Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
USSR wasn't socialist, it was state capitalist, the means of production were not owned by the workers it was owned by the state that privatized the profits for use of the state and utilized a capitalistic mode of production.
The state owning the means of production by definition is socialism. Not capitalism..
The state owning the means of production by definition is socialism. Not capitalism..
You dont know what the hell you're talking about.
No it isn't, the definition of socialism is social ownership of the means of production, not state, you don't know what you're talking about. If the state owns the means of production instead of the workers maintaining a capitalist mode of production then the state acts as the capitalist.
GOVERNMENT is creating poverty in our nation, but subsidizing poor living conditions and encouraging broken families and lack of work.
Which isn't socialism. How many people are in poverty because of socialist enterprises like the Mondragon Corporation? And how many people are in poverty because of capitalism ie private ownership of the means of production hoarding all the wealth. Look at how the United Fruit Company hoarded all that land in Central America with kickbacks from the government guaranteeing a monopoly for them, even going so far as to get the CIA to overthrow the one leader that wasn't friendly to them, that's capitalism, and that kept people in poverty.
No it isn't, the definition of socialism is social ownership of the means of production, not state, you don't know what you're talking about. If the state owns the means of production instead of the workers maintaining a capitalist mode of production then the state acts as the capitalist.
general term for the political and economic theory that advocates a system of collective or government ownership and management of the means of production and distribution of goods. Because of the collective nature of socialism, it is to be contrasted to the doctrine of the sanctity of private property that characterizes capitalism. Where capitalism stresses competition and profit, socialism calls for cooperation and social service.
Which isn't socialism. How many people are in poverty because of socialist enterprises like the Mondragon Corporation? And how many people are in poverty because of capitalism ie private ownership of the means of production hoarding all the wealth. Look at how the United Fruit Company hoarded all that land in Central America with kickbacks from the government guaranteeing a monopoly for them, even going so far as to get the CIA to overthrow the one leader that wasn't friendly to them, that's capitalism, and that kept people in poverty.
Name for me one billionaire who has gotten rich without providing jobs...
Heres a few American socialist programs that seem to be working .
For those anti socialist would you like to see the end of these tax payer funded resources that benefit many?.
*military
*police
*firefighters
*voting
*Medicare
*Medicaid
*Social Security
*healthcare (via emergency room, for people who can't pay)
*public libraries
*public schools
*government college grants, scholarships, and loans
*roads (except toll roads)
*the FDA
*the EPA...
Quote:
so·cial·ism (ssh-lzm)n.1. Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy.
Those programs listed fall under the definition provided, and whether they are bankrupt or not has little relevance on their status as socialist programs.
However for expanded understanding feel free to list your own list of examples as to what qualifies as socialist programs.
Those programs listed fall under the definition provided, and whether they are bankrupt or not has little relevance on their status as socialist programs.
However for expanded understanding feel free to list your own list of examples as to what qualifies as socialist programs.
First off those items listed are mostly security and safety measures. Nothing in them is industrious. The means of production in the hands of the state or government means quite literally you'd be punching in to the federal government's time clock to produce something like a tank, a refrigerator, a computer, cellphone, bandaid, etc.
I think some of you are confusing your property theories. Does the federal government own property with which it alone provides the means of production? That's socialism.
As far as corporations go they're the closest thing to communist property theory that has ever existed on this planet. State capitalism isn't socialism, it falls under the theory that the state provide the funds and private enterprises produce the goods. It's effectively an open ended deal for the best ideas but not necessarily the most efficient although in many cases it's more efficient than private industry having to get approval for an industrious idea. That idea and the regulations regarding it can be completely ignored or fostered in state run capitalism with restrictions.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
sh
-l
z
