[jfman]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

There's a lot of disjoint packed into that paragraph, jfman.

That is pure opinion on your part. Capitalism is a natural consequence of human nature. If it is in "existential crisis", were it to fall, what would replace it?

With millions of people sacrificed on the altar of capitalism at the hands of Coronavirus I think people would take stock. Not just poor people, and not just foreign people in distant wars, but including reasonably well off white people in countries like the UK and USA.

I think it'd be inevitable that people would rethink the role and purpose of the state. We are £2 trillion in debt (before Coronavirus) the obvious question being who to? Where did it go? Who did it benefit?

There's obviously a role for capitalism - as you say the natural profit making motive, and innovation through competition - are human instincts. However little regulated and barely controlled capitalism - that let's people like Richard Branson sue the NHS for millions then come cap in hand for a £4.8bn loan is simply unsustainable. If his airline fails it fails - the state should employ it's staff and take over it's routes.

The game is presently rigged in his favour - he extracts all the profits in the good times and gets bailed out in the bad times.

Are you sure? Doesn't the public understand that big businesses are big employers? Would the public associate that with the braod brush statement you've made about small businesses?

I fear that part of your post is driven by antithesis to a particular economic system rather than on facts and rationalism.

The aggregate of small businesses employ many people too Seph. 5.6 million people work for businesses employing fewer than 9 people. That's a lot of tax revenue end to end throughout supply chains.

That's people up and down the country in villages, towns and cities spending money.

Virgin Atlantic on the other hand employ 9,000 people worldwide. The big banks - tens of thousands each.

I've no issues with capitalism in markets that have perfect competition as understood in economics. None whatsoever.

---------- Post added at 21:49 ---------- Previous post was at 21:46 ----------

Originally Posted by Pierre

Capitalism is purely human nature. The urge to better oneself, provide for your family and give your offspring a better life than you had.

Socialism is a nice to have, insofar as if you have enough you may feel inclined to not take so much and share - but only after you have taken care of you and yours first.

The toilet roll debacle and unnecessary panic buying a few weeks only highlighted the fundamental base human traits.

I don’t believe there was any more toilet rolls available in socialist strong hold areas.

And in markets that don't have genuine competition and/or adequate regulation it's simply price gouging consumers. In others it is extracting profits by pushing your creditors and debtors as far apart as you can then failing leaving the taxpayer to pick up the tab.

That's not some sincere noble gesture to try and better one's self and provide for your family.