Total Posts:261|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Why not Socialism?

AIyssa
Posts: 63
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2015 1:33:09 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
I think we're at a stage where we're educated enough to have a socialist society. I mean of course not everyone is educated or informed, but if we can somehow start from ground zero of maximal political participation, we can build a good socialist government.
If only everyone could agree to being socialist, things would work out very well.
gingerbread-man
Posts: 301
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2015 1:52:41 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/4/2015 1:33:09 AM, AIyssa wrote:
I think we're at a stage where we're educated enough to have a socialist society. I mean of course not everyone is educated or informed, but if we can somehow start from ground zero of maximal political participation, we can build a good socialist government.
If only everyone could agree to being socialist, things would work out very well.

Thats the kicker - not everyone will agree with you....and then they will get their nose out of joint when you requisition their property.
Not my gumdrop buttons!

Debates currently in voting period:

http://www.debate.org...
SebUK
Posts: 850
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2015 12:31:28 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/4/2015 1:33:09 AM, AIyssa wrote:
I think we're at a stage where we're educated enough to have a socialist society. I mean of course not everyone is educated or informed, but if we can somehow start from ground zero of maximal political participation, we can build a good socialist government.
If only everyone could agree to being socialist, things would work out very well.

My question is even if we forget that centralised planned economies always fail , why should we implement it ?
I WILL DECIDE WHAT THIS DEBATE IS ABOUT. I AM SPIRITUAL, NOT RELIGIOYUS. YOU DONT HAVE TO BE RELIGIOUS TO BELIEVE IN GOD, AND YOU DO WORSHIP MONEY IF YOU CARE MORE ABOUT YOUR WALLET THAAN YOU DO THE POOR. YOU ARE A TROLL THAT IS OUT FOR ATTENTUION."- SitaraMusica
AIyssa
Posts: 63
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2015 12:36:07 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/4/2015 1:52:41 AM, gingerbread-man wrote:
At 1/4/2015 1:33:09 AM, AIyssa wrote:
I think we're at a stage where we're educated enough to have a socialist society. I mean of course not everyone is educated or informed, but if we can somehow start from ground zero of maximal political participation, we can build a good socialist government.
If only everyone could agree to being socialist, things would work out very well.

Thats the kicker - not everyone will agree with you....and then they will get their nose out of joint when you requisition their property.

Socialism does not necessarily mean property requisition. It means that we are not stuck to strict rules such as 'life liberty and property'. There are governments who say: "we'll protect your rights to life liberty and property even if it costs you your life and livelihood! Rawr!"
There are people who can acquire some kind of monopoly of property, making it hard or impossible for others to afford it. Appealing to a government stuck to protecting property will only result in the reply, "These people have right to property! Maybe if you get property, you'd have a right to it too!"
So the government could sacrifice the majority's happiness, desires and livelihood for the minority's property rights.
Socialism, on the other hand, allows everyone to start at ground zero: the political power is in the people regardless of principle. The majority decides what is right or wrong, If they decide in favor of property rights fine. The point is, people, as a majority, should have direct authority and influence on laws. That's what socialism is about: Power in the people.
Sounds a lot like perfect democracy doesn't it? That's because the classical definition of democracy is really socialism.
AIyssa
Posts: 63
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2015 12:38:03 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/4/2015 12:31:28 PM, SebUK wrote:
At 1/4/2015 1:33:09 AM, AIyssa wrote:
I think we're at a stage where we're educated enough to have a socialist society. I mean of course not everyone is educated or informed, but if we can somehow start from ground zero of maximal political participation, we can build a good socialist government.
If only everyone could agree to being socialist, things would work out very well.

My question is even if we forget that centralised planned economies always fail , why should we implement it ?

That's because we can have socialism without centralized planned economies. Centralized planned power in anything contradicts socialism because it detracts power from the people. What we need is like periodic referendum just like the way we have elections, except on laws and law propositions.
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2015 12:41:34 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/4/2015 12:31:28 PM, SebUK wrote:
At 1/4/2015 1:33:09 AM, AIyssa wrote:
I think we're at a stage where we're educated enough to have a socialist society. I mean of course not everyone is educated or informed, but if we can somehow start from ground zero of maximal political participation, we can build a good socialist government.
If only everyone could agree to being socialist, things would work out very well.

My question is even if we forget that centralised planned economies always fail , why should we implement it ?

This is a nonsense criticism. The failures of capitalism are just isolated for the time being, the weak merely getting crushed underfoot (and that is written with irony). But the mad dash that it is, so apathetic and squanderous, will eventually bring the whole thing down. Who will develop the third world countries that have no resources to offer in return? There is only centralised planning when it comes to morality/sustainability.
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2015 12:44:15 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
I mean, just look at over-fishing - this is an fault of capitalism. What way to resolve it but better collective coordination?
gingerbread-man
Posts: 301
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2015 12:44:29 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/4/2015 12:38:03 PM, AIyssa wrote:
At 1/4/2015 12:31:28 PM, SebUK wrote:
At 1/4/2015 1:33:09 AM, AIyssa wrote:
I think we're at a stage where we're educated enough to have a socialist society. I mean of course not everyone is educated or informed, but if we can somehow start from ground zero of maximal political participation, we can build a good socialist government.
If only everyone could agree to being socialist, things would work out very well.

My question is even if we forget that centralised planned economies always fail , why should we implement it ?

That's because we can have socialism without centralized planned economies. Centralized planned power in anything contradicts socialism because it detracts power from the people. What we need is like periodic referendum just like the way we have elections, except on laws and law propositions.

It is hard enough to get the voting population out every couple of years, let alone every month to vote on each peice of legislation coming through the government. Not a terribly efficient decision making process - thats why we vote for a party that mirrors our values and let them do the heavy lifting
Not my gumdrop buttons!

Debates currently in voting period:

http://www.debate.org...
AIyssa
Posts: 63
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2015 12:45:25 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/4/2015 12:41:34 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 1/4/2015 12:31:28 PM, SebUK wrote:
At 1/4/2015 1:33:09 AM, AIyssa wrote:
I think we're at a stage where we're educated enough to have a socialist society. I mean of course not everyone is educated or informed, but if we can somehow start from ground zero of maximal political participation, we can build a good socialist government.
If only everyone could agree to being socialist, things would work out very well.

My question is even if we forget that centralised planned economies always fail , why should we implement it ?

This is a nonsense criticism. The failures of capitalism are just isolated for the time being, the weak merely getting crushed underfoot (and that is written with irony). But the mad dash that it is, so apathetic and squanderous, will eventually bring the whole thing down. Who will develop the third world countries that have no resources to offer in return? There is only centralised planning when it comes to morality/sustainability.

Lots of 3rd world countries actually have resources, but they are forced to export it elsewhere where the profits gained from the resources are maximized elsewhere, and the people of the 3rd world country receive a pittance back to them. The people who benefit most are the capitalist overlords who get the resources exported, and the importers who process and refine the resource and sell it back to the 3rd world country who can't even afford the thing they were part of in making.
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2015 12:46:27 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/4/2015 12:45:25 PM, AIyssa wrote:
At 1/4/2015 12:41:34 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 1/4/2015 12:31:28 PM, SebUK wrote:
At 1/4/2015 1:33:09 AM, AIyssa wrote:
I think we're at a stage where we're educated enough to have a socialist society. I mean of course not everyone is educated or informed, but if we can somehow start from ground zero of maximal political participation, we can build a good socialist government.
If only everyone could agree to being socialist, things would work out very well.

My question is even if we forget that centralised planned economies always fail , why should we implement it ?

This is a nonsense criticism. The failures of capitalism are just isolated for the time being, the weak merely getting crushed underfoot (and that is written with irony). But the mad dash that it is, so apathetic and squanderous, will eventually bring the whole thing down. Who will develop the third world countries that have no resources to offer in return? There is only centralised planning when it comes to morality/sustainability.

Lots of 3rd world countries actually have resources, but they are forced to export it elsewhere where the profits gained from the resources are maximized elsewhere, and the people of the 3rd world country receive a pittance back to them. The people who benefit most are the capitalist overlords who get the resources exported, and the importers who process and refine the resource and sell it back to the 3rd world country who can't even afford the thing they were part of in making.

Exactly. Capitalism is the rich raping the poor.
SebUK
Posts: 850
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2015 12:50:32 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/4/2015 12:38:03 PM, AIyssa wrote:
At 1/4/2015 12:31:28 PM, SebUK wrote:
At 1/4/2015 1:33:09 AM, AIyssa wrote:
I think we're at a stage where we're educated enough to have a socialist society. I mean of course not everyone is educated or informed, but if we can somehow start from ground zero of maximal political participation, we can build a good socialist government.
If only everyone could agree to being socialist, things would work out very well.

My question is even if we forget that centralised planned economies always fail , why should we implement it ?

That's because we can have socialism without centralized planned economies. Centralized planned power in anything contradicts socialism because it detracts power from the people. What we need is like periodic referendum just like the way we have elections, except on laws and law propositions.

The definition of socialism is the control of the means of production by the collective . The power of the people is democracy.
I WILL DECIDE WHAT THIS DEBATE IS ABOUT. I AM SPIRITUAL, NOT RELIGIOYUS. YOU DONT HAVE TO BE RELIGIOUS TO BELIEVE IN GOD, AND YOU DO WORSHIP MONEY IF YOU CARE MORE ABOUT YOUR WALLET THAAN YOU DO THE POOR. YOU ARE A TROLL THAT IS OUT FOR ATTENTUION."- SitaraMusica
AIyssa
Posts: 63
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2015 12:50:34 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/4/2015 12:44:29 PM, gingerbread-man wrote:
At 1/4/2015 12:38:03 PM, AIyssa wrote:
At 1/4/2015 12:31:28 PM, SebUK wrote:
At 1/4/2015 1:33:09 AM, AIyssa wrote:
I think we're at a stage where we're educated enough to have a socialist society. I mean of course not everyone is educated or informed, but if we can somehow start from ground zero of maximal political participation, we can build a good socialist government.
If only everyone could agree to being socialist, things would work out very well.

My question is even if we forget that centralised planned economies always fail , why should we implement it ?

That's because we can have socialism without centralized planned economies. Centralized planned power in anything contradicts socialism because it detracts power from the people. What we need is like periodic referendum just like the way we have elections, except on laws and law propositions.

It is hard enough to get the voting population out every couple of years, let alone every month to vote on each peice of legislation coming through the government. Not a terribly efficient decision making process - thats why we vote for a party that mirrors our values and let them do the heavy lifting

It is hard, but if we start on young people early and have them grow up in an environment of political participation mentality or something, we'd develop ground zero state. Besides, as long as the people have the ultimate authority, referendum on legislation don't even have to be frequent. We have the internet! Petitioning through the internet is so easy and fast, and when the petition goes over a threshhold, the people's desires, outlined by the petition, must be addressed.
The party system makes it so that even if the majority is against some policy, if it goes against the party's ideas, it won't get anywhere. Limit our options to a few parties and make it so that we can't practically elect anything else. That's not power in the people. That's power by party and wealth.
SebUK
Posts: 850
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2015 12:52:08 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/4/2015 12:41:34 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 1/4/2015 12:31:28 PM, SebUK wrote:
At 1/4/2015 1:33:09 AM, AIyssa wrote:
I think we're at a stage where we're educated enough to have a socialist society. I mean of course not everyone is educated or informed, but if we can somehow start from ground zero of maximal political participation, we can build a good socialist government.
If only everyone could agree to being socialist, things would work out very well.

My question is even if we forget that centralised planned economies always fail , why should we implement it ?

This is a nonsense criticism. The failures of capitalism are just isolated for the time being, the weak merely getting crushed underfoot (and that is written with irony). But the mad dash that it is, so apathetic and squanderous, will eventually bring the whole thing down. Who will develop the third world countries that have no resources to offer in return? There is only centralised planning when it comes to morality/sustainability.

Capitalism has never existed previously in history , African nations hold some of the lowest positions on the economic freedom ranking.
I WILL DECIDE WHAT THIS DEBATE IS ABOUT. I AM SPIRITUAL, NOT RELIGIOYUS. YOU DONT HAVE TO BE RELIGIOUS TO BELIEVE IN GOD, AND YOU DO WORSHIP MONEY IF YOU CARE MORE ABOUT YOUR WALLET THAAN YOU DO THE POOR. YOU ARE A TROLL THAT IS OUT FOR ATTENTUION."- SitaraMusica
SebUK
Posts: 850
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2015 12:53:08 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/4/2015 12:41:34 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 1/4/2015 12:31:28 PM, SebUK wrote:
At 1/4/2015 1:33:09 AM, AIyssa wrote:
I think we're at a stage where we're educated enough to have a socialist society. I mean of course not everyone is educated or informed, but if we can somehow start from ground zero of maximal political participation, we can build a good socialist government.
If only everyone could agree to being socialist, things would work out very well.

My question is even if we forget that centralised planned economies always fail , why should we implement it ?

This is a nonsense criticism. The failures of capitalism are just isolated for the time being, the weak merely getting crushed underfoot (and that is written with irony). But the mad dash that it is, so apathetic and squanderous, will eventually bring the whole thing down. Who will develop the third world countries that have no resources to offer in return? There is only centralised planning when it comes to morality/sustainability.

Also I don't consider Socialism to be moral at all.
I WILL DECIDE WHAT THIS DEBATE IS ABOUT. I AM SPIRITUAL, NOT RELIGIOYUS. YOU DONT HAVE TO BE RELIGIOUS TO BELIEVE IN GOD, AND YOU DO WORSHIP MONEY IF YOU CARE MORE ABOUT YOUR WALLET THAAN YOU DO THE POOR. YOU ARE A TROLL THAT IS OUT FOR ATTENTUION."- SitaraMusica
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2015 12:53:30 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/4/2015 12:52:08 PM, SebUK wrote:
At 1/4/2015 12:41:34 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 1/4/2015 12:31:28 PM, SebUK wrote:
At 1/4/2015 1:33:09 AM, AIyssa wrote:
I think we're at a stage where we're educated enough to have a socialist society. I mean of course not everyone is educated or informed, but if we can somehow start from ground zero of maximal political participation, we can build a good socialist government.
If only everyone could agree to being socialist, things would work out very well.

My question is even if we forget that centralised planned economies always fail , why should we implement it ?

This is a nonsense criticism. The failures of capitalism are just isolated for the time being, the weak merely getting crushed underfoot (and that is written with irony). But the mad dash that it is, so apathetic and squanderous, will eventually bring the whole thing down. Who will develop the third world countries that have no resources to offer in return? There is only centralised planning when it comes to morality/sustainability.

Capitalism has never existed previously in history , African nations hold some of the lowest positions on the economic freedom ranking.

Don't be ridiculous dude. Capitalism is just IOUs between the fittest on top of survival of the fittest. What do you think it is? We've not moved far from animals.
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2015 12:55:51 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Currency's conception was in IOUs between successfully barbarous men. How can someone look to that as sustainable? And when it's getting more and more convoluted, the world is just pretty much being run on lies now.
AIyssa
Posts: 63
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2015 12:56:52 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/4/2015 12:50:32 PM, SebUK wrote:
At 1/4/2015 12:38:03 PM, AIyssa wrote:
At 1/4/2015 12:31:28 PM, SebUK wrote:
At 1/4/2015 1:33:09 AM, AIyssa wrote:
I think we're at a stage where we're educated enough to have a socialist society. I mean of course not everyone is educated or informed, but if we can somehow start from ground zero of maximal political participation, we can build a good socialist government.
If only everyone could agree to being socialist, things would work out very well.

My question is even if we forget that centralised planned economies always fail , why should we implement it ?

That's because we can have socialism without centralized planned economies. Centralized planned power in anything contradicts socialism because it detracts power from the people. What we need is like periodic referendum just like the way we have elections, except on laws and law propositions.

The definition of socialism is the control of the means of production by the collective . The power of the people is democracy.

That's the thing! Socialism is democracy!! The definitions have been changed so much that socialism is warped beyond recognition. So has democracy. Instead of the will of the people, democracy is defined as the struggle for some minority electorate to struggle for the vote of the majority. The elite and rich are the ones who win. The people is involved ultimately not at all outside of that vote.
And besides, we could run a socialist political admin with whatever economic system. It'd still be socialist.
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2015 12:58:13 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
National debts are the great joke. None of those are getting paid off. It's back to plain old muscle again, just currency is being maintained on a state level for motivational purposes.
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2015 1:00:01 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/4/2015 12:58:13 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
National debts are the great joke. None of those are getting paid off. It's back to plain old muscle again, just currency is being maintained on a state level for motivational purposes.

And, wouldn't you know, the U.S. is becoming dramatically more socialistic.
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2015 1:03:46 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
You think the powers that be give a f*ck about your petty and delusional gripes about taxes? lol

Libertarianism is so dumb.
SebUK
Posts: 850
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2015 1:21:02 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/4/2015 12:53:30 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 1/4/2015 12:52:08 PM, SebUK wrote:
At 1/4/2015 12:41:34 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 1/4/2015 12:31:28 PM, SebUK wrote:
At 1/4/2015 1:33:09 AM, AIyssa wrote:
I think we're at a stage where we're educated enough to have a socialist society. I mean of course not everyone is educated or informed, but if we can somehow start from ground zero of maximal political participation, we can build a good socialist government.
If only everyone could agree to being socialist, things would work out very well.

My question is even if we forget that centralised planned economies always fail , why should we implement it ?

This is a nonsense criticism. The failures of capitalism are just isolated for the time being, the weak merely getting crushed underfoot (and that is written with irony). But the mad dash that it is, so apathetic and squanderous, will eventually bring the whole thing down. Who will develop the third world countries that have no resources to offer in return? There is only centralised planning when it comes to morality/sustainability.

Capitalism has never existed previously in history , African nations hold some of the lowest positions on the economic freedom ranking.

Don't be ridiculous dude. Capitalism is just IOUs between the fittest on top of survival of the fittest. What do you think it is? We've not moved far from animals.

I believe in the definition of well respected Economists , Capitalism is the free market.
I WILL DECIDE WHAT THIS DEBATE IS ABOUT. I AM SPIRITUAL, NOT RELIGIOYUS. YOU DONT HAVE TO BE RELIGIOUS TO BELIEVE IN GOD, AND YOU DO WORSHIP MONEY IF YOU CARE MORE ABOUT YOUR WALLET THAAN YOU DO THE POOR. YOU ARE A TROLL THAT IS OUT FOR ATTENTUION."- SitaraMusica
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2015 1:23:00 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/4/2015 1:21:02 PM, SebUK wrote:
At 1/4/2015 12:53:30 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 1/4/2015 12:52:08 PM, SebUK wrote:
At 1/4/2015 12:41:34 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 1/4/2015 12:31:28 PM, SebUK wrote:
At 1/4/2015 1:33:09 AM, AIyssa wrote:
I think we're at a stage where we're educated enough to have a socialist society. I mean of course not everyone is educated or informed, but if we can somehow start from ground zero of maximal political participation, we can build a good socialist government.
If only everyone could agree to being socialist, things would work out very well.

My question is even if we forget that centralised planned economies always fail , why should we implement it ?

This is a nonsense criticism. The failures of capitalism are just isolated for the time being, the weak merely getting crushed underfoot (and that is written with irony). But the mad dash that it is, so apathetic and squanderous, will eventually bring the whole thing down. Who will develop the third world countries that have no resources to offer in return? There is only centralised planning when it comes to morality/sustainability.

Capitalism has never existed previously in history , African nations hold some of the lowest positions on the economic freedom ranking.

Don't be ridiculous dude. Capitalism is just IOUs between the fittest on top of survival of the fittest. What do you think it is? We've not moved far from animals.

I believe in the definition of well respected Economists , Capitalism is the free market.

Appeal to dumb authorities.
SebUK
Posts: 850
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2015 1:23:02 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/4/2015 12:56:52 PM, AIyssa wrote:
At 1/4/2015 12:50:32 PM, SebUK wrote:
At 1/4/2015 12:38:03 PM, AIyssa wrote:
At 1/4/2015 12:31:28 PM, SebUK wrote:
At 1/4/2015 1:33:09 AM, AIyssa wrote:
I think we're at a stage where we're educated enough to have a socialist society. I mean of course not everyone is educated or informed, but if we can somehow start from ground zero of maximal political participation, we can build a good socialist government.
If only everyone could agree to being socialist, things would work out very well.

My question is even if we forget that centralised planned economies always fail , why should we implement it ?

That's because we can have socialism without centralized planned economies. Centralized planned power in anything contradicts socialism because it detracts power from the people. What we need is like periodic referendum just like the way we have elections, except on laws and law propositions.

The definition of socialism is the control of the means of production by the collective . The power of the people is democracy.

That's the thing! Socialism is democracy!! The definitions have been changed so much that socialism is warped beyond recognition. So has democracy. Instead of the will of the people, democracy is defined as the struggle for some minority electorate to struggle for the vote of the majority. The elite and rich are the ones who win. The people is involved ultimately not at all outside of that vote.
And besides, we could run a socialist political admin with whatever economic system. It'd still be socialist.

The most accepted definition is the control of the means of production by the collective , I don't support democracy nor socialism .
I WILL DECIDE WHAT THIS DEBATE IS ABOUT. I AM SPIRITUAL, NOT RELIGIOYUS. YOU DONT HAVE TO BE RELIGIOUS TO BELIEVE IN GOD, AND YOU DO WORSHIP MONEY IF YOU CARE MORE ABOUT YOUR WALLET THAAN YOU DO THE POOR. YOU ARE A TROLL THAT IS OUT FOR ATTENTUION."- SitaraMusica
SebUK
Posts: 850
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2015 1:25:38 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/4/2015 1:23:00 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 1/4/2015 1:21:02 PM, SebUK wrote:
At 1/4/2015 12:53:30 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 1/4/2015 12:52:08 PM, SebUK wrote:
At 1/4/2015 12:41:34 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 1/4/2015 12:31:28 PM, SebUK wrote:
At 1/4/2015 1:33:09 AM, AIyssa wrote:
I think we're at a stage where we're educated enough to have a socialist society. I mean of course not everyone is educated or informed, but if we can somehow start from ground zero of maximal political participation, we can build a good socialist government.
If only everyone could agree to being socialist, things would work out very well.

My question is even if we forget that centralised planned economies always fail , why should we implement it ?

This is a nonsense criticism. The failures of capitalism are just isolated for the time being, the weak merely getting crushed underfoot (and that is written with irony). But the mad dash that it is, so apathetic and squanderous, will eventually bring the whole thing down. Who will develop the third world countries that have no resources to offer in return? There is only centralised planning when it comes to morality/sustainability.

Capitalism has never existed previously in history , African nations hold some of the lowest positions on the economic freedom ranking.

Don't be ridiculous dude. Capitalism is just IOUs between the fittest on top of survival of the fittest. What do you think it is? We've not moved far from animals.

I believe in the definition of well respected Economists , Capitalism is the free market.

Appeal to dumb authorities.

A definition of a word is not subjective. You don't get to make your own definitions.
I WILL DECIDE WHAT THIS DEBATE IS ABOUT. I AM SPIRITUAL, NOT RELIGIOYUS. YOU DONT HAVE TO BE RELIGIOUS TO BELIEVE IN GOD, AND YOU DO WORSHIP MONEY IF YOU CARE MORE ABOUT YOUR WALLET THAAN YOU DO THE POOR. YOU ARE A TROLL THAT IS OUT FOR ATTENTUION."- SitaraMusica
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2015 1:30:56 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/4/2015 1:25:38 PM, SebUK wrote:
At 1/4/2015 1:23:00 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 1/4/2015 1:21:02 PM, SebUK wrote:
At 1/4/2015 12:53:30 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 1/4/2015 12:52:08 PM, SebUK wrote:
At 1/4/2015 12:41:34 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 1/4/2015 12:31:28 PM, SebUK wrote:
At 1/4/2015 1:33:09 AM, AIyssa wrote:
I think we're at a stage where we're educated enough to have a socialist society. I mean of course not everyone is educated or informed, but if we can somehow start from ground zero of maximal political participation, we can build a good socialist government.
If only everyone could agree to being socialist, things would work out very well.

My question is even if we forget that centralised planned economies always fail , why should we implement it ?

This is a nonsense criticism. The failures of capitalism are just isolated for the time being, the weak merely getting crushed underfoot (and that is written with irony). But the mad dash that it is, so apathetic and squanderous, will eventually bring the whole thing down. Who will develop the third world countries that have no resources to offer in return? There is only centralised planning when it comes to morality/sustainability.

Capitalism has never existed previously in history , African nations hold some of the lowest positions on the economic freedom ranking.

Don't be ridiculous dude. Capitalism is just IOUs between the fittest on top of survival of the fittest. What do you think it is? We've not moved far from animals.

I believe in the definition of well respected Economists , Capitalism is the free market.

Appeal to dumb authorities.

A definition of a word is not subjective. You don't get to make your own definitions.

And what is the free market, then? A definition has to actually refer to something, dumbass.
SebUK
Posts: 850
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2015 1:34:45 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/4/2015 1:30:56 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 1/4/2015 1:25:38 PM, SebUK wrote:
At 1/4/2015 1:23:00 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 1/4/2015 1:21:02 PM, SebUK wrote:
At 1/4/2015 12:53:30 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 1/4/2015 12:52:08 PM, SebUK wrote:
At 1/4/2015 12:41:34 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 1/4/2015 12:31:28 PM, SebUK wrote:
At 1/4/2015 1:33:09 AM, AIyssa wrote:
I think we're at a stage where we're educated enough to have a socialist society. I mean of course not everyone is educated or informed, but if we can somehow start from ground zero of maximal political participation, we can build a good socialist government.
If only everyone could agree to being socialist, things would work out very well.

My question is even if we forget that centralised planned economies always fail , why should we implement it ?

This is a nonsense criticism. The failures of capitalism are just isolated for the time being, the weak merely getting crushed underfoot (and that is written with irony). But the mad dash that it is, so apathetic and squanderous, will eventually bring the whole thing down. Who will develop the third world countries that have no resources to offer in return? There is only centralised planning when it comes to morality/sustainability.

Capitalism has never existed previously in history , African nations hold some of the lowest positions on the economic freedom ranking.

Don't be ridiculous dude. Capitalism is just IOUs between the fittest on top of survival of the fittest. What do you think it is? We've not moved far from animals.

I believe in the definition of well respected Economists , Capitalism is the free market.

Appeal to dumb authorities.

A definition of a word is not subjective. You don't get to make your own definitions.

And what is the free market, then? A definition has to actually refer to something, dumbass.

"An economic system in which prices are determined by unrestricted competition between privately owned businesses:" Here you go Russell Brand fanboy
I WILL DECIDE WHAT THIS DEBATE IS ABOUT. I AM SPIRITUAL, NOT RELIGIOYUS. YOU DONT HAVE TO BE RELIGIOUS TO BELIEVE IN GOD, AND YOU DO WORSHIP MONEY IF YOU CARE MORE ABOUT YOUR WALLET THAAN YOU DO THE POOR. YOU ARE A TROLL THAT IS OUT FOR ATTENTUION."- SitaraMusica
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2015 1:36:51 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/4/2015 1:34:45 PM, SebUK wrote:
At 1/4/2015 1:30:56 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 1/4/2015 1:25:38 PM, SebUK wrote:
At 1/4/2015 1:23:00 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 1/4/2015 1:21:02 PM, SebUK wrote:
At 1/4/2015 12:53:30 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 1/4/2015 12:52:08 PM, SebUK wrote:
At 1/4/2015 12:41:34 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 1/4/2015 12:31:28 PM, SebUK wrote:
At 1/4/2015 1:33:09 AM, AIyssa wrote:
I think we're at a stage where we're educated enough to have a socialist society. I mean of course not everyone is educated or informed, but if we can somehow start from ground zero of maximal political participation, we can build a good socialist government.
If only everyone could agree to being socialist, things would work out very well.

My question is even if we forget that centralised planned economies always fail , why should we implement it ?

This is a nonsense criticism. The failures of capitalism are just isolated for the time being, the weak merely getting crushed underfoot (and that is written with irony). But the mad dash that it is, so apathetic and squanderous, will eventually bring the whole thing down. Who will develop the third world countries that have no resources to offer in return? There is only centralised planning when it comes to morality/sustainability.

Capitalism has never existed previously in history , African nations hold some of the lowest positions on the economic freedom ranking.

Don't be ridiculous dude. Capitalism is just IOUs between the fittest on top of survival of the fittest. What do you think it is? We've not moved far from animals.

I believe in the definition of well respected Economists , Capitalism is the free market.

Appeal to dumb authorities.

A definition of a word is not subjective. You don't get to make your own definitions.

And what is the free market, then? A definition has to actually refer to something, dumbass.

"An economic system in which prices are determined by unrestricted competition between privately owned businesses:" Here you go Russell Brand fanboy

You are such a ridiculous person. Please learn to take a back seat, I'm not interested in being driven off a cliff.