The Soviet Union collapsed and was socialist. Explain. (healthcare, Canada, politicians)
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.
I know, I know, the soviet union wasn't really "socialist" so you can't use that as an example.
I argue that the United States, being a corporatist oligarchy with a government that comprises 25% of GDP, is a bad basis on which to discount capitalism.
I know, I know, the soviet union wasn't really "socialist" so you can't use that as an example.
I could see someone arguing that the Soviet Union wasn't a communist state, but I can't imagine an argument denying that it wasn't socialist.
Quote:
I argue that the United States, being a corporatist oligarchy with a government that comprises 25% of GDP, is a bad basis on which to discount capitalism.
I would agree, If I were to put forth an argument opining on the what to base a negative critique of capitalism it wouldn't be based on the points that you put forward but rather how it equitably provides for society as a whole.
I argue that the United States, being a corporatist oligarchy with a government that comprises 25% of GDP, is a bad basis on which to discount capitalism.
Canada is "socialist" and hasn't collapsed. Explain.
Australia is "socialist" and hasn't collapsed. Explain.
Great Britain is "socialist" and hasn't collapsed. Explain.
Japan is "socialist" and hasn't collapsed. Explain.
China is "socialist" and hasn't collapsed. Explain.
dot.. dot... dot...
I argue that the United States, being a corporatist oligarchy with a government that comprises 25% of GDP, is a bad basis on which to discount capitalism.
i agree with that statement more or less, however, I don't know that government spending comprising any particular % of GDP has anything to do with it.
our policy makers lack the testicular fortitude to tell the American people: "we're going to have a recession, and y'all have to deal with it." Neither Republicans nor Democrats, nor liberals nor conservatives, nor voters nor politicians, have the stomach for economic stagnation. They DEMAND perpetual growth, as if such a thing were normal.
So instead of accepting a lower standard of growth (or negative growth) for some small, manageable period of time (in 1987, 1991, 2002), instead we kick the can down the road by increasing public and private debt levels, and pray for future growth so our kids can pay it off. "Double down and bet on black."
I could see someone arguing that the Soviet Union wasn't a communist state, but I can't imagine an argument denying that it wasn't socialist.
I would agree, If I were to put forth an argument opining on the what to base a negative critique of capitalism it wouldn't be based on the points that you put forward but rather how it equitably provides for society as a whole.
Capitalism is the most-perfect system for providing for the needs and want of a society as a whole. All you have to do is travel the USA, and then go to Cuba or Argentina or any number of other non-capitalist dung holes.
Capitalism is the most-perfect system for providing for the needs and want of a society as a whole. All you have to do is travel the USA, and then go to Cuba or Argentina or any number of other non-capitalist dung holes.
Would you count Norway, Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Germany or France as Capitalistic?
I know, I know, the soviet union wasn't really "socialist" so you can't use that as an example.
I argue that the United States, being a corporatist oligarchy with a government that comprises 25% of GDP, is a bad basis on which to discount capitalism.
Back in 1945 the United States was a coporatist oligarchy with a government that comprised 48% of GDP. Smells like socialism to me!
Canada is "socialist" and hasn't collapsed. Explain.
Australia is "socialist" and hasn't collapsed. Explain.
Great Britain is "socialist" and hasn't collapsed. Explain.
Japan is "socialist" and hasn't collapsed. Explain.
China is "socialist" and hasn't collapsed. Explain.
dot.. dot... dot...
What exactly do you mean by socialist? Just because a country has a single-payer healthcare system doesn't make the entire economy socialist. Does a socialist economy by your definition allow for privately-held industry, privately-owned real property, and profit-driven mechanisms for delivery of state services? If not, Canada, Britain, Australia and Japan hardly suit the socialist label. Big government maybe, but socialist? No.
So as for Canada and Australia, both have thrived because of a spike in prices for commodites which incidentally are extracted, processed and delivered by private corporations (BHP Billiton, Potash Corp, Suncor to name a few). These find a ready market in....
...China, which is rapidly promoting the growth of private industry to produce one of the greatest and most widespread creations of wealth in human history.
Britain and Japan haven't collapsed yet, in spite of their governments' efforts to run up crippling deficits to support its ever increasing dependency ratios. One can only hope that private industries in both countries can keep enough people employed to pay enough taxes.
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.
