Capitalism vs Socialism ~ MOD ALERT ~

Now you understand my point about an economic reason for States and legacy Statism arising from any, more anarcho-capitalistic form of non-political economy.

 

In any case, socialism can ensure full employment of resources in any given market. How can any political-economy go wrong with subscribing to the theory of demand and supply, as a form of federal doctrine; and simply establish a Standard of full employment of resources in any given market but especially, markets in human capital.

Once established as a federal Standard, simple recourse to the federal doctrine of employment at will could provide market friendly metrics for potential labor market participants in regard to a form of minimum wage that simply competes with the private sector for labor to better ensure full employment.

Simple poverty in the US can be solved as easily as administering a form of minimum wage that clears our poverty guidelines.

Why not lower our Tax burden by not burdening our elected representatives with anything more complicated than simply being able to be moral enough to bear true witness to our own laws regarding the concept and legal doctrine of employment at will.

 

There is no way socialism will/can ensure full employment with as much prosperity for even those you wish to help. Only capitalism can do that.

 

All it requires is sufficient social morals for free, to bear true witness to our own laws regarding the concept and legal doctrine of employment at will. The physical infrastructure already exists in every State of the Union and the federal districts.

Why do you have any problem with the subjective moral value of social programs that result in "goodwill toward men" through the promotion of the general welfare, with any form of capitalism?

 

I have no problem with them at all. They just won't work in socialism as it takes capitalism to create the wealth to pay for them.

 

Not at all; your continued misdiagnoses of the Body politic leads to my continually asking Dr. Orange for second opinions due to that lack of confidence.

Capitalism, under truer forms of socialism, is only necessary for ease of exchange and for monetary units of account in any Institution of money based markets.

Barter would work, but less efficiently unless more centrally planned, with input from every market participant.

Why do you believe the socialism of bearing true witness to our own laws, as a form of market recognizable social moral, would be worse for our political economy?

In any case, we may simply not yet be evolved enough to move beyond capitalism and capital based markets; and it shows in our secular and temporal, subjective value of morals.

 

You totally mistake my feelings on the issue. I have no problems with subjective (or objective) moral value of social programs which help the needy. My only problem is your assumption that socialism will do nearly as much in the way of funding to help as does capitalism.

To recap, your motives are good, your expectations about socialism are not.

 

Capitalism can Never solve for a Social problem of a poverty of Capital. Only socialism can do that through the subjective value of morals, if only we could convince our federal Congress to simply be moral enough to bear true witness to a federal doctrine regarding employment at will and compensation for being unemployed.

 

Communism is where everyone is exactly alike(as close as possible).Same food, same clothes, same schedule, same haircut, same glasses, same vaccines, same showers same______ The only ones allowed to be different are The Owners.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k1KreBkLa_o

 

How would that apply to a hypothetical, divine commune of Heaven, in that alternative?

 

This thread is now closed as it has reached over 750 posts.

Shangrila
Site Moderator