Will global Capitalism survive till 2100?

[suncowiam]

It's obvious that you haven't done your homework of reading the link I provided you because you keep on referring to "socialism as if it is monolithic, which anyone who has done any studying on the matter knows that it is not.

Secondly, you have fallen into the trap of dualistic thinking on this matter. There are not entirely "capitalistic" or "socialistic" economies, and all countries in today's world have what is called "mixed economies"-- iow, a mixture of both capitalistic and socialistic programs.

And finally, you keep on referring to Marxist models and not models like the Scandinavians have, which I've mentioned in my previous posts, but which you have totally ignored.

Actually, I'm not referring to socialism as monolithic, but when it becomes monolithic, it's a complete failure. So you didn't read my statement completely. I pointed that out to you that these successful socialist states have capitalism at its core. You say potatoe, I say potatoe. Ironic that I pointed that out to you and you missed it. And then you claim me being evasive.

You're attributing the success of these countries to socialism, but you don't know that for a fact. I'm pointing to you that the closer a country comes to pure socialism, it fails miserably. History has proven that. You want to evade this topic and simply blame Marxism on that?

Here is the wiki on your Scandinavian model:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordic_model

From my reading, it's much more Capitalistic than Social. It also has its fair share of criticism.

If you want to prove to me that socialism works, then show me a pure socialistic country that is succeeding. Otherwise, put an (*) behind all your comments suggesting the socialism is the end of all debates.

You're debating with theory that has yet to be proven.

[Edited]
Sure, there are always socialistic aspects of any government, but its not what makes that government successful. Capitalism is the driving force behind all successful countries. Statistics proves it. History proves it.

Want to shove a mix of socialism in there? Fine, but I'm just pointing out that you have a very hard time proving that it is socialism that drives a country to success.

 

[metis]

Actually, I'm not referring to socialism as monolithic, but when it becomes monolithic, it's a complete failure. So you didn't read my statement completely. I pointed that out to you that these successful socialist states have capitalism at its core. You say potatoe, I say potatoe. Ironic that I pointed that out to you and you missed it. And then you claim me being evasive.

You're attributing the success of these countries to socialism, but you don't know that for a fact. I'm pointing to you that the closer a country comes to pure socialism, it fails miserably. History has proven that. You want to evade this topic and simply blame Marxism on that?

Here is the wiki on your Scandinavian model:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordic_model

From my reading, it's much more Capitalistic than Social. It also has its fair share of criticism.

If you want to prove to me that socialism works, then show me a pure socialistic country that is succeeding. Otherwise, put an (*) behind all your comments suggesting the socialism is the end of all debates.

You're debating with theory that has yet to be proven.

There is no "socialist country", and that includes even Cuba and China, which do allow elements of capitalism-- probably more than you think. BTW, China is now an exporting nation that has had a higher rate of economic growth over the last two decades than any other country, and it's partially due to their blending of both capitalistic and socialistic programs.

Secondly, when the former Swedish minister of finance was asked how Sweden came out of the economic doldrums in the mid 1990's, his short and to the point response was "Higher taxes". If you have any understanding of macro-economics, what he said makes sense, but if you don't, then it probably doesn't.

Finally, as I mentioned before and even above, there is no "pure socialistic country", so all you are proving is that you have an agenda but you really don't know what you're talking about because you've invented a fantasy world that's devoid of even a basic understanding of macro-economics economics. I provided you with a link two posts ago, but it's still obvious that you didn't take the opportunity to read it, so all I'm doing is batting my head against the wall with someone who just is unwilling to learn.

The End.

 

[suncowiam]

There is no "socialist country", and that includes even Cuba and China, which do allow elements of capitalism-- probably more than you think. BTW, China is now an exporting nation that has had a higher rate of economic growth over the last two decades than any other country, and it's partially due to their blending of both capitalistic and socialistic programs.

Secondly, when the former Swedish minister of finance was asked how Sweden came out of the economic doldrums in the mid 1990's, his short and to the point response was "Higher taxes". If you have any understanding of macro-economics, what he said makes sense, but if you don't, then it probably doesn't.

Finally, as I mentioned before and even above, there is no "pure socialistic country", so all you are proving is that you have an agenda but you really don't know what you're talking about because you've invented a fantasy world that's devoid of even a basic understanding of macro-economics economics. I provided you with a link two posts ago, but it's still obvious that you didn't take the opportunity to read it, so all I'm doing is batting my head against the wall with someone who just is unwilling to learn.

The End.

You addressed my points exactly. China became more capitalistic and then what happened?

Cuba retains more socialistic aspects, and we all know how well its doing now.

My agenda can be equated to my opinions and my opinions as I have pointed out over and over is through real life facts and history.

As if you're being objective at all. History has shown over and over that any nation that swings more towards Socialism will fail.

I'll just keep on repeating that to you because you keep on evading that point. That's actually not even an opinion.