Is Socialism all that its cracked up to be
Day 2,649, 19:07
•
Published in Ireland 
•
by
•
by Releasethe Krakken
Socialism is a social and economic system characterised by social ownership of the means of production and co-operative management of the economy,[1][2] as well as a political theory and movement that aims at the establishment of such a system.
Will a person with a privileged background when he is earning a decent salary and building up his estate really share the means with others or want to share.
Contrasting would a person growing up poor want to life in a system where everything is split and he just get enough to life.
You all say a lot of socialism but i doubt any of you will actually really ever support it as a system for your own countries. Yes you will say give more of my tax money to the poor and the homeless. But who amongst you will say here is the money from the sale of my house give it to the homeless. I with my higher means will rent a property. You all claim to be socialist but bar the few students life the lives of rich capitalist (mostly)
i like most "africans" would when I make it prefer KASH and not socialism which mostly rich socialist folks preach. dont get me wrong south africa s probably one of the most socialist country if you stand still on any given corner you will be rewarded with some kind of pensions. but i truly belief a person that really suffered wants a better life for him and his family and not some socialist utopia where he and his fellow man just get enough to survive. Or when he is old have to rely on some measly government pension to survive.
Socialism breeds mediocrity ever heard about the rich russian with his innovative chain of coffee shops in the cold war era. No because he didnt exist. because communism subdued all capitalist ventures except if you were part of the social elite(wink wink)
Compare Russia with the USA and then with your starbucks coffee before you lie to me and say socialism won.
Yes give to the poor and have social programs but stop pretending that you will ever life in a system " characterized by social ownership of the means of production and co-operative management of the economy".
Will a person with a privileged background when he is earning a decent salary and building up his estate really share the means with others or want to share.
Contrasting would a person growing up poor want to life in a system where everything is split and he just get enough to life.
You all say a lot of socialism but i doubt any of you will actually really ever support it as a system for your own countries. Yes you will say give more of my tax money to the poor and the homeless. But who amongst you will say here is the money from the sale of my house give it to the homeless. I with my higher means will rent a property. You all claim to be socialist but bar the few students life the lives of rich capitalist (mostly)
i like most "africans" would when I make it prefer KASH and not socialism which mostly rich socialist folks preach. dont get me wrong south africa s probably one of the most socialist country if you stand still on any given corner you will be rewarded with some kind of pensions. but i truly belief a person that really suffered wants a better life for him and his family and not some socialist utopia where he and his fellow man just get enough to survive. Or when he is old have to rely on some measly government pension to survive.
Socialism breeds mediocrity ever heard about the rich russian with his innovative chain of coffee shops in the cold war era. No because he didnt exist. because communism subdued all capitalist ventures except if you were part of the social elite(wink wink)
Compare Russia with the USA and then with your starbucks coffee before you lie to me and say socialism won.
Yes give to the poor and have social programs but stop pretending that you will ever life in a system " characterized by social ownership of the means of production and co-operative management of the economy".
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
Except there is only one product in eRepublik worth mentioning: War.
Except there is only one product in RL worth mentioning: War. FTFY BB.
I dunno, science is pretty good generally.
Oh I prefer science and abhor war. Pragmatic pessimism strikes again.
War is the mother of science 😛
Fun fact, Moscow during the Cold War had more billionaires than any other city on Earth.
It seems you don't quite understand... what that definition is referring to is that, in a socialist society, the means of production (factories, farms, mines, etc) are owned by the workers. Those who are capable of more difficult or important jobs will be paid more for them, so it far from breeds mediocrity. As Marx said, "From each according to his own abilities, to each according to his own needs."
they still have a lot of rich ppl their called the russian mafia. russia dont compare with the usa or even smaller countries like japan.
thats why many woman of them leaves the country. also i dont think you understand how unbelievably cruel of a system this was. yes the members of the kgb had a nice life most other people had no freedom of speech and could not even leave their country. i think your info is anyway incorrect. of course socialism breeds mediocrity russia is a prime example of an incredibly under developed country. there was no business stars in russia. there was an accepted view. its just an pretentious pompous wannabe like yourself that in any way describe the ussr as a success.
what of all the people that died under their regime. how can you describe this as an success a country with almost no individual freedom. look at the totality : stalin, lenin and afterwards.
also for tax reasons individuals in the usa will hide their income in companies so your stat that you quote is very deceptive.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2255693/Last-pictures-life-iron-curtain-collapse-USSR.html
I'm sorry... did I say the USSR was a success? I said rich people lived there. And you seem to not realize, if you work hard in a socialist society, you're rewarded for it. It's not just a set amount of money everyone gets... if you're a genius scientist, you'll be paid more than somebody who only has a part time job. Your ability and how much you actually need both influence your income.
Also, Lenin was awesome. Stalin... if I locked Lenin and Stalin in a room with a book of Russian history, Lenin would probably use the book to kill him violently.
so why do you then need to be socialist? seems there is not much thought going in on this i will continue this on another article.
if you can work out for me the following 1. the business is operating at a loss - how do you handle it in a socialist system
2. if workers interest in the business does not go beyond their job and they share in all decisions how will the business expand if expansion means less money for them and they always vote it down.
3. sudden massive expenses how do you handle it in a socialist system
also if you just pay a lifeable wage and use the rest to operate the business how is this better than a capitalist system where some workers will branch out on their own.
also in a socialist system there is no shareholders and therefore you cannot raise money this way how will you substitute for this and dont say you will allow shareholders cause it aint gonna be a socialist system then.
1) Increase productivity, change prices, advertise... most of the ways you'd deal with a real business, except that the decision would be made by the employees, so nobody's getting laid off while executives are getting bonuses.
2) I don't understand what this means.
3) Cut back on spending, raise taxes... really the same way you'd do so in a capitalist system.
And technically, every worker would be a shareholder.
1 bs there is no money for workers meaning in south africa at this point they start with their strike. all that would already be in place and whats more why would they increse their productivity at this points they refuse to work more as well in south africa.
2. for example a mine they can buy new equipment and increase productivity in any country they will vote it down
raise taxes the business do not take taxes. raise the price...cut back on expenses. your costs would mostly be set stock to produce your product , salaries and water and electricity. you cannot cut any cost as this is a socialist system meaning every little cent is handed out to the workers as this is how workers mostly would handle this situation.. therefore if there is a breakdown you run into trouble. the socialist system cannot take a hard-line like a normal capitalist business for one they cannot retrench workers @ zero cost to them. the people taking the decisions is not necessarily the best to take economic decisions stop pretending your socialist you clearly have no idea how bad a system it really is.
you are clearly a student still and know nothing about the world .
No, that's not how workers would handle the situation, as if they did so they'd all be out of a job. The situation would be almost exactly the same in a socialist nation as a capitalist one, except the socialist one wouldn't be paying out huge bonuses to executives while firing workers.
you dont understand workers its almost like if their college grads for you. here they strike for months without any pay. every year what they lose is more than what they gain in wages. they certainly wont give a hoot about the tag you put on it. the one in charge would probably take the balance of the money for himself and pay the rest just wages. in richer countries they wont even bother with you if they have to go without pay.
So there are no problems with Capitalism?
All religions, political ideas, economic theories, legal systems and all such ideas are great on paper.
It is when people get involved that they get messed up.
People ruin everything.
there is not much wrong with the principle of capitalism. its a leaner business model. the government determine minimum wages. a worker can after a while use his wages to start his own business. a business can start and run with no workers.
i run basically 4 projects without workers besides my normal profession. although only 2 is in business other 2 can expand to big businesses later on.
how would i do this in a socialist system?
There is plenty wrong with Capitalism.
yes your correct though AC people ruin everything. I would like to see a "socialist" business in south Africa with out aggressive labor laws as well as aggressive labor practises. i would like to see how they get ppl to work together as i have no real hope for that as well. also i would like to see chrisjf curb factionalism later on.
not really with small businesses. yes big companies do evil things will this change in a socialist company
"stop pretending that you will ever life in a system characterized by social ownership of the means of production and co-operative management of the economy"
except that such systems have been implemented for years with success. Success that capitalists today would say aren't possible for even a month. It was only when Stalinists and "Democrats" collectively decided it was a threat to their own way of doing things that such systems were attacked from the outside and crushed through war.
if you mean communes sure i guess in some cases but i could almost give you a letter a normal farmer would far outproduce them for far less.