Socialism, Capitalism or what ?

[Pat494]

Which of these 2 do you prefer and why or could there be another better system ?

 

[Splitlink]

Which of these 2 do you prefer and why or could there be another better system ?

I like the theory of the socialists but the practicality of the capitalists.

The socialists spend all there is to spend and then start using the credit card.

Better system? There will always be an opposition in any democratic system so the only other one is totalitarian. No thanks!

 

[Pat494]

The USA prides itself on being Capitalist, even if the reality is a semi-capitalism. The lack of a system has just sort of grown up over the 200 years into a hotch-potch of minmimal rules from the Republicans and a more ordered/fairer view from the Democrats.

However if one views the USA from the outside it looks as if it is faltering against the strong competition from the BRIC countries. General Motors, the behemoth of car giants, would have crashed and died without drastic financial help. It seems to lurch from one crisis to the next.

As Splitlink points out, Socialism has a fundamental weakness in that it makes a country basically uncompetitive. The UK is a good example - 154 billion in debt ! Very much the same situation in the UK after the socialists made a similiar mess of the economy in the 1970s. They learnt nothing it seems from that fiasco.

Perhaps China has a more viable system. Communist politically but semi capitalist economically. A ruthless 1 party system where political dissent is outlawed. Is this the price of amazing economic growth ? Is it worth it ? Judging from the political apathy in Britain perhaps its not too high a price ?

Has India got any answers ? Democratic with a high growth. The pupil may have surpassed the master.

 

[oiltanker]

we have neither in the west. we have oligarchy. which is why the political system is a system of soft corruption.

 

[barjon]

Whilst money rules the world any system is always going to be capitalist in nature and a hotch-potch of state vs private ownership as well as wealth concentration vs distribution.

Under whatever political system it is always the elite group who take the cream and the only difference is whether the hoi-polloi have to make do with fully skimmed or semi-skimmed milk.

jon

 

[Splitlink]

The USA prides itself on being Capitalist, even if the reality is a semi-capitalism. The lack of a system has just sort of grown up over the 200 years into a hotch-potch of minmimal rules from the Republicans and a more ordered/fairer view from the Democrats.

However if one views the USA from the outside it looks as if it is faltering against the strong competition from the BRIC countries. General Motors, the behemoth of car giants, would have crashed and died without drastic financial help. It seems to lurch from one crisis to the next.

As Splitlink points out, Socialism has a fundamental weakness in that it makes a country basically uncompetitive. The UK is a good example - 154 billion in debt ! Very much the same situation in the UK after the socialists made a similiar mess of the economy in the 1970s. They learnt nothing it seems from that fiasco.

Perhaps China has a more viable system. Communist politically but semi capitalist economically. A ruthless 1 party system where political dissent is outlawed. Is this the price of amazing economic growth ? Is it worth it ? Judging from the political apathy in Britain perhaps its not too high a price ?

Has India got any answers ? Democratic with a high growth. The pupil may have surpassed the master.

I believe that our vote counts on one day. The day that we vote. After that, we had better have got it right because that's it for the next 4-5 years.

Capitalism rules America and America rules us. British socialism, when Blair was in power, is a case in point. America's policy has been to dominate countries economically.
If they have not been able to do that, the dirty tricks brigade, ie., the CIA, has gone into action. Examples are Nicaragua, Chile, Columbia, Africa and lots of other places, too numerous to count. If that fails, then they go to war. What is going on in Mexico, I don't know, but you can bet that Washington is playing a part in it and Chavez, in an oil rich country, is not far off the mark in being wary of the US.

The American citizen, the same as the British citizen, has no part in this. The establishment runs the whole show and big business runs the establishmnent.

Was this better than Stalinism was? Unfortunately, I think it was and I would not like to live in China, either.

This is a rant! I'm sorry, but that is the way I feel.

 

[Atilla]

I believe that our vote counts on one day. The day that we vote. After that, we had better have got it right because that's it for the next 4-5 years.

Capitalism rules America and America rules us. British socialism, when Blair was in power, is a case in point. America's policy has been to dominate countries economically.
If they have not been able to do that, the dirty tricks brigade, ie., the CIA, has gone into action. Examples are Nicaragua, Chile, Columbia, Africa and lots of other places, too numerous to count. If that fails, then they go to war. What is going on in Mexico, I don't know, but you can bet that Washington is playing a part in it and Chavez, in an oil rich country, is not far off the mark in being wary of the US.

The American citizen, the same as the British citizen, has no part in this. The establishment runs the whole show and big business runs the establishmnent.

Was this better than Stalinism was? Unfortunately, I think it was and I would not like to live in China, either.

This is a rant! I'm sorry, but that is the way I feel.

What you describe is 3-step text book CIA protocol in dealing with non-compliant countries as stated by Robert McNamara after he saw the light. He realised he was wrong and in later years devoted his life to serving the social community.

Here is some interesting blurb on his point of view from yours trully - https://www.cia.gov/library/center-...ations/csi-studies/studies/96unclass/ford.htm

I wouldn't call it a rant. Just defacto standard life as we have come to know it in our life time. Sometimes it is good to be less subtle as it conserves wastefulness.

Cuba - is a point in example. In comparison to other Latin American countries they haven't done too badly at all with respect to health and education. That is despite the suffocating hold placed on them by US policies which - unbelievably only now loosening up. They avoided all the junta/torture and fear fiascos which the other civilians did for good many decades.

Theoretically - the distribution of scarce resources is determined by;

1. economics - prices
2. socio-politics - taxation

The system whether it be communism - fascism, or socialism - capitalism is academic. They are to some extent polar extremes each other but in our modern day it pales into insignificance.

 

[Pat494]

Capitalism rules America and America rules us. British socialism, when Blair was in power, is a case in point. America's policy has been to dominate countries economically.

This Pax Americana phase looks to me to be on the way out because:-
1. The BRIC countries are catching up fast and the USA seems unable to respond enough to stay ahead
2. US foreign policy is so poor that they keep getting into very costly wars and waste most of their money/strength and gain nothing
3. Europe has a bigger population/market
4. The general perception of America around the world is not positive

Britain is so "hide-bound" I doubt that they can change enough to compete effectively either. The combination of bolshy Unions, grossly unfair wages for a days work and out of date practices see to that.

 

[Atilla]

Capitalism rules America and America rules us. British socialism, when Blair was in power, is a case in point. America's policy has been to dominate countries economically.

That is just step one.

Blair was hardly a socialist. More like - Thatchers tea boy.

If you want to explore US policy to dominate the world read up on McNamara's experience and point of view for an objective assessment... I can see you are going to take this down the socialists have failed us route but I stronlgy disagree.

 

[FX Bandit]

What you describe is 3-step text book CIA protocol in dealing with non-compliant countries as stated by Robert McNamara after he saw the light. He realised he was wrong and in later years devoted his life to serving the social community.

Here is some interesting blurb on his point of view from yours trully - https://www.cia.gov/library/center-...ations/csi-studies/studies/96unclass/ford.htm

I wouldn't call it a rant. Just defacto standard life as we have come to know it in our life time. Sometimes it is good to be less subtle as it conserves wastefulness.

Cuba - is a point in example. In comparison to other Latin American countries they haven't done too badly at all with respect to health and education. That is despite the suffocating hold placed on them by US policies which - unbelievably only now loosening up. They avoided all the junta/torture and fear fiascos which the other civilians did for good many decades.

Theoretically - the distribution of scarce resources is determined by;

1. economics - prices
2. socio-politics - taxation

The system whether it be communism - fascism, or socialism - capitalism is academic. They are to some extent polar extremes each other but in our modern day it pales into insignificance.

You have an intersting view of Cuba. Very similar to the official one.

I am not sure how good education and healthcare is for the majority of the population. Nor am I sure that torture and unlawful detention are not standard tools of the Cuban state.

Get me an official press release though and I'll probably change my mind .

 

[FX Bandit]

That is just step one.

Blair was hardly a socialist. More like - Thatchers tea boy.

If you want to explore US policy to dominate the world read up on McNamara's experience and point of view for an objective assessment... I can see you are going to take this down the socialists have failed us route but I stronlgy disagree.

How have people fallen for this nonsense about Blair being a Thatcherite / Ne wLabour being Tory etc?

Blair was nothing - he simply believed that he should be rich and famous, and politics was the way he chose to achieve his goals. He has no other beliefs.

New Labour is a rough grouping of cultural and social Marxists.

Come to think of it, so are the New Tories...

 

[Atilla]

You have an intersting view of Cuba. Very similar to the official one.

I am not sure how good education and healthcare is for the majority of the population. Nor am I sure that torture and unlawful detention are not standard tools of the Cuban state.

Get me an official press release though and I'll probably change my mind .

Cuba - is a point in example. In comparison to other Latin American countries they haven't done too badly at all with respect to health and education.

You comparing torture and unlawful detention as per other Latin American countries as endorsed, trained and facilitated by the US?

Cuba has got nothing on the US mate... Abu-Ghraib is just another feather in the big chiefs cap.

 

[Splitlink]

Capitalism rules America and America rules us. British socialism, when Blair was in power, is a case in point. America's policy has been to dominate countries economically.

This Pax Americana phase looks to me to be on the way out because:-
1. The BRIC countries are catching up fast and the USA seems unable to respond enough to stay ahead
2. US foreign policy is so poor that they keep getting into very costly wars and waste most of their money/strength and gain nothing
3. Europe has a bigger population/market
4. The general perception of America around the world is not positive

Britain is so "hide-bound" I doubt that they can change enough to compete effectively either. The combination of bolshy Unions, grossly unfair wages for a days work and out of date practices see to that.

I agree with you, Pax American could be coming to an end. In fact, I believe that China, holding trillions of US debt, could start to control America, economically if,and when,it suits her to do so.

 

[Pat494]

Cuba - is a point in example. In comparison to other Latin American countries they haven't done too badly at all with respect to health and education.

I hardly think Cuba has been a pleasant place to live, except for the elite, for the last 50 years of Fidel's dictatorship. Until recently they were so poor. A few 1950s cars, lovely old buildings falling apart and rationing. Bullied by the secret police etc. is not my idea of brotherly socialism.
I expect you will blame its short comings on the Americans. Well agreed in a small part but mainly their own fault.

 

[FX Bandit]

Cuba - is a point in example. In comparison to other Latin American countries they haven't done too badly at all with respect to health and education.

You comparing torture and unlawful detention as per other Latin American countries as endorsed, trained and facilitated by the US?

Cuba has got nothing on the US mate... Abu-Ghraib is just another feather in the big chiefs cap.

Well, there would not be any question of comparing Cuba to other Latin American basket-cases had it not been taken over by a deranged Communist.

I can't make sense of your second paragraph, although you seem to have an ideological anti-Americanism. Blaming Cuba's problems on the US is just childish frankly.

Abu-Ghraib is appalling. I would only point out that it was nothing compared to how it was under the Iraqis, and nothing compared to Cuban jails. Doubtless that is also somehow America's fault .

 

[Martinghoul]

Communism is best !

In seriousness, the question is certainly not about which setup is better/best, in an abstract sense. It's about which particular configuration suits humanity best, given its current level of moral and cognitive development. At the moment, it appears that capitalism works best, given that our lives are still largely "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short".

 

[Atilla]

Well, there would not be any question of comparing Cuba to other Latin American basket-cases had it not been taken over by a deranged Communist.

I can't make sense of your second paragraph, although you seem to have an ideological anti-Americanism. Blaming Cuba's problems on the US is just childish frankly.

Abu-Ghraib is appalling. I would only point out that it was nothing compared to how it was under the Iraqis, and nothing compared to Cuban jails. Doubtless that is also somehow America's fault .

I am not anti-American just against the US foreign policy and pursuit of rampant capitalism which is in danger of destroying it self from within.

I much prefer the US to Russia or China any day because it is in comparison a free democratic country with liberal enterprise policies. I've travelled the east coast and grew up on the Walton's and Happy Days so don't go into your little cave and get defensive about here is yet another Anti-Americanite (which I have heard many a times).

I am merely trying to highlight and correct the BS that comes from the US to maintain it's status quo which obviously isn't working. So called patriots defend crap because it is simply us againts them daft syndrome. Take a note of Pat's post points 2 & 4. I'm sure the whole globe is Anti-American by your standards but is that really the case or is it simple injustice which people can no longer stomach. Why are countries buying Airbus instead of Boing? Coke isn't flying off the shelves either.

Level of US involvement in fascist governments as long as it supported their banks and vested interests was sufficient for all kinds of abuse. The US has turned torture into an art form. Check out Guantanamo Bay - it's latest creation, which is outside the jurisdiction of any law courts - including the Geneva convention. How remarkably clever is that? It may as well be on planet Pluto. Untouchable indeed.

America is going down because there are no controls or checks on the world's SuperPower.

Pat is right in that modern empires are built on economic and technological advances - they reach saturation and then the last leg is often the military might that tries to sustain what can not last and further accelerates its down fall.

In that pursuit people like your good self are quite prepared to turn a blind eye to all the injustice and laugh it off until one day, one looks back and all the mistakes are glaringly obvious.

Anyhow, China has pretty much implemented its own doctrine - as with Africa, whereby it goes in and buys up the resources and businesses without interfering in the running of the country at all. It is quite prepared to do business with any government at market prices without the over hang of changing administration.

Likewise Russia is no longer in pursuit of changing any nations ideological orientation - but simply to do business.

India is probably the best of the three - orienting it self towards the high tech, a fully fledged democracy in control of multiple ethnic popullation imho.


And where is the US - globetrotting around the world kicking ass. How bloody marvellous...

 

[Splitlink]

That is just step one.

Blair was hardly a socialist. More like - Thatchers tea boy.

If you want to explore US policy to dominate the world read up on McNamara's experience and point of view for an objective assessment... I can see you are going to take this down the socialists have failed us route but I stronlgy disagree.

The socialists have not failed us? The socialist doctrine is "Don't do as I do, do as I tell you" The socialists (in Spain as well as the UK) are giving hand-outs to undeserving people with our money. In fact, each one of us, as a tax-payer, is in debt by thousands of pounds.

Another thing, while I'm at it, socialists would take democratic government away from us, completely, if they could. They come from the unions and I can remember, when I was a kid, the closed shop days and block voting that were an attempt to keep them in control of the most important industries.

 

[FX Bandit]

I am not anti-American just against the US foreign policy and pursuit of rampant capitalism which is in danger of destroying it self from within.

I much prefer the US to Russia or China any day because it is in comparison a free democratic country with liberal enterprise policies. I've travelled the east coast and grew up on the Walton's and Happy Days so don't go into your little cave and get defensive about here is yet another Anti-Americanite (which I have heard many a times).

I am merely trying to highlight and correct the BS that comes from the US to maintain it's status quo which obviously isn't working. So called patriots defend crap because it is simply us againts them daft syndrome. Take a note of Pat's post points 2 & 4. I'm sure the whole globe is Anti-American by your standards but is that really the case or is it simple injustice which people can no longer stomach. Why are countries buying Airbus instead of Boing? Coke isn't flying off the shelves either.

Level of US involvement in fascist governments as long as it supported their banks and vested interests was sufficient for all kinds of abuse. The US has turned torture into an art form. Check out Guantanamo Bay - it's latest creation, which is outside the jurisdiction of any law courts - including the Geneva convention. How remarkably clever is that? It may as well be on planet Pluto. Untouchable indeed.

America is going down because there are no controls or checks on the world's SuperPower.

Pat is right in that modern empires are built on economic and technological advances - they reach saturation and then the last leg is often the military might that tries to sustain what can not last and further accelerates its down fall.

In that pursuit people like your good self are quite prepared to turn a blind eye to all the injustice and laugh it off until one day, one looks back and all the mistakes are glaringly obvious.

Anyhow, China has pretty much implemented its own doctrine - as with Africa, whereby it goes in and buys up the resources and businesses without interfering in the running of the country at all. It is quite prepared to do business with any government at market prices without the over hang of changing administration.

Likewise Russia is no longer in pursuit of changing any nations ideological orientation - but simply to do business.

India is probably the best of the three - orienting it self towards the high tech, a fully fledged democracy in control of multiple ethnic popullation imho.


And where is the US - globetrotting around the world kicking ass. How bloody marvellous...

Your posts are difficult to read.

Nonetheless, you are anti-American, as evidenced by your bizarre assertions that Cuba's problems are the fault of American policies, and not Communism.

As it happens, I am not pro-American, I am anti-bullsh!t, which explains our disagreements. I turn a blind eye to nothing, but I do have a sense of proportion, something you lack.

America is not perfect, but to compare it to the bandit regimes of the world is just childish.

One final point, this is garbage:

America is going down because there are no controls or checks on the world's SuperPower.

America is going down for the same reason as the Romans did - get a copy of Gibbon and find out how it works.

 

[Splitlink]

There is so much being bandied about, here, that I can only answer what hits me.

The American mafia was in charge of Cuba before Castro. Castro is a direct result of American corruption in Cuba.

I have been to various S. American countries. The people are easy to get along with. The New World could be one, big, happy family if wasn't for US policy. Now, most S.Americans can't stick the Yanks. Whose fault is that? Thousands of Cubans have made their home in Florida. How did that happen if they are so difficult to live with?