Quote:
Originally Posted by GregW
I consider the old board game MONOPOLY to be one of the most realistic games ever invented. It starts with all the players equal (OK this is unreal but starting with only the banker having all the money ends the game before it starts) and proceeds with one investor eventually owning all if the property on the board. Then the game ends with the winner unable to sell or rent anything because there is no one to buy his stuff. Unfettered business results in the same situation but take longer because there are far more players.
Communism arrives at the same end without bothering with all the playing. The state owns everything so why bother playing. Both communism and unfettered business Capitalism result in the Tyranny of the Owner. Same result through different methods.
The socialism I propose uses the capitalist market system to allocate capital to where it will make the most money while the government taxes the winners to provide everybody with services that are less expensive to provide without the duplication required for the competitive part of the market to function. Public utilities are the prime example. It would be absurd to have two or more sets of pipes to supply a city with fresh water so the owners would have a way of competing on quality, quantity and reliability. The resulting market could be allowed to set prices for the water. The owners would receive a return on their investment but it would be limited by the price of the water. I believe this return would be too low to have any private investment in any system that did not have a monopoly on the water. Then lots of money could be made because the price could be set just below the level that would encourage other types of water supply. Even monopolies are not totally secure in setting the price.
I believe the things that people need (clean air and water, food, shelter, and health care) should be supplied by the government. [BTW – Obama’s health Insurance is IMHO completely improper because it us a forced insurance system that is still dependant on private business. He should have passed a Universal Health Care system regulating the entire industry for the benefit of the sick, not the greedy.] The rest of the economy should be operated by a capitalist market system with government protection from the monopolists, speculators, Ponzi artists and frauds.
I think the ideal system is a Monopoly game where none of the players can ever own a monopoly on any of the sectors as well as never own everything. The ideal system keeps the players playing forever. It also allows for any surpluses to be distributed in a manner that allows anyone to live well even if they do not want to play the game.
I will not argue with Roysoldboy about the merits of Glen Beck’s show because I do not watch or listen to the man. I simply have not bothered.
|
Once again perfectly spot on !
But then again reason and moderation are never going to be that popular with the "all or nothing crowd" .
It is as for some people the idea of Capitalism with checks and balances to prevent obscene excesses is somehow terrifying.
Communism and pure Capitalism are both extreme forms of tyranny . Both undemocratic and both extremely damaging to society. What is so hard about the concept of a more benevolent form of Capitalism where one can strive without having to step and spit on others on the way to the top ?
No countries are perfect but personally I prefer a German model which favours a Capitalism with a smaller C. Still not ideal by a long way but having lived in Germany many years I saw some extremely wealthy individuals with great financial success but also a much narrower gap in terms of social disparities.
There is poverty in Germany and like all countries it certainly has its fair share of socio-economic issues especially since the reunification but on the whole it has a much wider middle class and both extremes of poor and rich are more limited than in the US.
What is wrong with wanting to expand the middle classes ? I will never understand the rabid opposition to a little more social justice and a more level playing field. The mind boggles. I lived in Frankfurt for a while , the financial capital of Germany and the taxes did not seem to frighten German entrepeneurs. Same in Sweden and Norway.
I went to school in France with the grand-son of one of the richest man in France ( armaments tycoon Mr Dassault - 56th richest man in the world according to "Forbes" ) and he is still employing a heck of a lot of French people to produce his weapons of mass destruction .
He has also been implicated in financial scandals so he seems like a pretty regular exploiter to me... French or not. His views on taxes are just as right wing as most American CEOs and somehow he still employs a lot of people in France despite all those niggling issues ...
Maybe obscenely wealthy Europeans are more resigned to being simply being obscenely rich rather than super obscenely rich like Americans are... I'm not sure.
My school years were spent with the sons and daughters of some of the richest European ( and non European) men and women. Very few of them were in tax exile ( though of course tax loopholes are no doubt used to great effect... ) and the vast majority employing their own compatriots in their various enterprises ( as well as abroad of course, one does not have to be exclusive of the other).
Two Swedes, One German and one French entrepeneurs make it to the top 15 of the richest people in the world , all those with pretty high taxes and tougher financial rules in many ways. Only 5 Americans.
Capitalism is the only system which can work IMO but it needs to be modulated and moderated to be a little more benevolent.
We need to start cleaning the Stables of Augeas by closing ALL tax loop-holes as well as working with the International community to close ALL tax havens. That would be a start.
I do not see why a factory worker has to pay his/her full share of taxes when the richest of the richest get away with paying none ( such as Rupert Murdoch, a prime example of scum capitalism at its worst).
Thr richest of the rich make it to the top by exploiting their workers and the system and need to be made accountable. This is the 21st century and we still in essence still have a Victorian "workhouse" mentality which is shameful and a disgrace to our humanity.
I can't even begin to understand how a billionaire can sleep at night having made his billions on the backs of kids in sweatshops in Asia for example.
I was brought up on the private boarding/finishing school /yacht/servant/ mansion system and it still makes me shudder that we are all supposed to aspire to abusing those who somehow have not had the same luck or advantages in life.
Personally I would rather everyone was comfortably off and middle class than having either extremes of the social spectrum.
Certain basics should be universally accessible , regardless of money, such as food, shelter, health care and education.
Anything else is barbaric, archaic and from a social point of view can only lead to great social ills such as crime and social unrest. We ALL have to pay the bill at the end.
A country where only the few have access to education because of costs for example can only breed inequality . As the saying goes "If you think education is expensive , try ignorance".
Not a pretty picture, this forum is a prime example of what happens when education is considered to be a drawback rather than a positive. I don't believe everyone should go to University that is a ridiculous notion. However I believe everyone who is intellectually "worthy" should have that option. Regardless of whether Mom and Dad are billionaires or Janitors. We need to value aptitute and talent over money.
I would also like to ensure that NOBODY no matter how wealthy and no matter how many endowments Daddy makes for a new Library can ever enter into Academia.
I also think that we should channel people's strengths a little more efficiently so that the less academic can still receive a form of education including more technical skills. We have got our priorities completely wrong by elevating Academia as the ultimate when some people's skills like in different areas.
We need to value manual workers as much as we value white collar workers.
There should be no shame in being a plumber or a builder and yet there is a definite hierarchy of professions which I find divisive and futile. Our society seems to value only money as a benchmark of "worthiness" , rather than skill, usefulness or even goodness.
Caveat : Apologies if this is a bit befuddled and ranty by the way but I have been suffering from insomnia recently so the little grey cells are a little atrophied at the moment !
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.
