Capitalism vs Socialism ~ MOD ALERT ~

So you argue socialism + capitalism. This is what the populace wants and capitalism moguls who have no interest in the well being of anything but their wallets continue to fight tooth and nail.

 

I've often heard of this idea of socialism 'by free will/choice', but that is in essence still capitalism, where some of the individuals choose to do xyz with their income/wealth. That choice is essentially gone in socialism.

 

Being "regulated by laws" is a form of socialism, not for profit capitalism which must rely on voluntary social transaction and mutually beneficial trade.

 

Social programs do not socialism make. Don't read anything into what I assert as you will miss the point every time.

 

No Daniel, regulation of laissez-faire to prevent fraud; and social programs is not a form of socialism. Unless government or collective coops control production and distribution is is not socialism. In addition, the idea of voluntary social transaction won't exist on its own, it must have government elected by the people to insure it occurs.

 

Not true. Andrew Carnegie, J. P. Morgan, Andrew Mellon, Henry Ford, J. D. Rockerfeller, George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, Enoch Pratt are all examples of 'capitalism moguls' who have a deep interest in the wellbeing of everyone, and the list goes on far longer than that. Even think Bill Gates today, who has given a great deal to charity and has said that most of his massive fortune will be given to charity upon his death.

The reality that you're missing is that each individual acting in their own best interest is not inherently detrimental to the interest of others (which seems to be your understanding). Bill Gates, for example, has fought 'tooth and nail' for the expansion of his wallet (really his bank account, his wallet couldn't fit one thousandth of his wealth in $100 bills), yet has that been to the detriment of others? Not really. Businesses and individuals have benefitted greatly from Microsoft's programs and developments, not to mention it's entertainment department (I myself was a great fan of the Age of Empires series).

Do you think that a poor family is at a loss when they rent a movie from Red Box for $1? Are they not being provided quality entertainment at a cost lower than they're willing to pay? The public good created by Outerwall Inc. (who owns Red Box) is inherent in the choice of individuals to purchase their product, which is at or below the price the consumers are willing to pay for the product.

 

Communism in theory has many faces technically many science fiction utopias are Communist - Star Trek (TNG+), A Brave New World and Starship Troopers (book) in many ways but are not autocratic dictatorships. In fact Marx's Brother in Law taught leisure is the ideal not labor.

I would argue if Communism was comfort based cradle to grave comfort and making service to the state elective such as military service with added benefits, but little Ivan or Catherine would grow up content with no issues and be good ctizens. And get an assigned job when an adult. They could control them without the iron fist they used. Comfort with a sense of freedom controlled and malcontents dealt with by as minimally problematic means and they could have shown up Capitalism.

And Marx never said one could not have private property or even have cottage industry rather it had its place, you want to be a craftsman in fact it was a good thing maintaining tradition and allow some sense of freedom people need. Our government is not that great big industry runs everything and our votes mean little in the end.

Both systems Communism/Socialism and Capitalism can be cruel based on how its practiced but socialism provides a more even playing field IMHO if practiced properly.

Comfort is in and of itself a form of freedom, freedom from want.

 

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=330

If you go to the web site, you will note that there has not been very much change between the start year of 2000 and 2011 in how much the mean income is from year to year. It is my understanding that all amounts of wage are adjusted for inflation.

Mean household incomes by quintile as of the last avaiable data 2011
Upper. $178,000
Second. $80,08
Third... $48,842
Fourth $29,204
Lowest $11,239

- - - Updated - - -

I believe you are correct in saying that what the poor man earns is would not change if the rich man made more or less than he currently does.

 

Defending the corporate wealthy once again? Isn't that a bit "narrow minded"? The raiders can do no wrong huh?

 

Do you believe that there can be a socialist system in which motivation and ambition can be exercised and that resentments do not destroy the system. Effectively, do you believe, based known human behavior traits, socialism could ever be practiced properly? And if it could, do you believe that system would generate sufficient prosperity such that the least of the citizens could get the help they need?

 

So many movies thrown in the gulags whose only crime was being the wrong format. It was horrible.

 

Do you believe that without the most successful making the kind of money they do hurts the poor man? Do you believe that eliminating all of the current "1%ers to 5%ers today that the poor would be taken care as well? These are the questions which must be explored.

 

I didn't realize you could eat DVDs, or wipe them on your skin to cure acne...learn something new every day I suppose...

 

Obviously, the power the 1%ers and 5%ers yield, have corrupted society, and perverted the economic system. They say you can't throw the baby out with the bath water but, I think it's times to re-do the bathroom completely. The baby, the water, the walls. The whole kit and kaboodle.

 

No, I do not. Socialism can only be the name for a system in which the government owns the means of production or controls the means of production and the control of wages.,

- - - Updated - - -

What is "obvious" to you is not obvious to everyone.

 

Pat Buchanan once related this story that happened to him.

I went to the post office around Christmas time. I happened to ask the postal worker, hows business. He said, business couldn't be any worse. Look at how long this line is. Everyone got the Christmas spirit mailing those stupid post card, business couldn't worst.

Then Pat went to a restaurant. He asked, Hows businesses. The owner said, business couldn't be any better. Look at how long this line is. Everyone got the Christmas they are taking their familes out for dinner, business couldn't any better.

Compare the service you get at a for profit businesses verses the Department of Motor Vehicle. The government employee paid whether he does a good job or bad. The government employee will do what it takes to avoid getting fired. That means do the bare minimum. There is no reason to exceed expectation. When was the last time a government employee has gotten a tip for outstanding service? Will coming in early, leaving late, coming in on a Saturday profit the government employee?

The for profit firm has the incentive to do a good job. Because if he doesn't, the competitor will.

 

[QUOTE
What is "obvious" to you is not obvious to everyone.[/QUOTE]


It's never obvious to the supremely wealthy. It's blatantly obvious to the victims of the aftermath of the 1%ers.

 

It is not "obvious" to everyone that your opinion on the subject is correct, not blatantly or otherwise.

 

No one that's supremely wealthy, as I acknowledged. Ask the downsized, outsourced, laid off worker that gave most of their lives to the rich pricks that fattened themselves up at their expense. THEY know.

 

You seem to confuse with the means of production being owned by the government and being 'controlled' by the government. Not the same thing.

 

If you look at the 2nd definition, 2. a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property, you will see one of the reasons why I object so strenuously to LVT.

so·cial·ism
ˈsōSHəˌlizəm/
noun
noun: socialism

1. a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.
synonyms: leftism, welfarism;

Definition of SOCIALISM
1
: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2
a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property
b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3
: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done

Socialism is an economic system characterised by social ownership of the means of production and co-operative management of the economy.[1] "Social ownership" may refer to cooperative enterprises, common ownership, state ownership, citizen ownership of equity, or any combination of these.[2] There are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them.[3] They differ in the type of social ownership they advocate, the degree to which they rely on markets or planning, how management is to be organised within productive institutions, and the role of the state in constructing socialism.

 

So you refuse to believe the conclusions of a study which says, for every job off shored at least 1 job is created in the US. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/07/12/study-offshoring-creates-as-many-u-s-jobs-as-it-kills/

 

i think it's easier if obe doesnt look at socialism and capitalism as polar opposites. Voluntary socialism can indeed theorethically work inside a capitalist system. if there's this business run only by the workers and they redistribute income based on socialists principles that would be a socialist business wouldnt? and at the same time, its in a capitalist system.

 

'Fraud doesn't do evidence.

 

Sure it does; otherwise they would be called capital programs and be required to generate a profit.