Best results for who? Who actually decides what systems are in place? I'm not even talking conspiracy, who OPENLY is behind those decisions?The systems in place are in place because they are the systems that have produced the best results. Many systems have been tried yet here we are with every nation practicing or drifting towards some form of capitalism. I don't think its a conspiracy by "the rich"... but rather the system that simply offers the best tradeoffs.
And like I said earlier, the USA and its other clients have literally gone to war with, invaded, bombed, embargoed, or deposed anyone who wanted to buck the system. And that's been happening ever since the moment European merchants decided that they wanted to force others to join their economic circle. You can't claim "everyone is doing it" without acknowledging that there have been severe consequences for those who didn't do it.
And there are many systems that have not been tried, or which have only been tried on small scales before getting shut down by larger power brokers.
No, like I said before this is not demonstrably "human nature". For example, look at North America during the colonial period. The Native Americans were practicing a very different system from the Europeans. And they preferred it. FAR more Europeans voluntarily left colonial "civilization" and joined Native American tribes and economic networks than the other way around. (Some writers of the colonial period even claim that literally no Indian ever left his tribe for Western civilization except under dire circumstances.) But the colonialist system still "won" because they literally killed and stole the land of anyone who didn't obey their system.Sounds like you have a beef with human nature...
We are greedy and short sighted... and free of coercion we will democratically elect someone promising us riches over someone promising us environmental protections.
This isn't because of the system or some illuminati.
.
In the current system there are massive incentives and propaganda to convince us to pursue riches. The amount of money spent constantly trying to coerce people to propagate the current system is insane. So it's not surprise that most follow that path, but it is disingenuous to insist that means that people would all follow the same path in a vacuum. We follow the system because we're taught to follow the system.
Monetary cost/monetary gain for who?monetary cost/monetary gain.
Better for everyone If a taxation/redistribution system is in place.
I have been thinking about your push for redistribution instead of minimum wage and I will say that for part of the problem it "could" work. The key is that the redistribution would have to be at the level that submission to the capitalist masters would be at least borderline unnecessary. If basic needs could be met without wage work, then I agree that minimum wage would be unnecessary, and outlets like Walmart would be punished by the simple lack of incentive for people to work for them. But that would require redistribution at the level that we would call Basic Income. And it would address just one facet of the issues of the current system.