Executive summary: The author argues that imprecise definitions of “capitalism” lead to unproductive conversations, and proposes his own precise definition along with scenarios for potential future economic systems.
Key points:
The author defines capitalism as “an economy with capital markets”, while others use it vaguely to mean “the economic status quo”.
Many self-described socialists actually advocate for reforms like wealth taxes, not abolishing markets.
In a long-term future of abundance, democratic control of investment may become feasible and “capitalism” vs “socialism” may cease to be meaningful categories.
Polarization could be reduced by finding common ground around shared values and goals despite different economic visions.
This comment was auto-generated by the EA Forum Team. Feel free to point out issues with this summary by replying to the comment, andcontact us if you have feedback.
Executive summary: The author argues that imprecise definitions of “capitalism” lead to unproductive conversations, and proposes his own precise definition along with scenarios for potential future economic systems.
Key points:
The author defines capitalism as “an economy with capital markets”, while others use it vaguely to mean “the economic status quo”.
Many self-described socialists actually advocate for reforms like wealth taxes, not abolishing markets.
In a long-term future of abundance, democratic control of investment may become feasible and “capitalism” vs “socialism” may cease to be meaningful categories.
Polarization could be reduced by finding common ground around shared values and goals despite different economic visions.
This comment was auto-generated by the EA Forum Team. Feel free to point out issues with this summary by replying to the comment, and contact us if you have feedback.
(-___-)
This seems like a good summary! Was this downvoted merely because of a wrong pronoun?