• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Socialists may have the same mentality as Nazis: that people must be enslaved

PureX

Veteran Member
Let's say you find oilfields on your property.
The Government decides to expropriate your property and compensate you, because oilfields must belong to the Treasury.

Is that a socialist country or not?
;)
That oil either belongs to no one, or it belongs to everyone. And because people will not agree on which, they will need to establish a government entity to make that decision based on the best outcome to the collective society it has been established to represent and to govern. The capitalists hate this idea because the capitalists are all about individual ownership (because ownership gives them control). So they will claim this is some sort of heinous socialist/communist plot. But in fact it's just common sense democracy. If it is socialist at all, that will be determined by how the government was set up to function. (By how directly the citizens participate in the decision-making process.)
 

Terrywoodenpic

Oldest Heretic
There is no "uncontrolled capitalism" here.
Socialist do love to use that phrase, but it's a straw man.
We're highly regulated.
I know. I do business here.

You extol the virtues of Europe, & see only problems
in USA. This bespeaks blind prejudice. You can't
argue for socialism, ie, government owning the
means of production by citing capitalist countries
with social programs you prefer....including more
censorship of speech.

I've dealt with Citizens NA, a bank that's owned by
RBS, which is owned by the British government.
They are the most vicious lender I've ever had the
misfortune of dealing with.
Nowadays, I borrow only from lenders who hold
their portfolio...not those who might sell my loan
to a thug.

I have no idea how RBS subsidiaries operate in the USA, but it will certainly following American financial rules.
In the UK they operate by British rules which are generally understood to be fair.
However banks world wide only hold a tiny fraction of their deposits and the rest is invested in trades of various kinds.
The rules for these vary country by country. And bank by bank.

RBS was very badly hit by the American banking crisis, and only survived by accepting government loans. The British government has no direct control over it, nor does the government have any direct control over the bank of England. To a large extent the bank of England is independent of the treasury
I do not know how large a stake the government still holds in RBS. But I know most other British banks have already paid off their loans.

Socialism in Britain and Europe rarely includes ownership of the means of production, and as far as I can tell does not at all in the UK. however the is strong public pressure to bring back the railways under national control, as there is for the water industry. Both of which have suffered badly after privatisation.

The Chinese system of capitalism has certainly created the world leading infrastructure and the fastest growing industrialization and manufacturing base that the world has ever seen. With the establishment of the cleanest safest and most modern cities in the world that have the best communications and transport systems far out pacing anything America has to offer.

By and large a vast majority of Chinese support their government. And are pleased with the quality of their lives. I do not think many Americans understand how The "communist" Chinese government can establish such an effective capitalist society.

It is these hybrid socialist/ capitalist systems that are the most prevalent in the world today.
With the American version being regarded as something of a dinosaur.
 

Estro Felino

Believer in free will
Premium Member
That oil either belongs to no one, or it belongs to everyone. And because people will not agree on which, they will need to establish a government entity to make that decision based on the best outcome to the collective society it has been established to represent and to govern. The capitalists hate this idea because the capitalists are all about individual ownership (because ownership gives them control). So they will claim this is some sort of heinous socialist/communist plot. But in fact it's just common sense democracy. If it is socialist at all, that will be determined by how the government was set up to function. (By how directly the citizens participate in the decision-making process.)
Also because what will that Capitalist do with that oil? Drink it?
I mean... he needs a State to buy that oil...or to allow that that oil is sold.
 
Last edited:

Magic Man

Reaper of Conversation
There is no "uncontrolled capitalism" here.
Socialist do love to use that phrase, but it's a straw man.
We're highly regulated.
I know. I do business here.
"Highly regulated" is too vague. In what ways is it regulated? I can give you plenty of ways it's unregulated or regulated improperly due to influence of the wealthy.
 

Terrywoodenpic

Oldest Heretic
Let's say you find oilfields on your property.
The Government decides to expropriate your property and compensate you, because oilfields must belong to the Treasury.

Is that a socialist country or not?
;)
It might be, but both capitalist and socialist countries might do that.
Many countries consider what is underground and what is in the air belongs to the nation.

This is the case in the UK.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
I have no idea how RBS subsidiaries operate in the USA...
You can research my claim if you wish.
I know wherefrom I speak....at great cost.
...but it will certainly following American financial rules.
It's one thing to follow the rules.
It's another to use them abusively.
I'm unimpressed with the claimed higher morality
of British & European culture & business.
In the UK they operate by British rules which are generally understood to be fair.
I expect a higher standard of fair.
And US based lenders deliver.
RBS was very badly hit by the American banking crisis, and only survived by accepting government loans. The British government has no direct control over it, nor does the government have any direct control over the bank of England. To a large extent the bank of England is independent of the treasury
RBS's troubles began with their own
mis-management, not US financial bubbles.
I do not know how large a stake the government still holds in RBS.
When I last looked into it, the Crown
owned in the neighborhood of 90%
of RBS.
Socialism in Britain and Europe rarely includes ownership of the means of production....
Then it's not socialism, as defined
in every dictionary.
and as far as I can tell does not at all in the UK. however the is strong public pressure to bring back the railways under national control, as there is for the water industry. Both of which have suffered badly after privatisation.

The Chinese system of capitalism has certainly created the world leading infrastructure and the fastest growing industrialization and manufacturing base that the world has ever seen. With the establishment of the cleanest safest and most modern cities in the world that have the best communications and transport systems far out pacing anything America has to offer.

By and large a vast majority of Chinese support their government. And are pleased with the quality of their lives. I do not think many Americans understand how The "communist" Chinese government can establish such an effective capitalist society.

It is these hybrid socialist/ capitalist systems that are the most prevalent in the world today.
With the American version being regarded as something of a dinosaur.
Of course the majority of Chinese people support
their government. They dare not, or they disappear.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
"Highly regulated" is too vague. In what ways is it regulated?
It varies with the industry.
I deal with housing codes, zoning laws, building codes,
rent control, Fair Housing laws, consumer protection
laws, self storage laws, signage laws, financial regulation...
....just off the top'o me head.
 

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
Many European countries are what may be called Socialist Democracies. They are doing fine.

But they're capitalist economics.
Putting "socialist" in the label is merely
the inverse of "lipstick on a pig".
Although late the conversation, I have to agree with @Revoltingest. Of course, I don't call them "socialist democracies" but "social democracies." It seems a minor difference, but it really isn't.

No other economic system has proved able to generate wealth like capitalism can. This is simply an empirical fact. And let's be honest, some measure of wealth is required to satisfy the needs of everyone. Capitalism simply allows for the satisffying off wants, too -- and it is in those "wants" that the real engine of wealth creation lives. Individuals wishing to take risks, to invest their capital and their effort in the hope of enriching themselves enrich others on the way by.

The social democracies @sayak83 is talking about are all capitalist, in that they allow those individuals and organizations to take those risks and make those investments -- and keep the larger share of the proceeds. Yes, they skim some off in taxes to use for purposes controlled by the state, because there are some things that are better managed at that level -- for example anything which might be deemed a "universal" program.
 

Father Heathen

Veteran Member
This discussion reminds me of this old meme:
socialismcomic.jpg
 
Top