Socialism

[Finally_Found_Freedom]

And Oprah Winfrey, and Warren Buffet only some of the two richest people in the world.

Three people out of 8 billion, yes.

 

[farmer093]

Full blown socialism seems to me to have some serious flaws. That being said, I also think that unregulated capitalism has flaws of equal caliber. I prefer a moderate form - a socialist democracy. Namely, Rawls' form of socialism.

Are you talking about communism again?

Rawls is a liberal.

 

[farmer093]

Well if you are going to impose prices then why have socialism? If all you want it to do is imitate the market... why not just have the market instead?

What you are actually proposing is a system of price controls. Aside from being a form of theft, the detrimental effects of which you can read about in volume: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price_controls

I also recommened you read:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economics_in_One_Lesson

A copy of which may be found here:
http://www.hacer.org/pdf/Hazlitt00.pdf

So if I can leave without permission and I can freely trade my labour for money, and my money for products, under your socialism, then what actually is your socialism?

That is: physically what is it that you propose in your system? Because this, as you describe it, is closer to the market economy, than to any form of socialism.

Look useless: You haven't a clue what you're talking about, you haven't even a firm idea as to what socialism properly is, as evidenced by your earlier lack of willingness to define it, and your present lack of understanding as to what it pertains to in practice. You definitely don't understand economics. All you have thusfar spat at me is a bunch of prejudicial rubbish occasionally mixed with the fallacy of polylogism.

Come back when you have a clear conception of the thing you are advocating, and until that time, stop advocating it.




This is the hew and cry of the in-just: Why should anyone have to physically leave their property simply because they disagree with you, and you are unwilling to debate them, and their property simply happens to be in the same arbitrary and abstract territory as theirs?

I'll just declare a nation state around you house, put troops on the border and require you to pay me an income tax. And if you don't like it I too can say "If you don't like it then leave." I suppose you would consider this justice?

I think socialism is different theories that develop on platform of control of means of production and worker ownership.

Price control is bad because every aspect of the world is fluctuating? is that it?

No, I said I believe where the government regulates prices and ownership of large enterprises basically control most of the economy but allow all groups to participate. means of production are owned and managed publicly, resources distributed by market. I can define words however I want to considering you should know them already before engaging.

No one has to leave, socialism doesn't justify violence like fascism, but I believe that if they choose to leave the country on their own will, they should be able to.

Yeah but just having the situation you listed wouldnt be socialism it would be authoritarian or totalitarian. Actually what you are talking about is fascism, which is opposite of socialism.

 

Yeah but just having the situation you listed wouldnt be socialism it would be authoritarian or totalitarian. Actually what you are talking about is fascism, which is opposite of socialism.

I had posted replies, but there is the one and only thing that you need to do to resolve the debate:

Define Socialism.

Define Capitalism.

That is all I will let you do from here on, otherwise GTFO my server and stop wasting my time.

If you post anything other than a direct meaningful response, I will ban you.

 

[Rhodesy]

Correct me I am erroneous, as you have a much enhanced knowledge on this topic. I think socialism has many different ideologies. But in brief, I define socialism in general terms to me is that the principle that the state believes that activities are done better by them, rather then private markets. They believe that a fair distribution of wealth is better, irrelevant to the social classes. Basically man does not belong to himself, he belongs to society and his life is completely devoted to society.

 

[farmer093]

Capitalism: Market oriented commodity production, private ownership of the means of production, a large segment of population that cannot exist unless it sells its labor power in the market

Socialism: System of social organization under which the necessaries of production are owned, controlled and administered by the people, for the people, and under which, accordingly, the cause of political and economic despotism having been abolished, class rule is at end. (common ownership, democratic control by the people, production for use)

Please tell me which rule of this forum I have violated and I will seek to correct myself and abide by the rule at all times, I am currently unaware of the rule I have not followed.

 

Capitalism: Market oriented commodity production, private ownership of the means of production, a large segment of population that cannot exist unless it sells its labor power in the market

Socialism: System of social organization under which the necessaries of production are owned, controlled and administered by the people, for the people, and under which, accordingly, the cause of political and economic despotism having been abolished, class rule is at end. (common ownership, democratic control by the people, production for use)

So it seems your definition for the two are remarkably similar, except that in the first you use the term "market", and in the second you use the term "democracy".

So you should now define "market", and "democracy", and "common ownership" -- and how the latter is different from a company or non-profit.

And then elaborate on the differences between socialism and capitalism, as you understand them, and without reference to concrete examples.

You may start here:
1. Are both systems voluntary? If not, how?
2. Am I allowed to apply my labour and capital to the land, by myself, under each system? If not, why?

I do not expect a wall of text. Keep your answers to one or two sentences per subject. If I see another wall of sophistic socialist ranting, I will simply delete your post and your thread and ban you. I do not pay server-bills to host propaganda.

 

[Finally_Found_Freedom]

Are you talking about communism again?

Rawls is a liberal.

Is? He's dead. >_< And no, I'm talking about socialism.

 

[farmer093]

Oh yeah you're right he's dead but I thought he was a liberal...he didn't care about end state of society

 

[Finally_Found_Freedom]

Oh yeah you're right he's dead but I thought he was a liberal...he didn't care about end state of society

People's political views are not black and white, though he clearly cared immensely judging by his proposals.