Re: Is capitalism reformable [Riesz]

1/28/2001, Paul Riesz wrote:
    > Many investors might prefer capital growth, but they could
    continue thriving through receiving dividends.


Dear Paul,

Good point.  There was a leap of logic there, but it is easily patched,
and that will be attended to in the next draft.  Thanks for reading
so closely.

---

    > GROWTH does not depend on such harmful exploitation.
    Lately opportunities for growth have come mostly from quite
    different sources, they now depend mostly on the enormous
    technological progress (communications, computing,
    biotechnology, genetics, etc)

If you stand by the side of a rushing river, sometimes you can find eddy 
currents going the other way. If you squint your vision enough, you might 
convince yourself that the main flow is going upstream. 

---

    > My conclusion: you have not succeeded to prove through
    your arguments, that CAPITALISM cannot be reformed.
    Furthermore societies based on reformed capitalism do exist
    and are quite successful economically and socially.
    Therefore I do insist that CAPITALISM CAN AND MUST BE
    REFORMED:

OK Paul, may I make a humble request?  Would you please list
the primary reforms that you suggest imposing on capitalism
to make it acceptable?  You can say "like Sweden" if you
want, but please be specific as to which characteristics you
refer.  Also, I'm curious as to why you find 'reforming
capitalism' such a wonderful idea.  Is it that you think it
would more easily achieved politically than some other
alternative, such as socialism?

would be appreciated,
rkm
http://cyberjournal.org