Do You Prefer Capitalism or Socialism?

Therefore, a non-profit enterprise is SOCIALISM?

 

The standard gross misunderstanding (presumably wilful, because adults can't be this naive) of the human factor. You can pay people 'the value of their labor' til the cows come home, and a significant sector will STILL cry poor. You can provide them with free housing and healthcare too, and it won't make any difference. If they exist in any kind of democracy, they will simply spend/waste all those boons and you'll end up with exactly the same number of 'the poor' as you had before.

You cannot force people to be one-dimensionally good and responsible.

 

Effectively, yes. Especially when any profits raised are used to support employees (in non-money forms - like housing/food/clothing etc).

 

These wishful thinking naifs imagine socialism will be a nice cushy 'choice filled' middle class life for all.

 

Only that particular greed bothers you? Not greed generally?

What about the greed of people who expect to be supported without effort?

 

Worker ownership and worker management. That's not capitalism or Marxism.

 

Actually high taxes, burdensome regulations (a shadow tax) and collectivism via unions sent businesses out of the country. I call them the Democrat threesome. Some good ol Marxism....workers of the world unite.

 

I prefer whichever one affords me personally greater choice over how the fruits of my own labor are allocated.

 

* I prefer European Socialism over American Capitalism.
* I prefer Russian Catpiatlism over North Korean Socialism.

Does that answer your question?

 

Exactly. If the discussion/debate is about the two (Socialism and Capitalism) then there is much that can be said for and against both but when it's "X" who has no idea what he talking about then it is neither a discussion nor a debate. It's just a child with a pail & shovel in the sandbox. It is "righties" (as you say) who's the biggest and most often guilty of it.

 

The degree of your "capitalist society" and your "social programs" has changed and is in a perpetual state of change, but worst of all (and what is being completely ignored) is that no matter how far the US shifts to the left or to the right .... your Democracy is now a joke and it gets worse by the day.

 

Summary

According to you;

Capitalism = for profit enterprises
Socialism = non-profit enterprises

Such as;

Private K12 versus Public K12
Private Hospital versus Public Hospital


Correct?

My next question; What about Government-owned enterprises, and for profit?

Capitalism or Socialism?

Such as; Norway’s largest Oil Company?

 

What about; Dairy Farmers Of America?

Capitalism or Socialism?

Dairy Farmers of America (DFA) is one of the world's largest dairy cooperatives, with more than 13,000 member farmers across the US. Along with fresh and shelf-stable fluid milk, the co-op produces cheese, butter, powders, and sweetened condensed milk for industrial, wholesale, and retail customers. It also offers contract manufacturing services. The company's brands include Borden and Cache Valley for consumer cheese; Keller's Creamery, Plugra, Breakstone's, Falfurrias, and Oakhurst Dairy; and other dairy products under Sport Shake (sports beverage), La Vaquita (queso), Kemps, Guida's Dairy, and Cass Clay. The company owns more than 85 production plants nationwide.

2018 Net Income/Net PROFIT;

Dairy Farmers of America (DFA) officials reported net income of $108.5 million for 2018. DFA’s net sales totaled $13.6 billion for 2018, compared to $14.7 billion in 2017. This decrease is primarily a result of lower milk prices. The all U.S. milk price averaged $16.20 per hundredweight in 2018 compared with $17.65 in 2017.

https://www.dairybusiness.com/dfa-reports-2018-financial-results-2/

MY NEXT Question:

Do you buy the following products?

The company's brands include Borden and Cache Valley for consumer cheese; Keller's Creamery, Plugra, Breakstone's, Falfurrias, and Oakhurst Dairy; and other dairy products under Sport Shake (sports beverage), La Vaquita (queso), Kemps, Guida's Dairy, and Cass Clay.

 

Nice rant. Feel better?

 

Pure capitalism will devour itself, it needs socialism to keep it from it's excesses.

Pure socialism will collapse under it's own weight, it needs capitalism to sustain it.


Like man need woman, like woman needs man, capitalism needs socialism, and socialism needs capitalism.

What we must dispense with is the notion that pure version of each is desireable. They are not.

The trick is to find which each are good at, and let each to what they do best.


Capitalism is great for finding solutions to products and services that people want. They want car, lipstick, running shoes, fishing poles, guitars, cool clothes, ad infinitum.

We have a good idea what 'capitalism' is in America, where we are foggy is on the definition of 'socialism'. Socialism is a broad term, it is one of those words which no dictionary entry can adequately define. Consider that the wikipedia entry on 'Socialism' and 'Democratic Socialism', combined, if printed in PDF form, will fill up some 150 pages. No, no dictionary entry can deliver you 150 pages of knowledge.

So, for simplicity's sake, I am defining 'socialism' here, not as 'total government ownership of all means of production and distribution' which is socialism in the extreme, which is NOT desirable ( nor is any liberal I know advocating it) , so I am defining 'socialism' here as, basically, any endeavor or enterprise that is either run by, or sponsored by, the government.

Now then, with that out of the way......

Socialism is great for solutions that people seek to avoid, such as, you don't want to get robbed, so you need a cop. You don't want your house to burn down so you need a fireman. You don't want your country to be attacked, so you need military. You don't want to get sick, so you need doctors. ( on health, there is the boutique version, which would fall under wants, such as cosmetic surgery, dental implants, etc, and this is similar for other services which are best served by government sponsorship, but have boutique versions, ie., water is a good example. Water is a national [and therefore strategic] resource, and, in my view, should be socialized. but, there is the boutique version, ie., fancy waters in bottles you buy in stores, etc. Also, health, like education, should exist in both the private and public sectors and the reason for that is public demand, and this would hold true for other services, such as mental health. There is the public version, social services, and their are private mental health practitioners, the private version ).

Where capitalists and socialists get it wrong is the notion that the other is evil, or wrong. Both are evil, and the only thing that would ever be good is both, working in harmony after having reached proper equilibrium, that place where each is designated and allowed to do what they do better than the other can do.

Socialism is also good for services society must have to address, though it strives to prevent, so this is the societal version of the individual needs, and this would be social services, mental health. And, there are community centers, i.e, communal needs, such as free public access to knowledge and literature, such as libraries and all the resources available in libraries, public access television, and things of this nature.

In short, Capitalism cannot survive without socialism, and socialism cannot survive without capitalism.

So, with two opposing forces, you have a pendulum and the pendulum rests at that point where there is an equilibrium of the two.

On an actual pendulum, it is the center. For society, each side must struggle to find the place where both can live in harmony, and that is the constant struggle. The way to get there is communication and leadership by leaders who understand this principle, and can lead the nation to that ever - so - elusive sweet spot.

 

Your thread title offers a choice, capitalism or socialism. That is a grossly oversimplified question, hard to take seriously.

In fact, we have both in this country already. We have capitalism run amok to the point of fascism, and we have functioning socialism by way of medicare and even ordinary fire districts and police services.

 

Capitalism is simply a system where people control their own business and property. It is no different that you planting a garden centuries ago and trading what you produced for other things you need. Whether you choose to make that garden small or large, make it thrive or just get by- is up to you. If you choose to trade your work for compensation helping another person keep his garden, you are still doing the same thing- trading your services for things you need. You are free to be exceptional, mediocre or miserable at caring for your garden and yourself- but whatever you choose is your decision; you don't get to blame others because they haven't made you a winner. It's also known as Freedom, and independence. You don't get to live off others against their will, they don't get to live off you against your will.
The equality of opportunity is inherent in the system. Equality in results is dependent on how hard you work and how wisely you make your decisions. Doesn't get any fairer than that.

Capitalism gives you the control of your own destiny, and nobody has more at stake in that than you- so that is where the control should be.

I can see where those who can't cut it think capitalism is a bad idea, but that is usually the perspective of someone who needs to use others and lacks the character needed to accept personal responsibility..
The false promise of socialism revolves around the illusion that private business is unfair to customers and employees- both of which are free to go elsewhere at will.
Given what we know about the inefficiency and indifference of government, one would have to be really stupid to think that turning over personal control of your destiny to government was going to turn out well.
That's what socialism is- making the quality of your life totally dependent on the people in power. If you think capitalism is abusing you, a socialist system would give you an exponential increase in abuse, and you wouldn't be able to do a damn thing about it.

 

?? If you work at the business you own, that is most certainly capitalism. Most every business owner does just that.

 

Capitalism, Socialism, Communism - all are just chalk-board exercises - none exist in pure forms in any country or government.
All the world's present governments are hybrids. Pure Capitalism would devolve into either a dictatorship or an ever shrinking Oligarchy.
The "Communist" governments lasted about 30 seconds and then became hybrids of dictatorships and secret underground capitalist businesses.

 

Some systems are inherent failures; they can never function to the real benefit of all- because the "all" is comprised of people with different values. Socialism is most beneficial to those who want to avoid contributing, most detrimental to those who want to build, thus it erodes the very motives that make a society healthy and viable while promoting those that make it fail.

We have confused charity and generosity with entitlement, thus we have allowed aspects of socialism to become part of our capitalist system- welfare, food stamps, etc. This has been done mostly with the idea that it would be temporary help while people get on their feet, and if that were true- few would object. However, it has become a lifestyle for many, providing a way to procrastinate indefinitely and avoid ever getting on their feet. The more government increases those things with the illusion that it's beneficial, the more dependent those people become, and the more of them the system attracts.

There are laws against all kinds of injustice in business- and it is a combination of the character of good men and those regulating elements that keeps capitalism from becoming something else.
A dictatorship would never evolve from a legitimately capitalist system, that would take extensive corruption in government first. However, that is even more true for the socialist system,. and right now, corruption is rapidly growing as well as leaning towards socialistic concepts. Socialism is inherently corrupt in the first place and it promotes weakness and vulnerability in the people, and concentration of power in government- thus it is far more likely to be the foundation of dictatorships.

 

Everyone has their own definition/explanation of WHAT IS/WHAT ISN'T.

The fact is; For several years, ''PRIVATELY Owned'' Moderna had strategic partnerships with ''PUBLICLY Owned'' NIH, HHS, NIAID, DARPA, and BARDA, thus, in partnership with State-owned R&D Labs, Government Scientists, and other government resources.

Here's another example of PRIVATELY Owned/PUBLICLY Owned partnership;

For your info, from 1983 to 1987, I worked in Norway, and my then Employer; Phillips Petroleum, in partnership with State-owned/controlled Statoil, and WE ''The partnership'' accomplished 3 successful Ofshore Projects.

AND IMO, Statoil equates to Socialism

NASA equates to Socialism
Government R&D equates to Socialism
Bank of North Dakota equates to Socialism
Public K12 Education equates to Socialism

HOWEVER,

Dairy Farmers of America equates to Capitalism........Member's owned/Shareholder's owned, same phoooken thing!

Response: ''Yeah, but what about their tax preferential treatment?

Answer; So as Freddie and Fannie when they were stock companies/and were once considered ''The darlings of Wall Street"

As a percent of overall GDP;

Private ownership; approx. 80%
Public ownership; approx. 20%

IT IS WHAT IT IS!

THUS, the question the OP should have asked; Do you prefer more or less socialism?

 

Capitalism. There is no question.

Not crony capitalism.
Not the current military-industrial complex that we have.

Pure without-a-country unadultered capitalism.

 

There will always be things we need to do that will be outside the realm of pure private efforts, or capitalism. The military for example amounts to a government owned and managed institution- which no private system could provide. But most all those things, NASA, etc- being part of the government, are still owned by the people. So long as they work for the people, it is very much a cooperative effort for the benefit of all- sort of a corporation we all own stock in.

The supporters of socialism for all would like to use such things as a foot in the door, claiming that they are the same thing as universal socialism- but they aren't. Free enterprise can't run a national army, but government can, with the support of the people. However, government cannot run free enterprise successfully, because that enterprise must profit; it must support itself- and government has no idea how to do that. They operate with a blank check privilege on a bottomless reservoir of money- called taxation; they have no concept of economic limits. If they did, we would see the national debt forever rising, and the endless promotion of legislation designed to trade free money for votes wouldn't be thriving.

Capitalism helps keep that in check; socialism would remove all restraint on it.

 

Daniel STILL factoring in PANDEMIC

Here is a more honest graph..


Trump was still better then the Bush and Mr. Obatard until COVID.. Plus his unemployment numbers we far better the either President.. COVID changed everything and the dishonest DNC will forever us this Chiner attack on the world to spin their lies and disinformation..

 

Let's create a thread on socialism, let's create a hype based on a wishful thinking of a few;

Do you want the U.S. to become like North Korea?
Do you want the U.S. to become like Cuba
Do you want the U.S. to become like Venezuela?

Answer; Of course not!

''Well, that's what's going to happen if AOC has her way''

Comments......

''Damn leftists and their socialist mentality/Agenda.......they want to make us totally dependent on the people in power. If you think capitalism is abusing you, a socialist system would give you an exponential increase in abuse, and you wouldn't be able to do a damn thing about it''



ONCE AGAIN, the question the OP should have asked; Do you prefer more or less socialism, and why?