Standing In The Sun: Capitalism Analysis

Introduction

Christopher Meyer’s and Julia Kirby’s Standing in the Sun is the result of idealistic capitalists who have an undying commitment to the term capitalism. Although Meyer and Kirby present an economic model contrary to the key features of capitalism, they are determined to adapt capitalism to any practice. It is difficult to pinpoint why Meyer and Kirby believe that capitalism is an ever-adapting system as they have omitted their definition of capitalism. In addition to not defining key terms, Meyer and Kirby have relied heavily on anecdotal evidence to support their thesis which makes their book much less adaptable to real life practices. The use of anecdotal evidence also creates some contradictions throughout the book as the narratives

Though systems can adapt to better suit their environment, I also believe that key features must be present in the new applications for the system to still be called capitalism. The changes that Meyer and Kirby advocate for, are in direct conflict with the fundamental definition of capitalism. I believe that what Meyer and Kirby should be trying to prove is not that the structure of capitalism is shifting, but that the world is shifting away from capitalism into a new economic structure. Perhaps Meyer and Kirby are getting stuck in an embedded base and are having difficulty escaping the old term of

Meyer and Kirby strongly challenge the capitalistic attachment to property rights and strongly dispute its importance in “Chapter Six: The Invisible Handshake” where they encourage people to shift away from the mindset of owning everything so that innovation can be furthered. This new mindset found its way into Meyer and Kirby’s five rules, sitting at rule four on the list, give it away until you charge for it. Chapter six explores the concept of the invisible handshake which talks about the sharing and collective use of a non-rival goods, goods that don’t lose its value and can be consumed in multiple locations by multiple people at the same time. Meyer and Kirby advocate that by not claiming property rights to non-rival goods, and freely sharing whatever non-rival resources we may have, people will be motivated to participate in creating more innovative ideas. China is used as an example of a growing economy that Meyers and Kirby attribute to the lack of property rights. Their theory is that when people are not limited by lack of access to available information, innovation is able to progress at a much higher speed. Because China does not guard property rights as vigorously as North America, their economy is able to innovate and grow as extremely high