Coercive Capitalism vs. Voluntary Socialism

Consider that all US government expenditures, even if they are counterproducitve, such as money spent on the Depts of Education and Energy, which Jimmy Carter enacted, and Ronald Reagan promised to repeal, and then expanded. And the man hours spent to comply with the OSHA bureaucracy. Even the hundreds of billions of dollars spent to destroy Iraq and Afghanistan are counted as positive GDP for the US. Subtract all that from useful comodities produced, like grain, meat, vegetables, and lumber, etc, and what do you have? Your guess is at least as good as mine.

 

Why so Hostile ? One only needs to visit your local Dept.. or variety store and you'd be hard pressed to find any items Made in the USA. The United States is running a record trade deficit with China. This is no surprise, given the wide array of items in stores labeled “Made in China.”

The United States has been the world's largest national economy since at least the 1920s...

The US economy grew by an average of 3.8% from 1946 to 1973, ... The economy since 1973, however, has been characterized by both sluggish growth (averaging 2.7%), and nearly stagnant living standards, with household incomes increasing 0.3% annually.

Since the 1970s, several emerging countries have begun to close the economic gap with the United States. In most cases, this has been due to moving the manufacture of goods formerly made in the U.S. to countries where they could be made for sufficiently less money to cover the cost of shipping plus a higher profit.

Comparatively as to what we once produced and what we are capable of producing ... we produce next to nothing.

 

No, his guess of "next to nothing" is moronic while my guess of #1 in GDP and # 2 in manufactured goods is accurate.

 

We produce now, more than we produced in the past. Both then and now, NO WHERE CLOSE to "next to nothing" as you claim.

 

Comparatively as to what we once produced and what we are capable of producing ... we produce next to nothing.
We consume a tremendous amount , but produce next to nothing as far as consumer goods are concerned.

 

We produce now, more than we produced in the past. Both then and now, NO WHERE CLOSE to "next to nothing" as you claim.

 

I agree with OP that socialism can only be voluntary with cities and communities making the conscious decision to split from countries.
I don't agree that socialism is authoritarian as i don't agree that we need revolutions to achieve it .

 

Semantics ... totally verbal and statistical semantics . Per Capita .... valuation adjusted ... yada yada yada

Since the 1970s, several emerging countries have begun to close the economic gap with the United States. In most cases, this has been due to moving the manufacture of goods formerly made in the U.S. to countries where they could be made for sufficiently less money to cover the cost of shipping plus a higher profit.

Comparatively as to what we once produced and what we are capable of producing ... we produce next to nothing.

Discussion over , although I am certain you will come back with more. Quite frankly this topic is not high on my agenda at the moment.

Regards.

 

And you don't see this Utopian vision as a return to feudalism, and warlords? Which given Human Nature is what society would eventually degenerate into

 

A grasp on reality.

 

It is impossible for socialism to be voluntary beyond a short time. high achievers will get tired of supporting the rest of the people. Without autocratic/dictatorial government controlling the high achievers and keeping them from leaving it would fail very quickly. After the short time the people work at it, only the leaders are enriched. History tells us socialism, marxism as a whole, is a dismal failure.

Most of the countries that are touted as socialist are not really socialist. There are a few government owned or controlled industries, but the primary production and distribution is determined and carried out by private enterprise.

 

What manufacturing has left the US, other than that which won out in quality and service (like autos) are the labor intensive rote type assembly line industries. Those jobs are tailor made for 3rd world countries and will never be high paying jobs if they return to the US for some very strange reason. It doesn't matter that they left. It gave most of our labor the opportunity to step up to higher quality endeavors.

Offshoring creates as many U.S. jobs as it kills, study says

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/07/12/study-offshoring-creates-as-many-u-s-jobs-as-it-kills/

Now, consider this, http://www.cnn.com/2013/12/03/opinion/education-rankings-commentary-schleicher/index.html?hpt=hp_c2

"Consider this: Only 2% of American students can conceptualize, generalize and use advanced math in creative ways, which is what the highest performance level in PISA requires.

In Shanghai it is over 30%. Shanghai has understood that the world economy will pay an ever-rising premium on excellence, and that today's economy no longer rewards people simply for what they know -- Google already knows everything-- but for what they can do with what they know."​

 

Socialism is a requirement for States and statism to be created and exist via a Social Contract.

 

Nope; eminent domain completes the social concept regarding socialism.

 

Wrong yet again Daniel. You really need to learn what socialism really is, not this pipe dream you keep trying to sell us.

 

No , in direct democracy systems none has to follow or be economically / politically / socially subjugated so feudalism is out of question. Human nature is still under debate but if you like to go this way i have a couple of very strong arguments against selfishness .

Nobody asks you to support "the rest" and you can keep your high achievements for yourself if this is your thing.
You need to stop thinking of Bolsheviks , there are no "supreme soviets" or parties in communism because there is no need for them since societies are run through referendums .
History says that state capitalism (USSR) , primitivism (Cambodia), faux Bolivarianism (Cuba) and fascism (China) are failures and this is because you can not apply socialism parallel with the existence of a state , you have to get rid of it completely .

This is true

 

Why not learn more about social-ism? Eminent domain completes the requirement for public ownership of means of production.

 

Socialist states dont purchase the land from individuals through Eminent Domain because they already own it.

 

Our Founding Fathers were wise enough to enumerate that capital program under our form of socialism. Eminent domain over any means of production completes the socialism requirement for any form of socialism.

 

Uhhh no it doesn't. But feel free to point to ANY published source that defines government as socialism. I believe you are now up to 3 outside sources that failed to support your assertion. How about just one that does.

 

It doesn't work that way in practice. No matter how you try to theorize what it should be, it never works out that way. High achievers get screwed, low achievers get more than they deserve and only the leaders get rich. As you have listed above, all attempts at socialism have matured into bastard almost systems, and in each one only the leaders prospered.

A major problem with socialism is mostly the assumption that everyone is willing to engage in government by referendum, and that decisions can be made easily and in a timely fashion. In a modern economy it can't happen.

 

I know all I will ever need know about socialism. It is a dismal failure, and eminent domain has nothing to do with socialism. It is nothing more than a governmental tool to manage land use.

 

Because democracy can't be allowed on the workplace for some reason and autocracy is the norm. For some reason.

It is also due to some reason that those who have more money can decide more on the company's issues than those who do not.

It's also called freedom from rights, so, yeah. It's freedom.

 

It is a form of socialism regarding ownership of means of production.

 

Right Daniel. If the government has ownership of the means of production (or firm control of production) it is socialism.