Forum Links
Related Threads
Coming Soon
Thread Information
Views
899
Replies
12
Rating
0
Status
CLOSED
Thread
Creator
Creator
MagneCross
04-26-14 08:18 PM
04-26-14 08:18 PM
Last
Post
Post
thenumberone
04-29-14 04:11 PM
04-29-14 04:11 PM
Views: 254
Today: 0
Users: 0 unique
Today: 0
Users: 0 unique
Thread Actions
Thread Closed
New Thread
New Poll
Order
Socialism vs. Capitalism
04-26-14 08:18 PM
MagneCross is Offline
| ID: 1013540 | 8 Words
| ID: 1013540 | 8 Words
Is the human race supposed to be free? |
Newbie
Affected by 'Laziness Syndrome'
Registered: 05-25-13
Last Post: 3622 days
Last Active: 3187 days
Affected by 'Laziness Syndrome'
Registered: 05-25-13
Last Post: 3622 days
Last Active: 3187 days
04-26-14 08:33 PM
megamanmaniac is Offline
| ID: 1013547 | 342 Words
| ID: 1013547 | 342 Words
megamanmaniac
Level: 127
POSTS: 3276/4966
POST EXP: 452698
LVL EXP: 23130446
CP: 17207.3
VIZ: 151130
POSTS: 3276/4966
POST EXP: 452698
LVL EXP: 23130446
CP: 17207.3
VIZ: 151130
Likes: 0 Dislikes: 0
Lets look at the ideas of both capitalism and socialism.
CAPITALISM - Capitalism is a system in which people are competing to try and make as much profit as possible and become as wealthy and successful as they possibly can. This system enourages competition and ensures that lovey will be continuously be circulated, because the competition among everyone to try and get as much momey as possible, combined with a rising demand in manufactured goods by the people keeps the economy intact. Does it have it's flaws? Of course. Not everyone succeeds when participating in capitalism. Some people get a lot of money, and a lot of people don't. But for the most part, it works. People have an incentive to work and spend money, which is necessary for a properly functioning economy. SOCIALISM - Socialism is a system in which everyone is treated equally. Basically this system ensures that the goods of a nation are to be equally distributed among the people. In theory, this is good, because everyone who doesn't have much would love a system in which they get an equal amount of money like everyone else. The major problem with this IS that everyone gets equal pat. When that happens, people lose their incentive to work efficiently because they know that regardless of how hard they work, they will only receive x amount in payment. This system hurts the economy because noone is trying to work efficiently and nobody wants to work because they'll get nothing out of it. Capitalism has it's flaws, but history has all but proven that capitalism works. Socialism sounds good, but it can never be carried out because the way it works will never appeal to those who want to make as much as possible by working harder. As for people being free, I don't necessarily think that socialism is what you are thinking of. I think you are trying to compare capitalism to communism, which isn't possible since one is an economic system while the other, in essence, is a political system. CAPITALISM - Capitalism is a system in which people are competing to try and make as much profit as possible and become as wealthy and successful as they possibly can. This system enourages competition and ensures that lovey will be continuously be circulated, because the competition among everyone to try and get as much momey as possible, combined with a rising demand in manufactured goods by the people keeps the economy intact. Does it have it's flaws? Of course. Not everyone succeeds when participating in capitalism. Some people get a lot of money, and a lot of people don't. But for the most part, it works. People have an incentive to work and spend money, which is necessary for a properly functioning economy. SOCIALISM - Socialism is a system in which everyone is treated equally. Basically this system ensures that the goods of a nation are to be equally distributed among the people. In theory, this is good, because everyone who doesn't have much would love a system in which they get an equal amount of money like everyone else. The major problem with this IS that everyone gets equal pat. When that happens, people lose their incentive to work efficiently because they know that regardless of how hard they work, they will only receive x amount in payment. This system hurts the economy because noone is trying to work efficiently and nobody wants to work because they'll get nothing out of it. Capitalism has it's flaws, but history has all but proven that capitalism works. Socialism sounds good, but it can never be carried out because the way it works will never appeal to those who want to make as much as possible by working harder. As for people being free, I don't necessarily think that socialism is what you are thinking of. I think you are trying to compare capitalism to communism, which isn't possible since one is an economic system while the other, in essence, is a political system. |
Vizzed Elite
Affected by 'Laziness Syndrome'
Registered: 04-12-12
Location: Access withheld from you
Last Post: 2497 days
Last Active: 2493 days
Triple M |
Affected by 'Laziness Syndrome'
Registered: 04-12-12
Location: Access withheld from you
Last Post: 2497 days
Last Active: 2493 days
04-26-14 08:59 PM
EideticMemory is Offline
| ID: 1013561 | 105 Words
| ID: 1013561 | 105 Words
EideticMemory
Level: 137
POSTS: 2975/6326
POST EXP: 427597
LVL EXP: 30775651
CP: 26372.5
VIZ: 1209954
POSTS: 2975/6326
POST EXP: 427597
LVL EXP: 30775651
CP: 26372.5
VIZ: 1209954
Likes: 0 Dislikes: 0
They're both econopolitical (economic -and- political) since they deal with the role of government in economics, I'd say.
Since the topic is freedom, don't they -both- give freedom but just in different ways? Doesn't Capitalism give you social freedom while Socialism gives you economic freedom? That said, Socialism won't work in many countries, like the USA. Countries need secure financial footing to uphold socialist programs, such as welfare and high wages. Socialist governments try to bring about equality. And yes, they would succeed. There's only one economic class left, the lower class. =P Edit - Rethought what I said earlier and made some slight adjustments Since the topic is freedom, don't they -both- give freedom but just in different ways? Doesn't Capitalism give you social freedom while Socialism gives you economic freedom? That said, Socialism won't work in many countries, like the USA. Countries need secure financial footing to uphold socialist programs, such as welfare and high wages. Socialist governments try to bring about equality. And yes, they would succeed. There's only one economic class left, the lower class. =P Edit - Rethought what I said earlier and made some slight adjustments |
Vizzed Elite
Affected by 'Laziness Syndrome'
Registered: 12-30-13
Location: North Carolina, USA
Last Post: 155 days
Last Active: 155 days
Affected by 'Laziness Syndrome'
Registered: 12-30-13
Location: North Carolina, USA
Last Post: 155 days
Last Active: 155 days
(edited by EideticMemory on 05-07-14 07:38 PM)
04-26-14 09:38 PM
sop281 is Offline
| ID: 1013577 | 101 Words
| ID: 1013577 | 101 Words
sop281
Level: 93
POSTS: 802/2385
POST EXP: 163651
LVL EXP: 8022927
CP: 5530.8
VIZ: 101861
POSTS: 802/2385
POST EXP: 163651
LVL EXP: 8022927
CP: 5530.8
VIZ: 101861
Likes: 0 Dislikes: 0
Neither of the two systems allows for true freedom. Whilst there is a portion of freedom in each, and even more freedom within laissez-faire capitalism, neither of them provide full freedom for humans. People will always be strapped down by society's rules and codes of conduct, regardless of the economic system of a country.So no, I suppose that humans do not have true freedom, nor was anyone meant to have true freedom. It just does not work out that way, and if it did, we would all be similar to satanists, where everything is permitted. Anarchy and chaos abound with that. |
Vizzed Elite
Affected by 'Laziness Syndrome'
Registered: 04-02-11
Last Post: 3394 days
Last Active: 1439 days
Affected by 'Laziness Syndrome'
Registered: 04-02-11
Last Post: 3394 days
Last Active: 1439 days
04-26-14 09:51 PM
GenesisJunkie is Offline
| ID: 1013582 | 152 Words
| ID: 1013582 | 152 Words
GenesisJunkie
Level: 84
POSTS: 1724/1975
POST EXP: 136547
LVL EXP: 5581172
CP: 11436.7
VIZ: 91175
POSTS: 1724/1975
POST EXP: 136547
LVL EXP: 5581172
CP: 11436.7
VIZ: 91175
Likes: 0 Dislikes: 0
Is the topic freedom or Socialism vs. Capitalism? Capitalism is all about the dollar. Step on who ever you can to make it and do what ever it takes to keep it. Everything is a big fat scam, heath care is a joke, and the economy is like the sickest roller coaster, sometimes its alright (when we war our way to a good economy), sometimes its so low its enough to make you cry (most of the time). Does it work? Yeah it works, works like a broken chair. Socialism works much better. Government owns big business, less stress on classes, good social benefits and much more. A strong Socialistic government has a better footing than most others. But are they freedom? Nope, not at all really. Freedom can only be acquired through the glory of Anarchism and the working man but that is a topic for another thread and another time. Capitalism is all about the dollar. Step on who ever you can to make it and do what ever it takes to keep it. Everything is a big fat scam, heath care is a joke, and the economy is like the sickest roller coaster, sometimes its alright (when we war our way to a good economy), sometimes its so low its enough to make you cry (most of the time). Does it work? Yeah it works, works like a broken chair. Socialism works much better. Government owns big business, less stress on classes, good social benefits and much more. A strong Socialistic government has a better footing than most others. But are they freedom? Nope, not at all really. Freedom can only be acquired through the glory of Anarchism and the working man but that is a topic for another thread and another time. |
Vizzed Elite
Affected by 'Laziness Syndrome'
Registered: 03-03-13
Location: U.S.
Last Post: 3117 days
Last Active: 2908 days
Vizzeds official Sega addict |
Affected by 'Laziness Syndrome'
Registered: 03-03-13
Location: U.S.
Last Post: 3117 days
Last Active: 2908 days
04-27-14 03:34 PM
thenumberone is Offline
| ID: 1014100 | 117 Words
| ID: 1014100 | 117 Words
thenumberone
Level: 143
POSTS: 5877/6365
POST EXP: 365694
LVL EXP: 35019418
CP: 4946.4
VIZ: 329756
POSTS: 5877/6365
POST EXP: 365694
LVL EXP: 35019418
CP: 4946.4
VIZ: 329756
Likes: 0 Dislikes: 0
megamanmaniac :
You are describing communism, not socialism, you should really look into that more. Communism dictates the equal spread of all between its people. Socialism places emphasis on people above profit, and utilises policies such as food for the people, free healthcare, benefits for unemployed etc. That doesn't mean doing away with free markets. And it works in the real world. It works very well in several European nations especially, including my own. People point to nations like china and Cuba, as examples of the failure of socialism. The failure there however, is on the part of the individual, to even believe that those nations are socialist. Nazi Germany called itself socialist, that doesn't make it so. You are describing communism, not socialism, you should really look into that more. Communism dictates the equal spread of all between its people. Socialism places emphasis on people above profit, and utilises policies such as food for the people, free healthcare, benefits for unemployed etc. That doesn't mean doing away with free markets. And it works in the real world. It works very well in several European nations especially, including my own. People point to nations like china and Cuba, as examples of the failure of socialism. The failure there however, is on the part of the individual, to even believe that those nations are socialist. Nazi Germany called itself socialist, that doesn't make it so. |
Vizzed Elite
Affected by 'Laziness Syndrome'
Registered: 03-22-11
Last Post: 3382 days
Last Active: 3382 days
Bleeding Heart Liberal |
Affected by 'Laziness Syndrome'
Registered: 03-22-11
Last Post: 3382 days
Last Active: 3382 days
04-27-14 08:11 PM
Zurenriri is Offline
| ID: 1014189 | 240 Words
| ID: 1014189 | 240 Words
Zurenriri
Level: 35
POSTS: 180/272
POST EXP: 34871
LVL EXP: 271154
CP: 911.1
VIZ: 98463
POSTS: 180/272
POST EXP: 34871
LVL EXP: 271154
CP: 911.1
VIZ: 98463
Likes: 0 Dislikes: 0
thenumberone : Moving forward from what you said, can you really call China a failed state? They're falling behind in the human rights department, and they have one of the largest carbon footprints on the planet, but as far as their advances for mankind, they are second to none. They're one of the few countries with a functioning space program. To add my opinion to the argument, pure capitalism is a wretched idea. It ensures no safety for the welfare of those who have no greed. To put it simply, capitalism is a highway where there is no speed limit, and you're simply discarded and forgotten about if you crash, or if you fall behind the pack. Socialism is a better idea most of the time, but not always. Socialism, as others in this thread described, is a method of government where the basic needs and utilities of the people are run by the government, and all else is left for the free market to dictate. However, this only works if the government has integrity. Socialism is more like a highway with no speed limit, symbolizing unlimited success of individuals, but where there are guardrails, and you can count on the police and an ambulance if you crash. Personally, I'm more likely to support a government where, like in Socialism, the basic needs and utilities are taken care of by the state, but where there is also a private alternative. To add my opinion to the argument, pure capitalism is a wretched idea. It ensures no safety for the welfare of those who have no greed. To put it simply, capitalism is a highway where there is no speed limit, and you're simply discarded and forgotten about if you crash, or if you fall behind the pack. Socialism is a better idea most of the time, but not always. Socialism, as others in this thread described, is a method of government where the basic needs and utilities of the people are run by the government, and all else is left for the free market to dictate. However, this only works if the government has integrity. Socialism is more like a highway with no speed limit, symbolizing unlimited success of individuals, but where there are guardrails, and you can count on the police and an ambulance if you crash. Personally, I'm more likely to support a government where, like in Socialism, the basic needs and utilities are taken care of by the state, but where there is also a private alternative. |
Member
Affected by 'Laziness Syndrome'
Registered: 03-28-14
Location: Keizer, Oregon
Last Post: 2895 days
Last Active: 776 days
--Yami no Bouman-- ~LUCKY ROULETTE~ |
Affected by 'Laziness Syndrome'
Registered: 03-28-14
Location: Keizer, Oregon
Last Post: 2895 days
Last Active: 776 days
(edited by Zurenriri on 04-27-14 08:15 PM)
04-28-14 04:35 AM
thenumberone is Offline
| ID: 1014303 | 111 Words
| ID: 1014303 | 111 Words
thenumberone
Level: 143
POSTS: 5879/6365
POST EXP: 365694
LVL EXP: 35019418
CP: 4946.4
VIZ: 329756
POSTS: 5879/6365
POST EXP: 365694
LVL EXP: 35019418
CP: 4946.4
VIZ: 329756
Likes: 0 Dislikes: 0
Zurenriri :
who said failed state?I said failure of socialism, in regards to the fact that china is not socialist. And advances for mankind, second to none? Not really. There power comes from their population size, they are a source of cheap labour. And as they get richer, their wages will have to rise. Their economy is going to have to change very quickly. Plenty of nations contribute far more to mankind. And north america, europe and Russia all have functioning space programs. Chinas program isnt even that advanced. India is on par with them. As for socialism only working with individuals of integrity, the same can be said of any system. who said failed state?I said failure of socialism, in regards to the fact that china is not socialist. And advances for mankind, second to none? Not really. There power comes from their population size, they are a source of cheap labour. And as they get richer, their wages will have to rise. Their economy is going to have to change very quickly. Plenty of nations contribute far more to mankind. And north america, europe and Russia all have functioning space programs. Chinas program isnt even that advanced. India is on par with them. As for socialism only working with individuals of integrity, the same can be said of any system. |
Vizzed Elite
Affected by 'Laziness Syndrome'
Registered: 03-22-11
Last Post: 3382 days
Last Active: 3382 days
Bleeding Heart Liberal |
Affected by 'Laziness Syndrome'
Registered: 03-22-11
Last Post: 3382 days
Last Active: 3382 days
04-28-14 07:15 AM
warmaker is Offline
| ID: 1014315 | 75 Words
| ID: 1014315 | 75 Words
warmaker
Level: 91
POSTS: 1675/2198
POST EXP: 240742
LVL EXP: 7344216
CP: 4969.1
VIZ: 198528
POSTS: 1675/2198
POST EXP: 240742
LVL EXP: 7344216
CP: 4969.1
VIZ: 198528
Likes: 0 Dislikes: 0
GenesisJunkie : Anarchy? No thank you. Anarchy doesn't allow for any success economically unless you're talking about trading with your neighbor. Who enforces international trade with anarchy? Who builds roads, provides electricity or water, and supports infrastructure? Anarchy is good for small time, little farming communities with no serious desire to create. Anarchists wouldn't build video games or develop technology. I want to hear a scenario where anarchists develop and pay for utilities in a town. I want to hear a scenario where anarchists develop and pay for utilities in a town. |
Trusted Member
Affected by 'Laziness Syndrome'
Registered: 05-02-10
Location: Honolulu, HI
Last Post: 3175 days
Last Active: 2838 days
Affected by 'Laziness Syndrome'
Registered: 05-02-10
Location: Honolulu, HI
Last Post: 3175 days
Last Active: 2838 days
04-28-14 07:25 AM
GenesisJunkie is Offline
| ID: 1014316 | 122 Words
| ID: 1014316 | 122 Words
GenesisJunkie
Level: 84
POSTS: 1729/1975
POST EXP: 136547
LVL EXP: 5581172
CP: 11436.7
VIZ: 91175
POSTS: 1729/1975
POST EXP: 136547
LVL EXP: 5581172
CP: 11436.7
VIZ: 91175
Likes: 0 Dislikes: 0
warmaker : This is not the thread to debate Anarchism. I will keep my beliefs short and sweat because of the fact. I am somewhere in between Anarcho-Communism and Anarcho-Socialism. Pure (what I call clean Anarchy) Anarchy has its troubles with needed social work, but isn't a problem if you can rely on yourself (that is a sin in capitalism). That being said, it has its problems and those problems are the main reason I lean more to Anarcho-Communism. That is as far as I will go into what I think, if you have any problems with it or any questions feel free to make a thread or pm me, I will not reply to this thread on this topic after this post. |
Vizzed Elite
Affected by 'Laziness Syndrome'
Registered: 03-03-13
Location: U.S.
Last Post: 3117 days
Last Active: 2908 days
Vizzeds official Sega addict |
Affected by 'Laziness Syndrome'
Registered: 03-03-13
Location: U.S.
Last Post: 3117 days
Last Active: 2908 days
04-28-14 04:47 PM
Changedatrequest is Offline
| ID: 1014528 | 198 Words
| ID: 1014528 | 198 Words
Txgangsta
Level: 57
POSTS: 224/789
POST EXP: 104913
LVL EXP: 1409153
CP: 2185.3
VIZ: 149875
POSTS: 224/789
POST EXP: 104913
LVL EXP: 1409153
CP: 2185.3
VIZ: 149875
Likes: 0 Dislikes: 0
This is a dumb question. Socialism does give freedom - financial freedom for those who would otherwise struggle. Capitalism gives freedom - financial freedom for those who have finances to move, grow, or dwindle. So, I'll talk about freedom in general. There are two kinds, and we'll call them "positive" and "negative" freedom. "Negative" freedom isn't "bad" freedom, but it's freedom from something. A tax break is a negative freedom, and the Bill of Rights are all negative freedoms. "Positive" freedom isn't "good" freedom, but it's a restriction that, in effect, liberates you. Speed limits restrict how fast you can drive, but it also frees you from people who would otherwise choose to drive recklessly. Laws against murder restricts you from murdering that annoying guy at work, but it also frees you from people that think you're annoying and would kill you. Both positive and negative freedoms are useful in different scenarios, but I specifically champion positive liberty. Negative liberty, when take to it's extreme, is caveman-anarchy where everything is permitted, but positive liberty is the foundation of society. Pushed to it's extreme, positive freedom leads to a bee-hive like citizenry. The beehive is extremely ordered and efficient. So, I'll talk about freedom in general. There are two kinds, and we'll call them "positive" and "negative" freedom. "Negative" freedom isn't "bad" freedom, but it's freedom from something. A tax break is a negative freedom, and the Bill of Rights are all negative freedoms. "Positive" freedom isn't "good" freedom, but it's a restriction that, in effect, liberates you. Speed limits restrict how fast you can drive, but it also frees you from people who would otherwise choose to drive recklessly. Laws against murder restricts you from murdering that annoying guy at work, but it also frees you from people that think you're annoying and would kill you. Both positive and negative freedoms are useful in different scenarios, but I specifically champion positive liberty. Negative liberty, when take to it's extreme, is caveman-anarchy where everything is permitted, but positive liberty is the foundation of society. Pushed to it's extreme, positive freedom leads to a bee-hive like citizenry. The beehive is extremely ordered and efficient. |
Banned
Affected by 'Laziness Syndrome'
Registered: 03-04-13
Last Post: 2595 days
Last Active: 2592 days
Affected by 'Laziness Syndrome'
Registered: 03-04-13
Last Post: 2595 days
Last Active: 2592 days
04-28-14 06:37 PM
MagneCross is Offline
| ID: 1014597 | 136 Words
| ID: 1014597 | 136 Words
I think you have your stuff mixed up. Capitalism is the free market. This specifically means business. People call capitalism greedy, but everything is completely fair. If your business fails, or if you become a poor factory worker, it's you fault. A free market ensures anything, with no burden to dreams. Socialism is a social and economic system characterised by social ownership of the means of production and co-operative management of the economy. Meaning that whatever the government is, be as it may the monarch or the dictator, or simply the people, decide what to produce. In other words, Whatever serves as the government manages the economy;this is the opposite of a free market. Socialism has nothing to do with health care, or anything else. You're thinking of liberalism, which this thread does not deal with. Capitalism is the free market. This specifically means business. People call capitalism greedy, but everything is completely fair. If your business fails, or if you become a poor factory worker, it's you fault. A free market ensures anything, with no burden to dreams. Socialism is a social and economic system characterised by social ownership of the means of production and co-operative management of the economy. Meaning that whatever the government is, be as it may the monarch or the dictator, or simply the people, decide what to produce. In other words, Whatever serves as the government manages the economy;this is the opposite of a free market. Socialism has nothing to do with health care, or anything else. You're thinking of liberalism, which this thread does not deal with. |
Newbie
Affected by 'Laziness Syndrome'
Registered: 05-25-13
Last Post: 3622 days
Last Active: 3187 days
Affected by 'Laziness Syndrome'
Registered: 05-25-13
Last Post: 3622 days
Last Active: 3187 days
04-29-14 04:11 PM
thenumberone is Offline
| ID: 1015010 | 126 Words
| ID: 1015010 | 126 Words
thenumberone
Level: 143
POSTS: 5882/6365
POST EXP: 365694
LVL EXP: 35019418
CP: 4946.4
VIZ: 329756
POSTS: 5882/6365
POST EXP: 365694
LVL EXP: 35019418
CP: 4946.4
VIZ: 329756
Likes: 0 Dislikes: 0
MagneCross :
"Socialism has nothing to do with health care". It does. You stated socialism vs capitalism, with no specification of what form. The majority of socialist nations do not have rigid state control and ownership. And to call capitalism completely fare, and to state that if you fail its your fault, is naive to the extreme. I suppose for instance, if you have to look after sick family and drop out of school to do so, you're future working at mcdonalds is fare, and its your fault for caring about someone other than yourself. How is it not more fair that society spend a little money helping such people, instead of invading other country's? Socialism is a much more broad spectrum than you care to admit. "Socialism has nothing to do with health care". It does. You stated socialism vs capitalism, with no specification of what form. The majority of socialist nations do not have rigid state control and ownership. And to call capitalism completely fare, and to state that if you fail its your fault, is naive to the extreme. I suppose for instance, if you have to look after sick family and drop out of school to do so, you're future working at mcdonalds is fare, and its your fault for caring about someone other than yourself. How is it not more fair that society spend a little money helping such people, instead of invading other country's? Socialism is a much more broad spectrum than you care to admit. |
Vizzed Elite
Affected by 'Laziness Syndrome'
Registered: 03-22-11
Last Post: 3382 days
Last Active: 3382 days
Bleeding Heart Liberal |
Affected by 'Laziness Syndrome'
Registered: 03-22-11
Last Post: 3382 days
Last Active: 3382 days
Links
Page Comments
This page has no comments