Can socialism and capitalism co-exist together without domination?Posted by: Haroush
21 Total Votes
The Nordic model is basically this, and proof it works fine "coexisting"
@TBR America isn't a nordic country. We shouldn't blindly copy the Nordic Model. Nordic countries are actually more capitalist if anything.
@triangle.128k - 1) America is nowhere in the question. 2) The Nordic countries ARE very capitalists - just with a hell of a strong social safety net - consertatives describe this as "socialism". 3) I have no interest in running the nordic model play for for play.
I don't mind very minor socialism here and there, we have that with public schools and the space agency for example.
But I just believe most of the market should be Capitalism, it should be dominant over Socialism.
@UtherPenguin -- Actually, they ARE indeed mutually exclusive; no ifs, ands, or buts about it. They are complete polar opposites.
@MakeSensePeopleDont I think you are confusing Socialism with Communism:
I think you just lack imagination. Capitalism can exist just fine with some types of socialism. Its just your dogma that is the problem/
@UtherPenguin -- No, I am not confusing Socialism and Communism; it is most likely that you are confusing a small happy community with the larger population of the nation-state as a whole. With a very small, very closed-off community consisting of a small population embodying a complete set of perfectly equivalent and undisputed set of values, beliefs, ideas, lifestyles, likes & dislikes, wants & needs, etc.; Socialism in practice will be inline with Socialism in theory. However, as we all know, there is a reason why we differentiate so adamantly between theory and reality; reality VERY rarely translates directly into reality, this is the case with Socialism. || Socialism means that the "community" or in realistic terms, the nation-state, practices common ownership of a goods and resources. This means that everything belong to every member of the society in question and is taken as needed; great in theory, however, when introducing real living people into the equation, this idea very quickly falls apart. Why? Simple, because of human nature -- greed, power, narcissism, egotism, control issues, and more; this does not even account for resource and goods shortages, this is instead being generous and assuming we have a fantastical, heaven-like planet with endless amounts of EVERYTHING you could ever want and need. But instead of being enough, there will be greedy individuals who begin formulating and then enacting methods to gain more goods and resources than everyone else, to live better than what is approved and standard. Over time, these actions would be discovered, this means that the issue would need to be dealt with (again, this would NOT include ALL issues that will undoubtedly occur, this assumes the ONLY issue is this greedy individual). So how do you deal with the issue? There is no question that there would be disagreement within the community on how to deal with the issue, this would lead to a separation of the population into smaller groups fighting over the solution. Out of this stands up a small group of leaders; these leaders get together and end up being the "voice" for their respective groups in order to talk through everything in a more controlled environment. Once the decision is made, these leaders show that they have held more power in this decision than the rest of the population; this may not actively be seen by the population or the small group of leaders, but some individuals will identify this and see the opening. Shortly after, the individuals who saw the power that was given to the group of leaders will begin plotting and scheming to get a piece of this power; out comes the greedy, power hungry, narcissistic, alpha males. The next time something comes up, these alpha males would do whatever they have to in order to gain the power; once they have it, they will NEVER let it go. At this point you (UtherPenguin) will state something along the lines of: "Well the community won't let them keep power because it is spread about the group, not to be consolidated between a few men." Good idea in theory, but in reality it is not so clean. These power hungry alpha males would do EXACTLY what the U.S. politicians do to keep power; they will stand up and talk to the community using fear mongering and scare tactics about how it will happen again and worse will happen at some point if we don't have someone in charge of overview of the population; offering himself as "a servant of the people", offering to "do the hard work needed to ensure everyone is honest.", leading to the population approving of it and giving them power. This is getting longer than I wanted so I hope you get where I am going here and can fit the pieces together. Basically the alpha males will end up doing, again, EXACTLY what the U.S. government, Obama and most specifically, the Democrats are, have been, and will continue to do moving forward; doing everything they have to including lying to, cheating, stealing from, and even manipulating the population in order to gain more and more power and control. With all of this growing power and control, do you really think these greedy men will remain honest and equal? I KNOW they won't. In fact, Capitalism naturally begins to form WITHIN Socialism due to human nature; most notably greed. When this natural process begins to take place, the Socialist leaders begin to enact new laws and rules in order to crush all individualism; this is done to keep all power and wealth within the governing (or ruling) class. || This is the exact path that Socialism takes to Communism; however, I digress. The most notable difference between Socialism and Capitalism (and last I will mention in this dialog) is that BOTH Socialism AND Communism focus on the collective while Capitalism focuses on the individual.
Here is a list of Socialist nations as of 2015; take note of how small this list is and also do some research on the state of each of these nations. || People’s Democratic Republic of Algeria, Republic of India, United Republic of Tanzania, Republic of Angola, Portuguese Republic, People’s Republic of Bangladesh, Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka, Cooperative Republic of Guyana, Republic of Mozambique || Not any places you would want to live I am guessing. || There is a reason Socialism across the world has all but died, with Socialist nation-states migrating to or currently in the process of migrating to EITHER Communism or Capitalism. Funny thing is, if you look at the world, it breaks down pretty intriguingly: Most European nations plus America and Canada (The Western World) as successful as we all have been with Capitalism, are migrating back to Socialism relatively quickly. How many of the "Western World" nation-states are thriving within these new "Emo, bleeding-heart Liberal" policies today? I challenge you to list them. Meanwhile, the Asian world including India are mostly all moving toward Capitalism and they are beginning to grow very rapidly and thrive on the Capitalistic methodology. So, history is SCREAMING two things at us here: 1) Socialism NEVER survives, it is unsustainable; instead, it acts as more of a fork in the road between Communism and Capitalism. 2) Nation-states moving away from Capitalism and toward Socialism are showing major signs of decline economically, while nation-states moving toward Capitalism and away from Socialism are showing major signs of growth and a strengthening economy and society.
@brahmeek -- The last time what happened?
@TBR -- You are correct that the Nordic model has worked for them. But, you are not aware of the reasons behind a Socialist leaning system works for them. First of all, the population in the Nordic region is MUCH smaller, totaling about 26.5 million citizens of all 8 nations combined. The U.S. population is over 321 million citizens which is about 1,250% (1 thousand 2 hundred and 50 percent) more than the Nordics. Additionally, the Nordic region is populated by a huge majority of individuals holding the same beliefs, values, norms, and even ancestry. This means there is almost no argument over anything. However, recently their demographics have begun shifting as migration has begun shifting their demographics. Additionally, leaders of these nations have publicly stated that they are seeing additional cracks in their model by way of stagnant productivity, rising inequality and almost no economic growth. The leaders of these nations have also admitted that the sustainability of this model moving forward is becoming very concerning.
Capitalism can exist with anything. Socialism cant stand on its own and will constantly require growth and upkeep. Its the one you have to look out for. They can coexist if the socialism portion stays very very small, and you dont mind it failing every once in awhile. Dont let it talk you into appropriating more towards it to prevent that failure though ... Thats a ruse. Its failing is natural and will happen no matter how much you throw at it.
@FreedomBeforeEquality -- Great comment. I could not have said it better myself. There is 1 concern though which naturally occurs; everyone naturally wants more, wants better. This includes those on subsidies.This means that voting base demands more and more, in comes the politician hands them more and more to keep their votes which expands the Socialist end of the spectrum, then comes more demands, etc., etc. So if you COULD keep the Socialist side at a small level and push emphasis of the individual on growth using the Capitalist side of the market, it would be perfect and sustainable. Problem is, it will never stay at this sweet spot.
Yeah, not unless you empower people with the ability to control their tax dollars. They cant expand if they dont have the funding. The socialism portion should in effect work much like the capitalist portion ... You give where you want to give. The only difference is your intent there. Are you giving because its whats best for you at that time or are you doing it for the good of the rest. I never liked the idea of taking the freewill part out of charitable giving ... It totally defeats the purpose. And thats what socialism is.
@FreedomBeforeEquality -- I am not very big on handouts, even though I myself am a man who actually needs it. I did everything I was told to do in life to get where I want to be, moved myself from a childhood of poverty to a man in his mid-20's individually making 130% of the national average income for a household of two wage earners, I had an AMAZING retirement fund setup already, was months away from moving up to a position pulling in almost a 6 figure salary, and was well on my way to that glide path of a life that everybody wants. Then the universe bent me over, took a nice long, rocket power-assisted running start, and shoved the longest, widest, most solid, jagged rod it could find right up my backside...No lube. Lost my job, have to identify as physically disabled so now no employer will touch me due to fear of the Americans with Disabilities Act biting them in the future, have burnt through my savings paying bills, new budget cuts meant I only got pennies from unemployment and only for a few months, and because I'm not listed as partially disabled as opposed to fully I can't collect disability payments, I pulled my retirement savings and immediately got smacked with 62% tax rate plus penalties and fees so that ran dry fast, so now I have about a month of finances remaining to my name and a grand total of $0.00 of monthly income; no idea what I am going to do but I'm still not mad that the government isn't handing me money or paying my bills. The only thing I wish the government WOULD do, is get me a job, repair the job market and get me back in the labor force. THAT is how you give freewill AND pride, not by letting you regulate where your taxes go.
So getting hit with a 62% penalty on your earnings didnt let you know something was f'ed up? Or the fact that government legislation is what scared potential employers away from you? It sounds to me like things were rigged against you from the start. Why turn to those same people that screwed you and ask for their help in the matter? I'd still be asking them to out of my business, then losing your job would have been the only issue you had. It sounds like everything after that was their fault and just compounded the issue. It was otherwise a totally recoverable incident, until they stepped in.
@FBE -- Well...To be fair, the Affordable Care Act DIRECTLY led to my injury and eventual permanent partial disability as well as my job being split up then outsourced to China and southeast Asia; so the government took that from me too. Yes, I do see how having 62% of my income taken right off the top (excluding taxes and fees) is f'd up. Why ask them for help? Because they are the key holder for EVERYTHING these days. They played on the willful ignorance of the nation's majority and sucked up over 75% of the nation's dealings including 1/6 of the nation's economy in the health care sector and over 50% of the private sector. Where else does an honest, hard-working man turn?
Im starting to think that your mentality on the situation was something they were actually going for. Some type of Stockholm Syndrome is what it is.
Could you explain your thought process please? Im interested in your thought process here. I know what SHS is, just not sure where you are applying it to here.
Just being analogous. Government being the captor. Them setting up a scenario where you think they are the only channel to turn to to make things happen. In the meantime they are fully taking advantage of you.
Good thought process, I like the way you think. However, tell me where I SHOULD turn at this point.
Well alot of it is said and done now. I think personally if I had projected that my retirement accounts were only gonna tide me over a couple months after that 60-something% was taken out ... And that id be right back here at 0 again ... I would have just rode it out at zero back then and left the savings alone. It sounds like it didnt change much and the only one who really benefited was the financial institution and the Gov't. Id probably look for a job where I could lie (and never be found out) about having a previous condition ... Knowing full well that I wouldnt be able to make a claim because my previous circumstances would conflict with the integrity of that. Im not sure what the extent of the injury is though ... So i cant say for sure. But you could certainly do as the poor do and skirt taxes entirely by working under the table. Its pretty commonplace ... So I wouldnt hold that against you. In fact I wouldnt care if you took advantage of every single social program out there. The only thing I would find as being a mistake would be voting for those same programs and perpetuating that SHS for other people. I dont wanna start sounding religious or anything ... But I think at this point you either will be able to seize opportunity when it comes by (which it might not) or you just have to look beyond this whole thing and see how you can prevent others from falling into that same trap. Because turning to them for help is just going to keep this thing going on into the next generation ... And the next and the next and the next. Its gotta stop.
I mean granted, no one wants to see anyone have to live it out in your position. But root cause is where our efforts should be. If we can help a few get back up on the horse in the process then cool. What is it you used to do? If you dont mind my asking.
Well yeah that kindof explains it too. Theres been a huge boom in that ... Programmers are a dime a dozen. Its also one of those industries that is pretty age discriminatory ... And you dont sound very young to me ... No offense. Im sure that fact didnt help in the matter either.