{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
12/14/2015 4:36:02 AM
29
Capitalism or Socialism?
Which do you believe is most efficient?
-
Neitherism?
-
The only way to create the perfect economy is mix together the best aspects of each kind that exists. If a country were to adopt an economic policy like that I don't think there's be room to complain
-
True free-market Capitalism. Central planning (in addition to being immoral) limits the choice of the individual, and I believe that I can choose what is right for me more adeptly than a planner.
-
Capitalism because diamond encrusted canes
-
Socialism for the people. Capitalism for the money.
-
8 RepliesFree market capitalism is garbage and has been proven. Since when did water have to become commodified? Water used to be free and a basic human right of acess. Now it's blue gold. Why does there have to be private freeways with till booths every few miles and fast lane pass sales When did public parks turn private. Internet was universals but some plan to use the FFC (FRC?) loophole to start slowing people's internet that pay cheaper packages. Pay by websites like we pay for certain tv channels now. You can call me what you want but when did all the other counties start leading in issues. We only lead in war now. You can believe I hate America or something but I just want to improve it, you know like power lines being underground instead like the east has. Regressive conservative scum is weakening America and the day we go back to FDR and Eisenhower in policy is the day Americans win. Politicians used to campaign like Bernie sanders. Money not involved and actually discussed issues and policy. Not the self centered trump. You guys hate politicians for the money, HA, trump is literally your worst nightmare once he shows true colors People also used to fight by economic status, now all people fight for are social issues. We need change and going to laizze faire economics will only speed up the inevitable next depression that is free capitalism.
-
-
Few if any countries have a pure form of either. It is more of a 1-10 dial than a binary switch. But the less socialist an economy is, the better it performs, all else being equal. Example: the U.S. has higher average wages, higher GDP per capita, higher mean household wages and lower tax burden than the UK (or I think any country in Europe but there could be some weird exception like Leichtenstein).
-
Market socialism ftw
-
Wow this poll is sad Look at socialism in Greece Greece has virtually collapsed Capitalism forever
-
A pure form of either one in the being a hellscape. A hybrid is what is required most everyone agrees with this once they understand the true battle comes on what the percentages should be how much of each should be dialed in to get the ideal society. If you don't know the United States is already a hybrid. [spoiler] Pure capitalism businesses run without regulation they pollute through the roof they pay employees slave wages even at times using factory money. You end up with a society where 99% of all wealth is with .01%. Monopolies form to crush out all competition. Pure socialism tends to lead to societies with gross inefficiencies. Making it nearly impossible to hire and fire new employees for new business is the form and for bad businesses to fail. Typically it tends to lead to decreases in economic output. A hybrid system you want to have some worker protections without making it impossible for businesses to be flexible. And you want some regulations on corporations so they don't become monopolies so competition can thrive. You also want some industries controled by government. Almost all hybrid societies relegate the majority of the education sector to government control as well as the security (army/police) most provide forms of welfare and social security for the elderly.. many also extend it to the health care systems and to some natural resources controlled by the state. Basically too much of just about anything is bad. [/spoiler]
-
If we're talking about which is the most efficient in terms of: 1. pure capitalist & socialist economies in which their schools of thought occurs and plays out [b]without[/b] any issues or disturbances? - socialism would be the most efficient. 2. pure capitalist and socialist economies in which their schools of thought occurs and plays out [b]with[/b] issues and/or disturbances? - both would be pretty bad but capitalism would be the most efficient.
-
Whatever works for the specific country. Every country is different. Some countries are landlocked, some have an abundant access to trade avenues. Even cultural and societal aspects conform better with certain types of government. I can't stand it when I hear the US needs to be like Switzerland for example. The US needs some changes yes, but we're not a euro country
-
1 ReplyEdited by Autolycus: 12/14/2015 6:18:24 AMModerately regulated capitalism with moderate amount of socialist programs.
-
These aren't directly comparable, nor are they mutually exclusive ideals. People believe they are though, so I'll give it a shot under these incorrect perceptions. IMO, a mix is best... You have to regulate the "free market." In case you have a misunderstanding of what socialism actually means, it only implies regulation not necessarily state ownership. Without regulation, abuse occurs. As the "free market," large corporations and banks have proven time and again. Bell systems and the housing market crash come to mind. Also, socialist aspects of our current government that ought to stay are federally funded interstates, public education and even the USPS. People are too quick to demonize "socialism." Often they gave no idea of the services and regulation that are going on around them to stave off abuse by corporations and the ultra rich.
-
The government is there to protect and has no business with the workings of the honest man. Though it's much more complicated then that, that's my simple belief.
-
6 RepliesSocialism is the outsourcing of the free market.
-
Edited by mrhal: 12/14/2015 6:30:10 AMMix of both, pure capitalism or socialism would never work
-
Both are flawed, and need to be fixed by parts of the other
-
Pure capitalism is unfair. Pure socialism is controlling and results in some loss of freedom. Have a healthy mix of both
-
Both are ineffective without a mixture of both.
-
Both are perfect in theory but neither work in their pure form.
-
Edited by Britton: 12/14/2015 5:12:46 AMMixture of both. Neither works in a pure form.
-
Both are valid ways of governance/economics, but you couldn't do both everywhere. I don't think socialism would work in places that are very large/densely populated, such as The US, China, Russia, etc. It also depends on availability of resources/money
-
Socialism is best
-
In an ideal world, I feel like socialism would be better.
