----------------- HES POSTING ----------------- 
Mircea, it seems to me that you are using two different meanings of the term "capital." 
 
 
> My personal belief is that 'capitalism' described well the developed world economy in
19th century to just about 1950; _capital_ was the main scarce factor of growth and it
justified profits.
 
Here, capital is a factor of production. 
 
 
> 'Market economy' describes better the current state of the world: capital can be
obtained plentifully through a well-developed market; but the scarce factor to make it
work are favorable _markets_, i.e. intense consumer desires and/or cheap, organized
resources (technology, labor, nature).
 
Here, capital appears to be money. Of course money can be used to buy machines, tools,
buildings, etc. but it can also be used to buy technology, labor, and rights to "natural"
resources.
 
In light of this, what does "capitalism" mean? Ludwig von Mises (Human Action, 1966: 230)
had an interesting answer. He suggested that we associate the word "capitalism" with
capital accounting -- using money and estimates of future returns on saving and investment
to determine the current value of resources and goods. Capital accounting enables
individuals in a social setting to compare expected wealth. It enables them to make
informed choices about which investments are likely to be more profitable. Without money
and loan markets, such choices would be much more difficult to make.
 
Mises also claims that the term "capitalism" was employed to deprecate the free enterprise
system (or what Adam Smith called "the system of natural liberty.") This claim seems to be
based on the view that to readers who accepted a crude labor theory of value, it would
refer to a system in which capitalists captured surplus that rightfully belonged to the
hands-on manufacturers.
 
The word "market economy" has a different connotation. I define it as containing three
characteristics: specialization, money, and private property rights including the right to
the ownership of what one produces and the right to exchange ownership:
 
http://www.gunning.cafeprogressive.com/knowent/mi-1.htm 
 
I use the term "pure market economy" to define a market economy in which rights exist to
control every action that causes an external effect. In this economy, there are no non-
internalized externalities, except in the sense that it is more costly to make the
exchanges that would eliminate them than it is worth to the exchanging parties.
 
I know that this does not directly answer all of your questions. But you have placed a
rather tall order. Perhaps you could tell why you want to know the origin of these terms.
After all, words are just words.
Ideas are different. 
 
Pat Gunning 
 
------------ FOOTER TO HES POSTING ------------ 
For information, send the message "info HES" to [log in to unmask]