People should keep what they earn. Simple as that.
Communism will soon take over the world. I am Christian and am not a communist. I think the world should say separated. That is the only way to stay sane! World peace would be nice but it would go against all God has made (according to my beliefs).
Pure unregulated Capitalism. Because it works.
Competition Fosters Innovation we need capitalism
When government runs the economy, corruption is inherent to the system.
Free Market solutions are usually much better than government solutions. People who advocate for socialism (especially "young socialists" in the U.S. don't really know what they want. If they knew what real socialism was they wouldn't like their money, ipod, money cars, being taken away to get redistributed. Capitalism is good because it allows ownership and merits.
Socialism is not sustainable. A free market economy is sustainable even with some government regulation. The soviet union is a prime example of the inevitable failure of Socialism. And btw the U.S is practicing corporatism which is not true capitalism.
I believe mainly in capitalism, with a bit of socialism thrown in. Socialism makes a country in disaster become a poor yet stable country, and then capitalism takes over, making it rich.
I don't want lawyars to be paid as much as garbagemen.
History is on my side.
I personally believe in Capitalism. I believe competition in society is healthy and encourages the production of better goods and I believe people should have the opportunity to pursue their dreams and become successful. Having said that despite my support of Capitalism I do believe it should be regulated and monitored and I do believe in a form of National Healthcare although I do not support Obama's model.
America enjoyed the Reagan-era economic boom as the USSR collapsed. Obviously capitalism is what works.
Laissez faire capitalism is the only fair system of competition there is. The free market regulates better than the state. Socialism is evil with taking what others have learned and giving it to the failed, unproductive, and lazy.
socialism is one step closer to Communism and communism is the perfect system not for the human race.
Regulated, social democratic capitalism. Because it works.
Capitalism is the right choice because it gives everyone the opportunity to succeed, regardless of any discriminatory factor. You are judged by your merit, and not by your "contributions to society". Capitalism encourages trade, a series of mutually beneficial exchanges that helps everyone in the process. Those who have earned the most money (through merit) have the most power.
PIGS: Portugal, Italy, Greece, Spain. All are socialist countries and their economies are all failing.
Capitalism has often been described as a system that does not encourage people to benefits society. Quite to the contrary, capitalism is the system that most encourages people to benefit to society as they must get society to help them in order to seek their own self-interest. By seeking their own self-interest and wants, people will inadvertently help society as the only way (in a capitalist society) of getting what you want from society is to give what society (or the individual you are trading with) wants. In essence, every contract and every transaction is like a deal, I will help you by doing a, b and c if you help me by doing x, y and z. Furthermore, it is quite evident (yet the argument above only works if this is either assumed or found to be true) that beneficial transactions that occur (i.e. any transaction that is mutually voluntary) mostly in a capitalist society. This is for the simple reason that capitalism stresses freedom (and in this sense I mean freedom from physical coercion), and when everyone is free then no-one will engage in any transaction that is destructive in terms of their wants and self-interests. Lastly, it is also important to note that any equaliser, and thus socialism has a great deal of this, discourages work and thus these mutually beneficial transactions to occur. If a person is guaranteed money without earning it (and by earning it I mean by getting it from voluntary exchange, I do not here invoke moral principles of fairness), he will be less motivated to work, thereby less likely to work and thus less likely to benefit society (determined as the total wealth of all members of society, not just the poorer ones). The fundamental difference in the "fairness" of socialism vs capitalism is this. In capitalism, you reap what you sow (you must benefit society in order to receive benefits from society). In capitalism, you get what you earn. In socialism, you get things just for living.
Socialism redistributes poverty, not wealth: the lower-class grows as the middle-class shrinks and the upper-class (who also holds political power) remains largely unmolested. Hence, 9 out of the 10 richest counties in the United States are in Washington D.C. (which is ironically saturated with "liberal"/left-wing Democrats).
Austrian Economics. True free market, not crony capitalism aka corporatism.
Capitalism fits the needs of those who are willing to work hard for their freedom and happiness. That is the American way of economics.
Whilst socialism is commonly thought to be the 'fairer' and nicer option, it is simply those who are not successful or hardworking and taking what is not rightfully there's. Surely that is selfish behaviour? Keeping what you yourself have earned and worked for ( capitalism ) is simply the most productive and fair way.
Capitalism with a heart is the best economic system. We can choose to do good things with our economic system and it can be very efficient. It is our game to lose. There must be self governed moral accountability . If there is not then it is not at its peak potential.
Capitalism is the clear winner. In its history, ingenuity under socialist regimes ceased beyond meeting their populations' most basic needs. Indeed, while the Soviets were good at infrastructure development, they were not good at improving lives through technological advancement. It was capitalism, through its principles of competition, that harnessed human nature in a way that made life more livable. Every human invention, from the washing machine to space travel, was the product of capitalism. You may say, "Wait, wasn't it the Soviets that deployed space technology prior to the Americans?" Well, yes. But even the USSR had a very capitalistic approach to foreign policy. Socialism for the USSR was a product that had to be packaged and marketed just like any other on the world stage. It marketed that product as being responsible for innovations that led to space travel, but it was only in its irreverent need to compete with capitalist regimes globally in order to market that product successfully. Speaking exclusively from a domestic policy perspective, the ingenuity that has led to the advancement of society has historically always been a byproduct of self-interest and competition. If you remove self-interest, such as profits, from the equation, those responsible for innovation no longer have an interest in doing so. Had the Trotskyists been successful in uniting the world under a socialist government, the standard of living would not have approved for anyone in the world. The world is full of empirical evidence of this, whether it's the former U.S.S.R., which is still trying to recover from the drag on innovation caused by their Soviet pasts; China, which is liberalizing its economy in order to compete; Cuba, which is liberalizing its economy in order to compete; or North Korea, which is stuck in the 1930s and relies almost entirely on foreign aid; Socialism has never had a successful application in the world's history.
The only way to achieve equality of result is through inequality of rights. Capitalism has equal rights.
The free market is the voluntary exchange between two or more willing parties. Any other system runs contrary to a free society. No system has brought more people out of poverty than capitalism. Look at the true free market societies compared to socialist/communist societies in terms of economic output and quality of life. We've seen enough socialist/communist countries fail in their experiment until they opened up to the free market.
i chose capitalism because socialism would make an unbalanced system with the government having too much power. this results in societies like China where people have absolutely no rights whatsoever, that so called "equality" socialism promises keeps the government excluded. For this equality they seek can only be achieved by taking out the government which would then result in anarchy.
Socialism is not equal opportunity, it is equal results. If you are a lazy high school dropout you should not be making as much as doctors or lawyers
But we also need certain aspects of socialism such as welfare and minimum wage. I want a free market but I also want to eradicate poverty and stop bosses oppressing the working class
Capitalism creates opportunities: To have a good career, build up a business, new products that been produced to enrich our lives. The Cell Phone, tablet , the Internet and so on. All made possible by capitalism. The word capitalism is made bad by socialist and communist.
It encourages people to work hard. Equity (fairness and justice) is present instead of equality. "You cannot have an equal share of the pizza if you did even contribute."
Socialists just like it because they don't have to work. Look, if you flip buggers, a job that anyone can do, don't expect 8 dollars and hour.
Working hard only to recede the same as every one else. That is an unjust system, and no one in America would work hard. There is no reward or incentive in socialism. Whereas in capitalism there is a reward for putting time and effort into something
Capitalism is able to create superpowers and allow nations to reach their potential, socialism does not.
I support capitalism as I am a hard working banker and DESERVE more than a silly old binman. *Spits in disgust*
People have a right to their life, liberty and property. Capitalism aligns incentives correctly and produces wealth and opportunity for everyone.
No economic system in the history of time has been as effective as capitalism is at bring people out of poverty. Socialism literally relies on capitalist free markets to generate value, but decides to punish those who generate the value by redistributing their wealth. The essential problem with socialism is that you will run out of other peoples money. It punishes the people who create wealth and opportunity.
Capitalism has its problems, for one big corporate CEOs make too much money. More of the corporate payroll needs to be pushed down to the middle managers and workers. Paying someone 100 million or more a year to make decisions that probably were developed by those lower in the organization is ridiculous. Also, something needs to be done about the ultra wealth accumulated by investors. peel off some of that wealth and target it toward debt reduction. All that said, capitalism is still the best system as it drives innovation. The US has produced more inventions in its short life than all other countries combined. If socialism were so great why are Canadians poring over the border to get needed operations and why do Brits have to wait years for needed medical procedures.
In a laissez faire capitalist society both the consumer and the supplier win. The consumer gets what he or she wants and the supplier gets money from that. Socialists want everyone's outcome to be equal, but the problem with that is some people work harder and deserve to reap the benefits. We need to allow equal opportunities and not outcomes.
A Canadian’s View on American Capitalism Systems that base their principles on justice give normal people the ability to have authority, do not get their shorts in a knot when one individual has more power than the other, work is required to get this power, smiles upon competition, frown upon a “big brother” like leadership that will come pat you on the head and deliver an easy way out of the consequences of poor economic decisions. These are the systems that make it through recessions, promote the primary freedoms of people, and have been working for decades. The system I am describing is known as Capitalism. Although it has accumulated a lot of hate from people across the continent it is very important that we look closely at how capitalism has benefited the economic status, quality of life, and the ability each American citizen has for success. Capitalism in America started in the mid 1800’s during the time of two very huge revolutions. First, many thousands of people were migrating and settling further and further west, causing the size of the country to increase. Second, the development of new manufacturing processes that used machines powered by one man to do the work of ten in a matter of seconds otherwise known as the Industrial Revolution. During this time the average income went up, average quality of life practically doubled, and the normal seamstress whose business was limited to her own ability, could now invest in this thing called a “Sewing machine” and could hire a workforce to make hundreds of products faster then she could say “thimble.” These revolutions gave normal landowners the ability to do more with their life savings and resources. For example: Bill lives on a farm in 1795. His father is a farmer, and his father was a farmer. At this point in time it would be mostly impossible for Bill to become a doctor or a blacksmith, So Bill became a farmer but his son, Bob, hears about a factory that needs workers. So he leaves and starts work at this factory. He comes to like the work environment at this job and before you know it Bob gets promoted to administrator, then he becomes an executive, then after years of work he starts his own business and becomes a C.E.O. At this point you are wondering what all of this has to do with capitalism. In this day and age what Bob did with his life is hard, but nonetheless still possible because of capitalism. Socialism wants the economic decision making of citizens given to the government, preventing their ability to take necessary risks in order to achieve more. On the other hand, Capitalism glorifies the reward of risks taken matched with hard work to achieve wealth and status. Capitalism gives all people the ability to apply for loans and if they meet the necessary requirements the bank, or other business, will allow them to “borrow” an amount of money. Over time it is required of these people to pay back the money that they had “borrowed” plus the interest that had accumulated. In a large way, taking out or borrowing money in any way is an economic risk, but is usually required to be done when one wants to buy, or start a business, put a down payment on a house, purchase a car or make a large scale investment of any kind. Large scale investments are required for large scale increase in wealth, but when these investments go south they can and will cause a decrease in economic status and an increase in debt. Debt… that magical thing that socialism thinks is an excusable issue, when in reality is why many people are being evicted without question, and why so many towns are in the low class condition they are in; not because the higher class is hiding their wealth on desert islands, not because of the third and fourth Sports car that C.E.O joe got, not because the poor people are so far behind that they don’t have a chance. It’s because of the past bad economic decisions that these people are sadly accountable for. Socialism wants to apply mercy to these people that are deep in debt, possibly because the interest rates that under contract they have agreed to have gotten out of hand. I may seem like a total jerk here but if you haven’t payed the debt that you are under contract to pay, you shouldn't pay for that four week vacation to the Caribbean. So far I have given no real hard evidence to prove my point. Proven by fact there are many great benefits of capitalism that a lot of people don’t notice. First, healthcare; even without a free health care system people that have the right to eat and drink what they want are people that have the opportunity to be healthy and the responsibility to be as healthy as they see fit. Second, social good. At first glance it might seem like the lower class are being treated unfairly and the high class does not and will not do anything to help. If looked at carefully this couldn't be farther from the truth. When the upper class people build their new tennis court they pay a company to build it for him, that company pays young middle class workers to make it. While they are building one of the plate compactors break, and while they get it fixed by a small engine mechanic they rent a new one from a rental place down the road. Everyone wins. This is only an obscure example of things that occur everyday, like the people that fill Bill Gates’ coffee in the morning. Aid to the lower classes abounds. My last point is that equality is achieved through capitalism. Although many may choose to disagree, all people in the capitalist situation start at roughly the same place. This statement can be proven through the fact that in 2015 84% of the so called billionaires were self-made (including but not limited to Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, and Larry Ellison), while a lacking 16% inherited their wealth. Therefore, it can be concluded that the precepts that have built American capitalism have not only made America strong, but have made that people strong as well.
Taxation is theft.
You keep what you earn.
Just on the basic aims of the ideologies, not the results so far Socialism works under these basic principles 1. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few 2. Need outweighs justice While Capitalism works on the principle of 1. Awarding talent Socialism is designed to benefit the majority, Capitalism benefits those who deserve benefit (this may sound biased to socialists but rewarding those who deserve it is the goal of capitalism). To me personally this is a battle of good vs evil. I choose good.
Capitalism is the economic system most in line with human nature. The desire to compete and achieve greater than what we are now. Socialism runs counter to this. It demands that all people must be equal no matter their actual contribution to society. There is no room to dream or to aspire to something greater. You must be content with your fair share. That is not the kind of world I want to live in. Capitalism allows people to dream to be better, to improve their place in society. It breeds innovation and progress. Socialism breeds mediocrity and stagnation.
While as a Keynesian economist, I do believe that in times of extreme economic disparity (ie the Great Depression) that some sort of wealth redistribution, I believe in overall global capitalism with minimal government regulation. It ensures that people keep most of what they make an works to prevent laziness and forces people to be useful
The best system is a hybrid system with mostly capitalism being the driving force behind the economy, and socialist elements being used in the public sector.
Capitalism is the fairest system. If you work hard, you get reward. If you don't, you get nothing. If you can't be arsed to put the effort in, why should you deserve as much as someone hard-working?
Other than Capitalism being fair because you alone reap the benefits of your own hard work, it is also the most effective system for lifting nations out of poverty. I think a nice historical comparison is Hong Kong and China (before China took back Hong Kong).
Socialists in America often point to the fact that "everyone in America has the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness". The problem is that, socialists don't want to PURSUE happiness; they want those who do to give it to them for free. It's sickening.
The government should not be allowed to steal from people, similarly to what socialists paint businesses as doing. The reason businesses can't do this is because of the free market and decisions between both workers and consumers to switch companies, making companies that steal or discriminate fare worse in the competitive business environment that capitalism creates and socialism destroys. If a capitalist business goes wrong, it dies and others will replace it with better service. If a government-owned business discriminates or has bad service the people have no other choice.
Fact: Capitalism Wins, Socialism Loses The reason capitalism always wins over socialism is because capitalism encourages individuals to work hard and strive to be the best, and they will reap the rewards. Socialism, on the other hand, encourages society to become lazy over time and to rely on the government to help them get through life. Socialism steals money from those who worked hard to get ahead and redistributes it to society to "even the playing field" Socialism in practice punishes those who work hard to accumulate wealth and rewards those who sit around and do nothing. There is nothing wrong with being wealthy. If you want to get out of poverty, I suggest you get a job
I really wonder if socialist actually believe America would have the technology that they have today if there was no incentive to advance technology AKA no capitalism... If you are a socialist, you should have already thrown away your modern medicine, your iphone, your laptop, and your TVs because without capitalism we would be no where near the technological advancement we have today absolutely not even close. You seriously think CEOs funded companies to create new drugs or your iphone for you for free and not money? Please learn to think for yourself people! If that concept is too difficult to comprehend then I question if you should be allowed on the internet, wait you shouldn't even be using the internet unless you appreciate the results of capitalism unless you're a hypocrite. Newspapers would still be the main source of getting your news today without capitalism. Now will we become more socialist once AI and automation replaces a vast amount of jobs? Yes but capitalism won't die in the process, at least not the beginning and that's assuming we reach the very peak of technological advancements: a cure for every disease, the absolute fastest vehicle to be achieved or maybe that's just a fantasy.
This is the best economic system. While the best countries of this century are capitalist, the other third world nations struggle with socialism.
Free Market Capitalism is where we need to be. Unfortunately most confuse today's Chrony Capitalism as true Capitalism.
Give one example of collectivism ever working without denying individuals their human rights?
Capitalism is the reason why the west is the best. Yes it needs regulation but socialism is not thriving if it does not have aspects of capitalism. Socialism is like a religion. They do not change when they are wrong. People still associate socialism with Karl Marx. Who created capitalism? For me not to know that means the idea is more important then the person who is saying it. If it was moving forward then socialism followers will look at the faults and improve the system but to this day they make the same mistakes.
Capitalism, Or the free enterprise system is always superior to socialism. In capitalism, People are free to pursue their dreams, Private ownership is respected, Government does not stifle business with cumbersome regulations and privately-owned companies are allowed to compete. As a result, Hard work is incentivized and there is greater output in the economy leading to more innovation and more creation of wealth. In a socialist system, Economic conventional wisdom is eschewed in favor of a system in which most sectors of the economy are made public and wealth is stolen from productive members of society and forcibly redistributed to those who don't pitch in. As a result, Productivity goes down, Inflation goes through the ceiling, And people struggle to survive. Although the left likes to point to countries in Scandinavia as socialist success stories, These countries still have free market systems, And as a result of their more socialistic safety net programs taxes in these countries are excessive on ordinary citizens. In the United States, The common citizen has a much lower tax burden than those in places like Norway and Sweden. Additionally, The United States economy is the strongest in the world with the highest GDP and the greatest share of wealth. There is nothing wrong with providing those who have fallen back on hard times with a safety net to ensure their survival but this should be done through families and private charities such as food banks, Soup kitchens, And shelters so that the welfare is not attained through coercion.
it naturally gives reward for those who work hard at the right things and punishment for those who make bad choices. Socialism takes the reward from those who made good choices and gives it to those who made bad choices.
Fuck Socialism And Fuck The Retards That Support It. GOD Bless America, The Constitution, Capitalism, The Anthem, The Pledge, Our First Responders, & Our Military.
I prefer a mix of both but you did not give us this option
The new rising star of the Democratic Party is Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. The 28-year-old former bartender doesn't know much about politics — this week, She bungled her way through an interview answer by referring to Israeli "occupation" of Palestine and citing her lack of expertise on the issue despite her international relations degree. But she's young; she's energetic; and she speaks in glowing terms about rights to housing, Food, College and health care. She's a charter member of the Democratic Socialists of America, A group, We're informed by The New York Times' Michelle Goldberg, That is on the rise. "Its growth has exploded since the 2016 election, " Goldberg reports, "from 7, 000 members to more than 37, 000. " What exactly is democratic socialism, And what distinguishes it from socialism plain and simple? Ocasio-Cortez doesn't know. When asked about it by Meghan McCain on "The View, " she stated that there is a "huge difference" between the two notions but then concluded, "I believe that in a moral and wealthy America, In a moral and modern America, No person should be too poor to live in this country. " Which doesn't explain the difference at all. The difference is truly between socialism and social democracy. Socialism suggests state ownership and control of all major resources — and generally ends with the complete collapse and destruction of the productive population. Social democracy suggests redistribution of capitalistic gains — more like Denmark or Norway or Sweden. It's unclear where Ocasio-Cortez lies on this spectrum considering that the DSA openly acknowledges its desire to abolish capitalism. But let's assume that what Ocasio-Cortez and Democrats want is actually just European-style social democracy. If that's the case, They're still misreading the tea leaves: The Nordic countries aren't thriving and healthy because they're socialist; they're thriving and healthy because they are small and homogenous. In fact, Nordic lifestyles means that Nordic life expectancy outclassed life expectancy in the United States before the Nordic states tried to grow government redistributionism radically. The left is fond of citing Norway and Sweden — even though both are now moving in a politically right-wing direction — but neglecting Switzerland, Which is just as successful and far less socialistic. Furthermore, Generous welfare policies can only operate in small, Homogenous countries because if you open the borders to such countries, Immigrants flood in and then sink the boat. That's why voters in Europe have been consistently moving toward a more restrictionist view of immigration — particularly in that bastion of social democracy, Sweden. Yet the democratic socialist dream never dies, Even as it fades away in Europe. Democrats will continue to point toward the Nordic states and claim that utopia is a mere "free lunch" program away. But lunch is never free, As a former bartender should know.
New Zealand and Switzerland, Topping several charts as some of the most free and prosperous countries in the world, Are capitalist societies. The United States, Another capitalist country, Has the largest economy. No society is perfect and no form of economy is either. However, Most capitalist countries don't abandon the old, Sick, Poor, Jobless and homeless, As many believers in socialism seem to think. We still have taxes and we still have lots of programs to help those in need. Take myself, For instance. I am about to graduate with an associates and I didn't pay a single dollar because of a great program offered at my college for students who didn't graduate from high school. I am so thankful for this program, But I am also thankful that I'm about to take a trip in a couple of months to volunteer at a wildlife conservation project that is going to cost me quite a bit of my savings- money that I have been able to quickly save up due to the fact that I didn't have to give up 55% of it to the government.
It benefits the majority of people, and only marginally disadvantages a few people, which is a winner.
The 'ideal' economic system would be a mixture of socialist and capitalist policies- Under a system of this 'democratic socialism', enterprise can thrive, but inequality and poverty are both kept in check by a system that does not unfairly favour the rich.
In both systems there are people left to starve on the streets, but in capitalism, this is justified, whereas in socialism, this is because the system isn't working perfectly. The former inequality is ingrained in the line of thinking, in the latter inequality is merely a childhood disease to be overcome.
Socialism. Capitalism is inhumane and ruthless. At its heart capitalism is about making money without regard for the well-being of society. Capitalism is essentially anarchy with money. It is perfectly possible to run a mixed economy forever and a mixed economy would not slow down innovation, in fact it might boost it with governments providing funding for blue-sky projects that allow pure innovation whilst corporations work on fine-tuning those already in play.
Socialism if practiced like theory.
Capitalism is ruthless. Basically, it makes the rich get even richer and the poor become even more poor. I can take North America as an example right now; the middle class is actually DISAPPEARING because of capitalism. As the rich get richer, middle class and the poor get poorer. One day, there will be no more middle class; only the rich and the poor. The rich will TOTALLY DOMINATE everything with money. I'm not saying Socialism doesn't have its fault. But theoretically, socialism is better.
In theory and in practice, socialism has performed better than capitalism in modern europe.
Capitalism is a disgraceful, selfish method that allows the few who possess luck and good fortune to rise above the many who remain in the slums because of it. Communism advances the theory of class dissolution and unification, shared means of labor, government operated businesses and organizations, you can't go wrong.
Democratic socialism, full rights equally to all, equal wealth for all, the rich lose money yes, but the poor gain money, and there's more poor people than rich people.
Moving away from capitalism is the only way we can help solve the world's problems: environmental/poverty/war/unemployment etc. The trouble with capitalism is that MONEY is too much of an incentive to do anything. With a political system like socialism humans would be much more equal and EVERYONE will be supported. Also, I don't think "because it works" is a strong enough argument for capitalism - we only know 'it works' because that's all we've tried. And anyway it doesn't work because if it did then we wouldn't have so many people unnecessarily losing their lives.
Humanity must unite and use its resources efficiently and for the benefit of the whole. Instead of having a single person control a resource for the benefit of a few. Humanity does not have the resources to have Capitalism to remain a viable option.
Just picked this cuz there's no middle. What about a capitalist state with some communist aspects to help the poor?
Socialism/Communism encourages equality which, in effect encourages true democracy. Whilst Capitalism encourages profit and exploitation which only widens the class gap, enriches the elite classes and creates poverty. In the future there could be a balance between Communism and Capitalism but without a true egalitarian direct democracy (which socialism and communism would create) capitalism will continue to exploit everything.
Look at the Social Democratic countries like Sweden, Finland, Norway, etc. They all rank very high on the "quality of life" list, and are some of the happiest and most productive people in the world. Many people seem to think socialism = communism, which is untrue. The USSR and NK were/are not socialist, they were/are communist.
Just look at Canada, and Finland. Living in both places gives one bliss.
People don't understand socialism, they are brainwashed into thinking it's evil. This is not true, capitalism oppresses the poor and make the "pursuit of happiness" nothing but a joke. Socialism, unlike communism, still gives you the chance to succeed, but it comes with many benefits, free healthcare, free education, ABSOLUTELY 0 UNEMPLOYMENT, no homeless, no poverty, and lots more! Aren't these the things people running for president "promise" us every 4 years?? All we need is socialism to make it a reality.
The people on the other side clearly do not understand Socialism. Socialism is not where the government controls everything (That is communism). Socialism is a very good system. Look at Europe! Although its economy could be comparable to America's, it is one of the best, most innovative, happiest group of countries in the world!
SOCIALISM IS NOT THE SAME AS COMMUNISM
The best system is a blend of socialism and capitalism; a free market that is regulated by the democratically elected government, who in tur provides adequate public services to ensure every citizen enjoys a high quality of life.
Socialism can be interpreted many ways, which is one of the things that makes it more applicable in today's society. While capitalism is only used in a completely free-market economy, socialism can be used anywhere from free-market to government-controlled economy. Socialism simply has more options to fit a broader range of interests, not just the interests of wealthy oil tycoons who pay the same taxes as people living in a one-room apartment.
We should have socialism because THE POOR! All the 'goverment is corrupt' stuff IS true, however COMPANIES are worse! There's deception, unfair prices and unfair terms! You can still get all your things because socialism means to give an equal amount of money to everybody! Have people forgetten about the hard-working-underpaid-working class? Or forgetten about the rich in mansions earning millions without lifting a toe?!
Socialism is the better system . It is a society ran by and for the society, whereas capitalism is ran for the individual by the individual. Socialism makes sure everyone has a job, a place to live, food, healthcare, a military to protect you, police to protect you, a public education to teach you, and all basic social needs. It also guarantees no corporations or banks will become to big to control. Instead of billions of profits going into fat cats pockets, it instead goes into economic and social programs to better society as a whole. Capitalism is unintentionally designed to start out good, but then turn bad when The rich corporations enter politics and control the system from within. Socialism makes sure everyone participates and everyone gots the correct piece of the pie for participating. It is not welfare or steeling. It is a government acting on the behalf of society, and making sure everyone gets the quality of life they need.
I am for socialism because i am for humanity
How stupid you need to be to require an explanation?
I can fully understand one's support for capitalism. The support for reward for achievements is a common commodity to bring up. But Capitalism has caused overall hardship. I dream of a world where money is not a motivation in life and simply a part of it. I believe capitalism fosters greed whereas socialism fosters human happiness
Capitalism is extremely flawed. It produces too much and there is inequality.
The true definition of socialism is workers controlling their workplaces, not their bosses, nor the government. The government would be run democratically by the workers and would only be a tool for coordination amongst the workers who are in full control. The result of this would be the abolishment of wage labor, and cosequentially, the eventual breakdown of class barriers or class itself. I've seen people who have voted for capitalism saying that innovation can only happen in capitalism, yet this is easily disputable by noting two things: different forms of society with motivations other than material wealth or personal gain have existed for longer than capitalism, and there have been countless innovators whom have contributed to science only for the mere credit, not profit. I would also like to add that socialists don't deny that people are self motivated, in fact I would argue that capitalism, that places bosses over the individual, is the true society that crushes individual liberty. Countless studies have found that for labor that involves even the slightest cognitive ability (labor that isn't purely physical), that the key motivators were 1: Autonimy 2: purpose 3: mastery. Capitalism deprives the majority of people of their autonomy by essentially forcing people to rent out their bodies in order to generate profits for their bosses. Consequentially it deprives many people of purposeful labor, especially in modern capitalism which has an ideology of "you must get a job for jobs sake otherwise you're a worthless piece of shit". Many people are finding they are not engaged at work, and some also know of ways to completely automate their jobs, but refuse to reveal this for fear of losing their job. A direct loss of innovation found in, not socialism, capitalism. Socialism on the other hand, puts control completely in the hands of those actually doing the labor. Complete autonomy, and anyone who has control over what they are doing wouldn't be undertaking labor that has no purpose. However there is a catch with these three motivators: they only surpass money when people are paid just enough, so that they aren't worried about whether they can put a meal on the table or pay the rent etc etc. There is no reason to deprive people of the means to survive, under socialism everyone would be provided with the necessities to live. Capitalist supporters who say this would cause the breakdown of society because people would be less motivated to work are contradicting science since the main motivators for people are autonomy, purpose and mastery. Essentially everyone could actually be paid the same and things would run better, and studies show autonomy in the workplace is miles more productive. Education would also be less competitive and not focused on producing students who fit into the hierarchy of capitalism. People would be there to learn and only to learn, not to get marks. https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=u6XAPnuFjJc
Capitalism has run its course as did feudalism before it. Unlike European countries, we in the U.S. are "afraid" to openly and rationally discuss socialism due to long and intense anti-socialist propaganda here. For example, the vast majority do not know that there has never been a communist economy. This fact reflects a deep ignorance of Marx and what communism is. Socialism solves the problem of the people not being heard in our capitalist system. Socialism is indeed government of the people, by the people, and for the people. That is what scares capitalists.
Capitalism breeds inequality that will one day consume us all. Socialism, free of manipulation, ensures the wellbeing of all without favouritism
I believe the battles between capitalism and socialism and between the Democratic and Republican parties are a civil war bad for the US. Through in State's rights vs. Federalism. We will always have these dichotomies. What we have to do is learn to find common ground, compromise and especially a balance of it all. Capitalism with the right regulation and social programs along with a viable labor (middle class) political party is what we need. I'm willing to collaborate and come up with something even better than we have now. How bout you?