CDZ Poverty, what it is between a capitalist society and socialist/communistic society.

[alang1216]

I wrote this in another thread, but decided it needs it's own.

Poverty:

In Socialism/Communism, poverty is a state of existence at birth. You are either born in poverty, where you will stay. Or you are born among the elite, where you will stay. Examples of this fact, exist throughout history, all over the globe.

In a capitalist society, poverty is really two different states:
1) A temporary, escape-able condition (such as a business closure) or
2) A result of non participation in opportunities afforded to you.

You are of course entitled to your opinion but I'd bet the reality is that upward mobility under Socialism/Communism is no different than that under Capitalism.

Demarks ranks #1 in social mobility and they are much more socialist than the US is.

 

[task0778]

I wrote this in another thread, but decided it needs it's own.

Poverty:

In Socialism/Communism, poverty is a state of existence at birth. You are either born in poverty, where you will stay. Or you are born among the elite, where you will stay. Examples of this fact, exist throughout history, all over the globe.

In a capitalist society, poverty is really two different states:
1) A temporary, escape-able condition (such as a business closure) or
2) A result of non participation in opportunities afforded to you.

Just a couple of points: in any society people can escape poverty by means of criminal activity, or by aligning themselves with those in power. If you are/were buddies with Putin or Obama, you could have and probably did make bundles of money. Other than that, in a communist/socialist society it is really hard to better your lot in life any other way. But in a capitalist society, your chances are a lot better if you make the right choices. IMHO, people can actually live well at the poverty income level if you spend your money wisely and don't have a bunch of kids. There are ways to stretch your dollars to get the most out of them. AND, if you apply yourself can increase your income by making yourself more valuable to your employer.

 

[ReinyDays]

Former slumlord here ...

33 out of 100 are down-and-out, but up-and-coming ... I'll rent to them out of their car, they get a job within a week ... two years later I get a call from a mortgage company asking if their good for their rent payments ... and off the tenants go to their own home ...

66 out of 100 are down and out as a matter of lifestyle ... feeding their paycheck into the video slot machines ... there's no helping them out of poverty ... they choose this and they're allowed to ...

The number one cause of homelessness in this country is financial irresponsibility ... there are many reasons for this irresponsibility ... but come the first of the month, no housing payment means no housing ... pissed people off that I numbered the excuses ... "Yes, classic example of a lame excuse #3, you have 72 hours to pay or move ... or I'm dragging your lazy ass into a court of law" ...

... and 1 out of 100 will burn you down ...

 

[Agit8r]

Let's be real, upward mobility has been virtually shut down by the usurous student loan industry.

It has been designed to do just that too. The employers today don't want ambition. They want complete subservience.

Remember, that communism is only ever seriously disgussed where people have been living in deadly slave-like conditions.

As with the rubber plantations of Vietnam.

As with the hacienda system in Latin America.

As with people being wantonly exposed to plague by evil managers who make wagers on who dies first.

1) The student loan industry, and I can appreciate you also see it that way, because that is what it is, is a system developed by mostly Democrats that predictably resulted in disastrous consequences for students/parents and a HUGE win for pockets of the college system in America. Liberalism at it's core is a policy system based on idealism. This system was developed based on an IDEA that "everyone should go to college". The end result was skyrocketing tuition and student housing. Nearly overnight, colleges dramatically increased their housing units to take advantage of the government paying for not only tuition - but housing also. And the profits off of these quad units is astronomical.
2) "Employers don't want ambition" - God that is just stupid. I don't know how else to put it. I would guess you are referring to what they want from the lowest rung of employment... such as a burger flipper. You would be right, they don't need ambition from burger flippers. They just need them to flip the burgers when the beeping tells them to. But in ALL other types of jobs of course they want ambition, but not without a serious work ethic to go along with it.
3) Everything else you say... not sure where you are going with it, or the point.

Largely agree about liberalism and student loans.

As to the employers want ambition, not anymore. The modern workplace has become increasingly about enforced mediocrity, and removing all ownership of a job well done--whatever it takes to keep people "in their place.". Kids today don't fear communism, because it is what they have already been experiencing in the workplace

 

[iamwhatiseem]

I wrote this in another thread, but decided it needs it's own.

Poverty:

In Socialism/Communism, poverty is a state of existence at birth. You are either born in poverty, where you will stay. Or you are born among the elite, where you will stay. Examples of this fact, exist throughout history, all over the globe.

In a capitalist society, poverty is really two different states:
1) A temporary, escape-able condition (such as a business closure) or
2) A result of non participation in opportunities afforded to you.

Socialism is when government takes over companies and entire industries like in Cuba or Venezuela. With communism toss in no ownership of private property. Now communist government takeovers in places like China, or Vietnam they eventually discovered that relative to economies their ideas were as bad as possible, thus they switched to capitalism.

Absolutely, or bastardized systems based on it.
China's economic system is based on forced labor. From both the production that comes from it, and foreign investors that want a piece of it.
Like Mark Cuban... a typical global liberal elitist. He invest 100s' $millions in China every year, and other nations that are primarily slave laborist - and then has the audacity to come off as one of the good guys.
He is a piece of shit. And the best example I can think of how America is slowly killing itself.... but that is another topic.

 

[Donald H]

I wrote this in another thread, but decided it needs it's own.

Poverty:

In Socialism/Communism, poverty is a state of existence at birth. You are either born in poverty, where you will stay. Or you are born among the elite, where you will stay. Examples of this fact, exist throughout history, all over the globe.

In a capitalist society, poverty is really two different states:
1) A temporary, escape-able condition (such as a business closure) or
2) A result of non participation in opportunities afforded to you.

You are of course entitled to your opinion but I'd bet the reality is that upward mobility under Socialism/Communism is no different than that under Capitalism.

Demarks ranks #1 in social mobility and they are much more socialist than the US is.

Capitalism can perform as efficiently in a communist country as it does in a Democratic country.

Communism and Democracy are closer to being opposites than are Communism and Capitalism.

At least we can get that established!

 

[iamwhatiseem]

I wrote this in another thread, but decided it needs it's own.

Poverty:

In Socialism/Communism, poverty is a state of existence at birth. You are either born in poverty, where you will stay. Or you are born among the elite, where you will stay. Examples of this fact, exist throughout history, all over the globe.

In a capitalist society, poverty is really two different states:
1) A temporary, escape-able condition (such as a business closure) or
2) A result of non participation in opportunities afforded to you.

You are of course entitled to your opinion but I'd bet the reality is that upward mobility under Socialism/Communism is no different than that under Capitalism.

Demarks ranks #1 in social mobility and they are much more socialist than the US is.

Bullshit.
Denmark is not a socialist nation. Not even close. They have social programs, but their economic system is actually more capitalist than ours is.
It wholly depends on foreign investment. Without foreign markets and investment thereof, Denmark would have an economic holocaust.
And - it happens to be one of the most costliest places to live in the world.

 

[Donald H]

I wrote this in another thread, but decided it needs it's own.

Poverty:

In Socialism/Communism, poverty is a state of existence at birth. You are either born in poverty, where you will stay. Or you are born among the elite, where you will stay. Examples of this fact, exist throughout history, all over the globe.

In a capitalist society, poverty is really two different states:
1) A temporary, escape-able condition (such as a business closure) or
2) A result of non participation in opportunities afforded to you.

Socialism is when government takes over companies and entire industries like in Cuba or Venezuela. With communism toss in no ownership of private property. Now communist government takeovers in places like China, or Vietnam they eventually discovered that relative to economies their ideas were as bad as possible, thus they switched to capitalism.

Absolutely, or bastardized systems based on it.
China's economic system is based on forced labor. From both the production that comes from it, and foreign investors that want a piece of it.
Like Mark Cuban... a typical global liberal elitist. He invest 100s' $millions in China every year, and other nations that are primarily slave laborist - and then has the audacity to come off as one of the good guys.
He is a piece of shit. And the best example I can think of how America is slowly killing itself.... but that is another topic.

We can agree that America is slowly killing itself.

The rest of the world knows that China has elevated hundreds of millions of it's people up out of poverty. US hate propaganda against China isn't working anymore.

A review of China's history would tell you a lot about how China was destroyed repeatedly throughout history by greedy capitalist nations.
That can never happen again because China is a powerful nation with the nuclear deterrent.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Let's be real, upward mobility has been virtually shut down by the usurous student loan industry.

It has been designed to do just that too. The employers today don't want ambition. They want complete subservience.

Remember, that communism is only ever seriously disgussed where people have been living in deadly slave-like conditions.

As with the rubber plantations of Vietnam.

As with the hacienda system in Latin America.

As with people being wantonly exposed to plague by evil managers who make wagers on who dies first.

1) The student loan industry, and I can appreciate you also see it that way, because that is what it is, is a system developed by mostly Democrats that predictably resulted in disastrous consequences for students/parents and a HUGE win for pockets of the college system in America. Liberalism at it's core is a policy system based on idealism. This system was developed based on an IDEA that "everyone should go to college". The end result was skyrocketing tuition and student housing. Nearly overnight, colleges dramatically increased their housing units to take advantage of the government paying for not only tuition - but housing also. And the profits off of these quad units is astronomical.
2) "Employers don't want ambition" - God that is just stupid. I don't know how else to put it. I would guess you are referring to what they want from the lowest rung of employment... such as a burger flipper. You would be right, they don't need ambition from burger flippers. They just need them to flip the burgers when the beeping tells them to. But in ALL other types of jobs of course they want ambition, but not without a serious work ethic to go along with it.
3) Everything else you say... not sure where you are going with it, or the point.

Largely agree about liberalism and student loans.

As to the employers want ambition, not anymore. The modern workplace has become increasingly about enforced mediocrity, and removing all ownership of a job well done--whatever it takes to keep people "in their place.". Kids today don't fear communism, because it is what they have already been experiencing in the workplace

Kids today have no clue about reality.
Especially on economic principles.
Seriously, how clueless does one STILL have to be to say socialism is better than a market system??
FFS - every single example throughout the history of mankind - socialism/communism results in widespread - grinding poverty people have no ability to get out of, and countries that got out of communism and moved towards a market based system - improved the lives of their citizens 10 fold.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

I wrote this in another thread, but decided it needs it's own.

Poverty:

In Socialism/Communism, poverty is a state of existence at birth. You are either born in poverty, where you will stay. Or you are born among the elite, where you will stay. Examples of this fact, exist throughout history, all over the globe.

In a capitalist society, poverty is really two different states:
1) A temporary, escape-able condition (such as a business closure) or
2) A result of non participation in opportunities afforded to you.

Socialism is when government takes over companies and entire industries like in Cuba or Venezuela. With communism toss in no ownership of private property. Now communist government takeovers in places like China, or Vietnam they eventually discovered that relative to economies their ideas were as bad as possible, thus they switched to capitalism.

Absolutely, or bastardized systems based on it.
China's economic system is based on forced labor. From both the production that comes from it, and foreign investors that want a piece of it.
Like Mark Cuban... a typical global liberal elitist. He invest 100s' $millions in China every year, and other nations that are primarily slave laborist - and then has the audacity to come off as one of the good guys.
He is a piece of shit. And the best example I can think of how America is slowly killing itself.... but that is another topic.

We can agree that America is slowly killing itself.

The rest of the world knows that China has elevated hundreds of millions of it's people up out of poverty. US hate propaganda against China isn't working anymore.

A review of China's history would tell you a lot about how China was destroyed repeatedly throughout history by greedy capitalist nations.
That can never happen again because China is a powerful nation with the nuclear deterrent.

Dude you are pretty funny. Albeit unintentional.
China is a country neck deep in third world poverty. China uses slave/forced labor on a regular basis.
In Hong Kong alone, millions of citizens live in "micro apartments"... literally about the size of a car... or SMALLER. And these are people with full time jobs. A HUGE percentage of the population in the service industry - have no homes. They have one day off a week where they gather in large park settings and camp out on their day off.... because they are homeless.... but fully employed. But due to China's pitiful wages, they cannot possibly afford even a micro apartment.

 

[Agit8r]

Let's be real, upward mobility has been virtually shut down by the usurous student loan industry.

It has been designed to do just that too. The employers today don't want ambition. They want complete subservience.

Remember, that communism is only ever seriously disgussed where people have been living in deadly slave-like conditions.

As with the rubber plantations of Vietnam.

As with the hacienda system in Latin America.

As with people being wantonly exposed to plague by evil managers who make wagers on who dies first.

1) The student loan industry, and I can appreciate you also see it that way, because that is what it is, is a system developed by mostly Democrats that predictably resulted in disastrous consequences for students/parents and a HUGE win for pockets of the college system in America. Liberalism at it's core is a policy system based on idealism. This system was developed based on an IDEA that "everyone should go to college". The end result was skyrocketing tuition and student housing. Nearly overnight, colleges dramatically increased their housing units to take advantage of the government paying for not only tuition - but housing also. And the profits off of these quad units is astronomical.
2) "Employers don't want ambition" - God that is just stupid. I don't know how else to put it. I would guess you are referring to what they want from the lowest rung of employment... such as a burger flipper. You would be right, they don't need ambition from burger flippers. They just need them to flip the burgers when the beeping tells them to. But in ALL other types of jobs of course they want ambition, but not without a serious work ethic to go along with it.
3) Everything else you say... not sure where you are going with it, or the point.

Largely agree about liberalism and student loans.

As to the employers want ambition, not anymore. The modern workplace has become increasingly about enforced mediocrity, and removing all ownership of a job well done--whatever it takes to keep people "in their place.". Kids today don't fear communism, because it is what they have already been experiencing in the workplace

Kids today have no clue about reality.
Especially on economic principles.
Seriously, how clueless does one STILL have to be to say socialism is better than a market system??
FFS - every single example throughout the history of mankind - socialism/communism results in widespread - grinding poverty people have no ability to get out of, and countries that got out of communism and moved towards a market based system - improved the lives of their citizens 10 fold.

I'm not arguing on behalf of communism. I am explaining that trends have consequences. If the younger generations had been enfranchised into the capitalist system--by being allowed to own anything--they wouldn't be moving toward what they have been told is the only alternative.

Though in fairness I must note that the corporate media calling every useful function of government "socialist" or "communist" has undoubtedly led many people to believe that if they want a government that performs useful functions--their only choice for that is a scoialist one.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Let's be real, upward mobility has been virtually shut down by the usurous student loan industry.

It has been designed to do just that too. The employers today don't want ambition. They want complete subservience.

Remember, that communism is only ever seriously disgussed where people have been living in deadly slave-like conditions.

As with the rubber plantations of Vietnam.

As with the hacienda system in Latin America.

As with people being wantonly exposed to plague by evil managers who make wagers on who dies first.

1) The student loan industry, and I can appreciate you also see it that way, because that is what it is, is a system developed by mostly Democrats that predictably resulted in disastrous consequences for students/parents and a HUGE win for pockets of the college system in America. Liberalism at it's core is a policy system based on idealism. This system was developed based on an IDEA that "everyone should go to college". The end result was skyrocketing tuition and student housing. Nearly overnight, colleges dramatically increased their housing units to take advantage of the government paying for not only tuition - but housing also. And the profits off of these quad units is astronomical.
2) "Employers don't want ambition" - God that is just stupid. I don't know how else to put it. I would guess you are referring to what they want from the lowest rung of employment... such as a burger flipper. You would be right, they don't need ambition from burger flippers. They just need them to flip the burgers when the beeping tells them to. But in ALL other types of jobs of course they want ambition, but not without a serious work ethic to go along with it.
3) Everything else you say... not sure where you are going with it, or the point.

Largely agree about liberalism and student loans.

As to the employers want ambition, not anymore. The modern workplace has become increasingly about enforced mediocrity, and removing all ownership of a job well done--whatever it takes to keep people "in their place.". Kids today don't fear communism, because it is what they have already been experiencing in the workplace

Kids today have no clue about reality.
Especially on economic principles.
Seriously, how clueless does one STILL have to be to say socialism is better than a market system??
FFS - every single example throughout the history of mankind - socialism/communism results in widespread - grinding poverty people have no ability to get out of, and countries that got out of communism and moved towards a market based system - improved the lives of their citizens 10 fold.

I'm not arguing on behalf of communism. I am explaining that trends have consequences. If the younger generations had been enfranchised into the capitalist system--by being allowed to own anything--they wouldn't be moving toward what they have been told is the only alternative.

Though in fairness I must note that the corporate media calling every useful function of government "socialist" or "communist" has undoubtedly led many people to believe that if they want a government that performs useful functions--their only choice for that is a scoialist one.

From what I think you are saying, or my interpretation thereof - I agree.
With my own two kids (now 25 and 30)
When they were young I operated a successful printing company. I earned into the 6 figures every year for 9 years of that time.... until 2008 happened (another story). They did not need to get a job in high school or college. But I made them get one anyway. I paid for half of their first cars. I paid for their room and board during college, but not their tuition. They got loans for that. They both worked during college as well. It made it harder on them.
But I was deeply determined for them to learn and appreciate the value of money. And nothing teaches that better than earning your own money... and making that the only way you could do/have certain things is to work and earn your own money.
Today they are doing fantastic. Far better than I was at their age. They both have 5 figures in the bank as liquid cash, on top of that college funds for their kids and retirement funds. They are this way because of how I taught then the value of money. Money isn't what you can buy with it, it is what you don't have to worry about when you have it.... but yet again... another story

 

[Donald H]

Seriously, how clueless does one STILL have to be to say socialism is better than a market system??

What socialism? To even begin to discuss the question, it needs to be said that socialism and socially responsible capitalism are two entirely different things. Canada is not a socialist country

FFS - every single example throughout the history of mankind - socialism/communism results in widespread - grinding poverty people have no ability to get out of,..........

That's not true. China is a living example of how communism is bringing great wealth to it's people and will continue to do so as long as communist principles of wealth sharing are upheld.
Cuba is an example of greedy capitalism breeding corruption throughout the country to the extent of the people demanding revolution to stop the corruption and evil mafia abuse of the people's resources. Communism has very slowly corrected that but has been helf back by US interference and dirty tricks. China has finally moved in and Cuba is beginning to prosper enormously.

......... and countries that got out of communism and moved towards a market based system - improved the lives of their citizens 10 fold.

Communism in Venezuela has become the people's choice out of necessity, as is much the same as with Cuba. US interference aimed at capturing Venezuela's enormous wealth has almost destroyed their country. But as US influence is gradually negated by other more friendly nations, they will begin to prosper under their existing communist system.

Venezuela will eventually be allowed to adopt socially responsible capitalism under their own terms, and can become a new democracy in time.

With that Venezuela will become capable of maintaining state control of their oil resources. That unfortunately will mean that America will continue to interfere because America wants and needs control over the world's oil resources.

When Communism is backed up by the nuclear deterrent to US military aggression, communism can offer tremendous prosperity to a country's people.

What is communism in today's world but just a stepping stone toward prosperity for the world's poorest countries?

What is capitalism in a poor country but a system in which the wealthiest few steal the country's wealth from the hungry masses? And is enforced and upheld by America for profit!

 

[Donald H]

Let's be real, upward mobility has been virtually shut down by the usurous student loan industry.

It has been designed to do just that too. The employers today don't want ambition. They want complete subservience.

Remember, that communism is only ever seriously disgussed where people have been living in deadly slave-like conditions.

As with the rubber plantations of Vietnam.

As with the hacienda system in Latin America.

As with people being wantonly exposed to plague by evil managers who make wagers on who dies first.

1) The student loan industry, and I can appreciate you also see it that way, because that is what it is, is a system developed by mostly Democrats that predictably resulted in disastrous consequences for students/parents and a HUGE win for pockets of the college system in America. Liberalism at it's core is a policy system based on idealism. This system was developed based on an IDEA that "everyone should go to college". The end result was skyrocketing tuition and student housing. Nearly overnight, colleges dramatically increased their housing units to take advantage of the government paying for not only tuition - but housing also. And the profits off of these quad units is astronomical.
2) "Employers don't want ambition" - God that is just stupid. I don't know how else to put it. I would guess you are referring to what they want from the lowest rung of employment... such as a burger flipper. You would be right, they don't need ambition from burger flippers. They just need them to flip the burgers when the beeping tells them to. But in ALL other types of jobs of course they want ambition, but not without a serious work ethic to go along with it.
3) Everything else you say... not sure where you are going with it, or the point.

Largely agree about liberalism and student loans.

As to the employers want ambition, not anymore. The modern workplace has become increasingly about enforced mediocrity, and removing all ownership of a job well done--whatever it takes to keep people "in their place.". Kids today don't fear communism, because it is what they have already been experiencing in the workplace

Kids today have no clue about reality.
Especially on economic principles.
Seriously, how clueless does one STILL have to be to say socialism is better than a market system??
FFS - every single example throughout the history of mankind - socialism/communism results in widespread - grinding poverty people have no ability to get out of, and countries that got out of communism and moved towards a market based system - improved the lives of their citizens 10 fold.

I'm not arguing on behalf of communism. I am explaining that trends have consequences. If the younger generations had been enfranchised into the capitalist system--by being allowed to own anything--they wouldn't be moving toward what they have been told is the only alternative.

Though in fairness I must note that the corporate media calling every useful function of government "socialist" or "communist" has undoubtedly led many people to believe that if they want a government that performs useful functions--their only choice for that is a scoialist one.

From what I think you are saying, or my interpretation thereof - I agree.
With my own two kids (now 25 and 30)
When they were young I operated a successful printing company. I earned into the 6 figures every year for 9 years of that time.... until 2008 happened (another story). They did not need to get a job in high school or college. But I made them get one anyway. I paid for half of their first cars. I paid for their room and board during college, but not their tuition. They got loans for that. They both worked during college as well. It made it harder on them.
But I was deeply determined for them to learn and appreciate the value of money. And nothing teaches that better than earning your own money... and making that the only way you could do/have certain things is to work and earn your own money.
Today they are doing fantastic. Far better than I was at their age. They both have 5 figures in the bank as liquid cash, on top of that college funds for their kids and retirement funds. They are this way because of how I taught then the value of money. Money isn't what you can buy with it, it is what you don't have to worry about when you have it.... but yet again... another story

Isn't it something like 60% of Americans don't have $400 in reserve for a rainy day?

Wasn't it an American who received a $25,000 bill for an ambulance ride to a hospital?

 

[AZrailwhale]

I wrote this in another thread, but decided it needs it's own.

Poverty:

In Socialism/Communism, poverty is a state of existence at birth. You are either born in poverty, where you will stay. Or you are born among the elite, where you will stay. Examples of this fact, exist throughout history, all over the globe.

In a capitalist society, poverty is really two different states:
1) A temporary, escape-able condition (such as a business closure) or
2) A result of non participation in opportunities afforded to you.

Socialism is when government takes over companies and entire industries like in Cuba or Venezuela. With communism toss in no ownership of private property. Now communist government takeovers in places like China, or Vietnam they eventually discovered that relative to economies their ideas were as bad as possible, thus they switched to capitalism.

No, they switched to a combination of communism and crony-capitalism where the government uses it's central control to favor particular individuals who are almost always favored party members, or members of the ruling class.

 

[AMart]

I wrote this in another thread, but decided it needs it's own.

Poverty:

In Socialism/Communism, poverty is a state of existence at birth. You are either born in poverty, where you will stay. Or you are born among the elite, where you will stay. Examples of this fact, exist throughout history, all over the globe.

In a capitalist society, poverty is really two different states:
1) A temporary, escape-able condition (such as a business closure) or
2) A result of non participation in opportunities afforded to you.

Socialism is when government takes over companies and entire industries like in Cuba or Venezuela. With communism toss in no ownership of private property. Now communist government takeovers in places like China, or Vietnam they eventually discovered that relative to economies their ideas were as bad as possible, thus they switched to capitalism.

No, they switched to a combination of communism and crony-capitalism where the government uses it's central control to favor particular individuals who are almost always favored party members, or members of the ruling class.

Indeed, and one has to grease local CCP members if you want to get projects under construction.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Seriously, how clueless does one STILL have to be to say socialism is better than a market system??

What socialism? To even begin to discuss the question, it needs to be said that socialism and socially responsible capitalism are two entirely different things. Canada is not a socialist country

FFS - every single example throughout the history of mankind - socialism/communism results in widespread - grinding poverty people have no ability to get out of,..........

That's not true. China is a living example of how communism is bringing great wealth to it's people and will continue to do so as long as communist principles of wealth sharing are upheld.
Cuba is an example of greedy capitalism breeding corruption throughout the country to the extent of the people demanding revolution to stop the corruption and evil mafia abuse of the people's resources. Communism has very slowly corrected that but has been helf back by US interference and dirty tricks. China has finally moved in and Cuba is beginning to prosper enormously.

......... and countries that got out of communism and moved towards a market based system - improved the lives of their citizens 10 fold.

Communism in Venezuela has become the people's choice out of necessity, as is much the same as with Cuba. US interference aimed at capturing Venezuela's enormous wealth has almost destroyed their country. But as US influence is gradually negated by other more friendly nations, they will begin to prosper under their existing communist system.

Venezuela will eventually be allowed to adopt socially responsible capitalism under their own terms, and can become a new democracy in time.

With that Venezuela will become capable of maintaining state control of their oil resources. That unfortunately will mean that America will continue to interfere because America wants and needs control over the world's oil resources.

When Communism is backed up by the nuclear deterrent to US military aggression, communism can offer tremendous prosperity to a country's people.

What is communism in today's world but just a stepping stone toward prosperity for the world's poorest countries?

What is capitalism in a poor country but a system in which the wealthiest few steal the country's wealth from the hungry masses? And is enforced and upheld by America for profit!

Okay... well eventually you will grow up.
And perhaps in that time you will learn to read and understand what you read.
That sounds like an insult, it is not intended to be. You need to read a WHOLE lot more on China. China is a deplorable system based on forced/slave labor. A system that - you bet - absolutely rose some out of poverty - but on the backs of millions of forced labor camps.
Read about how China got into the wine business, and became one of the worlds largest wine producers. You know how they did it?
See - you don't know that they went out to villages of primarily agricultural people... just showed up with dozens of buses one day, and forced them - at gunpoint - into those buses and put them to work in wine vineyards where they are forced to work 6 days a week and live in concrete boxes.
Apparently you support that... applaud that.
So I guess it would make your day if one day soldiers appeared at your door, told you you had a few minutes to pack up your shit and get on a bus to go to work in the orange groves in Florida.

And then one of your evident heroes on the popular Shark Tank TV show... made millions investing in that Chinese wine markets... one of your beloved Canadians

 

[alang1216]

I wrote this in another thread, but decided it needs it's own.

Poverty:

In Socialism/Communism, poverty is a state of existence at birth. You are either born in poverty, where you will stay. Or you are born among the elite, where you will stay. Examples of this fact, exist throughout history, all over the globe.

In a capitalist society, poverty is really two different states:
1) A temporary, escape-able condition (such as a business closure) or
2) A result of non participation in opportunities afforded to you.

You are of course entitled to your opinion but I'd bet the reality is that upward mobility under Socialism/Communism is no different than that under Capitalism.

Demarks ranks #1 in social mobility and they are much more socialist than the US is.

Capitalism can perform as efficiently in a communist country as it does in a Democratic country.

Communism and Democracy are closer to being opposites than are Communism and Capitalism.

At least we can get that established!

I think your definitions are not accurate. Socialism, Communism, and Capitalism are economic systems, democracy is a political system. You can have a Socialist, Communist, or Capitalist democracy just as you can have a Socialist, Communist, or Capitalist totalitarian system.

 

[alang1216]

I wrote this in another thread, but decided it needs it's own.

Poverty:

In Socialism/Communism, poverty is a state of existence at birth. You are either born in poverty, where you will stay. Or you are born among the elite, where you will stay. Examples of this fact, exist throughout history, all over the globe.

In a capitalist society, poverty is really two different states:
1) A temporary, escape-able condition (such as a business closure) or
2) A result of non participation in opportunities afforded to you.

You are of course entitled to your opinion but I'd bet the reality is that upward mobility under Socialism/Communism is no different than that under Capitalism.

Demarks ranks #1 in social mobility and they are much more socialist than the US is.

Bullshit.
Denmark is not a socialist nation. Not even close. They have social programs, but their economic system is actually more capitalist than ours is.
It wholly depends on foreign investment. Without foreign markets and investment thereof, Denmark would have an economic holocaust.
And - it happens to be one of the most costliest places to live in the world.

China too has social programs, but their economic system is actually as capitalist as ours is. It was wholly dependent on foreign investment after Mao died but is much richer now. Without foreign markets and investment thereof, China too would have an economic holocaust.

BTW, Denmark is one of the happiest countries.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

I wrote this in another thread, but decided it needs it's own.

Poverty:

In Socialism/Communism, poverty is a state of existence at birth. You are either born in poverty, where you will stay. Or you are born among the elite, where you will stay. Examples of this fact, exist throughout history, all over the globe.

In a capitalist society, poverty is really two different states:
1) A temporary, escape-able condition (such as a business closure) or
2) A result of non participation in opportunities afforded to you.

You are of course entitled to your opinion but I'd bet the reality is that upward mobility under Socialism/Communism is no different than that under Capitalism.

Demarks ranks #1 in social mobility and they are much more socialist than the US is.

Bullshit.
Denmark is not a socialist nation. Not even close. They have social programs, but their economic system is actually more capitalist than ours is.
It wholly depends on foreign investment. Without foreign markets and investment thereof, Denmark would have an economic holocaust.
And - it happens to be one of the most costliest places to live in the world.

China too has social programs, but their economic system is actually as capitalist as ours is. It was wholly dependent on foreign investment after Mao died but is much richer now. Without foreign markets and investment thereof, China too would have an economic holocaust.

BTW, Denmark is one of the happiest countries.

China is capitalism.... uh... you better do some more reading. China is the opposite of capitalism.