US Unbridled Capitalism Soon To Be A Thing Of The Past? Era Of Socialsim On Threshold

Nationalization is pointless if the goal is not to convert the business to worker ownership.

 

mainly individual liberties that deal with someones ability to earn money, not their social liberties

small businesses can't afford big government regulations, taxes, and fines they will not be able to exist in a socialist government.

 

Then you obviously disagree with the father of big government economics. Even the President upholds the greatness that is John Maynard Keynes. However, I think you exude the bad side of Obama's economic mind, Obamanomics. People like yourself indicate how far off the deep end the Democratic party has gone. It is sad because I thought the Democratic Party is supposed to be the party of intellectuals, including economic intellectuals.

 

worker rights would be better protected under nationlized business as opposed to todays privitized business

 

So, you claim horse (*)(*)(*)(*) smells better than cow (*)(*)(*)(*). What do I care, if it still smells like (*)(*)(*)(*)? State control is no better than private control, both are divorced from the workers. A politician is little better than an owner, and only better at all because of the slight impact that public opinion has on his decisions.

 

agreed keynesian economics isn't really socialist economics

 

No, clearly not, because it was designed to prevent socialism.

 

I am glad it isn't. Although Keynes had affiliations with the socialist Fabian Society, his theories were not socialist.

 

its more direct control because the people elect their bosses, today the corporations have the luxury of a bigger disconnect with the worker because people have a harder time organizing to directly legislate business

 

Which is meaningless reform, because they would still have bosses. Being able to choose any master you please, so long as you have one... is the essence of capitalism. Direct control means direct control; the removal of management. Nothing else is direct control. There is no such thing as "more direct control", control is either direct, or is it practically nonexistent. Real reform means excising the need to be managed from the workforce; rather than managers, one would have representatives. You don't elect your boss, you nominate a speaker for the group. There's a big difference between those two types of organization.

 

that would be inefficient, the government officials should have the authority because they know whats best for the people.

today the wealthy conservative elite rule over business but this is advocating the intellectual liberal elite rule over business

the worker cannot manage themselves they are inferior to properly manage a business and the lack of productivity would cause a failure of the country

 

I have no interest in further continuation of this latest attempt at trolling, my position was stated to my satisfaction.

 

The welfare state is prone to collapse. If anything socialism is at it's zenith, and given the state of Europe, waning as we speak.

Socialism in the US is on the verge of utter collapse as well. Just look at SS/Medicare.

 

A society that uses government to impose forced mediocrity upon its people will inevitably collapse. That is what you are suggesting here. And I don't think you even care. Because you just want what you want and to hell with the consquences.

 

Unbridled capitalism? I think you mean unbridled corporatism which is propped up by the state.

http://www.cato-unbound.org/2008/11...ons-versus-the-market-or-whip-conflation-now/

 

If you think SS/Medicare are socialism, then your home schooling failed you.

SS has been a success. While it needs reform, and I would not argue against pushing it towards the state level, SS has been a huge success, especially in alleviating poverty of elderly people and mitigating business fluctuations.

 

How does SS/Medicare violate the tenets of Socialism?

This may come as a shock, but something which requires reform is not a success.

I see no metric by which SS can be considered a success. If individuals had invested the same amount of money in a bank account, they would have had a better return than SS has managed.

Not to mention the returns gained from index funds.

Fabricated nonsense. The same amount that they've been forced to put into SS would have netted far greater returns for them had the money been privately controlled.

 

That's why we like our 2nd Amendment.

 

Laissez-Faire Capitalism, surely has it limits of economic efficacy. It's part of what makes America what it is, but surely isn't the only concept we must abide (economically speaking).

 

Here is more to consider, concerning Laissez-Faire Capitalism.

It surely has some serious problems.

 

Indeed - see this post

 

A. You've never seen unbridled capitalism.
B. Of course, there are those for whom something for nothing is appealing. They're called deadbeats. Unfortunately, those who have to pay for the something tend to get irritated. Margaret Thatcher said, to paraphrase, "What do socialists do when they run out of other people's money?"

I do admire people like LiberalMinority who don't want to work and see nothing wrong with being supported by those who do work and are actually willing to admit it.

 

And we need to avoid it like the PLAGUE.

 

Europe has been sliding since the 1950s when it began to substitute laziness for innovation. A European never has any need to succeed because no matter what happens, the Gob'mint is there to change his nappies for him. Free everything tends to make people use the free services rather than grow the economy. It's why Britain went from a major world player in 1900 to an irrelevent nobody in 2000. They decided that work was no longer needed and could no longer support their empire. Now, the only time anybody cares about Europe is when one of the Windsors has a wedding or a baby.

 

What a great question and idea. Now this topic could be spectacular once all the nationalistic pettyness is over with. (probably take 30 pages then the serious debate can begin)