Amazon.com Widgets

Which is the best: Capitalism (yes) or Socialism (no)?

  • People should get what they work for.

    Capitalism, in its right-most form, is every man for himself. A capitalism is set up so those who work hardest and work smartest (not counting get luckiest in this explanation) get more resources, which makes good sense, as until there are enough resources to accommodate everyone there will always be conflict. The only way to get more resources, after a certain extent, is to create it, which can only be done through increased technology, like agriculture, electricity, and the Internet.

    Far left socialism is no less dangerous. Though I think the socialist ideal of a world cooperating and working together is good, the socialist model is not the way to do it.

    The problem with the really far left model, involving equal work and equal distribution, has already been discussed in depth by many, so I will just briefly cover it. I suppose that seemed like a better alternative to capitalism-gone-wild (it prevents the wealth gap and the consequent abuse of the $ owned government), but the society based on this model quickly collapses. Look at Communist China, Cuba, or to a certain extent, today's Europe. Europe is still great, but the cracks are starting to show.

  • Yes, capitalism is the best.

    Capitalism is the best because they are to many people who are not willing to contribute to society. The only way for socialism to work properly is for everyone to decide to work and contribute to society. Unfortunately there are many people who refuse to be productive. Capitalism rewards those who attempt to better themselves.

  • Capitalism works for about 300 million people and doesn't work for the other 6700 million

    Capitalism is responsible for colonialism, which is a large part of why these 6700 million people are poor and 300 million are wealthy.

    The poster shows pictures of Hong Kong and Havana at 50 year intervals. This is apparently intended to be a rousing display of why capitalism is so much better than socialism. What it really says if you know any history at all is that the elite of the US calls the shots. The elite in the US exploits and helps and hinders as it pleases. The State - Corporate elite of the US.

    There is no meritocracy in capitalism. Capitalist countries invariably end up as hereditary plutocracies, with a few very wealth people making decisions that benefit them.

    And those decisions are, of course, anti - socialist. Why does Havana have cars from the 50s? Because they can't sell resources or buy resources to build cars. Because of a blockade - by the US, which has not yet been lifted.

    Hong Kong looks how it does because that's where the rich of China and east Asia live. I guarantee if my the original poster were to post a picture of a proudly capitalist city that wasn't a colonial haven, such as Mexico City, he'd have a much less convincing rendition of the so called bountiful benefits of capitalism...

  • Socialism is where there are no rich and poor, everybody is equal.

    Capitalism is where some people became rich and everybody else is poor. Unfortunately 67% said yes to capitalism, meaning that they prefer a fiew people to be rich and the others to live in miserie. This is petty depressing. We, normal people,of all countries, shouldn't tolerate that. Please be reasonable.

  • Socialism is where there are no rich and poor, everybody is equal.

    Capitalism is where some people became rich and everybody else is poor. Unfortunately 67% said yes to capitalism, meaning that they prefer a fiew people to be rich and the others to live in miserie. This is petty depressing. We, normal people,of all countries, shouldn't tolerate that. Please be reasonable.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.