Capitalism and Free Enterprise
Good Morning
The following is a well written and thought provoking article contributed by
When I tell people that capitalism and free enterprise are not the same thing, I typically get a deer-in-the-headlights look, followed by a clearly articulated “Huh?” But they are not the same thing, and that is the subject of this piece.
Capitalism requires growth. Free enterprise does not. Capitalism can only be satisfied by “more.” Free enterprise can be satisfied by “enough.” Free enterprise can go on forever. Capitalism cannot.
Free enterprise means that I am free to set up my own enterprise, say a general store, and the Federal Agents will not come knocking at
Free enterprise requires freedom, but it does not require accumulation, or growth.
Capitalism, on the other hand, requires a return on investment (ROI). It requires me to accumulate ever more capital. If I invest $100, by the end of the year, I had better realize a minimum of $106. If I don’t then my investment became negative, as the very roots of capitalism are planted in inflation.
If I reinvest my $106, I must receive $113 the next year. This must continue forever, or else the capitalist system will fail. This is closely related to the concept of compound interest. This also requires an exponential increase in the money supply, which eventually becomes impossible to balance with the physical system of available resources.
The real diffe
“Growth” must come from an expansion of the money supply, resulting in the dilution of the value of the cur
Capitalism thus requires infinite growth. Since we live on a finite planet, this is clearly impossible. Eventually something has to give. It is not a matter of if, but only a matter of when. To believe otherwise is to believe in magic. When I was a child, compound interest seemed like magic to me. Yet any professional magician will tell you that magic is not really magic, but merely an illusion. Similar to capitalism.
The characteristics of capitalism is the characteristics of the weed: overshoot and die-off. Before the weed dies it shoots out consumerism, imperialism, and planned obsolescence. These are meant to delay the demise of the weed but in the end, when it has exhausted its resources, the weed dies anyway. Capitalism must, in the end, consume its own host society. The result of practicing unchecked capitalism in the
We have all seen those movies where the crew of a steamship, when the coal is gone, rips up the decks to feed the boilers. It is clear to everyone that this can only go on for so long as there are decks to rip up. A steadily increasing return on investment, which is the very essence of capitalism, can only have a similar result. The poor people on the steamship may be hopeful of rescue by another ship. On Spaceship Earth, I do not think we can count on being rescued by, or making landfall on another planet.
So it comes back to my initial comparison of capitalism and free enterprise. Free enterprise means, quite literally, freedom. Freedom to try, freedom to succeed, and freedom to fail.
Capitalism (sorry, Dr. Friedman) does not mean freedom. It means slavery to the demands of return on investment, of growth. Carried to its logical conclusion, in our present time it probably means turning into a society that might be characterized as high-tech feudalism.
Free enterprise is a shopkeeper, capitalism is a banker. With free enterprise, we can own our wealth. With capitalism, our wealth will wind up owning us. That is the real diffe


I wanted to assure everyone that Rick discussed with me beforehand that this is not a slam on capitalism, but rather a clear view of how our system of capitalism works…or doesn’t work, depending on how you view it.
And as you have also indicated in the past, unchecked capitalism is one of the many symptoms of a system operated solely on the premise of exponential growth. Most anything in dis-proportionately large quantities is usually not the best that could happen at any given time, including ignorance. -bb
Billy B,
Unchecked capitalism leads to the discussion of which comes first; people or profits?
Once profits become the driving force of any culture, and that force becomes so prominent that eliminating people from the work force to increase profits becomes publicly acceptable, one can look way out on the horizon and the end will be in sight.