Every system can and will get exploited. I am not sure how another economic system will fix this. Assholes will be assholes and if we don't stop them from getting into positions of power this will continue.

Not to say that capitalism isn't a bucket full of shit. But I would argue setting the incentives right, can mitigate damage. The issue is getting this done politically. Which brings us back to assholes (+capitalism) again.

I am not sure how another economic system will fix this.

Other economic systems have assholes, true, but capitalism is uniquely myopic in this respect. A socialist system would take away the polluters' power to hinder change. There's a reason (still capitalist to be fair) China is a world leader in renewable energy, and that's because they don't have rich and powerful lobbies forcing fossil fuels down people's throats.

But I would argue setting the incentives right, can mitigate damage

Until capitalists use their wealth and power to remove those incentives, which leads us back to "end capitalism." This is the fundamental problem with reformism; under capitalism there will naturally be mechanisms for resisting and winding back said reform, making "nicer" versions of it mere interludes interrupting the crushing boot of exploitation and destruction we all know and love.

Is this supposed to be an argument against climate action?

And the rollback of the incentive adjustments isn't theoretical. Incentives got adjusted around The Great Depression in many western countries like in the US and those changes have been slowly rolled back till the 70s, then much more quickly since then. And at breakneck speed since the dissolution of the Soviet bloc.

The world died because we needed even more plastic coffee pods. Capitalism is def the cause.

If something isn't priced (eg environmental damage, loss of human safety or dignity, the world) then capitalism is blind to it and will sacrifice it to optimize for profit. Genuinely the point of capitalism.

conservatives self-mythologize as the standards-bearers for deferred gratification and making hard trade-offs, but are utterly lacking in these traits when it comes to climate change and inequality

It's Prager-U. They argue even against anti-slavery

See, I think capitalism can work, we just need way more controls. Taxes that prevent billionaires from ever happening. Incentives for corporations to invest most of their profits into R&D.

Make smaller profit margins necessary to stay afloat. That means they either need to cut prices and/or invest in people (which is essentially what R&D is).

Actually enforce antitrust laws. Make forming a corporation, let alone a conglomerate, unpalatable compared to forming an NPO.

The biggest poison is the profit-driven media landscape (traditional and social). Particularly "news". Something needs to happen there, first.

Put a 500% tax on political contributions from PACs and a hard cap on total political donations from an individual (that's actually enforced and loopholes closed up).

Capitalism without corporations. Without billionaires. With strong regulation and very limited lobbying. It could work. It'll never happen, but it could work...and it's probably a necessary stepping stone to full blown socialist utopia.

I totally agree with you. Its obvious to anyone that "capitalism" as most people know it is super simple on the surface: I have thing or skill. You want things or skill. Depending how many people want thing or skill, I get paid fairly for it. To be honest, for me (healthy, able bodied and have a support network) I don't mind working and getting paid fairly for my skills; its a normal part of human life to work to get food. Granted, I'm in a VERY lucky minority. There needs to be Norway style welfare for the old, sick, and unable to work. As far as dumb/ignorant people (be honest, you've met them) who are able bodied but just can't do anything useful, I'm not sure what to do about them.

But then we have money in politics, monopolies, 1 person (fucking Rupert) owning every media outlet, and the system quickly falls apart.

The problem with all those measures aiming to make things fairer, is that the ones able to implement them are the ones benefitting from the most. This directly for the political measures, and indirectly for the corpo ones (due to the political measures)

The only way this is being changed is with a revolution or being forced due to protests. But social media is not only profit driven, but also an excellent way to control the flow of information.

And with the surveillance state that every country is seemingly moving towards this is only gonna get better.

So you're imaging capitalism except capitalism is suborned to the state

Like in the USSR and China

I envision more of a hybrid utopia...strong social programs (potentially even UBI), paid for largely by taxes by businesses.

Income taxes are straight-up bullshit and intended solely to fuck the lower and middle classes. I exponentially incrementing taxes on additional real estate. I want higher taxes on luxury goods. I want a higher gas tax and further incentives for green energy and public transit expansions.

Middle class, especially, gets all of the stick and barely any of the carrot. That needs to change.

But I also think essential industries should also be entirely socialized (like healthcare) or implement point-solutions to bolster the bottom 90% when markets get all fucky...such as heavily subsidizing first-time homebuyers, government pays x% upto $Y. (While at the same time also promoting more development of high- and medium- density housing, and transit to service it)

Anyway, that's my utopia. I don't think capitalism is inherently evil. I don't think a true socialist utopia can exist unless we are post-scarcity and solve a lot of other blockers. I do think that both systems have pros and cons, and some sort of middle-ground needs to be found. One that actually favors the majority of the people.

Billionaires are hard to prevent. Musk for example is a billionaire because tesla has been successful, you couldn't prevent that with taxes on him as the value is in the company he owns a significant portion of.

I think overall you have good ideas, but they're hard to implement

instance checks out, anyways this wouldn't be Like in the USSR and China, this would be like in the EU but more regulations.

more regulations because who says so?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Economic_Policy

english is not my first language so, I can't easily understand what "more regulations because who says so?" means.

I have no idea why you're being so hostile or pedantic. My point was that socialist countries can use capitalism as a tool when it's suborned to the state. You conceded my point. What's YOUR point?

Leaving this here in case anyone thinks you're joking: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NO_wmixXBdE

instance checks out

Is the language barrier responsible for you being a snippy little asshole?

i am not a pair of scissors, and please don't stick scissors up your asshole.

I wasn't using an idiom, I was speaking in plain language.

Memes aside, climate conversations get framed in extremes really fast. There’s probably more room for practical solutions than the usual “all or nothing” narratives suggest.

Maybe 80 years ago.

Now we very much have to stop and then think of ways to reach a middle ground between production and saving humanity.

One of the core pieces of capitalism - "You do the work and I keep the profits" - is undesirable. I would say it's even unjust. Children would recognize it as a problem.

the