Oh boy, I'm glad we don't live under socialism!!
This topic is locked from further discussion.
That was painful to watch.
Mixed economies... The false dichotomy of capitalism vs socialism needs to go away.
It's just amusing that we are always told in america that socialism is bad. Yet the scene on that poster is so easily recognizable, because that is what (crony) capitalism is doing to us. A hybrid economy is the best way to go. And anyone who thinks that capitalism alone is the best way to go, is a naive ideologue.
Yeah, I get it. The extreme "pure" ideologies have shortcomings a child can identify, and its good to talk about and identify those shortcomings.
You've gotta use a better messenger, though. That guy is terrible - illogical and, based on that clip, either advocating for the other extreme or ineloquent.
That was painful to watch.
Mixed economies... The false dichotomy of capitalism vs socialism needs to go away.
It's just amusing that we are always told in america that socialism is bad. Yet the scene on that poster is so easily recognizable, because that is what (crony) capitalism is doing to us. A hybrid economy is the best way to go. And anyone who thinks that capitalism alone is the best way to go, is a naive ideologue.
Bernie sold out.
You're never coming back from that.
Yeah, I get it. The extreme "pure" ideologies have shortcomings a child can identify, and its good to talk about and identify those shortcomings.
You've gotta use a better messenger, though. That guy is terrible - illogical and, based on that clip, either advocating for the other extreme or ineloquent.
Jimmy Dore is against crony capitalism, not good capitalism, he talks bad about it in a general sense for the sake of humor. If you watch his other videos, he is quite level headed. And he was pointing out the good things socialism does, that capitalism can't do. He refers to our current system as predatory capitalism. There are popular people on youtube, like Stefan Molyneux who are illogically against all forms of socialism, and government, and I consider him to be a childish ideologue, and cult like.
Bernie sold out.
You're never coming back from that.
Bernie took the high road after being lied to and betrayed, he knew that Trump is the worst of us and did what he had to to work towards a Trump defeat.
Bernie sold out.
You're never coming back from that.
Bernie took the high road after being lied to and betrayed, he knew that Trump is the worst of us and did what he had to to work towards a Trump defeat.
LOL.
Indeed! I was a Bernie supporter, but it gives him no right to sell his soul to the devil.
Mixed economies generally are not blends of capitalism and socialism. Scandinavian countries are good examples of this confusion. They are almost entirely capitalist economies. In this discussion, people always confuse the role of gov't with that of primary economic ownership.... they are not the same thing.
This is how you get weirdo made up terms like crony capitalism which really is just cronyism. Just like crony socialism is really just cronyism in China, only we don't think of it that way because their gov't actually owns all those state enterprises, so we assume they are the same. But even in China, there is recognition that they aren't the same which is why the current leader is attempting to purge as much corruption and cronyism as he can. The key here is that the failure/mess relates to governance, not to business.
For example, socialized healthcare in most economies is actually largely delivered by the private sector, yet we refer to it as socialism whereas it really just reflects a choice about the role of government....vis a vis a single payer system funded by taxation.
Similarly, you can have an almost entirely capitalistic underpinning and still have heavy regulation, heavy taxation, gov't redistribution of wealth, etc. aka our view of Scandinavia.
All of the foregoing relates to decisions about governance, not business itself and who owns that business. Almost every argument made about the failings of capitalism have little to nothing to do with the core principles of capitalism... they have everything to do with differences of opinion about governance and the role of gov't.
It Is important to be clear about principles and language, because we have a whole generation of people growing up with these impressions about the economic system that are false. There are plenty of problems, but virtually none can be solved via changes to who owns what. Demand more of your gov't since it is governance choices that are the problem and the solution. Capitalism will react and respond to the governance context it faces and people and business will make money, innovate, create and destroy whether it is laissez faire capitalism or a Scandinavian version, the difference being the role of governance.
Mixed economies generally are not blends of capitalism and socialism. Scandinavian countries are good examples of this confusion. They are almost entirely capitalist economies. In this discussion, people always confuse the role of gov't with that of primary economic ownership.... they are not the same thing.
This is how you get weirdo made up terms like crony capitalism which really is just cronyism. Just like crony socialism is really just cronyism in China, only we don't think of it that way because their gov't actually owns all those state enterprises, so we assume they are the same. But even in China, there is recognition that they aren't the same which is why the current leader is attempting to purge as much corruption and cronyism as he can. The key here is that the failure/mess relates to governance, not to business.
For example, socialized healthcare in most economies is actually largely delivered by the private sector, yet we refer to it as socialism whereas it really just reflects a choice about the role of government....vis a vis a single payer system funded by taxation.
Similarly, you can have an almost entirely capitalistic underpinning and still have heavy regulation, heavy taxation, gov't redistribution of wealth, etc. aka our view of Scandinavia.
All of the foregoing relates to decisions about governance, not business itself and who owns that business. Almost every argument made about the failings of capitalism have little to nothing to do with the core principles of capitalism... they have everything to do with differences of opinion about governance and the role of gov't.
It Is important to be clear about principles and language, because we have a whole generation of people growing up with these impressions about the economic system that are false. There are plenty of problems, but virtually none can be solved via changes to who owns what. Demand more of your gov't since it is governance choices that are the problem and the solution. Capitalism will react and respond to the governance context it faces and people and business will make money, innovate, create and destroy whether it is laissez faire capitalism or a Scandinavian version, the difference being the role of governance.
Interesting. I get what you are saying.
How much more of a socialist can i be at this point? Everything i deal with on a daily basis is subsidized in some way. From how i get my food and and crap i have to exist to the people that steal my shit there was a gov program subsidizing their production at some point.
I love how some Americans think that EVERYTHING government does is socialism.
This is how you get idiots like Sanders claiming that everything popular (law enforcement, military, roads etc) is socialism and thus there's nothing wrong with introducing his plans into the economy since socialism is already everywhere....
@SUD123456: I think most people here understand that. At some point you just have to move forward with the given parlance rather than continue arguing definitions.
Republicans won that battle over verbiage a generation ago. It's wrong, but it's there nonetheless.
This is not a topic that I think much about or one that am educated enough about to hold a strong opinion on. I think in general socialism is different things to different people.
That said, I have known people who lived in socialist countries that have told me they much prefer the US for that very reason. I have not lived in or really ever been exposed to it personally but the US is a wealthy and powerful country and it didn't get that way by being "socialist".
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment