“Capitalism” isn’t good or bad, it’s a tool in the societal design kit.
I often think of markets in that way and think the broad concept of “Capitalism” (and many other isms) fit well.
I think this applies to the OP about explaining harder. While also very market and capital friendly in thought (and action) I do often find the advocates seem to hold (generally implicitly) that somehow capitalism/price markets must be universal and nothing else could displace them. I think that goes too far.
I think framing the subject in that social tool allows for some better discussion. Just as we can talk about building tools, or just carpentry tools, tools serve to resolve a specific type of problem and can be used properly and improperly. Social level tools like markets or capitalism or law are much more complicated than hammers and saws, or even backhoes or cement trucks, or computer systems controlling a large assembly line but still fit into that model well I think.
So when having those interactions about “Yes, I get that but it shouldn’t be that way.” I think the tool framework can help get into the discussion about just what it means to “be that way”. What shouldn’t be that way—the problem to be solved or the tool being used for the problem?
I often think of markets in that way and think the broad concept of “Capitalism” (and many other isms) fit well.
I think this applies to the OP about explaining harder. While also very market and capital friendly in thought (and action) I do often find the advocates seem to hold (generally implicitly) that somehow capitalism/price markets must be universal and nothing else could displace them. I think that goes too far.
I think framing the subject in that social tool allows for some better discussion. Just as we can talk about building tools, or just carpentry tools, tools serve to resolve a specific type of problem and can be used properly and improperly. Social level tools like markets or capitalism or law are much more complicated than hammers and saws, or even backhoes or cement trucks, or computer systems controlling a large assembly line but still fit into that model well I think.
So when having those interactions about “Yes, I get that but it shouldn’t be that way.” I think the tool framework can help get into the discussion about just what it means to “be that way”. What shouldn’t be that way—the problem to be solved or the tool being used for the problem?