Koldo
Outstanding Member
Same in capitalism.
What steps can an ordinary citizen take to mitigate it in a capitalist country?
-
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!
What does Socialism Add to the Economy?
- Thread starter Nakosis
- Start date
Same in capitalism.
What steps can an ordinary citizen take to mitigate it in a capitalist country?
What does Socialism Add to the Economy?
A damping function.
I would favor something similar, with an emphasis on more local (not state) control. One of the ironies about "states' rights" in the U.S. is that, even as the state governments pushed for more autonomy from the central government, they still tend to run their state governments in a very centralized way. They don't believe in county or city rights as much as they believe in states' rights, which is the root problem with states' rights as it has generally been practiced.
It's also a root advantage, eg, preventing
counties & cities from wrongdoing.
Well, there would still be laws and Constitutional rights.
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Heh. I'm sure GTA aficionados would appreciate the commentary all the same.
Free economic enterprise is a guaranteed right.
But it cannot be a free economic enterprise that creates social inequality.
It needs rules.
Those rules are called socialism.
So capitalism is just the basis. Socialism is the rules that regulate it.
Otherwise it becomes like in the jungle,...the law of the fittest or jungle law.
We are not apes any more.
But it cannot be a free economic enterprise that creates social inequality.
It needs rules.
Those rules are called socialism.
So capitalism is just the basis. Socialism is the rules that regulate it.
Otherwise it becomes like in the jungle,...the law of the fittest or jungle law.
We are not apes any more.
Daemon Sophic
Avatar in flux
Your question is a bit... odd; and can be interpreted/used in differing ways, depending on what nation and mindset you're referring to.
Since I'm a US citizen, and it's election season, and righties throw the term around without understanding it.
I will discuss it in the context of US politics.
The USA has a combination of Socialistic and Capitalistic practices. The economy is almost entirely based upon Capitalism, (and neither party is trying to change that, regardless of the completely brain-dead fear-mongering that the righties vomit up each day). However, for some situations, capitalism is a bad choice.
The most well known example is Fire Departments. In the US they used to be private companies, like insurance companies (or the mafia). If your house or business was burning down, the local FD shows up and checks to see if you're up to date on your local FD bills. If not, then they would discuss contracts while their crew stood around and watched your home go up in flames. Pay, and they'll work to put out the fire and rescue your dying children.
No Bueno.
So local governments took over the process, and tax funds were used to pay Fire Departments, and the FD would respond rapidly to EVERYBODY, since the people have already paid their 'bills'.
So now, all FDs are a socialistic aspect of our capitalistic nation. They don't really represent "Socialism".Similarly, many activities that we all need, but people don't like to deal with, and/or its hard to profit from, and/or it creates a serious concern about impropriety. Such as light-house staff and maintenance; paying the cops; maintaining a HUGE military; maintaining every single road and flood-controlling culvert; etc...etc.... All of these things are not Capitalistic yet NEED to exist or civilization crumbles (fast). So we all pitch in and pay for them with our taxes.
Capitalism of course benefits immensely from it. Harbors and airports, roads and railroads - all built by the government, using tax dollars from the people. It's hard to sell refrigerators or car engines if you make a million in your factory and warehouse, but can't ship them out. And of course, how did you get all of those supplies shipped in in the first place? Including the materials you used to build the factory and warehouse?
Research and Development are also usually led by government investments (tax dollars). The military and NASA are always coming up with VERY EXPENSIVE news ways of doing things, trying to stay on the cutting edge of technology. And after they make the new thing, they let US companies use the technology to create factories and try to sell off their inventions for a profit.
Have you ever used/bought any of these military inventions? Ever heard of any private companies making a profit from their sale?
Radar
Microwave ovens
Blood plasma transfusions
Duct tape
Electric razors
Super glue, Canned food, Freeze drying, Frozen juice concentrate, Drones, Jet packs, Jet engines, EpiPens, Bug spray, Cheetos, and WD-40.
the internet.
How about NASA inventions - like cell-phones with cameras, CAT scanners, LED lights, athletic shoes, home insulation, water purifiers, portable computers, artificial limbs, baby formula, etc...etc....
Or how about basic research by government scientists in public universities and hospitals? Know any Capitalistic companies who profited from making vaccines? They didn't invent that.
In the US, the right-wing children have thrown around "socialism" and "socialist" as an insult for many years now. But our capitalism NEEDS these socialistic features to even remotely come close to competitive standards.
If there were socialism in the USA, there would be free universal healthcare, public universities, and free housing for the homeless.Your question is a bit... odd; and can be interpreted/used in differing ways, depending on what nation and mindset you're referring to.
Since I'm a US citizen, and it's election season, and righties throw the term around without understanding it.
I will discuss it in the context of US politics.
The USA has a combination of Socialistic and Capitalistic practices. The economy is almost entirely based upon Capitalism, (and neither party is trying to change that, regardless of the completely brain-dead fear-mongering that the righties vomit up each day). However, for some situations, capitalism is a bad choice.
The most well known example is Fire Departments. In the US they used to be private companies, like insurance companies (or the mafia). If your house or business was burning down, the local FD shows up and checks to see if you're up to date on your local FD bills. If not, then they would discuss contracts while their crew stood around and watched your home go up in flames. Pay, and they'll work to put out the fire and rescue your dying children.
No Bueno.
So local governments took over the process, and tax funds were used to pay Fire Departments, and the FD would respond rapidly to EVERYBODY, since the people have already paid their 'bills'.
Similarly, many activities that we all need, but people don't like to deal with, and/or its hard to profit from, and/or it creates a serious concern about impropriety. Such as light-house staff and maintenance; paying the cops; maintaining a HUGE military; maintaining every single road and flood-controlling culvert; etc...etc.... All of these things are not Capitalistic yet NEED to exist or civilization crumbles (fast). So we all pitch in and pay for them with our taxes.
Capitalism of course benefits immensely from it. Harbors and airports, roads and railroads - all built by the government, using tax dollars from the people. It's hard to sell refrigerators or car engines if you make a million in your factory and warehouse, but can't ship them out. And of course, how did you get all of those supplies shipped in in the first place? Including the materials you used to build the factory and warehouse?
Research and Development are also usually led by government investments (tax dollars). The military and NASA are always coming up with VERY EXPENSIVE news ways of doing things, trying to stay on the cutting edge of technology. And after they make the new thing, they let US companies use the technology to create factories and try to sell off their inventions for a profit.
Have you ever used/bought any of these military inventions? Ever heard of any private companies making a profit from their sale?
Radar
Microwave ovens
Blood plasma transfusions
Duct tape
Electric razors
Super glue, Canned food, Freeze drying, Frozen juice concentrate, Drones, Jet packs, Jet engines, EpiPens, Bug spray, Cheetos, and WD-40.
the internet.
How about NASA inventions - like cell-phones with cameras, CAT scanners, LED lights, athletic shoes, home insulation, water purifiers, portable computers, artificial limbs, baby formula, etc...etc....
Or how about basic research by government scientists in public universities and hospitals? Know any Capitalistic companies who profited from making vaccines? They didn't invent that.
In the US, the right-wing children have thrown around "socialism" and "socialist" as an insult for many years now. But our capitalism NEEDS these socialistic features to even remotely come close to competitive standards.
Ok, but what has that to do with socialism?
I've read my of the property was handed down from generation to generation, not socialism.
Also it is still privately owned. Again not socialism.
You take the land from the prior owners just a continuation of feudalism.
Things that are basically anti-capitalism. Companies trying to get around the free market system.
We have welfare and social security for that. Things that would not exist in a socialist society.
Capitalism certainly has a way of dealing with that without socialism.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
What is capitalism to you? What is a free market system? What is the role of the government? And so on.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
You really have to explain how welfare and social security are capitalism.
Secret Chief
Very strong language
In the UK - the National Health Service. Capitalists have tried to kill it so we can have a super system like in the US.
Your question is a bit... odd; and can be interpreted/used in differing ways, depending on what nation and mindset you're referring to.
Since I'm a US citizen, and it's election season, and righties throw the term around without understanding it.
I will discuss it in the context of US politics.
The USA has a combination of Socialistic and Capitalistic practices. The economy is almost entirely based upon Capitalism, (and neither party is trying to change that, regardless of the completely brain-dead fear-mongering that the righties vomit up each day). However, for some situations, capitalism is a bad choice.
The most well known example is Fire Departments. In the US they used to be private companies, like insurance companies (or the mafia). If your house or business was burning down, the local FD shows up and checks to see if you're up to date on your local FD bills. If not, then they would discuss contracts while their crew stood around and watched your home go up in flames. Pay, and they'll work to put out the fire and rescue your dying children.
No Bueno.
Public fire department where around long before socialism came on the scene. We'd have them without socialism. Basically not something that got added by socialism. Same for police, postal service etc. Socialism could never have been developed and we'd still have these.
So local governments took over the process, and tax funds were used to pay Fire Departments, and the FD would respond rapidly to EVERYBODY, since the people have already paid their 'bills'.
Similarly, many activities that we all need, but people don't like to deal with, and/or its hard to profit from, and/or it creates a serious concern about impropriety. Such as light-house staff and maintenance; paying the cops; maintaining a HUGE military; maintaining every single road and flood-controlling culvert; etc...etc.... All of these things are not Capitalistic yet NEED to exist or civilization crumbles (fast).
They are not socialist either. They were around long before socialism was Marx's wet dream. They'd continue to exist without socialism.
Right, so a capitalist economy would have had to and did develop these necessities to support itself. That's not socialism. It's not there to support a socialist economy. It's there to support a capitalist economy.
Yes, they do tend to limit which companies have the funding to invest is research. That's crony capitalism. Not usually a good thing. Creates a nice interaction between the government and folks who benefit from government investment and can return the favor by supporting their political campaigns. This is what socialism adds? Yikes!
Most of these "features" existed before socialism and would exist without it.
What's the first "socialist" rule that is used to regulate a capitalist economy?
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
Yeah, it is in effect different subjective interpretations of how parts of the human world works.
And some of these "features" existed before capitalism, so a society is not just capitalistic even by your standard.
Right, but there are principles which exist in capitalism.
I assume there exist principles in socialism.
If we create a set of socialist principles...
Ok, so lets say there exist a set of "interpretations of how parts of the human world works" which can be used by either.
Where is the set of socialist principles which effect the economy which is not already a part of the other two sets?
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
Socialism in the broadest sense is non-private control of a part of the output of a society.
It is not a principle. It is a description of human behaviour in regards to individual/private versus group/collective.