tooAlive
Silver Member
- Thread starter
- #21
It's a common argument from the left that under capitalism, workers will always be exploited and enslaved by their masters, or "CEOs."
If that were that case, isn't socialism worse?
I mean, instead of having many greedy CEOs to chose from, you're stuck with one government. What if that government turns out to be greedy, and begins exploiting it's people? You can't simply "quit" and go work for another government that treats you better.
I think we can all agree that not all CEOs are evil and greedy. For the sake of this argument, lets say that most of them are. That would still mean that there are some CEOs that are benevolent and giving.
Under capitalism, workers would have a choice whether or not they want to work for a benevolent CEO, or a greedy one. And if that were the case, wouldn't the greedy CEOs be forced to pay their workers more and treat them better to attract better workers? Obviously, they're competing with the benevolent CEOs; why would anyone want to work for them when someone else is paying them more?
Hopefully you could all understand my point.
So, given that, isn't it safe to say that socialism is a worse alternative to capitalism? Because simply but, the people would then be at the mercy of one government.
What could the people do if that government evolved into a dictatorship? Like what happened in Cuba. At least under capitalism the people have a choice, and aren't stuck working for one CEO (the state). What do you believe?
You DO understand that socialism does NOT imply that everyone works for the government, right? Because under definitive socialism, everyone works for THEMSELVES; that is, all workers are owners of their working environments.
You stupid crackers have never even understood what socialism is about.
No, you do not get to reinvent the definition of socialism.
Under socialism, you do not work for yourself. Otherwise you'd get to keep all the fruits of your labor, which you most definitely do not under socialism.
The fruits of your labor are confiscated by the state in order to be redistributed. This is how people get housing, rationed food, healthcare, ect. The textbook definition of socialism is government control over the means of production.
And when the government owns the means of production, you work for the government. I would think twice before calling someone a stupid cracker when you yourself have not the slightest understanding of what you're talking about.