>>508790452
>How is that bad?
Much worse for the west I mean. ;)
And just like with so many other recent habbenings, worse for the west means better for the rest of the world.

>>508790561
>2. Show me an example of capitalism working without fiat currency creation.
The US during gold standard?
All other economies using gold or silver as currency before that?

Now there have been various types of economic systems like feudalistic systems (arguably we have another form of it now), laissez fare etc and not all of them have been what we would consider mechanistically capitalist.
But in its simplest form, the consumer deciding where to spend their capital is the most efficient way to reward "good" producers as long as the market itself is transparent and regulated.

Right now for instance we don't have well regulated nor transparent markets, and we also in many areas have pathological tendencies.

>Why does profit matter at all though?
Excellent question and the most important one IMO.
Profits by themselves are not a problem.
A wealthy farmer for instance will spend his money somewhere.
It becomes pathological when other farmers can't make a profit and the few who do can use their wealth to expand their grip on the local market.
That is not desirable!
And to connect it to your example, if a farmer uses the profit to cover early retirement then he hasn't made any financial gain.
He has only improved life quality or enjoyment for himself.

So the focus here should be on wealth accumulation becoming pathological or not and to make sure that there exists some competition to ensure that farmland etc is used efficiently (as there isn't enough to go around if it is used inefficiently).

Applying the capitalistic mechanism to reward efficient producers is thusly not the issue.
>Personally, I think the notion of money and financial profit is mental illness.
And that is fine.
But we are talking past each other here.