I wouldn't be so opposed to socialism or even a mild for of communism if our system wasn't so bad at evaluating things. Take ethanol for example. That stuff actually inflates the price of food. Or the fact that they'd rather pay 35 billion to airbus (a foreign company) that doesn't have to deal with all of our regulations - which is why it's more expensive to buy American.

We need to make the system more active if we're going in that direction.

__________________
It doesn't matter who we elect, it doesn't matter what they've done or who they've done, what is important is what they actually do. Too many politicians are politicians - they like to talk about useless issues and keep people in the dark about the real issue: money. I will always care more about what the government tells me I have to spend my money on, opposed to some unborn assassination. Freedom is the right to chose, on everything.

There are so democratic countries actually let the government control the price of living necessities, such as electricity, gas, water and foods.

See, that's awful because the government is the opposite of economically efficient. But I bet they don't have very good representation, and I bet the people don't protest as much. See, that's the problem, if they tried to do something like that they would fail, yet if they had something that accurately told them how to price things perfectly, and they had a good idea of what people want, they could pull it off, maybe better than the free market. However, nothing like that exists, nor will it probably ever exist. The free market is ingenious.

__________________
It doesn't matter who we elect, it doesn't matter what they've done or who they've done, what is important is what they actually do. Too many politicians are politicians - they like to talk about useless issues and keep people in the dark about the real issue: money. I will always care more about what the government tells me I have to spend my money on, opposed to some unborn assassination. Freedom is the right to chose, on everything.

You probabluy mistunerstood how they operate, it's pretty much like our government subsidize farmers and oil companies. Only when inflation rate is uncontrollable will the government take its action.

Yea. Socialism sucks. I'm fine with as much Capitalism as possible.

Well, this really depends on a lot more factors not addresses here. For instance...........when the world's population has grown as ours has, and communications have sped up to the "instant" point, then we can no longer tolerate as many trivial freedoms as we did in the past.

Frivilous liberties cannot be allowed to impede our development as a progressive state. Both Hillary and Obam have shown their understanding of this as evidenced by their committments to establishing universal healthcare and and responsible environmental control.

Communism/Socialism/Libralism, or whatever term one chooses to use, is the only reliable method of controlling these vital needs.

Capitalism is a necessary but barbaric pre-requisite for socialism. Marxism, from its birth, recognised that capitalism creates the foundations for socialism. As the most dynamic system ever, capitalism creates a world in which scarcity would be abolished.

In pre-capitalist societies crisis were accompanied by underproduction. Capitalist crisis is accompanied by overproduction - more wealth is produced than can be absorbed by the market. The consequences - starvation, war, disease - might be the same, but the causes are very different.

People's needs could, potentially be met. But this potential is constantly undercut because needs are subordinated to the profit drive.

Fortunately, capitalism also creates the second pre-requisite for socialism - its 'gravediggers'. As Marx wrote:

"With the development of industry the working class not only increases in number - it becomes more concentrated in greater masses, its strength grows."

This is not just a feature of capitalism's past, of the industrial revolution, or of newly industrializing countries such as China. Half of Britain's workers are today employed in workplaces of over 250 people. Giants such as Heathrow airport (workforce 32,000) dwarf many of the factories of the past.

This growth and concentration of the working class opens up new possibilities. When earlier oppressed classes rose up, they could seize the productive forces of society and continue to use them in the old way. Peasants would revolt, kill their landowners, seize the land and divide it among themselves to farm.

For workers under capitalism this route is closed off. For instance, its not possible to divide a place like Heathrow airport 32,000 ways or parcel out a supermarket. When workers take control they will be forced to develop collective, democratic solutions to the problems they face. This is the essence of Marxism - it heralds a new world built from below by workers themselves.

I suspect you and most posters here don't have a clue a to what socialism or communism actualy means.

I know communism doesn't work because there are so many capitalists

__________________
A liberal is someone who feels a great debt to his fellow man, which debt he proposes to pay off with your money.The U.S. Constitution doesn't guarantee happiness, only the pursuit of it. You have to catch up with it yourself."
Benjamin Franklin
http://i27.tinypic.com/2hn2lpv.jpg

Thank you for your input. Anyone else?