Pages:
Author

Topic: Capitalism vs. Socialism - Make your argument here. - page 7. (Read 21323 times)

legendary
Activity: 3318
Merit: 2008
First Exclusion Ever
There isn't a debate being had.  No one supports socialism as the capitalists are defining it but people in this thread continue to argue against that straw man.   No one supports a system where people have no freedom.  Advocates of socialism and capitialism both want a system with more freedom. 

Stop fighting wind Smiley

They won't open their eyes on the very simple fact that previous communist countries were dictatorships... That a dictatorship is communist, capitalist, religious or whatever it doesn't matter. It's a dictatorship.

Now could we implement communism without dictatorship? That would be an interesting question.

But don't argue just put those idiots on ignore. They're too stupid to discuss anything outside of their beliefs.

I never saw a communist refusing to admit capitalism has its pros.
I never saw a capitalist admitting communism has its pros.

It isn't difficult to see where is the open mind.

They didn't just become dictatorships magically. Socialism and Communism were the preferred methods of usurpation for many of these dictatorships. You simply lack the intelligence to understand this process of degradation and what causes it. You think you have the answer but all you have is the same old genocidal dictatorships with a new face and an Instagram page.

Communism at best is "successful" until it runs out of resources and a way to motivate its people to produce resources. Once the resources are gone and there is no work incentive, guess what? You are now all slaves and you go to forced work camps or else the country collapses. This is the guaranteed outcome EVERY. FUCKING. TIME.

Communism has its pros like cocaine has its pros. It feels awesome for like 20 minutes then you feel like shit and you want more. You get addicted to it, burn through all of your savings, and now you are blowing people on the street for crack rocks. That is Communism in a nutshell. So if by pros you mean you have a tiny moment of euphoria before a horrible grotesque world is imposed upon you then, sure it has pros.
legendary
Activity: 1344
Merit: 1251
There isn't a debate being had.  No one supports socialism as the capitalists are defining it but people in this thread continue to argue against that straw man.   No one supports a system where people have no freedom.  Advocates of socialism and capitialism both want a system with more freedom. 

Stop fighting wind Smiley

They won't open their eyes on the very simple fact that previous communist countries were dictatorships... That a dictatorship is communist, capitalist, religious or whatever it doesn't matter. It's a dictatorship.

Now could we implement communism without dictatorship? That would be an interesting question.

But don't argue just put those idiots on ignore. They're too stupid to discuss anything outside of their beliefs.

I never saw a communist refusing to admit capitalism has its pros.
I never saw a capitalist admitting communism has its pros.

It isn't difficult to see where is the open mind.
legendary
Activity: 3318
Merit: 2008
First Exclusion Ever
There isn't a debate being had.  No one supports socialism as the capitalists are defining it but people in this thread continue to argue against that straw man.   No one supports a system where people have no freedom.  Advocates of socialism and capitialism both want a system with more freedom. 

So is your argument that all the other times Socialism and Communism failed they all sat around and said "Hey you know what would be great, if we had a Communist totalitarian dictatorship!". No. They all thought they were making an improvement just like you, and they all lacked basic understanding of economics and human nature that tell them this system ALWAYS leads to this result. What you want is irrelevant. The outcomes of your attempts to attain your goals are relevant, and history has filled entire libraries with the documentation of the failures of your ideology.
full member
Activity: 952
Merit: 175
@cryptocommies
There isn't a debate being had.  No one supports socialism as the capitalists are defining it but people in this thread continue to argue against that straw man.   No one supports a system where people have no freedom.  Advocates of socialism and capitialism both want a system with more freedom. 
legendary
Activity: 3374
Merit: 1824
I lived in capitalism and socialism.
Main difference is that in socialism state owns everything and regulate everything.
NO free market and no freedom.
In capitalism we have free market and freedom.
We have private ownership and people are free to start business.
I really prefer capitalism based on my life experience.
legendary
Activity: 3906
Merit: 1373
Everybody uses forms of socialism throughout their lives, whether they are poor or rich.

The socialism being talked about in this thread is being used by the wealthy as a form of capitalizing on people's ignorance to make them slaves of the wealthy. In other words, socialism is a form of capitalism that the wealthy are using.

Drop both, socialism and capitalism, and get on with your life.

Cool
sr. member
Activity: 441
Merit: 278
It's personal

...If you think you have a point of your own to make then make one.

It is quite obvious to me that this so called capitalism is nothing more than a system of hocus pocus, devised many years ago by self acclaimed  argle-bargle nitwits.

hero member
Activity: 912
Merit: 661
Do due diligence

Oh dear god
I really do have to learn to quote properly

Please stick to the topic under discussion...
Its complete capitalist dogma.  Bezos didn't become a billionaire by selling books out of his garage...Those would have been some expensive books...It is not possible to become a billionaire from your own labor.
 
                                                                                                     Ok

...for instance, take note neither Bezos, the garage-book seller, nor Bezos the CEO and president of Amazon could have been a billionaire using only his own labor.


                                                "Capitalism vs. Socialism - Make your argument here."  <---------topic

I've made my argument for capitalism clearly --- I'm not interested in reiterating for you: as you're trying to be rude,  you didn't take the time to read the thread and you don't seem to have any ideas of depth to add or conversate about.


If you think you have a point of your own to make then make one.

legendary
Activity: 3318
Merit: 2008
First Exclusion Ever

Oh dear god
I really do have to learn to quote properly

Please stick to the topic under discussion...

Its complete capitalist dogma.  Bezos didn't become a billionaire by selling books out of his garage...Those would have been some expensive books...It is not possible to become a billionaire from your own labor.
 
                                                                                                     Ok

...for instance, take note neither Bezos, the garage-book seller, nor Bezos the CEO and president of Amazon could have been a billionaire using only his own labor.


And you don't eat without the labor of others. What is your point?
sr. member
Activity: 441
Merit: 278
It's personal

Oh dear god
I really do have to learn to quote properly

Please stick to the topic under discussion...

Its complete capitalist dogma.  Bezos didn't become a billionaire by selling books out of his garage...Those would have been some expensive books...It is not possible to become a billionaire from your own labor.
 
                                                                                                     Ok

...for instance, take note neither Bezos, the garage-book seller, nor Bezos the CEO and president of Amazon could have been a billionaire using only his own labor.
sr. member
Activity: 1470
Merit: 325
Socialism doesn't work, because people are lazy and abusing the system.
Capitalism doesn't work, because people are lazy and abusing the system.

You understand that lazyness has nothing to do with both systems?

Communism didn't fail because people were lazy, it failed because it became a dictatorship. Capitalism isn't failing because people are lazy, it is failing because in his very basic idea it will always lead to an increase of inequality. And when growth is no longer there to compensate those inequalities, it becomes pure theft.

Lazyness is a simplistic stupid myth of the typical old right winger trying to claim that young people and hippies are lazy assholes...


capitalism is also a dictatorship actually.

through a financial cartel
legendary
Activity: 1344
Merit: 1251
If there is no lazyness then how to explain the gazillion public debt which we're observing now?
After that I would like to see your ideas why the USSR government borrowed a ton of money from the central bank, while experts were opposing such practice and claimed that it leads to cataclysmic collapse.

Greed of the people currently in power and different interest from yours. Why would the public debt be a problem for anyone but the public? Governments have no reason to reduce this debt that allows them to make harder policies, steer taxes to there pockets and increase the influence of their businesses.
Just give me a reason for them to NOT increase the debt.

USSR mismanagement is far too wide to give a precise answer here, what period do you talk about?
legendary
Activity: 3108
Merit: 1359
Nope, the lazyness is real. Just think about that: why bother doing anything when you can borrow some trillion from the central bank.
Two systems with different agenda but plagued by the same practice.

This is SO ABSURD and basically stupid that I can't really see what to answer.
It's like a child saying "The sky is blue so that birds can swim inside". I mean it's wrong on so many levels you can hardly explain him.

Lazyness means not wanting to actually do anything. Not wanting to work in the general and broad sense of the term.

You do understand that people in USSR weren't especially lazy and that people currently abusing the capitalistic system or the people trying to survive in it aren't especially lazy neither?
If there is no lazyness then how to explain the gazillion public debt which we're observing now?
After that I would like to see your ideas why the USSR government borrowed a ton of money from the central bank, while experts were opposing such practice and claimed that it leads to cataclysmic collapse.
legendary
Activity: 1344
Merit: 1251
Nope, the lazyness is real. Just think about that: why bother doing anything when you can borrow some trillion from the central bank.
Two systems with different agenda but plagued by the same practice.

This is SO ABSURD and basically stupid that I can't really see what to answer.
It's like a child saying "The sky is blue so that birds can swim inside". I mean it's wrong on so many levels you can hardly explain him.

Lazyness means not wanting to actually do anything. Not wanting to work in the general and broad sense of the term.

You do understand that people in USSR weren't especially lazy and that people currently abusing the capitalistic system or the people trying to survive in it aren't especially lazy neither?
hero member
Activity: 912
Merit: 661
Do due diligence
Oh dear god
I really do have to learn to quote properly
hero member
Activity: 912
Merit: 661
Do due diligence
Its really absurd to contribute every human advancement in the last 500 years to capitalism.  
It would be absurd to say that, that's why I didn't: it was a point of reference to a different time----don't try to change my words to fit your argument

Are you sure they would have never happened without capitalism?


                                                           Not sure whether they would have or not but they didn't.


Could they not happen in a communist world?  

                                                                           -------Maybe

Science is unique to capitalism?

                                                                               Never said that




Capitalism has created this---in fact not theory.
It has been a bottom up creation of opportunity for the individual human being.
Bezos didn't start out as a billionaire--- he sold books out of his garage.
            ----that's what I said

Its complete capitalist dogma.  Bezos didn't become a billionaire by selling books out of his garage...Those would have been some expensive books...It is not possible to become a billionaire from your own labor.
 
                                                                                                     Ok

Socialism doesn't work because of human nature, maybe in small scale ventures, for a time, until: two legs good four legs baaaaa'aad.
Even if we adopted socialism world wide tomorrow, people might feel better for a couple generations and then?

If we're going to fantasize about a utopian society, why not aim for the Star Trek model?
No one is ever scrambling for change for a cup of coffee or worried about whether to pay for their electricity or food.


We are aiming for the star trek model.  Thats communism.  Socialism is what gets us there.


 HuffPost
"The United Federation of Planets in Star Trek is mostly libertarian-socialist, post-scarcity economy."
Not sure I agree with HuffPost's analogy but it isn't a social structure that we are currently living anywhere.

I agree with "post-scarcity economy"
full member
Activity: 952
Merit: 175
@cryptocommies
No "WE" being the individual in the current collective of humanity.
Our quality of life, the experience you and we all are having now as opposed to 500 years ago.


Its really absurd to contribute every human advancement in the last 500 years to capitalism.  Are you sure they would have never happened without capitalism?  Could they not happen in a communist world?  Were most of the biggest advancements a product of private or public sector?  Did the soviet union not contribute to those advancements?  Science is unique to capitalism?


Capitalism has created this---in fact not theory.
It has been a bottom up creation of opportunity for the individual human being.
Bezos didn't start out as a billionaire--- he sold books out of his garage.

.
Its complete capitalist dogma.  Bezos didn't become a billionaire by selling books out of his garage...Those would have been some expensive books...It is not possible to become a billionaire from your own labor. 

Socialism doesn't work because of human nature, maybe in small scale ventures, for a time, until: two legs good four legs baaaaa'aad.
Even if we adopted socialism world wide tomorrow, people might feel better for a couple generations and then?

If we're going to fantasize about a utopian society, why not aim for the Star Trek model?
No one is ever scrambling for change for a cup of coffee or worried about whether to pay for their electricity or food.


We are aiming for the star trek model.  Thats communism.  Socialism is what gets us there.
hero member
Activity: 912
Merit: 661
Do due diligence
"We" being the top few percent of the people on the planet.



No "WE" being the individual in the current collective of humanity.
Our quality of life, the experience you and we all are having now as opposed to 500 years ago.

Capitalism has created this---in fact not theory.
It has been a bottom up creation of opportunity for the individual human being.
Bezos didn't start out as a billionaire--- he sold books out of his garage.

Has it become destructive for us to value money over people? YES
Personally I think it's perverse for us not to hold corporations criminally accountable when there actions have sociopathic results...and they knew it.
These are things we can address together right now.

Socialism doesn't work because of human nature, maybe in small scale ventures, for a time, until: two legs good four legs baaaaa'aad.
Even if we adopted socialism world wide tomorrow, people might feel better for a couple generations and then?

If we're going to fantasize about a utopian society, why not aim for the Star Trek model?
No one is ever scrambling for change for a cup of coffee or worried about whether to pay for their electricity or food.

sr. member
Activity: 1470
Merit: 325
It doesn't whether you have a "President of the US" or "Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the USSR". As well it doesn't matter how many political parties do you have. Because borrowing money from the central bank  is independent of such irrelevant things.

In fact, it is always like taking a cocaine dose: you have a short euphoria and sense that you can quit this in any moment. But in practise you're getting loans again and again, until you're coming to getting loans just to pay interest for your previous loans.

well said,

its always the same the bank is unloading risk on you, those that are the bank, have the least risks, they usually are free to work, and they enrich themselves and blame to others for their poverty, while abusing them as money earning cattle.

its the same in the usa (fighting against poverty) as in the ussr (fighting for social justice and against abuse)

regards
sr. member
Activity: 1470
Merit: 325
Socialism doesn't work, because people are lazy and abusing the system.
Capitalism doesn't work, because people are lazy and abusing the system.

Neither of these approaches is acceptable, and neither of them can exist without oppression.

capitalism also doesnt, work because no one wants to work for the money of an obvious scammer,

in socialism there is also capitalism, dont worry. its usually an even worse one.

people become imprisioned slaves, and the society is just a matter of time till there will be a revolution
Pages:
Jump to: