Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Socialism, Free Enterprise, and the Common Good
[Image: 1_1_1r_ppi4tpBC6A1wob7pj_540.jpg]
--- SCHiST Happens! ---
Often enough.

Haitians, Salvadorians, Hondurans,.... -- and nobody sane would call their mess "socialism" -- seek better future in Socialist US.
Africans and Syrians -- in Socialist EU.

(Any doubts that the US is a typical stagnant near-failed socialist state? S6 )
Sodomia delenda est

(04-10-2019, 10:53 AM)mv Wrote: (Any doubts that the US is a typical stagnant near-failed socialist state? S6 )

I quess they never taught you what Socialism meant, when you were growing up in Motherland, eh?  

Keep in mind that in the US, the State doesn't OWN the means of production.  Perhaps we can 'snap back' from Fascism-Lite easier as a result.  S22
--- SCHiST Happens! ---
(04-10-2019, 12:48 PM)John L Wrote: Keep in mind that in the US, the State doesn't OWN the means of production.  Perhaps we can 'snap back' from Fascism-Lite easier as a result.  S22

Perhaps you would kindly explain just what you mean by socialism then -- you are using this term a lot and I'd like to know the actual meaning of it.

The state's owning means of production is obviously NOT the definition you have in mind. For instance, the Venezuelan state does not own all or most means of production -- albeit there is a state-owned company.  Sweden followed what everyone called "socialism" for decades, but did their government own ANY means of production?

Let's have a definition if you want to use the term so much, OK?

Perhaps this will assist you:

you are using definition 2b.  If you want to stick to it, then a question: which countries TODAY fit this definition?


For the record: I'm not fond of socialism in any form; that I'm supporting Bernie for 2020 is not because of his socialism but despite it; but I'm even less fond of using ill-defined terminology S6
Sodomia delenda est

All right, let me help you a little with *socialism*. 
The definition 2b -- which you seem to be using -- is unsatisfactory.
Quote:a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state

"All the means of" or "Some of the means  of" need to be specified, this makes a difference! But worse yet, outright ownership is just one of the models of the state control over industry, there are other, "soft", but equivalent forms.

The essence, however, can be discerned:  state control over industry ("production means") is bad for competition (essence of capitalism!)  and ultimately bad for the country.

In fact, a better definition of socialism may be based on stifling of competition, but I would not go there.

So.. consider the US.  The government does not outright own any means of production or any large companies... but this is a distinction, not a difference.

People are a means of production too... and half of the US population depends on the state. Owned by the State, if you like.  Not going here either. 

More to the point: many large corporations are fully depended on government orders -- this is not an outright ownership but a very high degree of control, equally bad for the competition.  General approach to alleviating this is to maintain multiple companies, perhaps still interlinked with the space, but competing with each other. 

In the airspace industry, 20 years ago, there were two such companies: Boeing and MdS.  When they merged circa 1996, US made a huge step toward ... LOL .. socialism.   Competition was close within the US, and the external competition with Airbus became state policy, not mere business.

Thus,  it was just a matter of time before the lack of competition will translate into bad business. Bad decisions made by Boeing on the 737 Max were typical socialist decisions... just like bad decisions on Chernobyl nuclear station were 25 years ago. 

Same crap.

I want the capitalism back.... :S4

Now, watch Boeing going down.  And damaging a number of related companies in the process.... AA seem to stand out in this.

Now, why did I get into writing this? Oh yeah, Socialism of the US -- but of course. Not the only example or argument either.... heck, the Steroidal Monkey is a Socialist too, after all. S6
Sodomia delenda est

First of all, the reason why absolute definitions are almost always a bit different than reality, are many.  But that is because it is humans doing such things, and we don't all march in lock step.  

However, the true definition, from a political and economic POV has been well established.  

Socialism- A political/economic system in which the State Owns the means of production.   Venezuela is is a Socialist State, and it doen't own 100% of the means of production.   But its getting there, but they will almost certainly collapse before they reach perfection.  

Fascism- A political/economic system in which the State Controls and heavily regulates the means of Production.  The Fascist state doen't feel the overwhelming need to own everything.  Why do that when they are still able to control everything.

Both tend to be totalitarian, even though they may not begin that way.  After all, once the unrest begins, that all needs to be suppressed, correct?  Spiteful   But eventually they all come tumbling down, due to compound inefficiency.

The US is not socialist, but it is currently Fascist-Lite, unless the citizenry does something about it. Gah
--- SCHiST Happens! ---
...And the reason why Communism, Socialism, and Fascism get the good press, is because they also control the third estate. The media in Italy always said, "At least Mussolini made the trains run on time!" The problem was, that they didn't. Only the people who were always late knew the truth, because the media lied.
Difference between controlling and owning is a distinction, not a real difference.

Consider owning the controlling block of stocks as a clue here; but actually control can can be effected through other means. The Most Important Customer of any company exercises a large degree of control over its provider even if he does not "own" any stock in it -- he does not need to.
(this is the US model with companies like Boeing, or the Nazi model with say IB Farben. Franco-Germans control Airbus just as well, simply differently. Trump whines that the Euros subsidies Airbus ... surely they do, but the US subsidizes Boeing equally, using a different scheme.... distinctions, not differences.)

All of this can be lumped together as the government meddling with the economy and by definition is the opposite of capitalism.

I'd not try to distinguish between Socialism and Fascism -- the economic difference is just in the details of particular setups, otherwise it is very similar (and don't I recall someone here arguing that National Socialism is a leftist -- meaning Socialist! -- movement?) . You want to separate the two -- go into the difference between National and International, it would work better.

Quote:The media in Italy always said, "At least Mussolini made the trains run on time!"

I don't know whether this was true or not! Have not been there.

I did have a colleague years ago, an Italian in origin, not that he knew the language... who went to Italy for vacations and came back saying "At least Mussolini made the trains run on time!". This did not end well... a spontaneous alliance formed in his jobplace, between a religious Jew and religious Shia, aiming at his destruction and the war ensued.

Quote:The US is not socialist, but it is currently Fascist-Lite, unless the citizenry does something about it.

Nope, it is Socialist-lite, if anything S6 The globalist Deep State is internationalist, and elements of Socialism in the purest form abound.
But if the MAGA (Nationalist tint) Dong wins, then -- with no economic changes -- we can call it Fascist lite indeed S6
Sodomia delenda est

Now, on good press : again, the particular mechanism of ownership is immaterial.

In USSR, government owned all the press outright and forced the Agenda.
In Nazi Germany, government did not own the press, but the press complied with the Agenda.
In the Entity, the government does not own the press... but both the Government and the press are owned by the same people, who promote their Agenda.

Any difference ?

And in all these cases the press and the government deeply hate the alternatives .... which reminds me: today Trump won and made another little step toward the -ISM S6

[Image: D34zmpJX4AIuO4N.jpg]
Sodomia delenda est

[Image: goodwyn_Shell_lr_4-17-1920190418022648.jpg]
--- SCHiST Happens! ---
Stossel: Socialism Fails Every Time

--- SCHiST Happens! ---
[Image: 90mimb_pnwqww7qS81r54qfqo1_540.jpg]
--- SCHiST Happens! ---
[Image: IMG_1667.jpg?resize=600%2C600&ssl=1]
--- SCHiST Happens! ---

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Pope Francis Is Morally Wrong About Capitalism(Free Enterprise) John L 31 8,073 12-27-2016, 06:53 PM
Last Post: John L
  Why Intellectuals Hate Free Enterprise(Capitalism) John L 10 2,170 07-28-2012, 08:27 PM
Last Post: John L
  The New Generation of Free Enterprise John L 4 2,187 10-27-2011, 08:12 PM
Last Post: Gunnen4u
  Socialized Medicine and Free Enterprise Palladin 28 8,980 05-18-2007, 04:03 PM
Last Post: Grizzly

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)