[POLL] If you had to choose between Capitalism and Socialism - Which would it be?

[tooAlive]

Got to be one of the most stupid posts I've ever seen.

Hunter/gatherer societies had no concept of capitalism. So you're contention is that native Americans, African tribesmen, aborigines, etc ... had no "liberty?"

What an idiot

Hunter/gatherers lived in pure capitalism whether they knew it or not.

They had the freedom to hunt and gather food and supplies as they saw fit, and there wasn't a government to establish limits or regulations as to how much a single person could gather or how much had to be shared with the rest of the people.

So they had complete liberty, and their economic system would be classified as capitalism. Except their capital was food, animals, tools, objects they valued, ect..

WRONG ...
Their society more closely resembled socialism

I feel very blessed to live in a regulated capatlistic society. But trying to attach capatlism to hunter/gatherer societies is even more stupid THIS time.

Socialism can't exist without a government/state that imposes regulations and equally distributes wealth among the people.

In reality, anarchy would most closely resemble the system used by hunter/gatherers. Not socialism.

But out of the two we're discussing, capitalism would be the closest one. If people shared what they hunted they did so out of their own will. But there was not a system in place that made it mandatory.

 

[healthmyths]

You mean savage capitalism or capitalism with reasonable regulation and justice and a good safety net- then I'll take socialism, because I know what it means. NOT communism, as socialism is ALWAYS democratic.

Socialism over time leads to extinction of people and unlike you that make outlandish statements with NO substantiation, here is my proof!
Cuba's population
1910 2,219,000 646,203 41%
1920 2,997,000 778,000 35%
1930 3,647,000 650,000 22%
1950 5,516,000 1,869,000 51% Socialism replaced dictatorship in 1959
1980 9,724,000 4,208,000 76%
2000 11,142,000 1,418,000 15%
2010 11,241,161 99,161 1%
2012 11,163,934 -77,227 -1%
Population growth rate -0.01% (2006 est.)
Illicit migration is a continuing problem.
Demographics of Cuba - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Pure socialist country Cuba has been feeling the affects of the Socialist 1959 revolution since as their declining population ages and dies off
the younger population has migrated out from Cuba.
Now some Socialism defenders claim it has been because of the embargo and it probably is a factor... BUT why was there an embargo in the first place? The rest of the world apparently didn't like the form of socialism practiced under Castro.. i.e. dictatorship.

So in this illustration to prove my point socialism leads to extinction, Cuba if it continues at the declining rate of above will have in 20 years
9,716,000 or a loss of 13% of their population and that was at the 1% loss rate above. It will be more because fewer younger people and more older people dying off. At some point Cuba will under the current socialistic regime will be extinct... Let alone the financial burden by having fewer workers and older recipients.

 

[nodoginnafight]

Hunter/gatherers lived in pure capitalism whether they knew it or not.

They had the freedom to hunt and gather food and supplies as they saw fit, and there wasn't a government to establish limits or regulations as to how much a single person could gather or how much had to be shared with the rest of the people.

So they had complete liberty, and their economic system would be classified as capitalism. Except their capital was food, animals, tools, objects they valued, ect..

WRONG ...
Their society more closely resembled socialism

I feel very blessed to live in a regulated capatlistic society. But trying to attach capatlism to hunter/gatherer societies is even more stupid THIS time.

Socialism can't exist without a government/state that imposes regulations and equally distributes wealth among the people.

In reality, anarchy would most closely resemble the system used by hunter/gatherers. Not socialism.

But out of the two we're discussing, capitalism would be the closest one. If people shared what they hunted they did so out of their own will. But there was not a system in place that made it mandatory.

Tribes have chiefs.
Trying to apply capatalism to hunter/gatherer societies is absurd.

I like capatalism. I want to live in a capitalistic society. But trying to say that everything that is good = capitalism is childish.

 

[Wry Catcher]

I wonder which side Obama would choose?

Obama is more worried about his golf handicap becoming public knowledge.

There really should be a "No Thanks" button for stupid posts.

 

[ArmyCowboy]

Since neither can exist in it's pure form, nor would anyone really want to live in a pure socialist or capitalist society, this thread is nothing but an orgy of empty rhetoric and talking points.

 

[Deepbluediver]

Since neither can exist in it's pure form, nor would anyone really want to live in a pure socialist or capitalist society, this thread is nothing but an orgy of empty rhetoric and talking points.

Maybe a better poll would have been: From the current standpoint, do you believe America's economy would benefit from more or less government involvement, with regards to regulation, financial support (loans, subsidies), and taxes.

Because when we ignore loaded questions, thats basically what it boils down to.

I'd start one myself but I'm new here so I'm PROBABLY NOT ALLOWED TO DO THAT!


I wasn't allowed to post links until I hit 15 posts, and I'm not allowed to PM people until I hit 50. Is there a list somewhere I can check?

 

[ArmyCowboy]

Since neither can exist in it's pure form, nor would anyone really want to live in a pure socialist or capitalist society, this thread is nothing but an orgy of empty rhetoric and talking points.

Maybe a better poll would have been: From the current standpoint, do you believe America's economy would benefit from more or less government involvement, with regards to regulation, financial support (loans, subsidies), and taxes.

Because when we ignore loaded questions, thats basically what it boils down to.

I'd start one myself but I'm new here so I'm PROBABLY NOT ALLOWED TO DO THAT!


I wasn't allowed to post links until I hit 15 posts, and I'm not allowed to PM people until I hit 50. Is there a list somewhere I can check?

The problem that many are ignoring is that we're currently neither capitalistic nor socialistic. We're living in a corportist economy and very few really realize it.

 

[Deepbluediver]

The problem that many are ignoring is that we're currently neither capitalistic nor socialistic. We're living in a corportist economy and very few really realize it.

I tend to think that our free-market system is doing pretty good, but before I break out the torches and pitchforks, please define what you mean by "corportist economy". I don't think I've seen that term before.

 

[bripat9643]

Since neither can exist in it's pure form, nor would anyone really want to live in a pure socialist or capitalist society, this thread is nothing but an orgy of empty rhetoric and talking points.

All the evidence indicates that capitalism can exist in its pure form. The empirical evidence shows that the closer we get to it, the more the population thrives. Socialism, on the other hand, produces death, starvation and mass poverty.

 

[ArmyCowboy]

Since neither can exist in it's pure form, nor would anyone really want to live in a pure socialist or capitalist society, this thread is nothing but an orgy of empty rhetoric and talking points.

All the evidence indicates that capitalism can exist in its pure form. The closer we get to it, the more the population thrives. Socialism, on the other hand, produces death, starvation and mass poverty.

I'm not sure nothern Europe and Scandinavia are starving, but if it makes you happy to make believe they are, then knock yourself out.

 

[ArmyCowboy]

The problem that many are ignoring is that we're currently neither capitalistic nor socialistic. We're living in a corportist economy and very few really realize it.

I tend to think that our free-market system is doing pretty good, but before I break out the torches and pitchforks, please define what you mean by "corportist economy". I don't think I've seen that term before.

The Economic System of Corporatism

Its easier to link you to this than type out a thesis myself.

 

[Deepbluediver]

Its easier to link you to this than type out a thesis myself.

Thanks, that was an interesting little read. This quote jumps out at me:

Corporatism has sometimes been labeled as a Third Way or a mixed economy, a synthesis of capitalism and socialism, but it is in fact a separate, distinctive political economic system. emphasis original

It seems to be saying that anything other than a complete capitalism or complete socialist system is a corportist system (which I guess by strict interpretation would be true) and that corportism covers the entire range in between.

That doesn't really change my "new poll" idea, since I didn't mention either capitalism or socialism, just the degree of government involvement in free enterprise.

 

[bripat9643]

Since neither can exist in it's pure form, nor would anyone really want to live in a pure socialist or capitalist society, this thread is nothing but an orgy of empty rhetoric and talking points.

All the evidence indicates that capitalism can exist in its pure form. The closer we get to it, the more the population thrives. Socialism, on the other hand, produces death, starvation and mass poverty.

I'm not sure nothern Europe and Scandinavia are starving, but if it makes you happy to make believe they are, then knock yourself out.

That's because they are primarily capitalist states.

 

[ArmyCowboy]

All the evidence indicates that capitalism can exist in its pure form. The closer we get to it, the more the population thrives. Socialism, on the other hand, produces death, starvation and mass poverty.

I'm not sure nothern Europe and Scandinavia are starving, but if it makes you happy to make believe they are, then knock yourself out.

That's because they are primarily capitalist states.

Sweeden, Norway, Switzerland, etc are primarily capitalist?

So what exactly do you consider socialist?

 

[Luddly Neddite]

You mean savage capitalism or capitalism with reasonable regulation and justice and a good safety net- then I'll take socialism, because I know what it means. NOT communism, as socialism is ALWAYS democratic.

Thaks for putting into words what I was thinking.

Fact is, the US is partly socialist and the purist and ignorant rw's take advantage of that fact every single day.

So, to the rw's who say they hate socialism, when are you going to stop driving on our highways?

Hmmm?

 

[L.K.Eder]

op asks us to familiarize ourselves with what the poll choices stand for.

what a pompous gasbag presenting a more than stupid poll.

people like the op represent what is wrong with political discourse.

 

[tooAlive]

I'm not sure nothern Europe and Scandinavia are starving, but if it makes you happy to make believe they are, then knock yourself out.

That's because they are primarily capitalist states.

Sweeden, Norway, Switzerland, etc are primarily capitalist?

So what exactly do you consider socialist?

They have a mixed economy like we do; just quite a bit further down the left.

Is it better? I don't know. I don't hear of many Americans migrating to enjoy Europe's "socialism."

 

[tooAlive]

op asks us to familiarize ourselves with what the poll choices stand for.

what a pompous gasbag presenting a more than stupid poll.

people like the op represent what is wrong with political discourse.

There are many people that fully sympathize with one of the two choices I outlined.

Chances are you do as well, but don't like revealing your true colors publicly.

 

[tooAlive]

You mean savage capitalism or capitalism with reasonable regulation and justice and a good safety net- then I'll take socialism, because I know what it means. NOT communism, as socialism is ALWAYS democratic.

Thaks for putting into words what I was thinking.

Fact is, the US is partly socialist and the purist and ignorant rw's take advantage of that fact every single day.

So, to the rw's who say they hate socialism, when are you going to stop driving on our highways?

Hmmm?

If the government didn't pave the roads, what would stop the private sector from doing so?

 

[L.K.Eder]

op asks us to familiarize ourselves with what the poll choices stand for.

what a pompous gasbag presenting a more than stupid poll.

people like the op represent what is wrong with political discourse.

There are many people that fully sympathize with one of the two choices I outlined.

Chances are you do as well, but don't like revealing your true colors publicly.

if you were familiar with your poll choices and their meaning you would not have presented such a moronic poll, bubbele.

troll on, retard.