ForumsWEPRCapitalism or Socialism?

79 18076
Roger721
offline
Roger721
1,100 posts
Nomad

Hi everybody. The capitalism and the socialism are two ways of government.

This thread open the discussion: do you prefer capitalism (from countries like the USA?) or socialism (from coutries of the now-defunct URSS?)?

  • 79 Replies
ComradeWolf
offline
ComradeWolf
358 posts
Nomad

Socialism and Communism are about as evil as Representative democracy and capitalism. The ideal isn't the problem, its the people who carry it out into the real world.

So a consumerist, corporate society that expends and wastes resources to meet a bloated, unnecessary demand, that exceeds its safety limit for consumption and goes over the amount of supply it has is good?

A society that allows banks to loan out money to people who are not responsible and allows them to waste it, while the banks and their associates go into bankruptcy? A government that incites rebellions abroad and civil strife in the name of "democracy?"

The thing is both the USSR and the US were the "bad guys" in the Cold War. Do you know how many people died due to instigating the United States invoked with support of guerrilla and paramilitary forces within Columbia, Nicaragua, and numerous other countries in Latin America and the Caribbean? Do you know how many lives were lost in Afghanistan when the United States supported religious extremists against Soviet backed Marxists?

Do you know how many people died both at America and in the American army, and among the Vietnamese population during the whole course of the Vietnam war? You do realize your nation was capable, and did commit horrible atrocities equivalent to the USSR right?

The only difference is, for the most part, the Untied States tended to commit more atrocities abroad then they did upon their own people.

And even then, there was still atrocities committed within the United States. The era of McCarthyism and horrid interrogations inducted by the FBI against suspected Socialists, Communists, or anyone otherwise deemed "anti-American" by the state?

Or for the fact on how many immigrant groups were treated prior or during the Cold War? Do you know the Irish were persecuted within America in the 19th century, having rights equivalent to people of African descent at the time?

Or the fact of how Hispanic immigrants, legal or otherwise, are treated in the United States?


Take a look. America is no hero. Far ****ing from it. That being said, the USSR was no hero either. But don't dare say your nation is some angel, some prophet of political reform so great and grand that its the next messiah to follow. **** no.

ChillzMaster
offline
ChillzMaster
1,434 posts
Nomad

America was a beacon of hope and freedom in the 18th century, the 19th, the 20th, and maintains that status nowadays. In this country, Free Enterprise will get you anywhere. If you can't find a job, you're not looking hard enough. You have only yourself to blame for not suceeding in a Capitalistic society.

The parasites of society need to be eliminated, the socialists, for they thrive off the work of others while expecting to do nothing at all for the rewards of another man. I won't have it.

-Chillz

grimml
offline
grimml
879 posts
Nomad

America was a beacon of hope and freedom in the 18th century, the 19th, (...)

*cough* slavery *cough*

If you can't find a job, you're not looking hard enough. You have only yourself to blame for not suceeding in a Capitalistic society.

And if you're mentally/physically handicapped? Is this also your own fault?
ChillzMaster
offline
ChillzMaster
1,434 posts
Nomad

*cough* slavery *cough*


*cough* theory of relativity *cough*

And if you're mentally/physically handicapped? Is this also your own fault?


Indeed. You have to play with the cards you're dealt. Sometimes, it just sucks. But that's the beauty of Capitalism, the ever-present sense of "I could fail" keeps people motivated, keeps the system running smoothly. Only when the government steps into try and change the system does the system go wrong. The best way to solve a recession is a "Hands-off" approach, let the system fix itself, all oceans have high and low tides.

To finish replying to your second statement - Everyone is accountable for their own crimes. We're human beings, we've evolved to a state where there's no such thing as people who don't know any better.

-Chillz
flyguy43
offline
flyguy43
19 posts
Nomad

The thing I have against Capitalism is the gap between wealth it creates. I mean, I'm all for working and earning for your wealth, but I think the wealthy come to a point where they do not need that much money. I mean 1% of the American Population owns 90% of the wealth (source may be coming soon). Its excessive and unnecessary while many poor people struggle to even put food in their mouths in this country and the world. Its disgusting how the wealthy live and I'm sure some of them are disgusted by themselves.

Given Loans and the interest rates are also hazards, forming a great amount of unnecessary debts in this country. I personally think that we should still have Capitalism, but put almost a boundary on how much a person can make and tax the rich with a higher percent and distribute the wealth more and also eliminate all interest rates, almost like a Capitalism/Socialism system. I dont know if it will work, but thats my take.

Also, I personally think basing a society completely on "how much money you can make" or "survival" is just having our whole lives on making money and is kind of morally wrong to me. They should be motivated, but their whole lives shouldn't be based on this motivation, you know? You need to work for your Medical rights? C'mon. Again thats my personal opinion I'm completely open for criticism.

grimml
offline
grimml
879 posts
Nomad

*cough* theory of relativity *cough*

WTF? Do you know what the theory of relativity is? It has nothing to do with history or slavery...

Indeed. You have to play with the cards you're dealt. Sometimes, it just sucks. But that's the beauty of Capitalism, the ever-present sense of "I could fail" keeps people motivated, keeps the system running smoothly. Only when the government steps into try and change the system does the system go wrong. The best way to solve a recession is a "Hands-off" approach, let the system fix itself, all oceans have high and low tides

Okay, let me guess, you're a social Darwinist? Would you let a disabled person rather die because he/she can't work or letting the state give him/her some money?

To finish replying to your second statement - Everyone is accountable for their own crimes. We're human beings, we've evolved to a state where there's no such thing as people who don't know any better.

I don't know what that has to do with my comment. Being handicapped surely isn't a crime...

And I agree with bigfatkitty. It's incomprehensible that a CEO can earn 400 times the salary of a normal worker. That's just a perversion of Capitalism which needs to be regulated in my opinion.
Freakenstein
offline
Freakenstein
9,504 posts
Jester

Indeed. You have to play with the cards you're dealt. Sometimes, it just sucks. But that's the beauty of Capitalism, the ever-present sense of "I could fail" keeps people motivated, keeps the system running smoothly. Only when the government steps into try and change the system does the system go wrong. The best way to solve a recession is a "Hands-off" approach, let the system fix itself, all oceans have high and low tides.


And that is where I draw the line, because this is obviously ridiculous. Capitalism does not take everyone. This is a state of communism where everyone is handed a job, or a kibbutz where everything is shared and everyone has an equal amount of work given to pull their weight. Employers would have to be saints to give the physically handicapped jobs when they could employ a physically-fit individual who does not have medical dilemmas to hold them back. Before you take this out of context, this is not what I think, this is what they think. Why keep an employee that is going to cost THEM money as upkeep when he can employ someone who's medical expenses wouldn't be as terrible? Jobs are a business in and of itself, and the qualifications aren't "anyone", as you have posted. Even you would have to be at a loss for words when I give you an example of people who don't even have the APPENDAGES to work with. They are physically UNABLE to work. But somehow in your eyes, Capitalism will take them anyway, or else they aren't working hard enough. NO, of course not.
ComradeWolf
offline
ComradeWolf
358 posts
Nomad

As for people who cannot get work, I was in a dilemma where I am physically able with no impeding flaws upon myself and I could not obtain a job. Why was that? my nations economy was in a stagnant era due to a few events and numerous others like myself were laid off because employers could either not afford to pay us or didn't want to due to greed. The vast majority of the workers were capable and for the most part, experienced in their line of work and in other professions as well.

Your statement that anyone in a capitalist society can find a job is entirely false. There is men and women who for the life of them, regardless of their abilities, cannot obtain a job due to the problems within employment and hiring.

As for the handicapped and other people unable to work, they'll have to adapt to find a job. And that is a simple fact of life. If you have an impediment, such as loss of limb or a birth defect, your going to have to work twice as hard for the same sort of payment and position within a capitalist society. I'm not a socialist either, nor am I capitalist. I believe in a state that uses both some tendencies from socialism and capitalism. Free enterprise in a regulated market, as well as private healthcare for those who can afford it. Also, the state provides free education and healthcare, but again private sectors also can be available for anyone who makes a higher wage.

Going to either extreme will not help anyone. Balance is required in a society. Have one end too far gone, and the whole thing tips over.

ChillzMaster
offline
ChillzMaster
1,434 posts
Nomad

Ahem. And let It begin.

Firstly, they are not the same thing.


Indeed, but your definition is missing a drastic detail. Socialism is the TRANSITION into Communism. There has never been a truly Communistic State, its like being perfect. If you have one meager flaw, you're not perfect, you're just ridiculously good. If a Communistic State has a government, or unequal wages, or ANYTHING outside the guidelines set by Karl Marx, then it isn't Communistic, it's a socialistic state. Communism HAS never truly existed and probably will not exist, or if it does, won't survive for long in the modern world. It's like a rectangle and a square, Communism is a form of ridiculously equal socialism, but socialism is socialism, where parasites who don't contribute to the community get their fare share.

2. It is often hijacked by fascists and turned into a dictatorship (take Stalin, for instance).


An excellent example of why SOCIALISM (the road to Communism) is horrendous, it is fated to have an elite upper class of government-workers that are too reluctant to ever give up their power to create a truly Communistic State.

America is NOT a beacon of hope and freedom.


Ahem. "Oh Say does that Star Spangled Banner yet wave, o'er the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave". The United States was the only democracy with influence when it first came about in the late 18th century. It has saved the world from Colonial Tyranny (England, Spain), Global Piracy Organizations (The Barbary States), Empires that take away the rights of the working man (The Mexican Empire), those who would enslave other humans (CSA), world-threatening conquest-happy Facist States (World War II), the most powerful Socialistic Union of Nations to walk the Earth (Cold War), and now lead the spearhead into the War on Terror, where evil international forces would kill scores of innocents for their causes.

The theory of relativity was invented by Einstein, who was NOT an american.


So...

Ever since Ronald Reagan took office, America's reputation has gone down the toilet.


Ronald Reagan has the esteemed title of being one of the most successful Presidents in this nation's history. He oversaw the fall of the Berlin Wall, where one of the most important cities in all of history was divided because some Socialist Parasites thought they had a right to determine if their people could move or not, making Berlin essentially, a prison of the people.

Before that, America had limitations on big businesses,


And still do. They're the anti-trust laws we have to ensure no one company can control EVERYTHING, turning the nation from a glorious capitalistic power to a dystopian nightmare. It's like a Level Cap, so no one "Player" can ever hit some forsaken "Level 10000" and obliterate all others in "PvP". Its a weird comparison, but parallels my point nicely.

but not since "capitalism"


You sound as if Capitalism is some new idea. No, the basis of Western Civilization, Greek culture, is where America got nearly all of its ideas (the others were taken from parasites that couldn't handle their own lives and needed to be spoon-fed by an already-troubled government).

Somebody who is not smart is a parasite and must die.


There are plenty of people who aren't college graduates who contribute to society immensely more than socialistic parasites. You don't need to be too smart, you need to be able to read, write, and have the determination to push the economy further with your hard work. And I never said "Die". They must be corrected of their ways, and if they can't survive because of their own decisions, then that's their fault.

Again, it is IMPOSSIBLE to live well on wellfare, even in a more socialist society.


Why use a paper wall trying to stop a speeding car?

Now it's just insane. CEOs get paid 400 times more than their employees.


That's their own business choice. If an employee wants more pay, s/he can try and find somewhere else. Remember, play the cards you're dealt. It's their money, they can do what they want with it (within legal reason)

Everyone WANTS a job, but sometimes people can't get them. That does not mean they are parasites.


Yes is does. They're lazy parasites who have no survival instinct. If you want a job to pay for food, then you'll FIND ONE.

They are simply clinging on to the only thread they have, because they CAN'T get work.


The thread made of the hard work, elbow grease, and sweat off the brow of the working class of America, who worked just as hard to find work themselves.

So, if you want to kill 10% of the population for living on crumbs because they don't have anything else...
Show me a source of this "ten-per cent". I never said "Die", and again, if they want more, they'll work to get more. There's always more. It's called The Land of Opportunity for a reason, even then, other capitalistic countries like Canada, nations in the EU, South Africa, Australia, even Iceland have opportunities waiting. If someone wants a job, again, they'll FIND ONE, or fail because they cannot contribute. Unfortunately, the capitalistic nations of the world like helping out parasites, they thing they're cute, so they give them small amounts of food here and there and keep them as pets sucking out their blood. (Imagery)

WTF? Do you know what the theory of relativity is? It has nothing to do with history or slavery...


I was referencing the fact that when the US stopped having slavery, or in the final days of a US w/slavery, the only major nation w/o slavery was the British Empire. In a modern society, we consider this "wrong", but back then it was completely normal. It's like spilling milk, when you're a child, you think its a big deal, but now you're just like "Milk costs, like, what, three bucks? Whatever. Didn't even spill that much".

Okay, let me guess, you're a social Darwinist? Would you let a disabled person rather die because he/she can't work or letting the state give him/her some money?


I wouldn't define myself I'm totally sure I may/may not be, and yes, I would. Play with the cards you're dealt. It goes back to the "kill one to save a million" concept.

Capitalism could work in theory (although not as well), the problem is that it allows big businesses to grow so powerful nothing can stand in their way.


Ahem. The United States. Britain. Germany. Sweden. Denmark. Australia. Japan. South Korea. South Africa. Just a list of the most powerful nations on Earth that coincidentally also quite capitalist.

The People's Republic of China. North Korea. Cuba. Venezuela. A list of nations that are Communistic right now and aren't doing so hot (eh, maybe or maybe not excluding China, they never let any info out anyway, Commie parasites...) Not to mention, Venezuela was the nation that spear-headed the movement towards a united oil-country organization (Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries) that caused the late 1970's oil crisis and left half the world crippled, all for MORE MONEY. So don't start saying Capitalists are all in it for the money, I work minimum wage at a SUBWAY and don't complain to my boss about wages. These COMMIES are as money-hungry as the other humans, they just go about acquiring more in exploitation of the workers.

Going to either extreme will not help anyone. Balance is required in a society. Have one end too far gone, and the whole thing tips over.


Indeed. The above stated "Anti-Trust Laws" are excellent ways of keeping Monopolies from owning EVERYTHING, but I still say that Capitalism is the finest form of economical-social ideals.

Socialists are parasites. If you can't work, guess what? You get fired because you aren't useful any more, and that goes along with the freedom of business and Free Enterprise theories that keep Capitalistic Systems chugging. It's the freedom to own and run a business how you see fit that makes Capitalism work.

It isn't mean that you fire someone because they're a bad worker, or physically inept to work, its because you want to reward the people out there who ARE working hard to improve their skills so THEY can be excellent workers and push the productivity of a company further. Better productivity? More supply for the ever-increasing demand. A larger demand? The creation of a larger market of competitors wanting to also make money and creating more jobs for the common man. More competition? The greater a need to craft a better product to get a leg-up on the competition. The more releases of better and better products? The technological, social, and economical progress of the Capitalistic Society.

-Chillz
grimml
offline
grimml
879 posts
Nomad

I was referencing the fact that when the US stopped having slavery, or in the final days of a US w/slavery, the only major nation w/o slavery was the British Empire. In a modern society, we consider this "wrong", but back then it was completely normal. It's like spilling milk, when you're a child, you think its a big deal, but now you're just like "Milk costs, like, what, three bucks? Whatever. Didn't even spill that much".

Still this has nothing to do with the theory of relativity (which is about laws of physics)

I wouldn't define myself I'm totally sure I may/may not be, and yes, I would. Play with the cards you're dealt. It goes back to the "kill one to save a million" concept.

Wow, just wow... Are you dying right now? Not? People might die if they wouldn't get any welfare because they CAN'T find a work. Yes, there are parasites who take advantage of the system but there are also people who simply can't find a job. What if you're 50 and physically handicapped? Or if you have a severe mental illnes? Do you really think that somebody is going to hire you? Okay, there might be some exceptions, but generally you won't find any work... If you rather prefer to let them die, well, that says pretty much about your character.
MattCox7
offline
MattCox7
30 posts
Nomad

Capitalism could work in theory (although not as well), the problem is that it allows big businesses to grow so powerful nothing can stand in their way.


Ahem. The United States. Britain. Germany. Sweden. Denmark. Australia. Japan. South Korea. South Africa. Just a list of the most powerful nations on Earth that coincidentally also quite capitalist.

The People's Republic of China. North Korea. Cuba. Venezuela. A list of nations that are Communistic right now and aren't doing so hot (eh, maybe or maybe not excluding China, they never let any info out anyway, Commie parasites...) Not to mention, Venezuela was the nation that spear-headed the movement towards a united oil-country organization (Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries) that caused the late 1970's oil crisis and left half the world crippled, all for MORE MONEY. So don't start saying Capitalists are all in it for the money, I work minimum wage at a SUBWAY and don't complain to my boss about wages. These COMMIES are as money-hungry as the other humans, they just go about acquiring more in exploitation of the workers.



How would you know North Korea isn't doing well, they wouldn't tell anyone that.
ChillzMaster
offline
ChillzMaster
1,434 posts
Nomad

What if you're 50 and physically handicapped? Or if you have a severe mental illnes? Do you really think that somebody is going to hire you?


That's Life.

If you rather prefer to let them die, well, that says pretty much about your character.


I'd prefer to see the progress of the economy and the Capitalistic systems and the nation that follow it as a whole? Indeed, 'tis my character.

How would you know North Korea isn't doing well, they wouldn't tell anyone that.


With one of the lower GDP's, bombastic attitude towards South Korea, and having only one friend (PRC), its safe to say North Korea isn't exactly "In the Green".

-Chillz
ComradeWolf
offline
ComradeWolf
358 posts
Nomad

The fact that businesses have become so powerful and so unrestrained is why I never supported capitalism. I never supported socialism either fully due to how bureaucratic or autocratic it can become.

Chillz, im aiming this at you mi amigo.

You still haven't responded to my post.
I'll repeat it regardless.

What do you say to a system that rejects fully capable, and experienced workers who would work at the standard wage most mainline companies offer, but they get laid off due to corporate greed and are not paid proper. Men and women who may have worked as much as 30 or more years in a broad field and have irreplaceable experience, only to have lower quality workers who are paid less then minimum wage, and do their job at a halved rate?

Do you think that's right, that a company should be able to fire its loyal, hard working employee's with no bars held, and to present their customers with terrible service and product?

The customers can't do anything about it either, since that's all the companies are provided. And if you don't buy, the economy as a whole suffers due to how consumerism works in a corporate society.

Now my final question, how can you live with yourself day to day, knowing that men and women who are trying as humanly possible to find a paying job, who have the experience, yet still cannot obtain one due to a horrid employment environment?

I realize business needs to make a profit, but there has to be a line. Profit is only an ideal, money is only a commodity two parties put their trust in and exchange it. The only real value money has is that trust. Without that trust, without the loyalty of workers and society, all you have is a group of individuals out for themselves.

ComradeWolf
offline
ComradeWolf
358 posts
Nomad

Well, as I said im not against free enterprise and business kitty, but it must have regulation. Otherwise it gets out of hand.

NoNameC68
offline
NoNameC68
5,043 posts
Shepherd

I'll control myself better this time, I promise...

Anyway, BACK IN THE USSR!

What do you say to a system that rejects fully capable, and experienced workers who would work at the standard wage most mainline companies offer, but they get laid off due to corporate greed and are not paid proper. Men and women who may have worked as much as 30 or more years in a broad field and have irreplaceable experience, only to have lower quality workers who are paid less then minimum wage, and do their job at a halved rate?


It is usually not beneficial to replace skilled workers with incompetent workers.

Generally, a business that sells a high quality product will continue to sell high quality products unless they find that their products are too expensive to sell in which there is little demand for them, in which case they need to find ways to make their product cheaper in price which often means the product must be made with cheaper resources and possibly even labor. This results in a poorer quality product, but only so that they may stay in business.

A business that sells quality products for a profit would be unwise to replace their skilled workers with cheaper incompetent workers. A business could probably find a way to make more money selling lousy products at a cheaper price, but because of competition, they must make sure they can sell a quality product at an affordable price so they aren't driven out of business by other companies that offer better quality goods at affordable prices.

But what if a business can replace their expensive skilled workers with cheaper unskilled workers without sacrificing the quality of their goods or services? These skilled workers will either have to work for less or try finding a new job. The business is making even more of a profit to do whatever they want to do with it (keep it for themselves, expand the company, invest in stocks, et cetera). This is the immediate effect and quite horrible isn't it?

However, let's look at the not so immediate effects. When one business discovers it can profit more with cheaper workers (without sacrificing quality), other businesses will generally come to the same realization. Because these businesses are in competition, it is beneficial for them to sell their goods at a slightly cheaper price. Even though they are making less profit per good/service they sell, they'll be able to attract customers away from other businesses, which will allow them to sell even more goods/services. The idea is that it's better to sell 10 somethings at $10 each than 2 somethings at $20 each.

So, let's get back to the workers who were fired. Immediately, you see people who aren't making as much money as they once did or you see them looking for new jobs. However, you must also train yourself to look at the customers and how much they benefit. Because goods are cheaper, the customers save more money. Because the customers are saving more money, they have more money to invest in other ways.

So why can't businesses just keep their prices high so that they may keep their skilled workers payed well? By increasing the prices of goods and services, customers do not save any money, which means they have less money to invest in other parts of the market.

Under a true capitalist society with a TRULY free market, businesses will be unable to bribe politicians into making stupid laws that cripple some businesses so others may thrive.

Do you think that's right, that a company should be able to fire its loyal, hard working employee's with no bars held, and to present their customers with terrible service and product?


Generally this isn't beneficial to the company unless the product they are selling has a low value, which therefore means the product would require less valuable resources and cheaper production. If the company decides to buy quality resources yet they pay for cheap production, then the product will either remain cheap due to poor production, or the product will be of better quality, which benefits the consumers.

The customers can't do anything about it either, since that's all the companies are provided. And if you don't buy, the economy as a whole suffers due to how consumerism works in a corporate society.


Corporatist societies are societies where corporations are supported by the government. I believe in a free market, so corporatism is out of the question.

If the price of a product stops going down, then the product as a whole is being sold at the most efficient level currently known to anyone.

Now my final question, how can you live with yourself day to day, knowing that men and women who are trying as humanly possible to find a paying job, who have the experience, yet still cannot obtain one due to a horrid employment environment?


I look at the jobs destroyed by government favoritism (corporatism). I look at the jobs destroyed by lobbyists who call for more laws that restrict freedom, both market freedoms and person freedoms.

For example: in many places, you need a vending license to sell hotdogs or BBQ outside of a restaurant. These licenses are unfordable and limited. This results in less potential jobs. Because vendors could sell foods people want at cheaper prices, they would often force restaurants to share their customers.
Showing 46-60 of 79