Socialism vs Capitalism Controlled Experiment - Look No Further than Korea

[Jack4jill]

Apologies for posting something above your pay grade, bub.

Why don't you explain it to me then.

And the excuses start in 3, 2, 1 ......

I suggest that you read up on the situation in Venezuela and get back to us.

I'm asking you to explain it. You made the statement.

(We both know you can't explain it. You're just a parrot but it's funny to watch you squirm)

You really are an moron in a hardened bubble, aren't you hun.

Do you read anything besides Twitter, Vox and USMB?

Even the NY Times gets some of it right.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/28/world/americas/venezuela-crisis-what-next.html?_r=0

Again, I asked you to explain your statement relating Venezuela to North Korea. Try and stick to what you said. You remember what you said, right?

Only the utterly ignorant can say such stupid things.

And then can't even begin to defend them of course.

 

[boedicca]

Apologies for posting something above your pay grade, bub.

Why don't you explain it to me then.

And the excuses start in 3, 2, 1 ......

I suggest that you read up on the situation in Venezuela and get back to us.

I'm asking you to explain it. You made the statement.

(We both know you can't explain it. You're just a parrot but it's funny to watch you squirm)

Yes, you really are stupid enough to not understand that Venezuela is a strong competitor with North Korea for being an Epic Fail due to Socialism.

You really are an moron in a hardened bubble, aren't you hun.

Do you read anything besides Twitter, Vox and USMB?

Even the NY Times gets some of it right.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/28/world/americas/venezuela-crisis-what-next.html?_r=0

Again, I asked you to explain your statement relating Venezuela to North Korea. Try and stick to what you said. You remember what you said, right?

 

[Jack4jill]

Whatever socialism is, many nations today have a mixture of socialism and capitalism as does the United States and most European nations.

And that is because, kids, capitalism not the solution to every problem.

It also needs a good government to even exist. As we can see from South Korea, well planned government action can make for a kick-ass economy.

 

[davecmarino]

Now, back to the adult chat.

Venezuela did the opposite of what South Korea did. Venezuela, in their pursuit of political power, backed a socialist program that would remove the influence of their business leaders and put the control of production into the hands of the state. That mistake lead to the government choosing political hacks to run these companies. These people had neither the experience or the drive that comes from a profit motive to advance the condition of these companies and create an expanding economic environment. Socialism tends to push people toward doing the minimum to get by and over time your economic prospects shrink.

What Venezuela did is the inevitable outcome of socialism.

 

[RDD_1210]

Why don't you explain it to me then.

And the excuses start in 3, 2, 1 ......

I suggest that you read up on the situation in Venezuela and get back to us.

I'm asking you to explain it. You made the statement.

(We both know you can't explain it. You're just a parrot but it's funny to watch you squirm)

You really are an moron in a hardened bubble, aren't you hun.

Do you read anything besides Twitter, Vox and USMB?

Even the NY Times gets some of it right.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/28/world/americas/venezuela-crisis-what-next.html?_r=0

Again, I asked you to explain your statement relating Venezuela to North Korea. Try and stick to what you said. You remember what you said, right?

Only the utterly ignorant can say such stupid things.

And then can't even begin to defend them of course.

She's just throwing buzzwords out there and thinks she's being smart. She's not and now she's pissed she's actually being asked to explain what she means.

 

[Jack4jill]

South Korea, the wonder of Free Market Capitalism, directed by a strong central government based on five-year plans after we paid for their schools and communications.

/thread

 

[RDD_1210]

Now, back to the adult chat.

Venezuela did the opposite of what South Korea did. Venezuela, in their pursuit of political power, backed a socialist program that would remove the influence of their business leaders and put the control of production into the hands of the state. That mistake lead to the government choosing political hacks to run these companies. These people had neither the experience or the drive that comes from a profit motive to advance the condition of these companies and create an expanding economic environment. Socialism tends to push people toward doing the minimum to get by and over time your economic prospects shrink.

What Venezuela did is the inevitable outcome of socialism.

Again, NO ONE is advocating pure socialism here. Not even close.

How fucking dense can you people be?

 

[Jack4jill]

How fucking dense can you people be?

Like stupidity, that is also limitless.

 

[Jack4jill]

I know, let's discuss how the government having a plan for the economy is a terrible thing?

We can start with the very healthy economy based decades of five-year government plans in South Korea.

 

[davecmarino]

South Korea looked at the capitalism of the other Asian Tigers and as these countries where still in a high growth development situation, they got a view of the way capitalism starts out without the over regulation and the compromises that are in place in Europe and the United States. Korea saw that they could enter the tech industry with a competitive advantage and leveraged that advantage in the same manner than the early United States did with using tech for agricultural development and a pool of cheap labor.

This is the same ideas that eventually helped the Chinese people break from traditional Communist Economic policies to bring a high growth economy to their country.

The magic is not if capitalism will put an economy into a high growth model but if it is sustainable once the government starts to regulate these businesses too heavily.

I believe that protectionism can still bring back a high growth model to the United States and that the thing holding it back is the massive amount of regulation and the poor tax structure. US businesses should be taxed less on income and more on import/export. Let these companies make as much money overseas as they desire without a high tax rate. A flat tax on foreign income so to speak.

The biggest desire is to bring manufacturing back to the United States and the only way you can compete with a foreign market's lower labor cost is to make the companies pay that cost difference on the importation of their products and services. We are the biggest market in the world and our poor policies have allowed companies to consolidate to the point that the economies of scale are working against the working class.

Capitalism works as long as it isn't polluted with too many other motivations and the government's desire to be large is the biggest problem we have in growing our economy. It is the reason why we are seeing such meager growth rates in our own GDP. Why does a government employee still get a pension while the modern workers don't even get 401Ks in many instances? The working class has to pay for the overburdened salary of a person who is no longer producing for the good of the people. How many workers work 25 years and then retire?

Government policies have driven business policies since inception and if the government wants too much, it isn't taking from the big business. It is taking from the worker and anything else being said is just bullshit rhetoric on the part of government.

 

[Jack4jill]

South Korea looked at the capitalism of the other Asian Tigers and as these countries where still in a high growth development situation, they got a view of the way capitalism starts out without the over regulation and the compromises that are in place in Europe and the United States. Korea saw that they could enter the tech industry with a competitive advantage and leveraged that advantage in the same manner than the early United States did with using tech for agricultural development and a pool of cheap labor.

This is the same ideas that eventually helped the Chinese people break from traditional Communist Economic policies to bring a high growth economy to their country.

The magic is not if capitalism will put an economy into a high growth model but if it is sustainable once the government starts to regulate these businesses too heavily.

I believe that protectionism can still bring back a high growth model to the United States and that the thing holding it back is the massive amount of regulation and the poor tax structure. US businesses should be taxed less on income and more on import/export. Let these companies make as much money overseas as they desire without a high tax rate. A flat tax on foreign income so to speak.

The biggest desire is to bring manufacturing back to the United States and the only way you can compete with a foreign market's lower labor cost is to make the companies pay that cost difference on the importation of their products and services. We are the biggest market in the world and our poor policies have allowed companies to consolidate to the point that the economies of scale are working against the working class.

Capitalism works as long as it isn't polluted with too many other motivations and the government's desire to be large is the biggest problem we have in growing our economy. It is the reason why we are seeing such meager growth rates in our own GDP. Why does a government employee still get a pension while the modern workers don't even get 401Ks in many instances? The working class has to pay for the overburdened salary of a person who is no longer producing for the good of the people. How many workers work 25 years and then retire?

Government policies have driven business policies since inception and if the government wants too much, it isn't taking from the big business. It is taking from the worker and anything else being said is just bullshit rhetoric on the part of government.

For a Capitalist, you're a dandy Marxist.

While my arguments with you would not be that difficult,most here would hang from the nearest tree.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Prior to WW II Korea was a poor 3rd world country. During WWII Korea was occupied and devastated by Japan. After WW II the Soviets took the north and established a communist/socialist society and the US took the south and established a capitalist society. The Korean War strengthen the total separation of these two new societies.

Both countries have all similar traits: same people (Koreans), similar coastal land, similar natural resources, similar land mass etc. Yet the only difference is the north adopted communism/socialism and the south adopted capitalism.

The results are undeniable and telling. South Korea became a rich, 1st world, industrialized nation and a country to envy. North Korea is a 3rd world shit hole, that has a horrible economy, no exports, produces nothing and there are annual food storage in which a good percentage of the population starve.

But let socialist like Bernie and his lazy followers tell you the joy of socialism.

Who in the US is arguing for North Korean style socialism?

 

[NYcarbineer]

South Korea for decades has been taking advantage of our defense expenditures on their behalf to bolster their own non-defense economy.

 

[davecmarino]

South Korea for decades has been taking advantage of our defense expenditures on their behalf to bolster their own non-defense economy.

They have indeed, but it doesn't cost them much as our stupid government happily pays the bill to keep communist China and N. Korea in check. That means that we pay the bill for the defense of a foreign nation. It is the same in NATO, where we pay 25% of the annual costs and put up almost 50% of the equipment and infrastructure.

It isn't like these countries don't have the money today to pick up the cost but it is just too good of a deal that American workers pay for their protection.

I don't think that use of the military is a socialist or capitalist ideal. Some people seem to believe that paying for a standing army is socialism but it isn't. Socialism is not defined by the necessary government services, only the unnecessary ones. While we can debate about the size and scope of the military needed, it would most likely be agreed that some military is needed no matter what. Public infrastructure is not socialism as once a need of the public for infrastructure is identified, building it does not increase the individual citizen's control. It is not a substitute for the need to produce for your own welfare.

Socialism is about providing the worker with control of the system of their labor. S. Korea is not socialist. Social Programs can be argued to provided for some measure of socialism in that some programs are a replacement for work. Things like welfare, medicare....these provide individual benefits specific to a user that reduces or eliminates their need and or desire to provide these same individual benefits for their own well being.

Yes, there is some of this in every society because people have an innate desire to care for the less fortunate and the sick or injured. But this again, doesn't make the society a socialist society.

Words have become twisted through the centrifuge of politics. The meanings begin to be distorted over time as the different forces within a society try to steer the masses to a desired result. Today we make up compound words or alternate words to play with the definition of things instead of discussing the true desired results.

Capitalism has been slowly eroded into Oligarchy or Corporatism not because of the function of economics but because of the function of politics. Communism has softened into Democratic-Socialism to explain that we aren't talking about the people owning a larger stake in their own production but of government owning a larger stake in it for the good of the society. Taxation has become a force against income inequality but we never discuss the time inequality of those who work to support to their own families and pay taxes to support others and those who stay home all day and have all this "creative" time paid for by the efforts of the workers who are actually just losing more control over their own production.

 

[Norman]

Prior to WW II Korea was a poor 3rd world country. During WWII Korea was occupied and devastated by Japan. After WW II the Soviets took the north and established a communist/socialist society and the US took the south and established a capitalist society. The Korean War strengthen the total separation of these two new societies.

Both countries have all similar traits: same people (Koreans), similar coastal land, similar natural resources, similar land mass etc. Yet the only difference is the north adopted communism/socialism and the south adopted capitalism.

The results are undeniable and telling. South Korea became a rich, 1st world, industrialized nation and a country to envy. North Korea is a 3rd world shit hole, that has a horrible economy, no exports, produces nothing and there are annual food storage in which a good percentage of the population starve.

But let socialist like Bernie and his lazy followers tell you the joy of socialism.

East/West Germany?

The same happens every-time this experiment is tried. The law of gravity will be violated before this one... Socialism never works.

The Government of South Korea is minuscule and even a retard could not possibly make the argument that it's the reason why South Korea is successful. The fact is indeed it is the LACK OF government that is the difference between the failures of North Korea and success of the South. Libs of course have trouble understanding this and claim that the government is the reason for the success, even if it's completely insignificant, without any proof what-so-ever.

 

[Norman]

How South Korea became South Korea - lots of socialism: ERIEP

Government action can work, kids, when you are actually governing that is.

Nope, the SK government is minuscule and was even smaller in the past.

If you want to study how government action can work, please move to North Korea. There is no reason to believe the government policies were in any part responsible for the success... when indeed the only significant difference between the two nations is big government... and one is a failure.

 

[Jack4jill]

How South Korea became South Korea - lots of socialism: ERIEP

Government action can work, kids, when you are actually governing that is.

Nope, the SK government is minuscule and was even smaller in the past.

If you want to study how government action can work, please move to North Korea. There is no reason to believe the government policies were in any part responsible for the success... when indeed the only difference between the two nations is big government... and one is a failure.

Read the damn thread. The links to all of the government policy and controls have been published.

When you start with a Five-Year Plan, that ain't no Free Market capitalism.

 

[Norman]

How South Korea became South Korea - lots of socialism: ERIEP

Government action can work, kids, when you are actually governing that is.

Nope, the SK government is minuscule and was even smaller in the past.

If you want to study how government action can work, please move to North Korea. There is no reason to believe the government policies were in any part responsible for the success... when indeed the only difference between the two nations is big government... and one is a failure.

Read the damn thread. The links to all of the government policy and controls have been published.

When you start with a Five-Year Plan, that ain't no Free Market capitalism.

If that plan is 0.2% of the economy, yes it is. And may I remind you that even if it wasn't the experiment proves that freer economy still works better.

(regressive logic presented above).

 

[Jack4jill]

How South Korea became South Korea - lots of socialism: ERIEP

Government action can work, kids, when you are actually governing that is.

Nope, the SK government is minuscule and was even smaller in the past.

If you want to study how government action can work, please move to North Korea. There is no reason to believe the government policies were in any part responsible for the success... when indeed the only difference between the two nations is big government... and one is a failure.

Read the damn thread. The links to all of the government policy and controls have been published.

When you start with a Five-Year Plan, that ain't no Free Market capitalism.

If that plan is 0.2% of the economy, yes it is.

It wasn't.

 

[Norman]

How South Korea became South Korea - lots of socialism: ERIEP

Government action can work, kids, when you are actually governing that is.

Nope, the SK government is minuscule and was even smaller in the past.

If you want to study how government action can work, please move to North Korea. There is no reason to believe the government policies were in any part responsible for the success... when indeed the only difference between the two nations is big government... and one is a failure.

Read the damn thread. The links to all of the government policy and controls have been published.

When you start with a Five-Year Plan, that ain't no Free Market capitalism.

If that plan is 0.2% of the economy, yes it is.

It wasn't.

Compared to the disaster of North Korea, it sure was.

Even today, Korea has smaller government than the USA, even if it's not necessarily freer nation.

Govt Spending in Korea (trading economics % of economy - the statistic might not be aggregated).

So, was it the 10% of government spending, or the 90% (roughly) of private sector that made Korea successful?

I will take my bets. You on the other hand can equate 1000 with 1, and therefore socialism with capitalism, if you want to prove without any doubt, that you are indeed a retard.

So there we have it, capitalism works, socialism doesn't in the case... And it's simply moronic to call SK socialist in this context, especially when comparing it to NK. SK simply can't be considered socialist (or more socialist of the two), by anyone even remotely competent.