Talk:History of capitalism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of the Business and Economics WikiProject. |
| Start | rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale |
| Mid | rated as Mid-importance on the assessment scale |
 |
WikiProject Echo has identified History of capitalism as a foreign language featured article. You may be able to improve this article with information from the French language Wikipedia. |
I suggest that re-ordering of this page is appropriate:
Finance capitalism is both a tautology and (as Finance - the use of money for profit in the forms of rent, interest, dividends and unequal pay for work) forms the action element of capitalism (the pre-conditional element - ownership of property or theft from and of the commonweal depending upon the mode of analysis - preceding the action elements (each of which has their own history).
Since access to finance (money and its equivalents) is the precondition (under capitalism) for the 'owned/stolen' elements (land, banking rights, knowledge ownership rights and sanctioned variable paid work income rates), then the history of capitalism is probably co-extensive with the history of money.
In support of this, the Wikipedia entry under usury points to the pre-mediaeval existence of a capitalist element within (even) largely feudalist societies (ie those where the ownership of land was the predominant source of power).
The pivotal changes seem to have come with the permission to charge interest on lent money: particularly the Act 'In restraint of usury' of Henry VIII in England in 1545 (see: a) 'In Restraint of Usury: the Lending of Money at Interest', Sir Harry Page, The Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accounts, London, 1985, b) the Bibliography therein, and c) especially 'The Idea of Usury: from Tribal Brotherhood to Universal Otherhood', Benjamin Nelson, 2nd Edition, University of Chicago Press, Chicago and London, 1949, enlarged 2nd edition, 1969.)
Accordingly, I suggest the inclusion of such a starter text as the above at the start of the article, and will wait a few days for responses before doing so.
John Courtneidge
Contents |
[edit] Life expectancy
The claim about doubled life expectancy in developing world seems extremely unlikely, especially given the dramatic drop in life-expectancy in Africa over the last decade. It looks like a hand-picked selection of a few places, with very careful futzing with years considered nation-by-nation... if not a fabrication whole cloth. LotLE×talk 17:12, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Laissez-faire
- Mid- to late-nineteenth-century Britain is widely regarded as the classic case of laissez-faire capitalism.
Is this statement true? If so, does it matter that this widely held belief is quite simply wrong? I think this article would be better off without this line. -- TexasDawg 01:52, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Italian city-states
 |
Please help improve this article or section by expanding it. Further information might be found on the talk page or at requests for expansion. (November 2007) |
Someone commented on another talk page that the Italian city-states should be mentioned in this history. -- Beland 03:27, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Sub-articles
The division of this history into 19th, 20th, and 21st centuries does not seem natural, and seems to have resulted in short, disconnected subarticles. I propose merging the existing subarticles, then splitting off topical articles later (or expanding the existing one) as more content is contributed. -- Beland 03:34, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Why the name capitalism?
What puzzles me is the use of the name capitalism, which seems to derive from capital, yet capitalism seems to bear no relationship to capital. Was the definition of capital crafted from taking a specific snapshot of capitalism and then defining a specific aspect of how capitalism works? As far as I know, every economic system theory recognizes capital as an important component of the way the society operates, except perhaps those of nomadic societies. If Adam Smith is the iconic figure in defining capitalism as we know it today, his focus was on trade, not on capital, and his use of the term capital is different from most definitions.
What I find more puzzling is the way that many self proclaimed and self righteous "capitalist" say they are spending capital, and in fact, "spend" capital by consuming it rather than using it for production or increasing the stock of capital. Land is defined as a fixed good, but the fertility of the land is clearly capital, because if it is not replenished or sustained, it will be consumed and the land will exist, but be incapable of much production. It seems that the word capitalism is used to justify taking public land covered in forests and giving it to private owners who strip it of its capital and then abandon it with the demand that they be given new land filled with natural capital to strip.
So, is capitalism a term derived from capital, a generalization form the specific, and then loaded with all sorts of political meaning unrelated to capital, or is capital the term that represents the derivation of the specific from an instance of generalization? Mulp (talk) 21:07, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
I agree that something may have to be done about these pages (19th, 20th and 21st century capitalism), but you can't go criticising the actual definition of the word "capitalism." You might not agree with the specific definition of a word, but i don't agree with some very un-democratic countries in the world calling themselves republics, so maybe you should try arguing in a worthwhile fashion. Tbusby3 —Preceding comment was added at 11:51, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Globalization
This section seems rather biased and present some arbitrary statistics in presenting globalization in a positive light. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.170.241.23 (talk) 01:22, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Inequality Under Capitalism
There is overwhelming evidence from the World Bank, the United Nations Development Programme and several university studies that income inequality between peoples and countries has radically increased during the 18th and 19th centuries and especially in the second half of the 20th. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.36.186.38 (talk) 10:02, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
