Skip to main content

Capitalism Made Your iPhone


I've seen a lot of strange noise rising up on Facebook lately. It appears that some people think capitalism makes things, and that other people seem to think that capitalism is just getting in the way. Obviously neither case is true. This is an econ blog after all!

An example of the former problem is the quote inside the screencap below with the sentence 'capitalism made your iPhone' and a rebuttal to the effect that different economic systems sumply determine who gets paid for creating stuff. The rebuttal is true as far as it goes, so I won't address it here.


If we take the sentence 'capitalism made your iPhone' completely at face value then it's a false statement. Workers apply labour and capital to make and distribute iPhones. But nobody disputes that. At least no economist or businessperson disputes that, as economists and businesspeople are workers themselves.

Bear in mind what capitalism is and is not. It's just a mode of production. The difference between capitalist production and non-capitalist production is that capitalist production is necessarily entrepreneurial and reliant upon outside finance to initiate the production - of whatever - in question.

The cycles of capitalist production will over time drive prices down, eventually making it an affordable prospect for a business to make and sell consumer smartphones and tablets, and for competition between the different tribes of capitalists (Samsung and Apple don't get on very well) to continually improve the lifespans, feature sets and reliability of the devices.

Contrast this with the dearth of new consumer-focused products in those parts of the world which have not seen any sustained use of capitalist production yet and the conditions in which people live in those societies.

Of course there's also the matter of the contrast between the availability of goods and services sans capitalism versus the availability of goods and services with capitalism. This is made very clear by quick perusal of a GDP hockey-stick graph.

Daniel J. Mitchell is a bit of a dick but on the broad brush strokes of economic theory and history he is a sound source to go to. Hopisen has some lovely analysis - I respectfully disagree on the details, but we're justifying capitalism itself here, so the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Any finally there's an economist graph I half-inched from Patterico.



This tells us non-capitalist modes of production (sharing, theft, gift, and bureaucracy) can't produce affluence.

So no, capitalism doesn't literally make iPhones. It makes iPhones possible.

Love ya, learn econ.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Zeitardation

A Youtuber called axe863 made a video in which he used scientific, mathematical and statistical common-sense to deliver the KO that the Venus Project and Zeitgeist Movement so richly deserved. If his approach seems weird and unconventional it's because he's not attacking from a tradition neoclassical or Keynesian perspective. Axe863's poison is complexity economics, something a good deal more dangerous to ideas like TVP and TZM. [ 2 ] Now to a couple of comment threads from below the video that I thought could od with being replicated just in case they get deleted at source! ~~~ AstralLuminary 1 year ago Why can't we generalize the consumption patterns of middle-income people in the western world, set our constraints equal to the amount of localized resources, and the rate of resource recovery, derive a population growth model that would be sustainable to said consumption patterns, and derive the necessary quantifiable amount of work required to expen...
Post a Comment
Read more

World Hunger - Getting Better or Worse?

Thinking about how rates of hunger have shifted over the last 25 years led me to the Global Hunger Index , which covers - wait for it - the last 25 years. What do we see by looking at their figures for hunger in different countries in the years for which data are available? The Global Hunger Index uses aggregated statistics to arrive at a 'score' for every country studied in a given year with 0 the ideal and 50+ an absolute nightmare of near famine-level proportions. If you were switched-on enough to follow the link above you probably noticed it includes an interactive world map showing the change in rates of hunger for folks in many countries that might best be described as low-income or middle-income. An illustration of the score system is just below. And just in case it wasn't already obvious that everything is getting better, here is the data for all of the individual countries measured on a scatter plot in terms of their reduction in GHI score from 2000...
Post a Comment
Read more

Commentaryism - The Death Toll of Capitalism

How many people have died because capitalism exists? How many would still be alive if it had never existed? Let's dig in! We will take two approaches over the course of this blog post by looking at the the death tolls attributed to the word in its broad popular definition - everything socialists don't like - versus the toll that fits the definition offered previously on this blog. By the same token I will not lay any outsized figures at any other mode of production's door except where that mode of production demonstrably caused the problem that killed people. It's political ideologies that really matter here, and this is where the first big problem with even trying to lay a specific body count before capitalism runs into problems - there is no political ideology called capitalism. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Now then, Alfonso Gutierrez says  in a comment thread that "capitalism and free-markets have murdered billions of people" which is a risky cla...
Post a Comment
Read more