I am against socialism purely for its inneficiencies and if the same amount of wealth could be created from socialism as the free market than i would be a commy.

I want to try and separate my reasons for being against socialism with people who are against it for the power it gives the government.

Would you support a socialist government if the government was as economically efficent as a free-market system?

NO! Even if the system did work, I would not support it because their is no individuality allowed in the system. Their is no social fluidity, where people can easily go up and down the social ladder (classes). Because I consider myself a hard worker, I would get really frustrated really fast.

.
som e persons think there are not much socialism i n canada and u.s.
whe n big commerciales controleren much the gouvernement what are this? commerciales socialism istedenfor people socialism?
.

__________________
Hockey is more than just a game, It's an event - Peter Forsberg
I am living my dream right now. I get to make music -Ville Valo
Human rights are praised more than ever and violated as much as ever -Anna Lindh
I don't have respect for the people that made the decisions to go on with war -Avril Lavigne

There could still be a form of movement in a socialist society because if someone is working in industry and they are recongnized as smart, they can be moved to a service job. If you work hard you would be promoted to a job that uses more of your abilities. But you are right in that you would get the same reward as someone who doesn't work as hard.

I don't know how to word this...
Efficiency is not the crieria for which I prefer capitalism. Efficiency is a bean-counter virtue... and socialism run by bean-counters... That sounds like a nightmare.
Capitalism is better for growth of economy more so than efficiency itself (even if efficiency is a part of that).
Socialism is better for ensuring that all people benefit from the economy... but does not grow the economy at a good rate so unless the population is stagnant and can somehow afford low growth, not good.

That's why a capitalist system with some socialist elements is good.
Efficiency is part of both economic growth AND the problems in capitalism that cause some to fall through the cracks. Socialism's virtue is solving the problems created by efficiency.

So really socialism with efficiency is more like fascism. People would fall through the cracks... as that is how efficiency works... but it would be totally decided by the government rather than the market.

To me it's bad when people fall through the cracks, whether it's market or government deciding.
A mixed economy is the way to go.

__________________
"Man lives in the sunlit world of that which he believes to be reality. But unseen by most is an underworld, a place that is just as real... but not as brightly lit... A DARK SIDE!"
-opening from Tales From the Darkside

i should of clarified but i meant that economic the same economic growth would still exist in socialism.

But then we hve to question the nature of the economic growth.

Is this simply a fantasy question?
If so... sure, why not?

Or are you suggesting something might be done to increase the economic growth in socialism to that of a capitalist country?
If that's the case, no. We've seen how that works. Look at China.

__________________
"Man lives in the sunlit world of that which he believes to be reality. But unseen by most is an underworld, a place that is just as real... but not as brightly lit... A DARK SIDE!"
-opening from Tales From the Darkside

i tried to make the question to see if people were alright with the concept of the government controling the economy, hence the name of the thread. I wanted to try and take out the factor that socialism doesn't really work that well economically.
I like the idea of socialism, but i don't think it works, and i want to see if there are many people who are just against the large government in socialism.

i am trying to focus my question but it is kind of confusing to ask.

It seems to me that the confusion arose when you assumed socialism was inefficient. It is, in fact, more efficient than capitalism in many ways. For example, if there is an emergency the government can instantly command the production of the needed supplies instead of trying to convince private businesses that it would be profitable for them. However, you seem to be saying that efficiency is simply how much money you can make. Of course capitalism does this better, the system is built around greed. Socialism on the other hand, is not. It is constructed to benefit and provide services for the general public.

__________________
"When I give food to the poor they call me a saint. When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a communist."