system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
CMV: In a world where everyone's basic needs are met, including the Earth's, unchecked capitalism should be allowed to rule everything else.

If water, food, permanent shelter, basic utilities including internet, etc., are all provided, then there's no reason to restrict capitalism for what would amount to unnecessary comforts.

Like, if literally everyone were able to survive healthily without a job, why have a minimum wage? No one would need it to survive, so let the market decide. (Which, companies would need to offer a lot more for menial positions because almost no one would want to run a cash register for fun).

People would still be possibly wildly unequal with their wealth, but no one would be suffering for lack of it.

The only rebuttal I can think of is that some comforts should be provided. To that I say, only if it is necessary for health. But what of mental health? How do we decided who deserves more comfort than someone else? Maybe provide for a minimum amount of comfort, for mental health's sake. But not simply because of jealousy.
gpt
I think the flaw in this reasoning is that you ultimately have to decide the moment when further progress is just comfort and thus should be left to the capitalism and what basic human rights are.  After you make that decision, you are saying that any new innovation that is created after today will be seen as comfort and not a need.  Because, if you have committed 100% uncheck capitalism, you are creating a system that inherently doesn't allow for everyone to have access to that new innovation.  By that reasoning, if we go back 20 years, how many people do you think would agree with you about internet being one of the basic utilities that everyone needs?  How many people would have said that it is a basic need for everyone, or just a comfort that may help improve someone's mental health but not be absolutely necessary for happiness?  Wouldn't you say that we need at least some avenues to create price caps on certain things?  Or that the government should subsidize some new innovations to keep it cheaper for poorer citizens?  Seems to me that moving to the system you are proposing would look silly in about 30 years.