Be a Supporter!

Why Socialism > Capitalism

  • 6,878 Views
  • 128 Replies
New Topic Respond to this Topic
Ihatedapatriots
Ihatedapatriots
  • Member since: Oct. 12, 2011
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 03
Programmer
Response to Why Socialism > Capitalism Feb. 16th, 2012 @ 04:07 PM Reply

At 20 hours ago, djack wrote:
At 8 minutes ago, Korriken wrote:
At 17 hours ago, Ihatedapatriots wrote:
We can god back and forth all night. I'd shoot them, no they'd shoot you, I'm sure rocket launchers would be brought up at some point. Let's just end it now and get drunk.
5-12 vs 1 is bad odds, i don't care what weapon you have.
Is this the point where rocket launchers are supposed to be brought up? Maybe we should throw in some automated turrets and landmines guarding the front door. Hell, we can drop the pretense and just say magic right? Magic would let one person kill 12 armed robbers without getting themselves killed in the process, right?

I'm sorry, Korrike, but if I set up turrets, it's over. that's all I'm saying. They don't even need to be automated. The migrant workers I'll hire to tend to my fields will man them. Add to this attack dogs and possibly some well place, remote activated land mines and I'm sleeping snug as a rug.

Camarohusky
Camarohusky
  • Member since: Jun. 22, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 09
Movie Buff
Response to Why Socialism > Capitalism Feb. 16th, 2012 @ 08:21 PM Reply

At 19 hours ago, Iron-Hampster wrote: To their great surprise all failed. The professor told them that socialism would ultimately fail because the harder people try to succeed the greater their reward (capitalism) but when a government takes all the reward away (socialism) no one will try or succeed.

While that is a very good illustration of how socialism can fail, it still seems to be quite shallow to me. One class out of many of a college student's life is a pretty small part of their lives. Being so small, it is much easier to let fail.

Iron-Hampster
Iron-Hampster
  • Member since: Aug. 27, 2006
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 10
Blank Slate
Response to Why Socialism > Capitalism Feb. 16th, 2012 @ 09:12 PM Reply

At 38 minutes ago, Camarohusky wrote:
While that is a very good illustration of how socialism can fail, it still seems to be quite shallow to me. One class out of many of a college student's life is a pretty small part of their lives. Being so small, it is much easier to let fail.

well there's a much bigger example of this in the real deal, Mao dove straight into collectivisation as well, forget the cultural revolution, there is a reason he is not listed above Stalin as the evillest man in the world. he didn't kill as many people through purges and what not as a lot of those other guys, his deaths were mostly caused by either war, or the largest group, caused by famine. Pretty much every communist has had at least one famine, but his was by far the worst, even worse than Stalin's government forced famine. His famine happened for the same general reason as what that story outlined. The best farmers didn't get enough compensation for their work, so everyone did as little as they were allowed to do without provoking the reds to break down their doors.


ya hear about the guy who put his condom on backwards? He went.

BBS Signature
Camarohusky
Camarohusky
  • Member since: Jun. 22, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 09
Movie Buff
Response to Why Socialism > Capitalism Feb. 16th, 2012 @ 09:40 PM Reply

At 23 minutes ago, Iron-Hampster wrote: His famine happened for the same general reason as what that story outlined.

Actually, no it didn't. The famine in mid 20th Century China was a result of corruption, and cadre yes men. The famine was largely created by cadre member siphoning tons of wheat away from their people. On top of that, the cadre members vastly overstated their grain output to such an extent (like reporting record growth when in actuality they were having down seasons) that the country could not make up for it.

China is NO example of how socialism actually works. China was merely a dictatorship in Marx clothing.

Korriken
Korriken
  • Member since: Jun. 17, 2006
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 05
Gamer
Response to Why Socialism > Capitalism Feb. 16th, 2012 @ 10:38 PM Reply

At 6 hours ago, Ihatedapatriots wrote:
I'm sorry, Korrike, but if I set up turrets, it's over. that's all I'm saying. They don't even need to be automated. The migrant workers I'll hire to tend to my fields will man them. Add to this attack dogs and possibly some well place, remote activated land mines and I'm sleeping snug as a rug.

problem is, the people killing you ARE the migrant workers because they feel they're not being paid enough. now what?


I'm not crazy, everyone else is.

dude23
dude23
  • Member since: Mar. 1, 2003
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 10
Blank Slate
Response to Why Socialism > Capitalism Feb. 17th, 2012 @ 12:20 AM Reply

I think some people are confusing communism with socialism. rofl

Ihatedapatriots
Ihatedapatriots
  • Member since: Oct. 12, 2011
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 03
Programmer
Response to Why Socialism > Capitalism Feb. 17th, 2012 @ 12:54 AM Reply

At 2 hours ago, Korriken wrote:
At 6 hours ago, Ihatedapatriots wrote:

problem is, the people killing you ARE the migrant workers because they feel they're not being paid enough. now what?

Good point and one I've already thought of and, I believe, come to a decision regarding.

Shock collars.

Slizor
Slizor
  • Member since: Aug. 7, 2000
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 15
Blank Slate
Response to Why Socialism > Capitalism Feb. 18th, 2012 @ 07:32 AM Reply

At 2 days ago, Iron-Hampster wrote: Here is a nice story you folks would love to hear

A professor of Economics and Political Science at UF said he had never failed a single student, but had once failed an entire class.

The class (students) insisted that socialism worked since no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer. The professor then said,
"OK, we will have an experiment in this class on socialism."
"All grades will be averaged and everyone will receive the same grade so no one will fail and no one will receive an A."

After the first test the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who had studied hard were upset while the students who had studied very little were happy.

But, as the second test rolled around, the students who had studied little studied even less and the ones who had studied hard decided that since they couldn't make an A, they also studied less. The second Test average
was a D. No one was happy. When the 3rd test rolled around the average grade was an
F.

The scores never increased as bickering, blame, name calling, all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for anyone else.
To their great surprise all failed. The professor told them that socialism would ultimately fail because the harder people try to succeed the greater
their reward (capitalism) but when a government takes all the reward away (socialism) no one will try or succeed.

Three points. One, the story is fiction. http://www.snopes.com/college/exam/socialism.asp

Two, the story is predicated on a simplistic understanding of "reward". It assumes, following usage in the status quo, that what you receive for a service/product is "earned" - that you have a moral right to it on the basis of deserving it. However, the world is replete with examples of people who get a high salary but actually do very little - investment bankers being a good example. Equally, people who do do useful things - factory workers, for example - often see very poor returns for the provision (and fruits) of their labour. As such, to suggest that in Capitalism people are given their due "reward" is fundamentally not in line with how capitalism has operated. Also, to link reward to hard work in capitalism is just plain fucking stupid - feel free to use the same examples for this point too.

Three, your example, while using non-monetary "rewards" as an experiment, limits its understanding of rewards to being solely monetary in its supposed critique of socialism. Operating under its implicit definition of socialism, the government, even if it takes all the "reward" can not take away the inate pleasure of crafting something, or of enjoying your work.

Davoo
Davoo
  • Member since: Jul. 5, 2007
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 17
Game Developer
Response to Why Socialism > Capitalism Feb. 18th, 2012 @ 12:57 PM Reply

Explain to me in greater detail how socialism is supposed to work, and how capitalism got us into the problems we havw now.

Davoo
Davoo
  • Member since: Jul. 5, 2007
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 17
Game Developer
Response to Why Socialism > Capitalism Feb. 18th, 2012 @ 01:05 PM Reply

At 9 days ago, Camarohusky wrote: Capitalism is the epitomy of economic freedom. Under that people are free to set prices for selling and buying at whatever they can get away with.

Uhhh... really? I always thought you had to have prices equal or lower than everybody else (or be in a better location or have higher quality), and that you couldn't "get away" with anything more than that. But no, I guess Wal Mart sells almost everything so cheap just because they feel more generous than the Mom and Pop stores they run out of business.

Camarohusky
Camarohusky
  • Member since: Jun. 22, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 09
Movie Buff
Response to Why Socialism > Capitalism Feb. 18th, 2012 @ 01:23 PM Reply

At 14 minutes ago, Davoo wrote:
At 9 days ago, Camarohusky wrote: Capitalism is the epitomy of economic freedom. Under that people are free to set prices for selling and buying at whatever they can get away with.
Uhhh... really? I always thought you had to have prices equal or lower than everybody else (or be in a better location or have higher quality), and that you couldn't "get away" with anything more than that. But no, I guess Wal Mart sells almost everything so cheap just because they feel more generous than the Mom and Pop stores they run out of business.

Yes really. Setting prices equal to or lower is a method of competition, not a principle of Capitalism. Under capitalism I could sell a book worth $5 to someone for $50 if that person is willing to pay that much. I mean, if capitalism was all about equal or lower, then how come something with the same supply and same demand could cost $10 in NYC, $7 in Seattle and $4 in Kansas City?

Davoo
Davoo
  • Member since: Jul. 5, 2007
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 17
Game Developer
Response to Why Socialism > Capitalism Feb. 18th, 2012 @ 02:42 PM Reply

At 1 hour ago, Camarohusky wrote:
At 14 minutes ago, Davoo wrote:
At 9 days ago, Camarohusky wrote: Capitalism is the epitomy of economic freedom. Under that people are free to set prices for selling and buying at whatever they can get away with.
Uhhh... really? I always thought you had to have prices equal or lower than everybody else (or be in a better location or have higher quality), and that you couldn't "get away" with anything more than that. But no, I guess Wal Mart sells almost everything so cheap just because they feel more generous than the Mom and Pop stores they run out of business.
Yes really. Setting prices equal to or lower is a method of competition, not a principle of Capitalism. Under capitalism I could sell a book worth $5 to someone for $50 if that person is willing to pay that much. I mean, if capitalism was all about equal or lower, then how come something with the same supply and same demand could cost $10 in NYC, $7 in Seattle and $4 in Kansas City?

You're saying competition isn't a part of capitalism. Wow. That's a new one.

"Under capitalism I could sell a book worth $5 for $50 if that person is willing to pay that much."
Well first of all, who detirmines the worth of a book? But regardless of that, if the consumer is okay with that price and you're willing to sell it as such, what is the problem with that? And if nobody accepts the price, no one will buy it and you'll be forced to sell it cheaper or get another job. All that sounds exactly like capitalism.

Camarohusky
Camarohusky
  • Member since: Jun. 22, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 09
Movie Buff
Response to Why Socialism > Capitalism Feb. 18th, 2012 @ 03:51 PM Reply

At 1 hour ago, Davoo wrote: You're saying competition isn't a part of capitalism. Wow. That's a new one.

Now I'm starting to wonder if you aren't just trolling now. Either that or you're having trouble understanding concepts.

Competition is part of capitalism, but the main idea of capitalism is that the price is formed by the seller pushing the price as high as they can get away with, and the buyer trying to make the cheapest offer they can get away with. It's that simple. Everything else, including competition, is built upon this basic idea.

"Under capitalism I could sell a book worth $5 for $50 if that person is willing to pay that much."
Well first of all, who detirmines the worth of a book? But regardless of that, if the consumer is okay with that price and you're willing to sell it as such, what is the problem with that? And if nobody accepts the price, no one will buy it and you'll be forced to sell it cheaper or get another job. All that sounds exactly like capitalism.

Exactly. The seller is selling it for what he can get away with. So how are you not understanding this?

Davoo
Davoo
  • Member since: Jul. 5, 2007
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 17
Game Developer
Response to Why Socialism > Capitalism Feb. 18th, 2012 @ 04:06 PM Reply

Oh I'm sorry, I completely misunderstood. This whole time, I thought you were talking about a flaw in capitalism, from the tone I was picking up. But now here we are, completely agreeing. My bad; I'm glad to talk to another capitalist on Newgrounds.

Camarohusky
Camarohusky
  • Member since: Jun. 22, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 09
Movie Buff
Response to Why Socialism > Capitalism Feb. 18th, 2012 @ 06:30 PM Reply

At 2 hours ago, Davoo wrote: Oh I'm sorry, I completely misunderstood.

No worries. If I had to guess, I'd say about 10% of the arguing on here comes from people who are saying the same thing but in different ways.

My bad; I'm glad to talk to another capitalist on Newgrounds.

Don't assume too much now. Just because I don't know capitalism as much as the others doesn't mean I am a Lasseiz Faire type.

TNT
TNT
  • Member since: Jul. 20, 2005
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 11
Musician
Response to Why Socialism > Capitalism Feb. 18th, 2012 @ 10:53 PM Reply

At 2 days ago, Iron-Hampster wrote:
their reward (capitalism) but when a government takes all the reward away (socialism) no one will try or succeed.

Yeah I heard of that story before, but that was capitalism vs. communism. Socialism is in between capitalism and communism in a way.


Latest song cover: Rock Is Dead.
Steam ID: echoes83 (Tyler from Texas)

BBS Signature
Camarohusky
Camarohusky
  • Member since: Jun. 22, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 09
Movie Buff
Response to Why Socialism > Capitalism Feb. 19th, 2012 @ 12:24 PM Reply

At 13 hours ago, TNT wrote: Yeah I heard of that story before, but that was capitalism vs. communism.

There is a lot of mixing that up around here.

Socialism is in between capitalism and communism in a way.

Generally speaking, Communism is state ownership of all business. Socialism is where the state uses its income to provide strong social services for the people. In actuality socialism and capitlism aren't contradictory as they live in two different realms of government. Communism and capitalism are the contradictory systems.

streetbob
streetbob
  • Member since: May. 28, 2008
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 14
Gamer
Response to Why Socialism > Capitalism Feb. 20th, 2012 @ 11:14 PM Reply

At 12 days ago, Nintharmed wrote: Allow me to make my case.

Okay, now let me make mine.

You have a classroom, your the teacher, you tell your students that you will be having a pop quiz, and that everyone's grade will be the average grade the class makes. Half the class is very smart, hard workers, who get A's constantly. The other half is full of dumb, George W. Bushes, Hermin Cains and Michelle Bachmans who never get higher than a C. Now at first the class might get a B or an C, but soon, the smarter half will start to get lazy and the dumb side will start getting even more lazy. Then the smart ones start getting C's and D's, while the dumb ones are getting nothing but F's.

Welcome to the world of socialism!


BBS Signature
Dabus
Dabus
  • Member since: Feb. 13, 2012
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 04
Blank Slate
Response to Why Socialism > Capitalism Feb. 21st, 2012 @ 12:01 AM Reply

Socialism calls for too much reliance in the government.

Camarohusky
Camarohusky
  • Member since: Jun. 22, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 09
Movie Buff
Response to Why Socialism > Capitalism Feb. 21st, 2012 @ 08:57 AM Reply

At 9 hours ago, streetbob wrote: You have a classroom ... socialism!

We already discussed this and the shallowness of this view.

adrshepard
adrshepard
  • Member since: Jun. 18, 2003
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 07
Blank Slate
Response to Why Socialism > Capitalism Feb. 21st, 2012 @ 06:26 PM Reply

At 3 days ago, Slizor wrote:
Two, the story is predicated on a simplistic understanding of "reward". It assumes, following usage in the status quo, that what you receive for a service/product is "earned" - that you have a moral right to it on the basis of deserving it. However, the world is replete with examples of people who get a high salary but actually do very little - investment bankers being a good example.

You don't have the slightest idea what you are taking about. An investment banker has to make extremely difficult and risky decisions about what companies to accept as clients, whether their securities are marketable and how to make them so, and deal with a whole other slew of complicated financial instruments.

Equally, people who do do useful things - factory workers, for example - often see very poor returns for the provision (and fruits) of their labour.

You're fundamentally confused about the concept of "value." It is not the amount of calories or muscles used, or whether the end product is something real, like a house, as opposed to something abstract like financial advice, it's about how replaceable you are. I'm sure many factory laborers work pretty hard, but the fact is that there are a hell of a lot more people who can operate part of an assembly line than can keep track of the latest financial regulations or trends and use them to build securities. The market for employees functions the same way as the market for goods. Especially skilled or uniquely capable individuals will get paid more than those who blend in with everyone else.

As such, to suggest that in Capitalism people are given their due "reward" is fundamentally not in line with how capitalism has operated. Also, to link reward to hard work in capitalism is just plain fucking stupid

Not true. You're just forgetting that hard work applies to young adults as well. The people who bungle through high school, don't care about learning, or who only do the minimum necessary to advance to the next grade aren't going to be in a good position to get a college education. The poor but dedicated student has far more potential than the rich, uninspired slacker. The US spends hundreds of billions of dollars each year for just this purpose through community and state colleges, scholarship programs, and subsidized financial aid, not to mention what's spent at the federal level to support primary education.

Operating under its implicit definition of socialism, the government, even if it takes all the "reward" can not take away the inate pleasure of crafting something, or of enjoying your work.

Every failed socialist system spent considerable resources trying to convince people that this was the case. It didn't work, so instead the government just punished anyone who publicly said otherwise.

The-Great-One
The-Great-One
  • Member since: Sep. 2, 2006
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 30
Writer
Ihatedapatriots
Ihatedapatriots
  • Member since: Oct. 12, 2011
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 03
Programmer
Response to Why Socialism > Capitalism Feb. 21st, 2012 @ 07:47 PM Reply

At 55 minutes ago, The-Great-One wrote: Why is it that the one user who put a good deal of thought into their post is ignored?

Because this is the internet. I disagree with him so I thusly ignored his post.

Get with the program.

UndamagedRook
UndamagedRook
  • Member since: Oct. 26, 2010
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 11
Animator
Response to Why Socialism > Capitalism Feb. 21st, 2012 @ 07:56 PM Reply

Friendship over money. It's that simple.

Davoo
Davoo
  • Member since: Jul. 5, 2007
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 17
Game Developer
Response to Why Socialism > Capitalism Feb. 21st, 2012 @ 08:09 PM Reply

At 11 minutes ago, UndamagedRook wrote: Friendship over money. It's that simple.

Elaborate.

Camarohusky
Camarohusky
  • Member since: Jun. 22, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 09
Movie Buff
Response to Why Socialism > Capitalism Feb. 21st, 2012 @ 09:01 PM Reply

At 2 hours ago, The-Great-One wrote: Why is it that the one user who put a good deal of thought into their post is ignored?

If this is such a crime, then how about you try to rehash it through discourse insetad of just pointing it out and blaming everyone else?

SmilezRoyale
SmilezRoyale
  • Member since: Oct. 21, 2006
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 03
Blank Slate
Response to Why Socialism > Capitalism Feb. 21st, 2012 @ 10:32 PM Reply

At 13 days ago, Camarohusky wrote: It ain't as easy as you think.

A better dichotomy, and one the puts two important values at odds, is freedom v. community.

They are both rife for abuse, and both have severe downsides.

Although, How does the situation of FDA Agents sending heavily armed troopers into an amish farmers shop and arresting him for selling raw milk fit into this dichotomy exactly?


On a moving train there are no centrists, only radicals and reactionaries.

streetbob
streetbob
  • Member since: May. 28, 2008
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 14
Gamer
Response to Why Socialism > Capitalism Feb. 22nd, 2012 @ 02:35 AM Reply

At 13 days ago, Trerro wrote: Socialism and Capitalism are not competing baseball teams, they are 2 sides of a spectrum.

Wow man, I had to delete 99% of all that, but I read all of it and agree 100%. Jesus Christ through, you put some thought into this, I wish Congress thought like you.


BBS Signature
Camarohusky
Camarohusky
  • Member since: Jun. 22, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 09
Movie Buff
Response to Why Socialism > Capitalism Feb. 22nd, 2012 @ 04:07 PM Reply

At 17 hours ago, SmilezRoyale wrote: Although, How does the situation of FDA Agents sending heavily armed troopers into an amish farmers shop and arresting him for selling raw milk fit into this dichotomy exactly?

It fits in the community side in the abuse section.

The community interest is consumer protection, from sour, bad, or improperly made, milk. The use of armed soldeirs is an abuse of this.

It may also fit into the "large milk manufacturers have used their money to get the government to act on their interests and no one else's" third catergory of flat out corruption.

Korriken
Korriken
  • Member since: Jun. 17, 2006
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 05
Gamer
Response to Why Socialism > Capitalism Feb. 23rd, 2012 @ 09:44 PM Reply

At 4 days ago, Camarohusky wrote:
Generally speaking, Communism is state ownership of all business. Socialism is where the state uses its income to provide strong social services for the people. In actuality socialism and capitlism aren't contradictory as they live in two different realms of government. Communism and capitalism are the contradictory systems.

this is great and all until the socialist programs create too much burden on the system and bring it crashing down. The biggest problem is finding a proper balance between what the masses need and what the system can support and still function. This happened in Greece. the Greek government kept heaping entitlements on the masses and eventually overburdened itself with debt while spoiling the populace. When the party was over, the masses began to riot because they didn't want to see all that free money go away.

Socialist programs are fine, to a point, problem is when you cross the line between helping people who need help and giving handouts to degenerates who think they are too good to be productive citizens. Once you cross that line, it's only a matter of time before the ship sinks and all the rats on board drown.


I'm not crazy, everyone else is.