What does Socialism Add to the Economy?

[Stevicus]

I don't see what this has to do with capitalism.
It's about enforcing laws.

And yet, capitalists in the U.S. maintain that enforcing laws would hurt their businesses and have a ripple effect upon the entire U.S. economy.

 

[Kfox]

So, are you suggesting that when the first settlers came in 1607, they just waved a magic wand, and suddenly we had cities, factories, railroads, and infrastructure just like that?

No, I said nothing about factories, railroads, and all that other stuff you mentioned, I spoke of an economic system.

That's what I mean when you can't just "put an economic system in place."

Those things are not economic systems.

You have to build stuff first. You need people and some form of political system.

Yeah; but you don't need centuries of trial and error to put an economic system in place

 

[metis]

Now you're just being silly!

No, I've taught macro-economics, and you're simply clueless and too much into yourself to study.

So, unless you have something intelligent to add, I'm just moving on.

 

[Kfox]

No, I've taught macro-economics, and you're simply clueless and too much into yourself to study.

So, unless you have something intelligent to add, I'm just moving on.

How about if you disagree with anything I've said thus far, tell me what and why you disagree with me, and we can discuss it. Because to only say I don't know what I'm talking about, end of discussion; is a cop-out.

 

[Wandering Monk]

?

Happiness.

Democratic Socialist Countries Rank Highly in Happiness - US Drops Again

The 2018 World Happiness Report is out, and the US ranks the lowest that it's even been, dropping from 18th place to 19th place. The top spots are again dominated this year by Nordic countries - in order, Finland (finishing first once again), Denmark...

www.dailykos.com

 

[Nakosis]

Happiness.

Democratic Socialist Countries Rank Highly in Happiness - US Drops Again

The 2018 World Happiness Report is out, and the US ranks the lowest that it's even been, dropping from 18th place to 19th place. The top spots are again dominated this year by Nordic countries - in order, Finland (finishing first once again), Denmark...

www.dailykos.com

Maybe if we had better leaders.

 

[metis]

Maybe if we had better leaders.

Or maybe the Nordic leaders actually care about their people instead of just power & money.

While in Amsterdam, I talked with a woman originally from New York but who lives in the Netherlands now, and she said she'd never go back to America to live. Yes, they have higher taxes but then far less worries.

 

[Stevicus]

No, I said nothing about factories, railroads, and all that other stuff you mentioned, I spoke of an economic system.

Those things are not economic systems.

Yeah; but you don't need centuries of trial and error to put an economic system in place

Then why did it take centuries of trial and error to actually get to that point?

 

[PureX]

I disagree. It is the job of society to add to the economy, without a thriving economy, society can't survive.

Human societies have survived a great many problems over the millennium. And yet in the end it may well be capitalist greed that does us all in. So as usual, you are wearing your 'wrong-way' gasses, again.

And when you put an economic system in place that rewards laziness and discourages accomplishment and innovation, that hurts society; not help it.

Actually, lazy people do very little harm to anyone but themselves. It's the insatiable go-getters that keep causing all the problems. Enough is never enough for them. And like you, they think everyone else is holding them back, and so deserve to be trampled under the mighty wheels of their "progress".

 

[PureX]

If we don't master the economy then it will master us.

It has already enslaved the vast majority of us. And the few that are "masters" are nothing more than criminal accomplices.

 

[Kfox]

Then why did it take centuries of trial and error to actually get to that point?

Cause we're constantly evolving and changing.

 

[Stevicus]

Cause we're constantly evolving and changing.

That's a different position than the idea of "putting an economic system in place," as if it's simply a matter of passing a law that says "socialist" or "capitalist" to be enacted immediately.

 

[Nakosis]

Or maybe the Nordic leaders actually care about their people instead of just power & money.

While in Amsterdam, I talked with a woman originally from New York but who lives in the Netherlands now, and she said she'd never go back to America to live. Yes, they have higher taxes but then far less worries.

Yes, but it also depends on what the government does with that tax money.

 

[Kfox]

That's a different position than the idea of "putting an economic system in place," as if it's simply a matter of passing a law that says "socialist" or "capitalist" to be enacted immediately.

That's not the argument I was making. I was just saying it doesn't take hundreds of years to put in place

 

[Stevicus]

That's not the argument I was making. I was just saying it doesn't take hundreds of years to put in place

Your original argument was "And when you put an economic system in place that rewards laziness and discourages accomplishment and innovation" (post #111). What sort of process are you referring to when you say to "put an economic system in place"?

 

[Kfox]

Human societies have survived a great many problems over the millennium. And yet in the end it may well be capitalist greed that does us all in.

Capitalist greed has existed for multiple millennium and has not done us in; sooo... your argument fails

Actually, lazy people do very little harm to anyone but themselves.

No; when lazy people take more than they contribute, when they refuse to pull their own weight, they force others to take up their slack. This is harmful

 

[Kfox]

That's a different position than the idea of "putting an economic system in place," as if it's simply a matter of passing a law that says "socialist" or "capitalist" to be enacted immediately.

It doesn't work that way. Nobody says Socialist or Capitalist, they put laws in place allowing free enterprise, and in doing that it becomes capitalist. Or they might outlaw free enterprise, and in doing that it becomes socalist.

 

[Kfox]

Your original argument was "And when you put an economic system in place that rewards laziness and discourages accomplishment and innovation" (post #111). What sort of process are you referring to when you say to "put an economic system in place"?

A system where the Government owns the means of production; rather than private enterprise, where the Government decides your income based on what it determines you need, rather than the amount you are able to generate, where the Government sets prices rather than supply and demand; etc.

 

[Stevicus]

It doesn't work that way. Nobody says Socialist or Capitalist, they put laws in place allowing free enterprise, and in doing that it becomes capitalist. Or they might outlaw free enterprise, and in doing that it becomes socalist.

I don't agree entirely. The buying/selling/trading of goods is a process that doesn't automatically require any written laws or governments, only a social contract between individuals. The reason that laws and governments exist is because of the human propensity towards greed, dishonesty, theft, and violence.

It's not that a system is "put into place," but it's more a matter of the complexities and inherent malice involved in human interactions which leads to the necessity of putting restrictions upon that system. That's where the trial and error comes into play, since they've had to try different ideas out from time to time. Sometimes they work, and sometimes not. The Federal Reserve Bank, for example, was created to manage the money system. The IRS was also created around the same time. Various anti-trust acts and labor reforms came about as well.

So, this proves, at the very least, there's a certain flexibility in the system which can make changes and reforms which might have certain socialistic characteristics, but wouldn't automatically "become socialist."

 

[Wandering Monk]

I don't agree entirely. The buying/selling/trading of goods is a process that doesn't automatically require any written laws or governments, only a social contract between individuals. The reason that laws and governments exist is because of the human propensity towards greed, dishonesty, theft, and violence.

It's not that a system is "put into place," but it's more a matter of the complexities and inherent malice involved in human interactions which leads to the necessity of putting restrictions upon that system. That's where the trial and error comes into play, since they've had to try different ideas out from time to time. Sometimes they work, and sometimes not. The Federal Reserve Bank, for example, was created to manage the money system. The IRS was also created around the same time. Various anti-trust acts and labor reforms came about as well.

So, this proves, at the very least, there's a certain flexibility in the system which can make changes and reforms which might have certain socialistic characteristics, but wouldn't automatically "become socialist."

What may be good business between two parties could harm third parties.

For instance, it is cheaper to dump your industrial waste into a river or landfill than to dispose of it in a safe way. Saves you money and so saves your customer money, but may injure or kill third parties who live downstream or near the landfill.