You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Removing Social Constructs from Capitalism
I guess I'm curious about your list -- what constructs, to you, are necessary to remove, necessary to keep, and necessary to modify? As long as humans are on the same planet together, some have a desire to function together successfully, some have a desire to get on top while pushing everyone else down, and some desire to be alone. This list is extensive, to say the least, many of these are outdated or the source of corruption and greed (ruling party, political parties, banks, slavery) and many of them are parts of society I very much enjoy and think you do too (hospitals, schools, culture). If everything is a social construct, how do we weed out the destructive ones?
I will try to explain with schools. Schools are just buildings where the service of teaching is done. The teacher can continue to teach, but he/she becomes a owner-operator of the service. She/he can either open her own building (possibly home) or goes to the homes of the students.
Part of the broader point I am trying to make is that there is a lot of socialism that people are calling capitalism.
If you remove the socialism out of capitalism it looks very different than what people have been calling capitalism.
The only way I know how to disassemble social constructs is to remove(divest) authority in them, and not fund them.
Excellent questions.
You think teachers across the states want to become owner-operators of their own service? That puts a lot on them, most are not willing to take that on. We all know teachers don't get paid enough, but if you take away the school system, they'd be hard pressed to find pay at all. Additionally, school curriculum is important for getting kids a somewhat balanced education. Otherwise, we'd have 100% private teachers teaching what they want, which gets real ugly real quick. There's already too many teachers teaching kids that evolution isn't real and that the world is 2000 years old, teaching a bastardized version of American history, etc... I say we take that socialism you mentioned and re-purpose some of our gluttonous defense funds to pay teachers what they deserve, and increase the quality of life for kids across the board.
If the social constructs are removed there is no defense fund. That wealth stays locally, to where people can afford to give teachers a lot of wealth for the service they provide.
Plus what the states waste in education would be gone. So all the wealth wasted in inefficiencies would go directly to the teachers. There would be absolutely no loss between the person providing the teacher wealth, and the teacher receiving that wealth.
Curriculum may be important, so why would you ever trust a social construct to get that right?(the social construct may intentionally have motive to get it wrong) (can we mention the social construct of religions mixing in the social construct of education, that's like a whole post right there)
Subject matter and specialization isn't a great thing when distributed with a wide brush. Why not have teachers more oriented in what they teach?
Allow the teaching value provided to determine the wealth they receive. It has a direct incentive for the teachers to be good at what they do. I certainly wouldn't give wealth to some of the teachers I have seen, yet wealth is taken from me and given to them anyway. There is no choice. These social constructs are not voluntary if they require taxes.
It is true that owner operating isn't for everyone, but it has potential for better outcomes than when many social constructs distort what it is supposed to be doing.