Capitalism vs. Socialism
CorporateWhore
Posts: 1,890
The rich are worth more, in economic terms, than the poor. In legal terms, every human life has equal value, though. I wouldn't want anyone to think I hate the poor.
When rich people invest their vast amounts of money, they do fail to give it directly to the poor through taxation or charity. But, when they invest it, they create wealth. This is more valuable to the poor than taxation or charity.
Because the economy is not a zero sum game, the size of overall wealth can be augmented. When rich people invest their money in the market, they create jobs and grow the economy for all. Even though their motivations are selfish, the result is a higher standard of living for all. Adam Smith talks about this when he explains the importance of a capitalist economy.
I have a serious problem understanding how socialism creates a similar standard of living when every attempt at making socialism work has proven a failure. If one were to judge the respective systems based on the scientific method, socialism would fail every time. I don't understand why anyone would advocate socialist policies. The standard of living in socialist nations is simply not as high as in america.
My point in writing this post is to start a dialogue about the rationale behind advocacy of socialism. If I am missing something, let's talk about it.
When rich people invest their vast amounts of money, they do fail to give it directly to the poor through taxation or charity. But, when they invest it, they create wealth. This is more valuable to the poor than taxation or charity.
Because the economy is not a zero sum game, the size of overall wealth can be augmented. When rich people invest their money in the market, they create jobs and grow the economy for all. Even though their motivations are selfish, the result is a higher standard of living for all. Adam Smith talks about this when he explains the importance of a capitalist economy.
I have a serious problem understanding how socialism creates a similar standard of living when every attempt at making socialism work has proven a failure. If one were to judge the respective systems based on the scientific method, socialism would fail every time. I don't understand why anyone would advocate socialist policies. The standard of living in socialist nations is simply not as high as in america.
My point in writing this post is to start a dialogue about the rationale behind advocacy of socialism. If I am missing something, let's talk about it.
All I know is that to see, and not to speak, would be the great betrayal.
-Enoch Powell
-Enoch Powell
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
Estimated worth: $400,000 trillion or so.
It's the banks. Usury, or the act of lending money that does not belong to one's self at an interest. Is mostly to blame.
Say, I own a bank, you come in and put your money in that bank, because you pretty much have to have a bank, you can't get paid without one. Then I leave 10% of your money in my bank and lend the other 90% out to other people that nead the money. I charge those people 10% on what I lend them of your money. How is that fair to anyone but the bank?
So the bank is making money out of virtually nothing. The person borrowing the money is probably borrowing it because they are living in poverty or struggling just above that line. Now they are even more impoverished because they have to pay back 10%.
Another problem I have with banking. In order for me to get paid, I have to have a bank account. In order for me to have a bank account I have to pay bank fees. A couple of months ago my bank fees were $70. I've got it down quite a bit, but shit, I just want to spend my hard earned money.
You ever been to a checks cashed place? You don't need a bank in order to cash your check.
The bank charges a premium for keeping your money safe. Additionally, if you put your money in a savings plan, your investment grows without you doing any work either.
If people didn't put money in the bank, the economy would fall apart because inflation would cause their cash stash to decrease in value every year.
-Enoch Powell
My problem is with fractional-reserve banking.
Yeah but the FDIC guarantees that you can take your money out of the bank up to about $400,000 right?
-Enoch Powell
I have no idea. Sorry, I'm not an economist. :(
Just irked by the idea that one family can have a personal armageddon shelter and 25 kids grow up in an orphanage.
Amen. I see that as a failure of morality instead of the economic system.
-Enoch Powell
No system is perfect and Capitalism does have its flaws, but overall it is a powerful economic system that has made America the success it is today. Socialism cannot touch it.
~Ron Burgundy
The bank charges 10% because it is taking on the risk of that loan not being paid back. The bank has other options instead of loaning (it could invest the money), so it would be foolish to just give the money away and not receive a return, except for principal payments. The bank then pays some of the 10% to its deposit holders as interest income. Plus the debtor gets the use of money he didn't have the day before to buy the house or car he needs. So, everybody is happy. Why be mad at the bank? I don't think i've seen anyone say, "Damn, I got a loan." Instead, they are usually thrilled as they finally bought their first house, or got a dependable car.
You want to buy a house? Well, good luck working for 20 years and saving up until you finally have enough to buy it straight up.
Interest is the fee for having something now. There is nothing wrong with it. You have $20,000 in cash, and want that $180,000 house, but don't want to pay interest, that's your problem. Quit hiding behind "Capitalism" or "Socialism." There are options.
exactly hippiemom. too often people are confused about what they think socialist governments or sytems that have socialist tendencies are. scandinavian countries that use socialist systems consistently rank very high in standard of living and always higher than the US. the gap between rich and poor continues to grow at an alarming rate especially in the US, while systems used in countries like sweden, as you mentioned, maintain more of an equality that means you don't see too many people living on the streets and struggling to make a decent living...you don't see many people owning several hummers and luxury items either. it's quite a nice balance.
haha, healthcare tax for britney spears
~Ron Burgundy
very good points.
when it hits you, you feel to pain.
So brutalize me with music.”
~ Bob Marley
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
Thats kind of what we have here in Canada, but it does have it's pitfalls, for example we pay higher taxes than the US but we get health care in return, now the downfall with that is if you do not have a doctor you probably will not have one in the very near future, wait times for elective surgery are very long.
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
yes, that is part of it. again, that is a result a more socialized form of government.
if i'm not mistaken, the US ranks last among so-called "developed" countries in terms of the gap between wealthy and poor. the ten percent of americans with the highest incomes earn 15 times more than the bottom ten percent. it's only getting worse. i believe the gap is widening here in canada as well. it's a scary thing, and it's a determining factor in the standard of living in nations as well.
There are certainly degrees of capitalism and socialism in many societies. The democratic socialist countries of europe are farther left on the scale compared to american capitalism. Indeed, we have some socialist policies in America, but I am apt to argue that even those are unnecessary.
So, my definition for socialism is thus: Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy.
I don't think any of the means of production or distribution should be owned collectively or by a centralized government. I don't think the government should help plan or control the economy in any way.
For example, I believe that social security is a socialist policy. I also believe that is has proven to be a failure.
-Enoch Powell
Yes indeed, when the top income earners earn more, they pay more taxes. This results in more tax funding for programs for poor people. Additionally, as I've said, when rich people have more money they invest it in companies and the market.
A gap between rich and poor is a term used mainly by people who support more socialist policies. Socialism takes into account a divided class system, but in theoretical capitalism, class mobility is very high. In my view, class mobility is very high. In democratic socialist countries like France, class mobility is very low. 13% unemployment is not uncommon, and I don't believe those unemployed want to be employed either.
-Enoch Powell
personally i prefer a system like they use in sweden where the rich are taxed VERY highly, so that you don't have the extreme gap between rich and poor. they have great social programs and the people who may not earn enough or need help can actually get it, instead of barely being able to meet their needs or not being able to get help at all.
difference of opinion i guess...i don't believe in people being ridiculously rich and not having to pay their fair share in taxes. by fair share i'm meaning a VERY high tax rate so that, as i said, the rich are not earning 15 times that of the lower class. i would also disagree about your statement that the unemployed don't want to be employed.
You cannot have your cake and eat it too. You want Utopia. I think the best quote ever about the US is this: "Democracy, the worst form of government, but I would want nothing else."
You fuckers need to start understanding that you are living in the best environment for humans there is. That environment is provided by the laws and mores set up within these borders. They allow free speech, they allow freedom of travel, and most of all, they allow you to leave if you think you can find something better. So, if you are so pissed with your situation, you are welcome to find a better solution....or you can sit at a computer and bitch. The choice is yours. but remember, most people can't even type what you are saying right now without fear of retribution from the government. Get some fucking perspective.
i have actually lived in sweden, and they have a much better standard of living than we do here in north america. i would go back in a second and i intend to. it's not utopia but they treat people like human beings, whereas many people here are ok with the fact that the extremely wealthy earn 15 times that which they do. it's not right.
again, you misunderstand governments that have socialized tendencies. there is no lack of freedom. it just makes things reasonable and livable for all people...not just ten percent of the population. there are better ways to live than that. we have been fooled into thinking that "ours is the best" when there are so many better options that could be utilized.
thanks for your eloquent response.
Here's something else Sweden is good for: suicides. Sweden's suicide rate leads all others. Not sure that is the 'better option'.
most agree that depression is a part of living in a place where part of the year involves living with very little sunlight.
you're off the topic and obviously grasping at straws to demean a place that has a higher standard of living than the US.
Socialism falls apart because of the very people it tries to help: the poor.
-Enoch Powell
Hey, fucko, how high is the standard of living there when they have the greatest percentage of their population killing themselves? I think you are confusing 'standard of living' with 'quality of life'. Idiot.
Methinks the standard of dying is quite good in Sweden.
-Enoch Powell
Quite. Superior, actually.