08-17-2004, 08:45 AM #1AR-Hall of Famer / Retired
- Join Date
- Aug 2001
- Wherever necessary
I think that this is a far more relevant topic than communism as was put up earlier - Why? because the US is in danger of drifting into socialism, not communism - moreover, most EU countries (old europe) are proud socialists, something most americans are not even remotely aware of - and finally, we have a faction of the Democratic party who is clearly socialist as well (some say that the US communist party decided to give up and infiltrate one party starting in the 40s and 50s and that they chose the Democrats to do so, true or not it looks like they have been largely successful)
now the question is - does socialism work really? we have a number of examples of it going on now as well as even more who are 1/2 socialist in some areas (like Canada) - does it really work at a societal level?
I propose that it does not - tho it does provide comfortable mediocraty at some points it in no way encourages human endeavor to reach its apogee - and that is what has brought us out of the stone ages - I think the inherint conflict in democracy and capitalism actually - the cycles of creation and destruction end up providing a better end product even if the transition is certainly more painful for some. I also like that the primary determinant for ones future is ones own initiative, subject to time and chance of course - over a state body largely regulating much of our lives via massive income redistribution, onorus work parameters, etc
08-17-2004, 09:07 AM #2
IMO this is up there right behind communism, great in theory but put in the human element and it gets shot to hel*. By our very nature we will rebel against forced limitations and things that hinder our personal progress. This is especially true of the U.S., our collective attitudes will not allow for someone (to use an analogy) to come into our kitchen , take our food and give it to someone else that THEY deem worthy.
As a people Americans are very generous with their time and money without it being forced on them. MAKE THEM and see how long it takes for another revolution!
08-17-2004, 09:27 AM #3Originally Posted by 1victor
08-17-2004, 10:11 AM #4
Socialism does not comply with human nature; people need incentive to work, innovate, take entrepreneurial risks, etc. These are elements that have made capitalism successful. The U.S is a good example of that. If people don't feel pressured or have incentives to work, the will not. The society will be much less productive, the economy will start failing, poverty becomes the norm, revolution, so on and so forth.....it just doesn't work.
While I feel we need some socialistic aspects (Anti-Trust legislation, etc) are needed to keep balence in society, it is dangerous to suppose that being more socialistic will benefit anyone but those who will not or cannot work to support themselves. Tell me: Why I should feed an illegal immigrant who came here to live on Social Security?
08-17-2004, 01:41 PM #5
I don't think it's a coincidencel that the socialist countries of Northern and Eastern Europe have extremely high suicide rates. 50% above the United States per capita.
Last edited by MMC78; 08-17-2004 at 01:54 PM.
08-17-2004, 02:06 PM #6
what it socialism? i thought it was the same as communism
08-17-2004, 02:09 PM #7
08-17-2004, 02:10 PM #8
08-17-2004, 03:02 PM #9
The United Nations rankings (2001 stats). Countries ranked by: per capita income, health care, life expectancy and educational levels.
6. United States
This is a sample of 1 year but it's always a similar shuffle among the top 10 or so. America is never ranked #1. Every one of these countries is socialist, other than the USA, so there is no doubt a high standard of living can be obtained through a socialist model. Personally, I would argue that it is an unfair comparison becasue there is only one competitive capitalist player in the world, the USA. Who knows how things would stack up if there were a few dozen more well developed capitalist countries. Socilism is sucessful and enjoys wide popularity, and for the life of me, I cannot figure out why.
08-17-2004, 03:05 PM #10
Chica, is is the easier softer way. Why not have "daddy or mommy" take care of you? It makes sense. Most of those countries are scandanavian my mom is 100% Dane so I can say this, they are an odd people anyway, a totally different mind set than most other peoples.
08-17-2004, 06:08 PM #11Originally Posted by chicamahomico
08-17-2004, 11:16 PM #12
Sure, no question about it. There are some adjustment you would need to make in order for the comparison to be more realistic and fair. You would have to adjust for population and also draw up some criterion which considers the contributions of expatriates working in America. How are there contributions tallied up? Consider Fermi when he won the Nobel Prize in physics. He was an Italian who came to America, which is where he made his greatest contributions, and became a citizen. Should that Nobel Prize be counted for the USA or for Italy and why?
Bottom line about your point is that stuff is not factored in for a simple reason. It doesn't matter where these contributions are made, they benefit people all around the globe.
I'm not hating on capitalism at all, it's my peronal belief that's it is a fantastic philosophy but there is no doubt that socialist countries can prosper as well.
Originally Posted by MMC78
08-17-2004, 11:20 PM #13
I meant it more from an 'I don't know why Canadians would rather head toward socialism than towards capitalism'.
Europe, totally different mindset there. IMO they think that way is good because every last country ni that area was or still is some form of monarchy. Very top down, central planning sort of mindset. Blechhh.
Originally Posted by 1victor
08-17-2004, 11:23 PM #14Originally Posted by 1victor
08-18-2004, 12:16 AM #15Originally Posted by chicamahomico
Great contributioins to science are a reflection of our capiltaist society. We have the best scientific universities, the best graduate students, and the best research professors. There's a reason why Time chose Einstein as the man of the century. Our value system is centered heavily towards acheivement of the individual rather than placation of the masses.
08-21-2004, 10:33 AM #16
No disagreement with the fact that America has the majority of the best. What I'm saying is that a lot of it is about as American as sauerkraut. Becasue America provides financial incentive for the best scholars (which they should IMO) to leave their home country and do research in the USA doesn't make that reasearch 100% American IMO.
I just realized we are sidetracking somewhat from the original discussion. Anyone here familiar with Schumpeter's theory of creative destruction? (other than CYC cause I know he is)
Originally Posted by MMC78
Last edited by chicamahomico; 08-21-2004 at 10:39 AM.
08-21-2004, 10:38 AM #17
Badger, Being outdoors and blowing each other away with handguns!
I didn't realize that those were THE two components to a successful society. Do they go in that order or is it not blowing each other away and then being outdoors?
08-21-2004, 11:17 AM #18AR-Hall of Famer / Retired
Originally Posted by chicamahomico
- Join Date
- Aug 2001
- Wherever necessary
as to being American - Many of our greatest inventors, businessmen, artists, etc have indeed immigrated - but I firmly believe that the reason that they excelled so much here was due to the environment of freedom that we enjoy as well as the ability to profit that we encourage.
08-21-2004, 11:51 AM #19
Oddly enough, I have no opinion on this . . .
Seems to me trading capitalism for socialism would be like trading your single marital status for being married. There are advantages and disadvantages to each, but you trade one set of problems for a totally different set of problems.
Ya, socialist countries have higher taxes, but everyone gets health care, and you don't end up with old folks dying alone of starvation. Capitalist countries have lots more people in desperate situations, but they can be considered to be merely falling into a natural "survival of the fittest," where they will eventually die off and be replaced with other folks better suited to constructively participate in the economic system.
Actually, you can find good and bad in both. Some genius ought to figure out how to combine both into a practical combination.
08-21-2004, 03:54 PM #20
I think sweden is evidence that it can work pretty good. The socialist democrats have won most elections the last 50 years if Im not misstake and we are the third ranking country in living standard(atleast we was) and well its a nice and good place to live.
But its downfalls as I se it is that its very hard to get very wealthy and that sux and WAY to easy to take advantage of the social security and I dont know if this is socialis in general but the current imigration policys sucks dick cause we are getting overrun by musslims right now.
Sweden is on its way down but socialism worked here for a long time so dont know if its socialims or stupid politicans to blame right now.
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)