Is Capitalism merciless? Does it promote survival of the fittest by eliminating those who can’t adapt?

Well, people who have trouble surviving tend to be a burden on the rest of society.

I lived in the US for 10 years and had to relocate back to Europe. I couldn't deal with the lack of a social safety net for people. Unfortunately Europe has followed the lead of the US though it's far from being as unforgiving should one fall on hard times.

“What is the purpose of the economy: should it maximize individual wealth or maximize the well being of the populace?”

Capitalism aims at maximum efficiency or production given finite resources. I have no problem with that in theory, though it is Darwinian economics.

Social stability requires subsidies or economic transfers to those less able to compete in the market place.

Hence, successful and enduring societies are a blend of the two.

Let the obese, disabled people die. Society doesn’t need them. I should not have to pay extra taxes for them. I do not love them. I do not care about them. Therefore, I owe them nothing.

[quote] I lived in the US for 10 years and had to relocate back to Europe.

Where were you originally from?

Netherlands

@ R5

The problem is not capitalism, it's the people in power who control the levers and could adjust them to ensure more of a spread of the resources but just allow the rich to get richer.

Well sure r7, we’d all move there given the chance.

Mercy is a relative concept. And everything is about survival of the fittest. You want to turn to farming?

No, OP; in fact, capitalism is very much like socialism, only just for rich people.

R5, I don’t want my tax dollars to support corporate welfare.

Define capitalism. Seriously. I would love to know what people think it is. And it's not just "free markets" whatever that is supposed to mean.

Capitalism is going to kill us all. It requires infinite growth, and the planet has just about had enough of us.

R5, sarcasm or no? One really can't tell these days.

Actually, since economic activity is a factor of material inputs and productivity (the labor humans perform on material inputs), and since productivity is theoretically limitless, b/c it depends on human ingenuity, which is also theoretically limitless -- economic activity on Earth is also theoretically limitless. The harm to the environment comes when we rely too much on material inputs to manufacture growth or when we employ strategies that pollute and despoil our environment.

I am NOT saying that infinite growth is necessarily desirable, as capitalism is too quick to assume. I AM saying that the desirability of growth depends very much on how we produce it, and there is no limit to it, in theory.

r2: "I lived in the US for 10 years and had to relocate back to Europe. I couldn't deal with the lack of a social safety net for people."

Bitch, why did you come here to lay around in our social safety net, bitch? Glad you got the fuck out.

Infinite growth is not sustainable. Also, capitalism dictates that you fire on all cylinders in perpetuity. This culls the working herd to the detriment of the economy. We need workers of all types who can engage and contribute to the economy to keep it robust. Disenfranchise too many able-bodied workers and the economy collapses.

Hence the need for a strong social safety net. Its all about keeping as many people as possible within the means to contribute to the economy which grows demand for products and services. Which in turns creates more jobs. THATS how you create sustained growth.

THye only count the success of competition, not the failures. Count the failures, and it no longer seems like best system. It has created wealth but this is by CORRECTING market failures with socialization of risk, not by embracing free markets.