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.
As for myself I don't want any Government limiting my dreams or opportunities or the dreams and opportunities of my children.
When your generation Y children are living in your house at age 35, waiting for you to die and leave them your wealth, because all the jobs are in China/India/Africa, you might change your mind.
Typically, the only people who are in favor of running people over with the bus, are the driver of the bus and the people safely seated on the bus.
The computer you are typing this response on was only created due to capitalism. The food you ate for breakfast today was created due to capitalism. The home that keeps you warm in the winter was created by capitalistic ventures.
Wow, housing and food are capitalisitc ventures? Wow, I always thought they were basic needs. I guess its a miracle how people have had housing and food for thousands of years, without capitalism. In fact, capitalism does nothing but limit access to food and housing. Instead of simply having to be able or willing to construct a shelter and hunt/farm/search for food, now you have to own the land you are building on, hunting on, growing on.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hnsq
I challenge you to go one day without using a product created through a capitalistic venture.
This is like challenging someone to go swimming without touching the water. You cannot possibly exist in capitalism without participating in it. Even bums and homeless people participate in capitalism. Hell, even the guy living in the state park, eating bugs, is still participating in capitalism.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hnsq
Also please describe one socialistic government that has proven to be sustainable.
Depends on what you mean by "socialistic". Much of Europe, especially the norse countries are very socialized and doing just fine. Canada is very socialized, and is doing just fine.
Now, if we are talking about bastardized forms of communism, then of course they werent sustainable, especially when they all turned in to state run capitalisms.
The computer you are typing this response on was only created due to capitalism. The food you ate for breakfast today was created due to capitalism. The home that keeps you warm in the winter was created by capitalistic ventures.
Claiming something you rely on for the comfort of your day to day life is evil seems very ignorant to me.
I will pose them again.
Are you willing to respond to either of these challenges?
I challenge you to go one day without using a product created through a capitalistic venture.
Also please describe one socialistic government that has proven to be sustainable.
There has never been a socialistic government.
There are some countries that have SOME elements of socialism but I can't think of a single country that is 100% socialistic.
What happened in the Society Union and China bears little resemblance to the writings of Marx and Engels.
Socialism has never been tried in the industrialized world.
You can't say it doesn't work if it's never been tried.
Wow, housing and food are capitalisitc ventures? Wow, I always thought they were basic needs. I guess its a miracle how people have had housing and food for thousands of years, without capitalism. In fact, capitalism does nothing but limit access to food and housing. Instead of simply having to be able or willing to construct a shelter and hunt/farm/search for food, now you have to own the land you are building on, hunting on, growing on.
This is like challenging someone to go swimming without touching the water. You cannot possibly exist in capitalism without participating in it. Even bums and homeless people participate in capitalism. Hell, even the guy living in the state park, eating bugs, is still participating in capitalism.
Depends on what you mean by "socialistic". Much of Europe, especially the norse countries are very socialized and doing just fine. Canada is very socialized, and is doing just fine.
Now, if we are talking about bastardized forms of communism, then of course they werent sustainable, especially when they all turned in to state run capitalisms.
A poll of little or no middle ground obviously designed to be extreme on both ends. A raw and biased characterization as well, all rolled into one.
A troll. Other descriptions that would fit to a T are not allowed by the TOS.
Wow, housing and food are capitalisitc ventures? Wow, I always thought they were basic needs. I guess its a miracle how people have had housing and food for thousands of years, without capitalism. In fact, capitalism does nothing but limit access to food and housing. Instead of simply having to be able or willing to construct a shelter and hunt/farm/search for food, now you have to own the land you are building on, hunting on, growing on.
This is like challenging someone to go swimming without touching the water. You cannot possibly exist in capitalism without participating in it. Even bums and homeless people participate in capitalism. Hell, even the guy living in the state park, eating bugs, is still participating in capitalism.
Depends on what you mean by "socialistic". Much of Europe, especially the norse countries are very socialized and doing just fine. Canada is very socialized, and is doing just fine.
Now, if we are talking about bastardized forms of communism, then of course they werent sustainable, especially when they all turned in to state run capitalisms.
How does capitalism 'limit access to food and water'? Right now I work 60-70 hours per week. I want to be able to provide for the family I will one day have, and I want to be able to take care of my parents when they get older. Why would I work 60-70 hours per week if I didn't get the benefit of it? If I am provided for by other people's money, why would I work that much more than most americans?
I was asking Purple to think about the consequences of calling capitalism evil. I was also asking her to explain how socialistic societies might work in a practical sense. Thus far I have not recieved answers to either of those things from her (or anyone for that matter). Can you help me understand? I am trying to learn how a non-capitalistic world might work. You can bash me for that, or you can try to educate me. If I am wrong (and lets face it - no one on this board is an expert, we ALL might be wrong) I honestly want someone to explain how a better system would work.
How does capitalism 'limit access to food and water'? Right now I work 60-70 hours per week.
Capitalism has limited access to food to those who can "afford it" or "own the means to produce it". This is opposed to lack of ownership of land, where one is free to collect materials from nature to build shelter, and to grow/hunt for/or collect food on communal grounds.
So, you are FORCED to work 60-70 hours a week to afford food and shelter, because you must buy them from a capitalist, rather then have the option of growing your own food, and building your own shelter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hnsq
Can you help me understand? I am trying to learn how a non-capitalistic world might work. You can bash me for that, or you can try to educate me. If I am wrong (and lets face it - no one on this board is an expert, we ALL might be wrong) I honestly want someone to explain how a better system would work.
What would I suggest?
The following
1. No private ownership of any capital assets, all current businesses should be seized, and placed under the controlling interest of the employees. Each shop would elect a representitive, and the shop would make democratic decisions on the path they take. No person in a shop would ever be paid more then 3x the lowest, and no person in society would ever be paid more then 3x the lowest.
2. No person would be allowed more then one reasonably sized house and more then 1/2 acre of land.
3. Healthcare should be free for everyone
4. Education, both k-12 and college, should be free and merit based. There will be no private schools or colleges.
5. There should be no 2 party oligarchic plutocracy. All shops will be represented at increasing levels by democratically elected reps, who are immediatley recallable. At the top level would be a national council, with a representitive of every labor classification. Here, they will set policy.
6. An independent economic research arm will be heavily funded and staffed with top level scholars and experts to plan the economic production for the country. This office will also set the college/training quotas, so that no profession becomes saturated.
7. These production quotas will be distributed amongst the shops in such a way that the most productive shops receive the most orders, and therefore those workers would make more money. Poor performing shops will be folded, and the workers dissipated in to other shops. If those workers fail to produce an accepted minimal production level for the lowest wage of their profession, then they will be let go, and become homeless. I do not believe a healthy adult should not contribute to society unless he is independently wealthy.
8. There should be no income tax on personal or business income. There should be a consumption tax with a set amount exempt. This is similiar to some of the prebate fair tax plans floating around. These taxes will only be used to pay for schools, healthcare, social security for the seriously infirm and elderly, equipment for a militia, roads, police and fire, research for projects approved by the majority of the council, and the economic chamber. Pork will be eliminated, and all other "government entities" will either run at revenue, or be eliminated. For instance, the current US Post Office should be eliminated.
9. The US should immediatley withdraw from all foreign treaties, especially trade ones.
10. All moral vices which are outlawed now, should become legal and regulated.
11. All connection between church and government should be abolished and severed officially. Church has nothing to do with the governship of the populace.
Given a choice would you choose the Conservative/Republican ladder of opportunity with minimal Government interference?
-OR-
The Liberal/democrat rocking chair of stagnation with maximum Government interference in your life?
Many Americans are unwisely choosing the latter, where they are just a number, satisfied with mediocrity, circus's and welfare bread of Government HealthCare benevolence.
Does the Government owe you a living? Then move to a Socialist utopia like Cuba or Venezuela!
As for myself I don't want any Government limiting my dreams or opportunities or the dreams and opportunities of my children.
Choosing the ladder of opportunity you would vote Conservative.
Choosing the rocking chair of mediocrity you would vote Liberal.
What an idiotic poll.
Yeah, I wouldn't want anyone to help ensure that I can access affordable, reliable urgent medical treatment if I get into a car accident or suffer a major life-threatening illness! That would just be COMMUNIST.
I would rather just die for lack of treatment or else being forced into bankruptcy by a $250,000 medical bill. YAY FREEDOM!
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.
