Scott Adams's Blog
 
Subscribe to RSS feed
Things change. It's the nature of the universe. Yesterday's greatest ideas give way to ideas that are better, or better suited to the present, or at least different. Change is the only thing on which you can depend.

So what about capitalism?

I think capitalism had a good run, but it will soon be done. Socialism will be too expensive to maintain as the world economies slow, and communism won't be making a comeback. The economies of the future will be something new.

Capitalism was conceived before the Internet, and before the gears of commerce became computerized. The system could absorb a lot of con artists because they didn't have the ability to steal fast enough to cripple the system. As you know, that has changed. Crooks in expensive suits now have the ability to swindle trillions, collectively, thanks to the efficiency of the system. And idiots in expensive suits can do even more damage.

The economy is now too complicated for even the regulators to know when a con or a huge mistake is happening. The balance of power has swung to the crooks and the market manipulators. Even if we could regulate away these problems, it's already too late. There isn't enough money left to support the planet under the current social systems, at least not when the boomers start retiring and unemployment starts climbing.

I've been wondering what the new economic system will look like. I think the next economy will have the same freedom of employment and entrepreneurship as capitalism. That part seemed to work well. But you might see restrictions on what types of investments individuals can make, to keep them out of trouble. Most people should be restricted to buying only the broad indexes with an ETF. And perhaps the percentage of stock you can legally own as a percentage of your net worth should go down as you near retirement. Stock bubbles could be avoided by restricting how much money can be invested in stocks, on an annual basis, to keep the price earnings ratios around 15. New stock offerings would be funded by existing companies and institutional investors.  (Clearly that idea isn't well thought out. It's just a directional sort of prediction.)

But the biggest change could be in what sort of consumption is allowed under the new economy. Most of our problems were caused by people who couldn't control their own spending. Banks could tighten their credit requirements but that won't be enough to stop the spending junkies from depleting their own nest eggs. So you might see some forced savings rules in the new economy.

Depending on how bad the economy gets, you could also see rules banning single passengers in cars. And working from home might become a legal requirement for economic reasons. Perhaps your health insurance premiums would be based on your body mass index and whether or not you smoke. You could see a whole range of restrictions on how consumers can live, spend, and invest, to prevent market bubbles and waste.

So I think the new economy will allow you freedom of employment, but you won't be able to spend and invest your money as freely as you once did. That was the part that got us in trouble.

I'm not saying this new economy will be an improvement. It's just a prediction.
 
Rank Up Rank Down Votes:  +2
  • Print
  • Email
  • Share

Comments

Sort By:
User Name: HowardI Mar 1, 2009
0 Rank Up Rank Down
Lets just hope that our economy would now do better. Everyone is affected by the recession that we are facing and almost everyone today is now in need for financial options like payday loans. The popular online auction site eBay may be next in line for payday loans. The website has been an online Mecca for people looking to sell superfluous items, collectible and offbeat, for over a decade, but their revenue has been slipping of late. The auction function of the site hasn't been as lucrative as it once was. The website may be looking for payday loans to boost its diminishing stock price. Extraneous spending has been dropping across the board, and most of eBay's income has been from straight sales rather than auctions. The average person doesn't want to bid on a vintage lava lamp when they are contemplating <a href="http://personalmoneystore.com/Cash-Advance-Loans/">Cash Advance Loans</a> just to keep their lights on.
 
 
User Name: Coldman Jan 18, 2009
0 Rank Up Rank Down
Here are my predictions on what will change:

To keep risk-taking and moral hazard under control: expect more restrictions on lending and debt financing, stricter corporate governance and securities market regulations, more vigorous prosecution of white-collar crime, and harsher bankruptcy laws.

To raise the revenue needed to fund entitlement programs in a politically convenient manner: expect more taxes on consuming things that are deemed to be socially harmful, such as various unhealthy substances and environmental pollutants.
 
 
User Name: Nelsonbenson Jan 10, 2009
0 Rank Up Rank Down
How about banning blogs that advocate stupidity while conveying authority (yes you)?

How about making it illegal for popular people like Mr. Adams to give advice without a license?

Mr. Adams, capitalism never failed. American materialism did. People borrowed in order to finance
a lifestyle they did not earn or deserved. People turned in new cars for newer cars with better GPS.
People traded 3000 sf houses for 5000 sf houses for that cathedral ceiling.

Capitalism never failed. It actually succeeded so much we forgot it can SOMETIME fails. And so
we lived like is no tomorrow and are paying the price which we should all, including myself, pay.

Mr. Adams is also a great beneficiary of capitalism and the ease by which one can conduct
business in this wonderful country of ours.

As an immigrant, who lived in many other countries, I have to tell you, America is not perfect,
but it is still the best.
 
 
User Name: KenK Dec 29, 2008
0 Rank Up Rank Down
This guy says capitalism does not exist and never has. I agree.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/12/meritalism_not_capitalism.html
 
 
User Name: chiffon khaki Dec 22, 2008
0 Rank Up Rank Down
How could they ban single passengers in cars?

More people are staying single every year.

So invest in the blow-up doll industry now and

don't forget to buckle them up.
 
 
User Name: rockhopper Dec 22, 2008
0 Rank Up Rank Down
Actually whenever I catch on fire I smoke. Don't you?
 
 
User Name: mattmcknight Dec 21, 2008
0 Rank Up Rank Down
The end of capitalism- no way. The end of consumer credit- maybe. The end of consumer debt securitization- definitely. Individual stock ownership is not the problem, it's debt. We are be seeing the end of easy credit for companies, individuals, and the United States. Hopefully we will also see an end to people being able to buy insurance on risky loans.
 
 
User Name: graciemaesharpei Dec 20, 2008
0 Rank Up Rank Down
I agree with johno777. One of the main problems with what has happened here has been deregulation. We have either deregulated industries so they are no longer accountable or we make laws but then don't fund for enforcement.

I work in healthcare as a rehabilitation therapist and it is a huge mess because of deregulation. What I see is that most healthcare companies, including hospitals, nursing homes, and assisted livings are owned and operated by people who have no background in medicine and are there only to make the investors money. The problem with this is patients are often snowed by the facility into unneccessary treatments so that the healthcare center can make money off of insurance and Medicare.

Now, one would think that the doctors and the therapists could step in and stop this right? Wrong. Most physicians and therapists don't work for themselves anymore, they work for a company. The company pushes "productivity" quotas that healthcare providers must reach in order to stay employed.

This is suppossed to be regulated and physicians and therapists can be charged and convicted of Medicare and insurance fraud. Unfortunately, the company and/or management doesn't get in trouble for this. Also, Medicare and the FBI are so poorly funded for this right now, that they seem to be looking the other way and these companies know this.

So now, healthcare providers are between a rock and a hard place: Refuse to give unethical medical treatments and lose their jobs (and be unable to find employment without the same expectations) or commit the fraud and (maybe) get caught and lose their license to practice.

Are the companies and the investors hurt by this? No. If one provider refuses to do something unethical and is terminated, they can always find someone else who will do it.

My solution: Healthcare shouldn't be a business. Invetors shouldn't be able to make money off of your illness or health crisis. The money the company makes should go back to the patients in the form of salaries for healthcare providers (CNAs don't make squat and they have the hardest job in the whole building), increased staff for more individualized care (think patients in nursing homes!), improved environments and activities (again, eldercare), and programs for preventative medicine that acutally work (here's one solution for destructive behaviors, like overeating and smoking).
 
 
User Name: KevinKunreuther Dec 18, 2008
0 Rank Up Rank Down
Why does your blog's censors find the word e-n-t-i-t-i-e-s offending?
 
 
User Name: KevinKunreuther Dec 18, 2008
0 Rank Up Rank Down
I've posted this already in comments section of I, Cringely's last column, but deserves to be reposted here for consideration. Scott's predictions are very interesting, but I can't say they are based on any ongoing trends that are for seeable. My predictions are based on ongoing trends that have been going on since the nineties, originally at a glacial pace but are now picking up steam and being picked up by the younger generation. These things will be commonplace within twenty five years:
Paper bills and coins will disappear as money, except as annual uncirculated premiums and proofs from government mints for numismatists and investors. Money in most parts of the world will be electronic, you will have one unique credit and debit account, accessible by you at all times. Unless you have certain privileges or are very sneaky, most people will not have multiple credit/debit accounts. Tampering with your personal credit/debit account or another person's or !$%*!$%* credit/debit account will be considered a felony with very stiff penalties. In some countries it could mean death, in other countries, you could be declared a non-person, and have your credit/debit accounts wiped, then be given a specie or script lump sum and forced to live in the scary unregulated gray area economy occupied by other miscreants in the off-line world. Banks as we know them will be gone, replaced by financial online !$%*!$%*, managed as a quasi-government institution. Your value (or potential earning power) will be determined and fluctuate according to services you can and do provide. This can, by your own choice, be either fixed for periods of time, evaluated after each term, or be floating and fluctuating on free market of exchange. You can elect to take your value and services off and on the market at any time. People who misrepresent or distort their market values (disruptors) will be punished severely.
 
 
User Name: barmstrong Dec 17, 2008
0 Rank Up Rank Down
Wow...I wouldn't want to live in that society. Freedom is the only way Scott, I'd move wherever I had to for that.
 
 
User Name: endofcapitalism Dec 17, 2008
0 Rank Up Rank Down
http://endofcapitalism.com

capitalism will end, but not because of speculation itself. it is the finiteness of our planet, and the absurd level of destruction that capitalism requires to exist, which will put an end to growth. there simply is not enough oil, or many other resources, to allow the production-consumption-machine to keep chugging much longer.

what is the future? democracy or fascism. either we take control of our own destinies as communities, or we let those in power turn this into a very different and dark world.

my website http://endofcapitalism.com has more on these subjects.
 
 
User Name: webgrunt Dec 17, 2008
0 Rank Up Rank Down
Scott,

I suspect the interminable slowness of your site is some sort of experiment you're running. Testing to see how slow the site has to be before your visitation rate drops to zero, or something like that.

I hope the conclusion is very near.
 
 
User Name: mathieu Dec 17, 2008
0 Rank Up Rank Down
The system you describe would still be capitalism. Adding more restrictions on what people can invest in (there already ARE restrictions) won't change anything. Forcing people to consume less is just some form of social engineering, which will change the way capitalism will work but it won't make it anything other than capitalism.
 
 
User Name: tlniec Dec 17, 2008
0 Rank Up Rank Down
User Name: callcopse Dec 17, 2008
"I'd go with a variant of anarcho-syndicalism, a form of libertarian socialism. Decentralize power and give it to local communities. Let no man be your boss and be the boss of no man. But whatever..."

Look, Dennis, that's all good until King Arthur gallops into your community and demands to know who the lord of your castle is!

:-)
 
 
User Name: johno777 Dec 17, 2008
0 Rank Up Rank Down
What is this about the end of capitalism?

Capitalism is working beautifully here in Australia. Of course we are suffering a few minor shocks in industries that depend on trade with the USA, but other than that we're simply experiencing low petrol prices and mortgages. For the majority of Australians we are currently in good times (and of course I know enough about the world economy to not take that for granted; but still . . ).

I think rather than the end of capitalism, what you are observing is the end of unregulated capitalism. With the right regulatory structures, the system is better than anything else anyone has ever proposed.
 
 
User Name: imgabe Dec 17, 2008
0 Rank Up Rank Down
I think you overestimate people's willingness to give up freedom in how they spend their money. Nobody would vote for a plan like the one you proposed. As far as each individual person goes, they think "I'm managing my money just fine, but *everyone else* needs to get with the program."
 
 
User Name: callcopse Dec 17, 2008
+1 Rank Up Rank Down
I'd go with a variant of anarcho-syndicalism, a form of libertarian socialism. Decentralize power and give it to local communities. Let no man be your boss and be the boss of no man. But whatever...
 
 
User Name: KaranJ Dec 17, 2008
0 Rank Up Rank Down
Is it just me that gets the feeling that something similar to this would've been published early on in the Great Depression?

Busts are part of the cycle of capitalism - much as at the height of every boom, the prediction is that "It'll be different this time," every bust leads to predictions of "it'll be different this time..."
 
 
User Name: AReasonableMan Dec 16, 2008
0 Rank Up Rank Down
Scott,

If you think people controlling their own money has a lot of problems, just wait until you increase the ability of people to control other people's money!
 
 
 

Dilbert 2.0 - 20 years of Dilbert

Old Dilbert Blog