Why doesn't socialism work?

That's providing for those unable to provide for themselves, and is necessarily temporary. It's not really socialism.

Once adulthood is reached however, life demands personal responsibility and full participation - as you say - but not everyone wants or needs to do it in a team. Some people are sufficiently wealthy to go it alone - that's why it must be voluntary.

 

As stated.

Name one country where most resources and means of production is owned by the collective ?

 

Says who? "That's the point of it."

From each according to their ability (says who) and to each according to their need (says who). Who says what another's ability is? Who says what another's need is?

A much better way to organize a society is from each according to their will and to each according to their ability.

 

Says who what?

But yes, the point of it is that everyone works to secure the 'survival of the pack'. No one but the very old, the very young, and the sick get to be supported.

 

Capitalist Democracy in its pure form doesn't exist in any G-7 nation. Perhaps I don't understand your concept of Democratic Capitalism. Certainly pure capitalism doesn't define America. It's far too draconian for a Judaeo - Christian nation.

Like most nations, the United States is a complex socio-economic conglomeration consisting of many parts. Some of those parts are socialistic. Some are capitalistic.

 

There is no such thing as voluntary-socialism. Socialism has a compulsory nature. The closest thing to voluntary-socialism is Pelagianism. The socialism in families with small children does not have a voluntary nature. Children are legally freed from authority over and responsibility for themselves (socialists) until they legally take it on themselves.

 

Says who? Who gets to say who is who? Who gets to say what someone else's ability is or what someone else's need is?
The problem with - Each according to their ability and each according to their need - is who gets to say?

People acting in their own self interests to the benefit of others is the least worst way to produce goods and services,
and - from each according to their will and to each according to their ability - is the least worst way to provide them.

Services are best performed when their rewards come in consequence of them being performed and is in proportion to the diligence employed in performing them.

 

There are no 'socialistic' parts. Social support mechanisms are funded by capitalism - and voted into practive by democracy. Without very robust capitalism, and the freedoms of democracy to vote, we wouldn't have any of those social supports.

 

Yes, there is. It's practiced all over the world, in many different iterations. Co-habiting extended families (common outside of the First World), small business cooperatives, religious groups, hippies, food growers, etc etc.

 

Those who volunteer for socialism, are the only ones deciding.

As for profit according to effort ... not everyone is willing to pursue that method. Some prefer to trade profit for security and community. They know that working harder won't do anything but provide 'better' security and community. It won't earn them a new phone, or a vacation, or a pay rise. Again .. that's why socialism must be voluntary. Not everyone wants or needs that life.

Having said that .. there are plenty of people who probably SHOULD want it, but don't. They're so fixated on their discretionary consumerism, that even when they have very little, they'd prefer to forfeit security by spending it. They don't care that doing so will potentially make them a burden on the taxpayer.

 

There's no volunteer-socialism.

 

Cuba.

 

Sure, there is--farm cooperatives.

 

yeah? why then Soviets produced audio equipment for domestic use?



why they produced TV sets then?

 

THIRTY years ago?



Socialism EVOLVED into Social Democracy since then!

 

The smaller the mind the bigger government appears to be to them!

 

Southern slavery was Welfare for Whites!

 

Your capitalist dystopia results in poverty level wages with homeless people on the streets and the oceans clogged with plastic waste.

 

Your source is puerile pablum!

"Sort of makes you wonder why some people still believe this nonsense? "

Guess we just found out who believes that kind of vacuous drivel!

 

Thank you for establishing via your naysaying that you have nothing meaningful to contribute.

Have a nice day!

 

Freedom also means you are free to be poor and homeless if you want.

And the plastic in the oceans are not my concern.

 

How did he get into this conversation comrade? He is an example of someone taking full advantage of capitalism. Is he the new boogieman? Or is this just another example of keeping up the pretense to influence the vote? Русские тролли сосут.

 

Black and white Tv's and tape decks?

???

 

No one but the greed obsessed want a capitalist dystopia that is destroying our planet.

 

The plastic in the oceans belong to someone else.

The capitalist nations have pollution control measures that are far superior to what the rest of the world has.