[Daz1]

Because capitalism is the only system which incentives continual innovation through market competition, removes non-competitive organisations which fail to meet consumer demand from the market, and empowers consumers to make choices which are in their self-determined best interest.

[rajanaccros]

> Because capitalism is the only system

This is what largely I am arguing against. I think the benefits of capitalism have been proven, but the negatives are largely brushed aside. I think this form of capitalism is dangerous (and I should have been more explicit about that in my original comment). My original comment was to get rid of publicly traded companies and remove wall street altogether. Private companies can continue to exist and compete but the profit motive to solely deliver growth and profit to public shareholders has distorted the whole system into pro-forma income sheets at the best and to outright devastation and exploitation at the worst. Private companies would be largely in check because they wouldn't grow unchecked by raising capital they don't have by going public. In so doing, they wouldn't be "in debt" (overloaded non-technical sense of debt) to shareholders. This would lead to more sustainability and less growth over everything mindset. The knock on effects I mentioned would contribute to a more just and fair system.

That said, I am not an economist, but I would like to see this world exist for future generations. And this economic system isn't it.

[Kbelicius]

> Because capitalism is the only system which incentives continual innovation through market competition

Why would a for profit company invest into basic research without a clear goal to monetizing that research while their competitor is spending that money on marketing?

[Daz1]

What is the implication of your question?

[Kbelicius]

Implication is that the claim: "Because capitalism is the only system which incentives continual innovation" has no basis in reality. By the lack of answer to the posed question I'm guessing you are starting to agree?

[Daz1]

Of course I don't agree, your question is worthless.

"Why would a for profit company invest into basic research without a clear goal to monetizing that research while their competitor is spending that money on marketing?"

The only form of R&D spend that cannot be monetised is that which fails to better meet consumer demand, which is a purposeless waste of money.

Rephrase your question so it make sense.

[Eisenstein]

I assume they are stating that we don't actually live in a pure capitalist society, or else your definition is wrong.