can be sued.

Right... Who exactly is going to "prosecute fraud" and where will those "impartial civil courts" appear from? That never happened to child labor until it was expressly forbidden by the government, for example.

What incentive does capitalism have to "prosecute fraud" and have "impartial courts"? Literally none.

Example from very recent times:

"From 1952 to 1966, Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) dumped about 370 million gallons (1,400 million litres) of chromium-tainted wastewater into unlined wastewater spreading ponds around the town of Hinkley, California, located in the Mojave Desert about 120 miles north-northeast of Los Angeles... Although the dumping took place from 1952 to 1966 (when Hinkley was a remote desert community with one school and a general store),[1] PG&E did not inform the local water board about the contamination until December 7, 1987"

This is capitalism. They did that. Where were all the capitalists with "fraud prosecution" and "independent civil courts"? I mean, capitalism is everywhere around the world in all its forms. We have a well-documented history of capitalism. The claims you make should be validated, right?

The total global surveillance and all the issues we have with Facebook and Twitter are also the result of capitalism, where are the "market instruments" that surely should've come into play by now?

> says nothing about the broader impact on capitalism, which is captured by statistical evidence like the rate of poverty.

What was that quote about lies and statistics? Statistics show:

- the shift from totalitarian states to democracies

- the spread of widely available healthcare and education (note: neither are provided by capitalism)

And then it's capitalism, but again: not unrestricted capitalism.

And to remind ourselves that we're in a topic on crypto, crypto is about unrestricted capitalism which is "you pay at the company store with the tokens barely provided to you by the company". And we all (well, some of us) know, how well that works.