“So why wouldn’t the benevolent individual give their share of the company to whatever collective system that determined the needs of the world? They could still be ceo, so that they could manage the company better (as they have good data about that). It seems like the capitalist system would morph into either socialism or charity-sector owned means of production, if everyone were benevolent.”
I don’t understand this. Do you suggest that all companies should be trying to fulfill (all) the needs of some collective. It is very useful for companies to specialize.
I think charityism and capitalism can work well together. The question of how to best produce something (1) is separate from what to produce (2), and these are in turn separate from the question how to best donate (3).
Basically, in a market economy, investors (capital owners) are making bets on how to answer the first two questions. Consumers (which includes also capital owners) are collectively affecting and largely determining (2) and also (3) (to the extent they decide to donate). If you are a large investor (own a lot of capital) you can donate all your returns if you wish, EA-style.
“So why wouldn’t the benevolent individual give their share of the company to whatever collective system that determined the needs of the world?”
My short answer: because they are experts in organizing how to best produce a valued good or service X. While doing this they can still donate all the returns EA-style (e.g to maximize social impact)
In general, I like the conceptual distinction you make here. Few comments:
“Capitalism = The private ownership of the means of production. Socialism = The collective ownership of the means of production.” I find this still a bit problematic. One could argue companies and other possible legal entities are collective means of ownership. Alternative definition that socialism = State ownership of the means of production?
I like the the way you phrase the relationship between system of ownership and ethos of selfishness/benevolence as an empirical question. My question is though: what is the relevance of ethos of selfishness—isn’t that a process goal? Should we focus on individual well-being instead which is a outcome goal (i.e. ethos of benevolence is valuable because it is seen to cause well-being).