What is Wrong With Socialism and why is Capitalism better?

[Purge_WTF]

WRONG IS HAVING A SOCIETY THAT DOESN'T GIVE A SHIT ABOUT ANYONE IN REGRDS TO MONEY, HEALTH AND EDUCATION AS THE REPUBLIC (NOT DEMOCRACY) THAT YOU HAVE IN AMERIKKKA. HOW DO ANY OF YOU TOLERATE THE NONSENSE OF AMERIKKKA IS BEYOND ME...YOUR GOVERNMENT IS FULL OF LIARS AND HOMOSEXUALS, YOUR JOBS/BUSINESS' ARE SENT OVER SEAS OR TO MEXICO WITHOUT REGARD TO YOUR OWN FINANCIAL NEEDS/INCOMES AND SURVIVALS AND YOUR HEALTHCARE SYSTEM WON'T EVEN LOOK AT YOU UNLESS YOU ARE INSURED...NOW THAT IS WRONG!!!!

  Stop breathing.

[War-Horse]

let's hope so. 


NT

   amen.   theres a few blind ball lickers like like bb and brittney but theyll be crying soon.

[w8tlftr]

let's hope so. 


NT

Yay socialism! 

Entitlement is a wonderful thing! 

[War-Horse]

Yay socialism! 

Entitlement is a wonderful thing! 

Your definition of socialism is fvcked up is all.  Some christian you are........

[w8tlftr]

Your definition of socialism is fvcked up is all.  Some christian you are........

A man that doesn't work doesn't eat. Pretty straight forward even for a rock with lips like you.

[War-Horse]

A man that doesn't work doesn't eat. Pretty straight forward even for a rock with lips like you.

Agreed.   Under the rule of socialism everybody works to contribute, penischaser.

[w8tlftr]

Agreed.   Under the rule of socialism everybody works to contribute, penischaser.

Right. Because that's exactly how it works in the socialist world of entitlement, Bukkake Boi. 

[War-Horse]

Right. Because that's exactly how it works in the socialist world of entitlement, Bukkake Boi. 

Yes everyone works to contribute.  no free rides.  Whats your problem with that lil rich man.??

[w8tlftr]

Yes everyone works to contribute.  no free rides.  Whats your problem with that lil rich man.??

I don't have a problem with everyone working, Julian.

[War-Horse]

I don't have a problem with everyone working, Julian.

Then why are you against socialism, Fred.?

[w8tlftr]

Then why are you against socialism, Fred.?

For obvious reasons that have already been discussed in this thread, Bukkake Boi Julian.

[Decker]

...

Really isn't much of a debate. 

Not yet it isn't.  Are you familiar with the Tragedy of the Commons?

"Fourteenth century Britain was organized as a loosely aligned collection of villages, each with a common pasture for villagers to graze horses, cattle and sheep. Each household attempted to gain wealth by putting as many animals on the commons as it could afford. As the village grew in size and more and more animals were placed on the commons, overgrazing ruined the pasture. No stock could be supported on the commons thereafter. As a consequence of population growth, greed, and the logic of the commons, village after village collapsed.

An apparent solution to avert the collapse of the commons was the introduction of private ownership. Common lands were parceled up into small tracts, each owned by a household. If a household greedily destroyed its plot, its demise was its own fault. However, as population grew, each new generation of households was left with a smaller and smaller portion of the original holdings. And, there was still the opportunity for some households to accumulate wealth by acquiring land from others, one way or another. Thus, private ownership did nothing to control greed. It merely shifted to a new arena...The number of landless households grew rapidly, each one descending deeper and deeper into abject poverty."

http://members.aol.com/trajcom/private/commons.htm

American business and politics (the same thing?) rarely operate on long-term perspectives/planning.  Short-term profit rules the day.

We will squeeze out of the environment every tree, fish, and drop of oil until exhausted in order to turn a profit today.

The automakers knew that oil is finite.  So what do they do?  Build Hummers!

Fisherman know the problems of 'fishing-out' an area.  Yet they do it anyways.

Bush's economists know that tax cuts always result in a net loss to the government so Bush proposes a 1.6 trillion dollar tax cut in the face of a 5 trillion dollar national debt.

Laissez-faire Capitalism--where everyone maximizes his own self-interest--results in this kind of destructive nonsense.

[w8tlftr]

Not yet it isn't.  Are you familiar with the Tragedy of the Commons?

"Fourteenth century Britain was organized as a loosely aligned collection of villages, each with a common pasture for villagers to graze horses, cattle and sheep. Each household attempted to gain wealth by putting as many animals on the commons as it could afford. As the village grew in size and more and more animals were placed on the commons, overgrazing ruined the pasture. No stock could be supported on the commons thereafter. As a consequence of population growth, greed, and the logic of the commons, village after village collapsed.

An apparent solution to avert the collapse of the commons was the introduction of private ownership. Common lands were parceled up into small tracts, each owned by a household. If a household greedily destroyed its plot, its demise was its own fault. However, as population grew, each new generation of households was left with a smaller and smaller portion of the original holdings. And, there was still the opportunity for some households to accumulate wealth by acquiring land from others, one way or another. Thus, private ownership did nothing to control greed. It merely shifted to a new arena...The number of landless households grew rapidly, each one descending deeper and deeper into abject poverty."

http://members.aol.com/trajcom/private/commons.htm

American business and politics (the same thing?) rarely operate on long-term perspectives/planning.  Short-term profit rules the day.

We will squeeze out of the environment every tree, fish, and drop of oil until exhausted in order to turn a profit today.

The automakers knew that oil is finite.  So what do they do?  Build Hummers!

Fisherman know the problems of 'fishing-out' an area.  Yet they do it anyways.

Bush's economists know that tax cuts always result in a net loss to the government so Bush proposes a 1.6 trillion dollar tax cut in the face of a 5 trillion dollar national debt.

Laissez-faire Capitalism--where everyone maximizes his own self-interest--results in this kind of destructive nonsense.

Both examples show that, greed unchecked, is destructive. How does this show that one is better than the other?

[Decker]

Laissez-faire capitalism is predicated partly on serving the purchasing power of the individual.  Everyone acting in his own self-interest will eventually destroy the commons/resources.

You asked for it.  Have it your way.  You want it, you got it.

We are running out of oil yet we produce bigger and bigger trucks.  We fish out our waters.  We have the desertification of productive land.  We have industry dumping toxic sludge into our water (I have so much anecdotal evidence of this).

This dynamic of the destructive force of self-interest, population growth, and out and out greed all conspire to destroy the very object of capitalistic expoitation--the natural resources belonging to us all.

It's not sustainable.

[Dos Equis]

Not yet it isn't.  Are you familiar with the Tragedy of the Commons?

"Fourteenth century Britain was organized as a loosely aligned collection of villages, each with a common pasture for villagers to graze horses, cattle and sheep. Each household attempted to gain wealth by putting as many animals on the commons as it could afford. As the village grew in size and more and more animals were placed on the commons, overgrazing ruined the pasture. No stock could be supported on the commons thereafter. As a consequence of population growth, greed, and the logic of the commons, village after village collapsed.

An apparent solution to avert the collapse of the commons was the introduction of private ownership. Common lands were parceled up into small tracts, each owned by a household. If a household greedily destroyed its plot, its demise was its own fault. However, as population grew, each new generation of households was left with a smaller and smaller portion of the original holdings. And, there was still the opportunity for some households to accumulate wealth by acquiring land from others, one way or another. Thus, private ownership did nothing to control greed. It merely shifted to a new arena...The number of landless households grew rapidly, each one descending deeper and deeper into abject poverty."

http://members.aol.com/trajcom/private/commons.htm

American business and politics (the same thing?) rarely operate on long-term perspectives/planning.  Short-term profit rules the day.

We will squeeze out of the environment every tree, fish, and drop of oil until exhausted in order to turn a profit today.

The automakers knew that oil is finite.  So what do they do?  Build Hummers!

Fisherman know the problems of 'fishing-out' an area.  Yet they do it anyways.

Bush's economists know that tax cuts always result in a net loss to the government so Bush proposes a 1.6 trillion dollar tax cut in the face of a 5 trillion dollar national debt.

Laissez-faire Capitalism--where everyone maximizes his own self-interest--results in this kind of destructive nonsense.

I'm familiar with a country that has the best legislative document ever written (the Constitution).

I'm familiar with a country that allowed an immigrant African to move here, create a halfrican, have that kid educated in the finest educational institutions in the country, earn a very high income, accumulate assets, become a state and national senator, and be on the verge of possibly becoming president of the United States.

I'm familiar with a country where a guy shows up as an immigrant, penniless, works his butt off, becomes one of the top movie stars in the world, amasses about $500 million in assets, and becomes governor of California.  

I'm familiar with the countless stories of people starting off with nothing and becoming brilliant success stories through hard work.  

I'm unfamiliar with any socialist country that has thrived over the long term like the greatest country in the history of the world.  

[calmus]

I'm familiar with a country that allowed an immigrant African to move here, create a halfrican,

Cute    Go peddle your hate and your long-winded bullshit somewhere else.


about the "socialism-capitalism" debate

John Rawls had the balance right.

[War-Horse]

I'm familiar with a country that has the best legislative document ever written (the Constitution).

I'm familiar with a country that allowed an immigrant African to move here, create a halfrican, have that kid educated in the finest educational institutions in the country, earn a very high income, accumulate assets, become a state and national senator, and be on the verge of possibly becoming president of the United States.

I'm familiar with a country where a guy shows up as an immigrant, penniless, works his butt off, becomes one of the top movie stars in the world, amasses about $500 million in assets, and becomes governor of California.  

I'm familiar with the countless stories of people starting off with nothing and becoming brilliant success stories through hard work.  

I'm unfamiliar with any socialist country that has thrived over the long term like the greatest country in the history of the world.  

Youre missing the point.  You are listing sterling examples of the times.   These ones at the top of your capitialist pyramid are demanding more and more from the support system of the middle and lower class.  What decker is saying is that it is unsustainable over the long run when people like you will be eaten up to the control for those at the top.

Our resources and the money available to run the elite class is now being built on money that is being printed out of thin air....false money that raise inflation and makes the middle class dissapear to support itself.  Do you see this as a chain in the events?      this is our course.....

[calmus]

Youre missing the point.  You are listing sterling examples of the times.   These ones at the top of your capitialist pyramid are demanding more and more from the support system of the middle and lower class.  What decker is saying is that it is unsustainable over the long run when people like you will be eaten up to the control for those at the top.

Our resources and the money available to run the elite class is now being built on money that is being printed out of thin air....false money that raise inflation and makes the middle class dissapear to support itself.  Do you see this as a chain in the events?      this is our course.....

don't humor the stubborn asshole.

[Decker]

I'm familiar with a country that has the best legislative document ever written (the Constitution).

I'm familiar with a country that allowed an immigrant African to move here, create a halfrican, have that kid educated in the finest educational institutions in the country, earn a very high income, accumulate assets, become a state and national senator, and be on the verge of possibly becoming president of the United States.

I'm familiar with a country where a guy shows up as an immigrant, penniless, works his butt off, becomes one of the top movie stars in the world, amasses about $500 million in assets, and becomes governor of California.  

I'm familiar with the countless stories of people starting off with nothing and becoming brilliant success stories through hard work.  

I'm unfamiliar with any socialist country that has thrived over the long term like the greatest country in the history of the world.  

How does any of that address the sustainability of Capitalistic Economies.

Here's a short list of socialist countries that have been around much much longer than the US:  France, Great Britain, and Austria.

[Dos Equis]

How does any of that address the sustainability of Capitalistic Economies.

Here's a short list of socialist countries that have been around much much longer than the US:  France, Great Britain, and Austria.

We have been sustaining pretty darn well for over 200 years.  Incredible gains.  Incredible opportunities.  Unlimited potential for every individual.  That's why people from all over the world come here in droves. 

China has been around much longer than the U.S. too.   

[War-Horse]

We have been sustaining pretty darn well for over 200 years.  Incredible gains.  Incredible opportunities.  Unlimited potential for every individual.  That's why people from all over the world come here in droves. 

China has been around much longer than the U.S. too.   

Were not talking about now. (even tho your too dumb to notice, now)   The course we are on!!  Get it?

More than once, i have thought you were an "alien mind controlled experiment" from the goverment.....

[calmus]

For those with more than a smidgen of literacy.

From wiki. PRetty good entry on Rawls

Demanding that everyone have exactly the same effective opportunities in life is a nonstarter: achieving this would almost certainly offend the very liberties that are supposedly being equalized. Nonetheless, we would want to ensure at least the "fair worth" of our liberties: wherever I end up in society, I want my life to be worth living, with enough effective freedom to pursue my plans. Thus we would be moved to affirm a second principle requiring fair equality of opportunity, paired with the famous (and controversial) difference principle. This second principle ensures that those with comparable talents and motivation face roughly similar life chances, and that inequalities in society work to the benefit of the least advantaged.

[War-Horse]

For those with more than a smidgen of literacy.

From wiki. PRetty good entry on Rawls

The second principle is where greed and a sense of entitlement come in.......

[calmus]

The second principle is where greed and a sense of entitlement come in.......

Say more. I'm not following you.

[w8tlftr]

Laissez-faire capitalism is predicated partly on serving the purchasing power of the individual.  Everyone acting in his own self-interest will eventually destroy the commons/resources.

You asked for it.  Have it your way.  You want it, you got it.

We are running out of oil yet we produce bigger and bigger trucks.  We fish out our waters.  We have the desertification of productive land.  We have industry dumping toxic sludge into our water (I have so much anecdotal evidence of this).

This dynamic of the destructive force of self-interest, population growth, and out and out greed all conspire to destroy the very object of capitalistic expoitation--the natural resources belonging to us all.

It's not sustainable.

No argument there but you're just providing more arguments of the dangers of pure unchecked capitalism and self-absorbing individual greed. It's just common sense that too much of a good thing is a bad thing.