Funny. I read the article and couldn’t shake the feeling that this is exactly how capitalism lifts whole countries out of poverty.

▲

czbond 12 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Agree - I am an ardent capitalist, but a conscious capitalist. I believe the purpose of capitalism redirected can be used as a vehicle for massively changing economies and lives - such as in this case.

▲

r14c 12 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

What's capitalism to you?

	▲	beeflet 10 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		People buying and selling things with minimal interference from protection rackets
	▲	worik 8 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		A system based on ownership
	▲	baq 11 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		an economic system which rewards winners and tears itself apart in a winner-takes-all tragic finale without an impartial regulator/judge.

▲

griffzhowl 12 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It's not capitalism, it's technology. That can often go together with capitalism, but Russia from 1917-60 and China from 1960-2025, say, are big counter-examples. As are the many poor countries with capitalist economies. Growth in electrification, transport infrastructure, manufacturing and mechanized agriculture will grow any economy, capitalist or socialist

▲

Ray20 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> It's not capitalism, it's technology.

Seems like it's completely capitalism

> but Russia from 1917-60 and China from 1960-2025, say, are big counter-examples.

Russia and China are good examples of that.

We have Khrushchev's memoirs about how, before the communist revolution, he, as a simple worker, lived better than workers live 40 years after the revolution. That is, the period from 1917 to 1960 in the USSR was one of complete stagnation, despite all the technological progress.

And in the example of China in the second half of the 20th century, we see yet another confirmation: their standard of living was literally directly proportional to the level of implementation of capitalist mechanisms.

> As are the many poor countries with capitalist economies.

As far as I understand, there is not a single poor capitalist country. Name a single poor country where private property is reliably protected and people enjoy economic freedom. There is no such country. As soon as even the poorest country begins to protect private property and guarantee economic freedom, it becomes rich within 10 years or something.

▲

tick_tock_tick 12 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Strongly disagree, you're example is nonsensical as it's normally used to prove the exact opposite. Nearly every quality of life improvement and economic boom in China and Russia during those periods are directly tied to adopting some parts of capitalistic systems.

▲

griffzhowl 10 hours ago | parent [-]

What quality of life improvements are you thinking of that weren't based on mass electrification and mechanization of agriculture?

▲

Ray20 an hour ago | parent [-]

Those that happened in the USSR and China, no? After the start of electrification and active mechanization of agriculture, more peasants died of hunger there than in the previous 100 years (in Russia more than in the previous 200 years).

	▲	baq 6 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		At least some of them died because they weren't allowed to consume what they produced. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor

▲

manoDev 12 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Sure, capitalism has been working great for Africa since the 1700! The poverty was caused by not enough capitalism.

	▲	beeflet 10 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I find that arguments against capitalism like this are unconvincing. It is like saying that a sword is useless technology. It's directional: the pointy end goes in the other guy.