lol. The market for Labor. Capitalists call it a "natural rate of unemployment"; the left calls is, a natural rate of inefficiency or failure.
When Great Britain became a mercantilist nation, they forced farmers and rural people to leave their lands and move to cities to work in factories creating massive poverty. Where before an average person could live off the land, now they had to toil in factories at the mercy of owners supported by the crown.
I think it might not have been like that. People living off the land are typically poorer than factory workers. People move off the land for the better opportunities that factory work provides. The industrial revolution was time of great wealth. https://fee.org/articles/the-industrial-revolution-working-class-poverty-or-prosperity/ Consider China as a modern day example. Peasant economy to working class and beyond in 30 years. 300 million people raised out of abject poverty.
Nope; love is selfless. In extreme cases, a lover would decide to die, if that's the only way how the loved person can survive.
Its difficult to understand the self-sacrifice of the mother. If you want to adopt hyper-rationality you have to assume some form of extreme altruistic behaviour.
However, all that has nothing to do with capitalism. BTW, I'm not an enemy of capitalism. But I don't understand why some declare capitalism as moral.
Feminist Economics might disagree with you though. They'd perhaps argue that the self-sacrifice of the mother is often the consequence of how capitalism thrives from dicriminatory relations (e.g. with patriarchy, rent from the wage exploitation of the mother is guaranteed)
No, the market creates jobs. Capitalism insists on unemployment, ensuring restricted bargaining and the protection of rents going to the employer.
Sure, but that's only effective if the worker himself acts as capitalist. Workers behaving like slaves are dangerous for the whole system.
Capitalism loves extreme inefficient hierarchy. See, for example, how racial dicrimination doesn't go away.
The people who are already at the top may love that, but capitalism needs competition and fighters who want to get to the top. The inefficiency of the hierarchy is due to the temporariness of the position. Capitalism is life par excellence. A concrete jungle; one predator eats the other. It has nothing to do with morality.
Without hierarchy, reproduction of capitalist profit cannot be ensured. There are problems from extreme income inequality (and resulting social immobility), but that refers to marginal effects on growth rates. Capitalism freely gives up economic efficiency in return for continuation of economic rent. You can refer to differences in capitalism (e.g. liberal democracy requires a lower poverty rate for stability, relative to the Anglo-Saxon economies). However, again we're only referring to marginal effects.
love its very rarely selfless but it is much like capitalism. First you love your customers and workers and then you get love in return. Libsocialism is opposite, everyone tries to use everyone else.
wrong of course capitalism is not about fighting but more about loving your workers and customers. Do you want to buy from someone who is fighting or from someone who cares about your needs? Do you understand now?
if you get an MBA they teach you if you are moral and caring toward workers and customers you will succeed and if not you will fail. Workers and customers don't like predators. 1+1=2
capitalism is 100% about efficiency. This is why an airline, for example, will choose a paint scheme for its planes that weights 2 LBS less. They don't want to waste fuel flying paint around. Do you understand?
absurd gibberish of course given that capitalist poor are really rich but nevertheless encouraged to be unstable by libcommies with ulterior motives. Do you understand?
workers and customers don't behave like slaves, they always gravitate to the best jobs and products. Do you understand?
Actually the capitalist creates the market which in turn creates jobs. There were no markets to speak of before Republican capitalists created them!
Actually, capitalism is based on supply and demand so there is no unemployment. It would be like saying customers insist on over supply to keep prices low to collect rent
Yes, they do. But the ordinary short-sighted capitalist want them to be slaves. There is a slight discrepancy, but that doesn't really matter.