
A majority of millennials now reject capitalism - yusufp
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/04/26/a-majority-of-millennials-now-reject-capitalism-poll-shows/?utm_source=nextdraft&utm_medium=email
======
tsaprailis
I think this sums it all: ""The word 'capitalism' doesn't mean what it used
to," said Zach Lustbader, a senior at Harvard involved in conducting the poll,
which was published Monday. For those who grew up during the Cold War,
capitalism meant freedom from the Soviet Union and other totalitarian regimes.
For those who grew up more recently, capitalism has meant a financial crisis
from which the global economy still hasn't completely recovered."

~~~
tsaprailis
In my opinion Capitalism is not the perfect system, it's better than the
alternatives. That, however, doesn't mean we should not criticize and try to
amend any wrongdoings that Capitalism has evolved to have.

~~~
threesixandnine
Capitalism is perfect system. The thing is that there's no real capitalism
anywhere in the world.

~~~
aethr
There is no "perfect system" in the same way that there is no "perfect
algorithm", unless you can define the goal.

What is the best sorting algorithm? Is it the one that sorts a random list in
the shortest time? Or the one that uses the least memory? Most likely we'll
pick by balancing a few important metrics, which leaves us with "optimal". Far
from perfect.

If we're discussing Capitalism vs Socialism, instead of criticizing the
opposition for ignorance (like every comment below the WashPo story), let's
accept that different groups are optimizing for different goals. And there are
so many competing objectives: efficient distribution of wealth, national
economic growth, safety net for unlucky/disadvantaged, protecting shared
resources (environment), etc etc etc.

~~~
dkopi
Sorting arrays is such a capitalist concept. All array elements should be
treated equally. There, sorted in O(1).

------
tomp
An important distinction to keep in mind: capitalism != free market.

From the article
[http://stumblingandmumbling.typepad.com/stumbling_and_mumbli...](http://stumblingandmumbling.typepad.com/stumbling_and_mumbling/2016/01/capitalism-
vs-markets.html)

> They are, in fact, two different things: capitalism is a system of
> ownership; markets a method of exchange. Although the two have sometimes
> gone together, this need not be so. Crony capitalism in which a few
> monopolies or cartels run much of the economy gives us capitalism without
> markets. And market socialism would give us markets without capitalism*.

~~~
VMG
I'm not sure how "free" a market can be if you're not free to acquire capital.

~~~
atemerev
There is a button directly at the top of this page: "apply to S2016 YC batch".
Boom! Capital acquired.

There are other ways, too.

~~~
VMG
I agree with you. That's why I'm questioning GP's idea of "Free Markets
without Capitalism" for any reasonable definition of "Free".

------
mrob
I am in favor of socialism, and if I was forced to choose between "socialism"
and "capitalism" on a survey I would pick socialism. But this does not mean I
reject capitalism. I am generally in favor of free markets and private
property. But I want taxes on externalities (eg. pollution), and I want enough
wealth redistribution to prevent the kind of extreme inequality we see in
America and similar countries. Countries generally considered capitalist
already have some taxation and wealth redistribution. The question of
"capitalist" as the article calls it vs. "socialist" is a matter of degree,
not a binary choice. I think we should move further towards the socialist
side, but that does not mean I want a centrally planned economy and everybody
to have exactly the same wealth.

------
return0
Don't be quick to dismiss them as ignorants. Just looking at the markets the
past few years, how they are and how they react, it doesn't seem like
capitalism is trustworthy. There is no direction and often no reason behind
it. If capitalism is a means to achieve national interests, it's not clear
whose interests it serves anymore, it's too globalized.

~~~
atemerev
Capitalism serves the interests of all market participants, including general
public. As every consumer-faced business owner knows, rich and well-developed
middle class is absolutely necessary for good sales and healthy profits.

"National interests" don't care about public welfare. They only care about
outcompeting other nation states, both in wartime and peacetime. Public
interests are routinely sacrificed by governments for the sake of such
competition.

~~~
ethanbond
So what do you think dissolved the rich and well-developed middle class that
millennials never saw?

~~~
atemerev
Middle class is currently far from being dissolved. Jobs are still there,
salaries are paid, taxes are collected.

As for "what caused the crisis of jobs and industrial society", the answer is
of course automation (this is one thing where Marx was right). The full-blown
crisis was imminent 100 years ago (which is why socialist regimes appeared),
but it was delayed by two world wars (there are no unemployed in wartime), the
Cold war, and rise of the clerks / bureaucracy.

Socialism was Marx's answer to the idea of automation of production, but it
didn't work out 100 years ago. It will not work now as well. We have to think
of something new.

------
cmdkeen
A man who has not been a socialist before 25 has no heart. If he remains one
after 25 he has no head. — King Oscar II of Sweden

Whilst that's a variant of an older quote there is generally an expectation
that 19/20 year olds are going to be more revolutionary than their elders. As
a 30 year old who grew up during the 90s capitalism had vanquished communism
and was rapidly improving quality of life around the world. Economic growth
was assumed and student radicalism went through one of its quieter patches and
began to focus much more on equalities and access rather than economic issues.

Today's youth are perhaps returning back to a more traditional model of
rebellion against their parents. Be it the 1930s elite becoming communist at
Cambridge, French students in the 60s or US students in 1970.

~~~
ethanbond
Alternatively, a rebellion against a system that screwed our parents (loss of
labor jobs, mortgage crises) and is now screwing us (student loans, mass youth
unemployment, climate change).

Capitalism did a lot of good and then in order to really juice it for
everything it had, we let it run wild. Now we're seeing the pendulum swing
back. So we agree there, but I don't think it's a matter of youthful
rebellion. It's the only logical stance for our generation to take.

------
ageofwant
Corporate feudalism has ruined capitalism.

In a surreal turn of events the east coast of communist China has the
strongest "pure" form of capitalism currently in existence. This has a lot to
do with their scant regard of imaginary property, what westerners insist on
calling "intellectual property". Capitalism only work when information flows
freely. When people can make decisions based on facts. This cannot happen when
information is hoarded as a so called competitive advantage, not in the long
run anyway, not any more. Ad to this the degree of rent-taking on all levels
and its clear that capitalism as we know it a spent vein.

------
dnautics
"By a continuing process of inflation, governments can confiscate, secretly
and unobserved, an important part of the wealth of their citizens. By this
method they not only confiscate, but they confiscate arbitrarily; and, while
the process impoverishes many, it actually enriches some. The sight of this
arbitrary rearrangement of riches strikes not only at security, but at
confidence in the equity of the existing distribution of wealth. Those to whom
the system brings windfalls, beyond their deserts and even beyond their
expectations or desires, become 'profiteers,' who are the object of the hatred
of the bourgeoisie, whom the inflationism has impoverished, not less than of
the proletariat. As the inflation proceeds and the real value of the currency
fluctuates wildly from month to month, all permanent relations between debtors
and creditors, which form the ultimate foundation of capitalism, become so
utterly disordered as to be almost meaningless; and the process of wealth-
getting degenerates into a gamble and a lottery." -Keynes

Ironically it is (a distorted version of) Keynesian economics that is used to
justify inflationism as public policy

Schumpeter would add, the middle class will then reject capitalism (presumably
instead of placing the blame where it truly ought to lie).

~~~
bainsfather
We have very low inflation.

~~~
dnautics
It's low, but it's "continuing".

------
tomelders
Capitalism has become an umbrella term for fraud, tax avoidance and
corruption.

~~~
atemerev
In Panama Papers leak, who were the fraudsters, tax cheaters and generally
corrupt persons? Hint: not the capitalist business owners.

------
dkopi
Capitalism Sucks!

\- Sent from my iphone

~~~
rabbyte
Comcast Sucks!

\- Sent from Comcast

~~~
dkopi
Sure, we could all benefit from more broadband competition (and less
regulatory barriers to entry from local governments). But would you really
prefer the alternative of governments providing internet services instead?

~~~
Brybry
In some cities/towns/regions, yes, I would.

Municipal ISPs work just fine. Governments already provide (or contract with
private businesses to provide) mail, electricity, water, sewage, garbage
collection, roads, etc.

In an area that already has adequate service competition and coverage I don't
see any reason they would want to run a municipal ISP. But state-wide laws
that inhibit municipal ISPs, in order to protect the current ISP duopoly
status quo, don't make sense either.

It's not like it's something that requires new taxes to run. And many
utilities already have to run their own networks anyway.

------
jensen123
Instead of looking at capitalism vs. socialism, I think it would make more
sense to look at free markets vs. unfree markets. Many businesses will lobby
politicians for laws and regulations to protect themselves against
competition, for subsidies, for special tax deductions etc. Private banks
cooperate with the government in order to create fiat money, which primarily
benefit those who are already rich etc.

You can certainly have capitalism and an unfree market at the same time. Guess
that's called crony capitalism. It's a very different beast from a free
market.

------
k__
Where do we really have (free market) capitalism in the world?

I once read something about how traffic works best when 100% regulated or 0%
regulated. Everything in the middle is sub-optimal. That's what we seeing with
capitalism at the moment. Everything is half-regulated. There are many people
who got a big part of the global wealth and many of them inherited it from
people that had it before the world switched away from kings and queens.

------
mtgx
They reject capitalism because capitalism has been turned into "crony
capitalism". They hate big corporations, because big corporations go out and
buy politicians who then pass favorable laws only for those corporations, but
not _necessarily_ favorable to the people as well.

If this didn't happen so _pervasively_ I don't think millennials would be that
mad about capitalism. To fix this, bring back real democracy in the US (and I
mean that as a generic "People's voice must be heard" term, not as direct
democracy or mob rule, as many often misconstrue such comments).

Relevant:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5tu32CCA_Ig](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5tu32CCA_Ig)

~~~
WalterSear
If free market capitalism doesn't devolve into an oligarchy, it was never
really free market capitalism.

------
kristofferR
"Only a Sith deals in absolutes."

Seriously, this is stupid. It's a poll about words, not really about politics.

I'm sure almost all would agree that either complete capitalism or complete
socialism would be bad. Everyone actually agrees that there needs to be a
balance.

------
informatimago
One word that is conspicuously absent from this articles and the comments so
far, is "SCARCITY". Both socialism and capitalism are systems designed to deal
with scarcity (and often, to generate it as well, since as systems, (and the
stake holders in those systems), they benefit from scarcity.

The problem we have now is to establish a new system (or systems), to deal
with abondance, or at least greatly reduced scarcity. If the stakeholders of
the old systems don't prevent us, eg. by declaring a very destructive WWIII.

~~~
bad_user
Communism isn't based on scarcity. That's actually the whole point of
communism.

WWIII, really?

------
moon_of_moon
q: "do you support capitalism"

a: "not in the way it treats engineers as 'resources', and cronies, friends
and relatives as 'management' as but in principal yes"

q: "i need a yes/no answer"

a: ".."

q: "so i'm putting down no"

a: "whatever".

fun fact: If the fortune 500 were a country it would have the second largest
GDP in the world.

Most of you here reject or would like to run away from that institutional form
of capitalism anyway to a good startup.

------
carsongross
And why shouldn't they? Capitalism, as we have it, has given them a huge
amount of debt right out of school, impossibly expensive housing, declining
real wages, unemployment-hidden-as-not-seeking-work, almost non-existent
family formation and backbreaking healthcare costs.

I'm an instinctive libertarian, but how can you look at the current state of
affairs and expect anything else?

------
trhway
that is what young people do. 99 years ago they rejected capitalism in my old
country. ~70 years ago - in China, and 20 years later during Cultural
Revolution the next generation of young people in China doubled down on that
rejection sending the first generation into re-education camps... "Mistakes of
youth" :)

US version of the same i guess is "If You Are Not a Liberal at 25, You Have No
Heart. If You Are Not a Conservative at 35 You Have No Brain"

Personally, at 43, born and grown in socialist USSR, having lived through
transition to wild capitalism in 199x in Russia, and living in US for 16+
years, i'd rephrase Churchill - "capitalism is the worst economical system,
except for all the others".

~~~
kuschku
Capitalism as it’s implemented in the US, or Stalinism and Maoism as
implemented in Mao’s China or the USSR are not the solution, sure.

But the answer has to be a balance – one which Social Democracies have shown
to be quite stable.

~~~
trhway
oh yes! i specifically mentioned wild capitalism of 199x in Russia which i
immigrated from. Though it isn't about balance as a goal or a tool. It is just
that the human civilization has learned through direct experience that
capitalism is the most productive system while it most glaring deficiencies
can be corrected [and those corrections happen to actually increase the
productivity of the system] by government enforcing the rules to manage
tragedies of commons and providing the things like education/medicine/welfare.

------
websitescenes
Capitalism killed democracy and now technology is killing capitalism. Once
technology is fully embraced, capitalism will seem archaic and cumbersome. In
capitalism money rules. In democratic socialism utility rules. Take your pic.

------
whazor
The benefit of switching between systems is that power will be redistributed.
The current problem is that organisations who previously offered superior
value, are now abusing their position.

------
colincarter41
Is it true? I have come across many articles that most of the millennials are
focus on earning and career growth.

------
rtehfm
Washington Post also published an article about how millennials prefer
socialism until they get jobs and it comes out of their pocket.

[https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/in-
theory/wp/2016/03/24/...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/in-
theory/wp/2016/03/24/millennials-like-socialism-until-they-get-jobs/)

------
jdimov9
You can also reject sunlight if you want to. Guess who you're screwing up?

------
kome
I may like the market (not always), but I see no reason to like capitalists...

------
rawTruthHurts
They reject it in their 20's, they'll embrace it in their forties.

Nothing to see here.

------
vegancap
A majority of millennial's don't really know what capitalism is.

~~~
qwenda
They also do not know, what socialism is.

~~~
return0
Trying to sell the black/white view of capitalism/communism to millenials
proves to be a hard sell. People travel, they see social democracies in europe
and elsewhere and begin to doubt capitalism. I think american media is
adapting very slowly to the underlying realities behind the rise of Bernie
sanders.

~~~
ptr
Are you talking about the social democracies of Northern Europe? They wouldn't
be possible without capitalism.

~~~
ethanbond
Nor without socialism. There are no millennials advocating USSR style
communism. They're advocating a move away from unbridled '00s capitalism.

~~~
jazzyk
What "unbridled '00 capitalism"? More like statist, crony-capitalism
intertwined with kleptocracy.

~~~
ethanbond
So capitalism is supposed to exist in a vacuum in which it won't corrupt the
government around it?

~~~
jazzyk
The government should not be involved in the market in the first place , other
than ensuring fair play (through simple, enforceable regulations, primarily to
ensure transparency and prevent monopolies/duopolies and). No government
bailouts for anybody. No corporate "lobbyists". Etc.

