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.
So the reasons people give for why capitalism is better than socialism are:
1) Everybody is better off in a capitalist society than a socialist one.
2) People have property rights and capitalism does a better job of protecting those rights than socialism does.
3) We don't have the resources to help everybody and capitalism does a better job of making sure resources go to who most deserve it.
4) Cheaters who are looking to take it easy and not contribute their fair share will ruin socialism for everybody.
Are these good reasons?
Frankly, socialism is the second worst system ever devised by human and only surpassed by communism.
The question should be "What kind crazy question is this? Do you think a cake is better than a pile of feces? Even Nazism is better than socialism."
Last edited by lifeexplorer; 02-20-2018 at 03:17 PM..
My point was that people have no choice but to participate in a system that extracts value from the laborers at the bottom and shifts it to the owners at the top. The laborer at the bottom has no bargaining power, because he has the “choice” of being milked for all he is worth or starving to death.
All cultures recognize the moral wrongness of armed robbery (extraction of wealth via unequal bargaining power), but when it’s organized on a large enough scale, nobody seems to care.
The irony here is you are describing socialism/statism. Taxation is armed robbery.
Capitalism/anarchy is where everything is voluntary. Under it you only starve to death if...
A. You refuse to voluntarily find unclaimed non-privatized resources to either feed yourself or make something out of those resources to sell/trade for food.
B. You are the first person born into the world where all resources are privatized already and you happen to be the cutoff of sustainability. This of course is so statistically irrelevant it is absurd to even bring it up but it is there.
Man, the State-mandated public indoctrination centers did a number on you.
Your complaint seems to be with existence itself. In order to get something, you have to do something.
If you're alone on an island, you can't just expect to be fed, because there's no one to do it for you. If you're surrounded by others, you can say it's unfair that they don't feed you, but I think they'll strongly disagree. They're the ones doing the work to produce the food.
It is a problem with existence.
Most people do support their children from birth to a certain age until they develop the skills to attain their own resources.
Simply replacing parents with government is what that poster is advocating.
My point was that people have no choice but to participate in a system that extracts value from the laborers at the bottom and shifts it to the owners at the top. The laborer at the bottom has no bargaining power, because he has the “choice” of being milked for all he is worth or starving to death.
That is only partially true.
The bolded part is exactly what capitalism is designed to do. If it were not that way, as many others have pointed out, there would be no motivation to excel. A society doesn't land people on the moon unless they are motivated.
Denmark is a perfect example. According to polls, they are the happiest people in the world. But I don't see them leading the world in scientific endeavors. How many Danish satellites are up there providing instant communication ability to the world? The USA has dozens up there doing that very thing.
The second part of your statement is completely wrong. The laborer at the bottom has many choices besides the two you mentioned. Among them is to excel at what they are doing (even if they are only the janitor) in order to be noticed, rewarded, and promoted. Most millionaires are self-made using this very method. But, ironically, there are some posters here that would love to climb the ladder of success, yet believes "millionaire" is a dirty word. No wonder they can't get anywhere.
Another option you have is to move to a purely socialistic country if socialism is what you crave.
Yes, every country that has ever fully embraced socialism.
So human nature is driven by self interest? According to my understanding of biology I thought tribalism is the natural state of humans. Not social darwinism.
So human nature is driven by self interest? According to my understanding of biology I thought tribalism is the natural state of humans. Not social darwinism.
Already covered this. Look at any nomadic tribes, and you'll see association for the benefits of trade, strength in numbers, safety from neighboring tribes, etc. What you will also see is a serious amount of survival of the fittest. You provide a benefit as part of the association, or you do not associate. The individual chooses to associate, but if they do, they hold up their end of the association "contract." Ad yeah, that is driven by self-interest.
I will associate with you and you with me if we both find a benefit from doing so. Take away the benefit as defined by our own respective self-interests, and we have no reason to associate. Tribes operate under that very simple paradigm. Bring something to the group or begone.
The bolded part is exactly what capitalism is designed to do. If it were not that way, as many others have pointed out, there would be no motivation to excel. A society doesn't land people on the moon unless they are motivated.
Denmark is a perfect example. According to polls, they are the happiest people in the world. But I don't see them leading the world in scientific endeavors. How many Danish satellites are up there providing instant communication ability to the world? The USA has dozens up there doing that very thing.
The second part of your statement is completely wrong. The laborer at the bottom has many choices besides the two you mentioned. Among them is to excel at what they are doing (even if they are only the janitor) in order to be noticed, rewarded, and promoted. Most millionaires are self-made using this very method. But, ironically, there are some posters here that would love to climb the ladder of success, yet believes "millionaire" is a dirty word. No wonder they can't get anywhere.
Another option you have is to move to a purely socialistic country if socialism is what you crave.
Already covered this. Look at any nomadic tribes, and you'll see association for the benefits of trade, strength in numbers, safety from neighboring tribes, etc. What you will also see is a serious amount of survival of the fittest. You provide a benefit as part of the association, or you do not associate. The individual chooses to associate, but if they do, they hold up their end of the association "contract." Ad yeah, that is driven by self-interest.
I will associate with you and you with me if we both find a benefit from doing so. Take away the benefit as defined by our own respective self-interests, and we have no reason to associate. Tribes operate under that very simple paradigm. Bring something to the group or begone.
Is that because you really are a sick twisted freak that would love to unleash a bunch of pent-up hostility, or because you know that if we met in a dark alley you'd get your a** kicked?
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.
