Restaurants now charging 30 dollars for a regular size pizza in NY.

[PureX]

Capitalism is rightful. But a socialist state is needed whenever capitalists cross certain line they shouldn't cross, like misbehaving or create social injustice. Or exploit workers.
Just that.

The problem is that capitalism has no mechanism for not crossing those moral and ethical and essential social lines. Capitalism is just a mindless greed based system for enabling excess money to capture more money. Under capitalism, money IS control. So of course that control gets used to acquire more money, and so more control. The system has no governor, and does not care who wins or who loses. In fact, it doesn't care about people at all.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

I'll continue criticizing real socialist countries, just as
you'll continue complaining about your pet peeves.
This is how RF works.

This continues to be your problem with that criticism. You're not criticizing "real socialist countries", you're criticizing Communist countries. Vaguely, without specifics, just by name dropping them and assuming that's enough to quell favor for socialism.

 

[Estro Felino]

The problem is that capitalism has no mechanism for not crossing those moral and ethical and essential social lines. Capitalism is just a mindless greed based system for enabling excess money to capture more money. Under capitalism, money IS control. So of course that control gets used to acquire more money, and so more control. The system has no governor, and does not care who wins or who loses. In fact, it doesn't care about people at all.

There is a perverted mechanism called profit maximization. Which is normalized in Microeconomics. But that is like a suicidal, self-destructive mechanism.
Lots of businesses destroyed themselves because they were lost in that vicious cycle of greed.

 

[Revoltingest]

They aren't free to dismiss an employee without just cause.

We are free to do that here.

They aren't free to make a contract which isn't admitted by the law.

We too have limits on what in a contract is enforceable.
There is much regulation of contracts.
Oddly, this seems largely unknown outside of people
in USA who run businesses. We have extensive
regulation. I'll wager that when @Debater Slayer
becomes a landlord, we'll compare our experiences,
& discover that he faces less regulation.

Now when will he get off the pot, & actually buy
that property so that we can get on with this, eh!

 

[Estro Felino]

You have a mish mash of definitions there.
Perhaps you should address systems & policies
instead of labels with too many personal meanings.

With all due respect, but if you haven't read the Italian Constitution, it's normal that you assume it isn't socialist.
Read it first, and then you can judge.
Assumptions can be wrong.

 

[Estro Felino]

We are free to do that here.
!

Because yours isn't a socialist country.

 

[Revoltingest]

This continues to be your problem with that criticism. You're not criticizing "real socialist countries", you're criticizing Communist countries. Vaguely, without specifics, just by name dropping them and assuming that's enough to quell favor for socialism.

What definitions do you use for "socialism" vs "communism"?
I use dictionary definitions. Whence come yours?

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

What definitions do you use for "socialism" vs "communism"?
I use dictionary definitions. Whence come yours?

That's a pretty weird dictionary.

 

[Revoltingest]

With all due respect....

Uh oh...that usually precedes disrespect.
I'm now on guard.

....but if you haven't read the Italian Constitution, it's normal that you assume it isn't socialist.
Read it first, and then you can judge.
Assumptions can be wrong.

I don't need to read your constitution.
Besides, it's in Italian.
And we're using English, with its terminology & definitions.
So we'll stick to that.

Edit....
Your constitution might use a word for "socialism",
but does using the word always mean what you think?
Socialists always object when told what "Nazi" stands for.
(It states that it's socialist.) Yet they cite N Korea as
democratic because that term is in its name.
Actions mean more than names.
And actions fit definitions.

 

[PureX]

There is a perverted mechanism called profit maximization. Which is normalized in Microeconomics. But that is like a suicidal, self-destructive mechanism.
Lots of businesses destroyed themselves because they were lost in that vicious cycle of greed.

Our entire culture is collapsing because of it. Because capitalism has no innate governor. Greed as a motive is bottomless. It cannot ever be satiated. Billionaires still think they need to capture and control even more money. And millions of idiots among us think they should have that right. It's a form of insanity. And it's completely inhumane and self-destructive. As a system it couldn't care less about the humans involved in it, or what happens to them.

 

[Estro Felino]

Uh oh...that usually precedes disrespect.
I'm now on guard.

I don't need to read your constitution.
Besides, it's in Italian.
And we're using English, with its terminology & definitions.
So we'll stick to that.

There's also in English, available on the Internet.
It changes nothing. Terminology is identical in both languages.

 

[Revoltingest]

Because yours isn't a socialist country.

By your apparent definition, it would be.
We have capitalism with high taxes that support
common infrastructure, public schools, Social
Security, & various other aspects of a welfare state.
Of course, the social services just aren't as extensive
or generous as you & others might want.

 

[Revoltingest]

That's a pretty weird dictionary.

View attachment 72222

View attachment 72223

OK.
But recognize that those definitions
aren't shared by all here, including
socialists & marxists.

 

[Revoltingest]

Private healthcare, private universities, private colleges...
Private, private, private.

Were you really unaware that we also have...
Public health care in addition to private.
Public universities & colleges in addition to private.

I've attended many public schools & universities.
Not one was ever private. (Too spendy for us.)
I currently receive health care thru a government
program...with supplementary private insurance.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

OK.
But recognize that those definitions
aren't shared by all here, including
socialists & marxists.

Then they're using incorrect definitions. Those above are the definitions as given by the Oxford English Dictionary.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Capitalists think it's the people's responsibility to serve the system, not the system's responsibility to serve the well being of the people. So those who the capitalists feel are not doing that to the system's satisfaction deserve to be 'left out' of the system's benefits. They are deemed not worthy.

And apparently supposed to be the government's problem. Surprising to see that coming from @Revoltingest.
And (to him) it's especially surprising as at least a few people here know I work on cars, am a certified phlebotomist and wicked smart. No, it's not me. I'm very skilled, very capable and should be very employable, but **** me when I'm at an interview and the person of front of me is walking out and chatting up a storm with manager? That is where I'm not so skilled and talented. My aspie senses give me an advantage over many in countless areas. Doesn't matter when you give it your all and best and come off as hardly a step above human robot.

 

[Revoltingest]

Then they're using incorrect definitions. Those above are the definitions as given by the Oxford English Dictionary.

Hence all the arguing.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Then they're using incorrect definitions. Those above are the definitions as given by the Oxford English Dictionary.

Hence all the arguing.

These semantic problems go away when one acknowledges that a socialist can aspire to achieve public ownership of the means of production without viewing it as feasible now and immediately. It seems that some people assume someone who advocates that is "not a real socialist" if they don't try to force public ownership immediately or don't view it as currently achievable.

One's vision of an ideal society can be quite informative about their position.

 

[Revoltingest]

And apparently supposed to be the government's problem. Surprising to see that coming from @Revoltingest.

This is a good opportunity to relate my philosophy
regarding social assistance....

Businesses are in the business of business, ie, make
profit for the owners. They hire employees for that
purpose...not to support people in need, ie, who wouldn't
produce as much as they'd cost.
Some people endure difficulties at being employed.
Whether lacking in skill, having a difficult personality,
or other handicap, it's government's roll is to assist them.
That cost spread across all taxpayers, not imposed upon
one who employs them. One approach to this is for
government to subsidize the barely employable. Earning
some income reduces their cost to society without ever
burdening the employer with excess costs.
This is optimum liberty for all.

And (to him) it's especially surprising as at least a few people here know I work on cars, am a certified phlebotomist and wicked smart. No, it's not me. I'm very skilled, very capable and should be very employable, but **** me when I'm at an interview and the person of front of me is walking out and chatting up a storm with manager? That is where I'm not so skilled and talented. My aspie senses give me an advantage over many in countless areas. Doesn't matter when you give it your all and best and come off as hardly a step above human robot.

I don't know why you're not hired. But employers are the most
knowledgeable about whom to employ. Have you ever asked
for feedback? Such info might give you something to act upon.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Soon USA will ditch capitalism, & become the
worker's paradise that other socialist countries
are, eg, N Korea, Cuba, or the old USSR, eh.

There are a myriad possibilities between the communism of the USSR and the capitalism of the US. Both are extremes with deeply harmful side effects.

Of course, there's a big issue about exactly
what these whippersnappers believe "socialism"
actually is. It appears that many only think it's
getting generous social services.

It seems that you realize most self-identified supporters of socialism don't support the type of government in the USSR, Cuba, or North Korea.