Dear HL socialists ..Heres why socialism always fails

ⒶⓁⒾⒶⓈ

Doctors without Labcoats
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
7,180
Reputation
-2,210
Daps
14,762
Reppin
Payments accepted Obamacare,paypal and livestock
1) Incentives: Capitalism rewards people who create something of value to society..Create a car that gets 100mpg and you can sell the patent to GM for millions of dollars..socialism doesnt incentivise innovation

2) The price problem..Capitalism has price to guide decision making ,without price there is no telling what projects are worth undertaking and what projects should be left alone

3)Socialism completely disregards human nature,Human beings are afflicted by greed envy,jealousy..capitalism actually take advantage of these vices

4)Socialism has never worked anywhere it has been tried

5) Totalitarianism is inevitable because sooner or later someone will refuse to do their fair share..so a boot must be put on their neck which means spies and a police state
 
Last edited:

ⒶⓁⒾⒶⓈ

Doctors without Labcoats
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
7,180
Reputation
-2,210
Daps
14,762
Reppin
Payments accepted Obamacare,paypal and livestock
Here is a more verbose write up on the same lines
5 Reasons Socialism Is Inferior To Capitalism

1) Capitalism produces faster growth than socialism. Ever heard someone say, "A rising tide lifts all boats?" It's very true. Why do you think most poor people in this country have refrigerators, microwaves, and televisions that we think of as basic necessities even though those items are considered to be luxuries in much of the world? For all the Occupy Wall Street talk about the "1%," if you make $34,000 a year after taxes, you are part of the worldwide 1% -- and Americans make up half of the total 1%ers on the planet. You can thank the growth created by capitalism for that. Even nations like China have figured this out and have seen their economies lift off by moving towards capitalism. If China keeps at it long enough, eventually the hundreds of millions of Chinese who're still living in huts and shacks will be able to have the sort of lives and technology even the American poor take for granted.
2) Capitalism works in concert with human nature while socialism works against it."From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs." That famous quotation from Karl Marx is at the heart of communism and socialism. It runs completely contrary to human nature. As a general rule, people will work hard for themselves and their families, but it's considered an imposition so large that only God can ask them to pay other people’s bills without resentment. Put another way, the vast majority of human beings care far more about what they're going to eat for lunch today than they do about whether someone they've never met can pay his rent. (PS: And most of the people who claim to be part of that exceptional few are lying).
3) Capitalism rewards merit. Socialism rewards mediocrity. Who gets rewarded in a capitalist society? People who can produce. If you come up with a hot new product, give people a service they want, or entertain them better than they can find elsewhere, they will pay you handsomely to do it. Some people complain about the people who get rewarded in a free market. Why should Peyton Manning make so much more than a school teacher? Why should a bank CEO make so much more than a teller at the same bank? Capitalism offers a simple solution to that problem: If the market rewards NFL quarterbacks and CEOs more than teachers and tellers, you can become a quarterback or a CEO -- if you're capable. If you can't and you don't like what you get paid as a teacher or a teller, the good news is that you're free to move on to somewhere that better rewards your talents. In this fashion, capitalism encourages people to make the best use of their talents.
4) Capitalism is freedom while socialism is slavery. Socialists often use envy to trick people into becoming angry at successful people instead of the ones who are really taking away their freedom.For socialists to gain authority over your life, your own power has to shrink. The more the socialists take, the less of their own money the people get to spend. Capitalism reacts to the citizenry, while socialism tries to control and enslave the citizens. Capitalism will give you what you want for the right price, while socialism will give you what it thinks is best for you and tell you that you better like it!

5) The marketplace does a much better job of allocating resources than socialism's central planning. As Ronald Reagan noted, "Millions of individuals making their own decisions in the marketplace will always allocate resources better than any centralized government planning process." How could it be otherwise? Is there any one person on the planet who truly understands all the ins-and-outs of making a television, an airplane, a computer, and a vending machine? No, of course not. So, how can some bureaucrat in a central location, who may have no practical experience with business at all, make wise decisions that impact tens of millions of products and hundreds of millions of consumers? They can't. That’s why some people have to wait more than six months for hip operations under socialized medicine in Britain. It's also why people used to wait in long lines to buy poor quality toilet paper and toothpaste in the Soviet Union.

Conversely, under capitalism, the market reacts almost like a living thing and allocates resources where people want to spend their money. You may think that people aren't using their money "as they should." I might even agree with you in some cases, but the only thing the market "cares" about is finding a way to make a profit giving people what they want. Complain all you want about capitalism, but you won't be waiting for hours to get toothpaste and toilet paper while you do it.
 
Last edited:

ⒶⓁⒾⒶⓈ

Doctors without Labcoats
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
7,180
Reputation
-2,210
Daps
14,762
Reppin
Payments accepted Obamacare,paypal and livestock
You're confusing socialism with communism m. America is already in a way a socialist country.
I wouldnt go that far..America has some socialist policies but there is no "from all by ability and to all by need " here ...yet

The socialism im talking about is Economic policy...maybe is should have been more specific in the thread title whereas communism is more a social,political and economic system ...an extreme form of socialism if you will.


Bernie wants to expand socialist programs or add additional ones. The competitive factors will still be in place to spur innovation.
Bernies economics have been tried in places like Venezuela and failed spectacularly...If he got his way (he wont) the innovation we would get is rolling blackouts and a rise in black markets and smuggling in essentials like toilet paper and toothpaste from mexico and canada
 

ⒶⓁⒾⒶⓈ

Doctors without Labcoats
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
7,180
Reputation
-2,210
Daps
14,762
Reppin
Payments accepted Obamacare,paypal and livestock
I agree for the most part. A mixed economy is probably the best ... some industries shouldn't be strictly profit-driven, IMO.
True...for profit policing and firefighting doesnt sound very appealing but there may be better ways of funding and managing those services that is more customer focused ...
 
Joined
Feb 7, 2015
Messages
15,508
Reputation
2,186
Daps
58,307
America was essentially a socialist country during one of largest growth periods in the 50's and 60's post WW2. Taxes were high, and played a massive role in creating the infrastructure we have today.... For the record there has never been a purely socialist country on this planet, so number 4 is false.
 
Joined
Feb 7, 2015
Messages
15,508
Reputation
2,186
Daps
58,307
True...for profit policing and firefighting doesnt sound very appealing but there may be better ways of funding and managing those services that is more customer focused ...

People who advocate for the privatization of things like police, and firefighters are retarded. Please go live in your libertarian shythole in some failed state in the ME, South America, or Africa.
 

ⒶⓁⒾⒶⓈ

Doctors without Labcoats
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
7,180
Reputation
-2,210
Daps
14,762
Reppin
Payments accepted Obamacare,paypal and livestock
America was essentially a socialist country during one of largest growth periods in the 50's and 60's post WW2. Taxes were high, and played a massive role in creating the infrastructure we have today....
That Growth was in large part due to a War economy revving in high gear being re purposed to produce consumer goods and industrial supplies being exported to rebuild the war damage in Europe and Asia...there will never be demand like that for American exports again(without another war) which is why it set records

why do you say America was socialist then...other than a few veterans programs , social welfare programs and high taxes to repay war bonds not much changed economically

For the record there has never been a purely socialist country on this planet, so number 4 is false.
And there has never been a purely capitalist one either..these are Ideals societies aspire to because humans are flawed....the USSR and Maos China came as close as one could ever get without genetically engineering the perfect proleteriat
 

ⒶⓁⒾⒶⓈ

Doctors without Labcoats
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
7,180
Reputation
-2,210
Daps
14,762
Reppin
Payments accepted Obamacare,paypal and livestock
People who advocate for the privatization of things like police, and firefighters are retarded. Please go live in your libertarian shythole in some failed state in the ME, South America, or Africa.

The failed ME states only have Theocratic despotism, South America fails into Narcostates ,Africa failed states usually descend into feudal Warlord territory...the only protolibertarian sate is Somalia perhaps
However, as far as living standards can be assessed, they appear to be improving since the collapse of Somalia’s national government. In fact, standards are improving faster in Somalia than in most of sub-Saharan Africa.

In other research my coauthors and I used the World Development Indicators to compare Somalia’s performance with 41 other sub-Saharan African countries in both the current period and, when data allow, over time. All data from Africa—and perhaps Somalia in

particular—should be treated with caution. But our findings are broadly consistent with the improvements other ethnographic and anthropological evidence has found.

Unfortunately, using a broad cross section of countries over a 20-year period for a region with often unreliable (or uncollected) data limits our metrics of comparison. We examined 13 measures: the death rate, infant mortality, life expectancy, child malnutrition, telephone mainlines, mobile phones, Internet users per 1,000 population, households with television, DPT immunization, measles immunization, percent of the population with access to sanitation and an improved water source, and cases of tuberculosis.

Although Somalia’s 2005 standard of living was low by western standards, it compared fairly favorably with other African nations. Of our 13 measures, Somalia ranked in the top 50 percent of nations in five and only ranked near the bottom in infant mortality, immunization rates, and access to improved water sources. Although in 2005 the nation placed in the bottom 50 percent of countries on seven measures, it has actually improved performance relative to other countries since the collapse of the Somali state. Somalia ranked in the bottom 50 percent of all seven variables for which we have 1985-1990 data. In the last years of the Somali nation-state (1985-1990), its performance relative to other African countries deteriorated from the early 1980s, with Somalia losing ground in life expectancy, death rate, and infant mortality as well as DPT and measles immunization. Only telephone landlines showed a slight improvement during this time.

Life expectancy in Somalia fell by two years from 1985 to 1990, but it has increased by five years since becoming stateless. Only three of the 42 countries improved life expectancy as much since 1990.

While Somalia’s infant mortality ranking has continued to slide, its death rate has improved, jumping from 37th to 17th since 1990. While still in the bottom 50 percent in cases of tuberculosis, Somalia’s relative rank has improved from 40th to 31st since the collapse of the government. Although Somalia’s immunization rates for measles and DPT are among the lowest in Africa, its problems in this area existed before the collapse of the state. During the last five years of government rule Somalia’s immunization rankings fell from 19th and 21st, respectively, to next to last in both categories. While the country has stayed near the bottom of this ranking, the percentage of children immunized has improved.

Access to improved water sources is a problem in Somalia. It ranks considerably better in access to improved sanitation facilities. Unfortunately, neither of these measures was available over a long enough time period to compare performance before the collapse of the state.

Telecommunications is a major area of success in Somalia. The one measure for which we have complete data, telephone landlines per 1,000 of population, shows dramatic relative improvement since Somalia became stateless, moving from 29th to eighth among the African countries included in our survey. It ranks high in mobile phones (16th) and Internet users (11th), while it ranks 27th in households with televisions.

In many African countries state monopolies and licensing restrictions raise prices and slow the spread of telecommunications. In Somalia it takes just three days for a landline to be installed; in neighboring Kenya waiting lists are many years long. Once lines are installed, prices are relatively low. A $10 monthly fee gets a customer unlimited local calls, and international calls are only 50 cents per minute. Web access costs only 50 cents an hour. According to The Economist, using a mobile phone in Somalia is “generally cheaper and clearer than a call from anywhere else in Africa.”

We also compared Somalia to a subset of African countries that have been peaceful to make sure that it was not wars in other countries that account for Somalia’s relative improvement. We found basically the same results.

Although the data should be treated with caution, our findings are consistent with the evidence showing the rural pastoral sector growing and an increasing willingness of international businesses to open up in Somalia. Unfortunately there is one new international “business” in Somalia that has many observers concerned—piracy.
:sas2: jussaying
 

MegaManX

Superstar
Supporter
Joined
Apr 24, 2016
Messages
3,481
Reputation
6,480
Daps
17,641
So you use Capitalist LEANING governments to argue the merits of capitalism IDEOLOGY but use socialist IDEOLOGY to discourage socialist leaning governments.

If you ever took a class in economics, you would know there is no such thing as a capitalist or socialist country for they are so extreme, they would not function.

A true capitalist society would have no laws EXCEPT laws that stop people from treading on other people's rights to life.

In true capitalism, food regulations wouldn't exist because "if you serve an inferior product, your demand will drop, and you will be forced out the market."

Which is true UNLESS you have a monopoly in the market.

Which then comes to the question, when does capitalism begin to fail?

It begins to fail when there becomes an elite class gobbling up everything. Competition becomes non-existent and as a result, the elite stay the elite FOREVER.

Right now, some rich kid can "borrow" 1 million dollars from their dad, invest in their dad's friends company, that company "happens" to merge with a much more valuable company, and now that kid "earned" 49 million dollars.

That is american capitalism. Insiders always win and some are lucky to fit in the cracks.

Socialism is a way to fight against monopolistic societies through democratic means. The people decide.

Norway, Sweden, Denmark are all socialist countries with the HIGHEST educational ranks, overall happiness, and employment.

Why? Because they voted for their socialism.


A funny thing about socialism. If a dictator does it, it goes to hell. If the people elect it, its just fine.

In fact, the libertarians state "I am fine with socialism so long as the people willing give into it."

And they are the most anti-government of them all.
 
Top