{"ops":[{"insert":"Hi Kathy,\n\nIt is a pleasure to read your thoughtful comments, especially the way you give what you consider both positive and negative effects of capitalism.\n\nSomething that became clear to me from reading your comments (and those of Bruce below) is that there was a flaw in the content of the podcast itself. Neither Linda or I made clear what we meant by capitalism. That's more serious in my case because I've found in my teaching that people have wildly different concepts of what capitalism is.\n\nA central part of capitalism is that people can make money not through their work or their contributions to society, but through their "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"capital"},{"insert":"--the money they have invested in businesses. Thus, in a capitalist system you can \"earn\" money--dividends--simply by buying a share of stock in a corporation. Your money itself earns you money. Similarly, in a capitalist society you can make a profit on a business you own. In a non-capitalist society (socialism or communism) you don't earn a profit, but you do earn a salary, it can be high or low or anywhere in between, depending on what you do. Think of it: if you own enough shares in a corporation that's successful, you can play golf all day, not do a day's work, and still \"earn\" an unlimited amount of money.\n\nIncome tax is in fact an "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"anti-capitalist"},{"insert":" law. It was passed in the teeth of opposition from corporations. Capitalists are still strongly opposed to it. \n\nI like the way you use experiential evidence as part of your response: your time living in a communist country. I too have experienced the lack of a work ethic in communist countries (coupled with a high degree of bureaucratic rudeness). But in Malaysia, there is also a significant lack of work ethic. Malaysians are guaranteed a degree of comfortable living by the government. But Malaysia is a strongly capitalist country. In another contrast, Scandinavian countries have been pretty strongly socialist for the lat 50 years, but they have the highest standard of living in the world and they have well-developed work ethic. So there are many variables.\n\nThe U.S. too has many \"socialist\" aspects to it. Think of "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"public"},{"insert":" universities (in contrast to for-profit universities). All of the following are \"owned\" by the public, and no one makes a profit on them: streets, highways and interstates (even toll roads); national, state and city parks; police and fire departments; sidewalks; public elementary, middle and high schools; anything else you can think of that is public. In a thoroughly capitalist society, all of these could be privately owned. You'd have to pay someone to drive down the street. (There are important capitalism-advocates who push for privatization of almost all of these!)\n\nI find that the problem in making comparisons with \"Communist\" countries is that the ones that existed in the 20th century were all also dictatorships. As far as I can see, there is nothing in the concept of \"communism\" itself that either requires dictatorship or limits people's freedom (except of the \"freedom\" to make a profit without working for it).\n"}]}