It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Hungry Citizens of Socialist State Raid Stores for Bread

page: 9
42
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 1 2016 @ 05:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: projectvxn
Except nationalization IS a socialist policy. Always has been and always will be. It is only the socialist who suggest such stupidities.

And when "capitalist" countries do it what does that make them?




posted on May, 1 2016 @ 05:59 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

It would depend on what their government is.

As has been pointed out: Capitalism is not a government, it is an economic system, but socialism is both because the state is part and parcel in the economy.

All democratic socialism implies is that the people purport to vote on who dictates to them.



And since the state really ends up controlling it all and we've already discussed the deep and entrenched corruption that thrives in those places where the state power is absolute, those elections aren't really free although everyone votes. Honestly, they do! Voter participation in those countries is sky high, and dear leader is extremely popular.



posted on May, 1 2016 @ 06:01 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

How about who being honest for a start? What you mean is a new system not invented yet is necessary, which we don't have yet ? Do you want capitalism to go away?



posted on May, 1 2016 @ 06:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko


I just thought a visual aid would be helpful for imagination challenged.


We don't have capitalism here in the USA. We have big corporations who own the government. That isn't a fair and level paying field. The empty shelves are coming. You just don't see it yet.
Our system is destined to go to socialism. If the government didn't hand out so much to poor people then they wouldn't sell anything. Its the only way the corporation will have enough customers. You can't leave the poor with nothing now. It's like the child who has been babied by their parents. They don't know how to fend for themselves. Once we reach the point where the money handed out isn't enough to buy all these products then the system will crash. This is what happened in Venezuela
This is just an opinion, you do agree that at some point it will fail and 30% of Americans would riot or die if the government didn't take care of them.
edit on 1-5-2016 by jlafleur02 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 1 2016 @ 06:27 PM
link   
a reply to: jlafleur02

I think if you read the thread, you will find that no one here disagrees that there is simply too much government involvement in the economy, too much cronyism, for there to be actual capitalism, unfettered. It hasn't been that way for well over 100 years if it ever was.

And a lot of this thread is designed to warn people against allowing even more into the economy. We should be going the other way with things. More liberty, not less.



posted on May, 1 2016 @ 06:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: daskakik

It would depend on what their government is.

As has been pointed out: Capitalism is not a government,

I meant countries that claim to have a capitalist economy.
edit on 1-5-2016 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 1 2016 @ 06:27 PM
link   
dp
edit on 1-5-2016 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 1 2016 @ 06:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: ThirdEyeofHorus

How about who being honest for a start?

Anyone rooting for a side.


What you mean is a new system not invented yet is necessary, which we don't have yet ?

Not really. I don't really care.


Do you want capitalism to go away?

As far as I can tell it isn't here and never has been.



posted on May, 1 2016 @ 06:49 PM
link   
The greatest gift of socialism is to make everyone equally poor. Rigged capitalism isnt great, but its better than full on socialism.



posted on May, 1 2016 @ 06:51 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

It makes them at the mercy of a socialist take over. Like what happened in Venezuela.



posted on May, 1 2016 @ 07:04 PM
link   
a reply to: projectvxn

The grammar seems off. It might leave them in that situation but that is not what I asked.



posted on May, 1 2016 @ 07:11 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

Well even China claims to have capitalism now, so what do you mean?



posted on May, 1 2016 @ 07:13 PM
link   
But here's just a sampling of why government involvement doesn't work out well, and this is just the government getting involved in the economy by "investing," not by controlling it all. Now imagine that the government controls it all and can take whatever it wants from you and me in the form of tax revenue and property to continue to sink into some of these projects.

How is that hyper rail train in Cali coming, for example?


edit on 1-5-2016 by ketsuko because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 1 2016 @ 07:16 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

If a country claims to have a capitalist economy but carry out nationalisation what kind of economy do they really have?

If it isn't capitalist and they were supposed to be then that is a failure for capitalism.



posted on May, 1 2016 @ 07:20 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

What exactly do you think nationalism is?

As far as nationalizing, it is not a failure for capitalism. As capitalism is NOT a government system, where socialism is, you cannot have an economic system fail when the political system fails it.
edit on 1-5-2016 by ketsuko because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 1 2016 @ 07:28 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

Autocorrect? Project said and i repeated nationalization.

ETA: of course it is a failure of capitalism because it is a move in the other direction.
edit on 1-5-2016 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 1 2016 @ 07:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: ketsuko

Autocorrect? Project said and i repeated nationalization.


Nationalization is a failure of the political system. For example, we are supposed to have a Constitutional Republic that recognizes private property rights. Under such a system, socialization of the health care system (i.e. single payer) should not be possible because it would involved state ownership of what is now privately held goods and services.

If such a system is implemented, it represents a failure of our system to protect those rights which should be guarateed in the most foundational document of the country's law, not a failure of capitalism which is solely the way the economy itself operates.

In other words, the economy does not all of a sudden hand itself over to government voluntarily. That happens only by force.



posted on May, 1 2016 @ 07:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko


In other words, the economy does not all of a sudden hand itself over to government voluntarily. That happens only by force.

That's a whole lot of twisting just to not call uncle.

And not everything is about the US.
edit on 1-5-2016 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 1 2016 @ 07:45 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

Now who's shifting the goal posts? I gave you an example of what I meant. If you don't like it, that's not my problem.

All capitalism is is the free exchange of goods and services. You will find it even in countries that do not claim to be capitalist. They all have their black markets which are more or less capitalism rearing its head.
edit on 1-5-2016 by ketsuko because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 1 2016 @ 07:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: daskakik

Now who's shifting the goal posts? I gave you an example of what I meant. If you don't like it, that's not my problem.

I never asked what you meant.

I was replying to project, using the context that he established.
edit on 1-5-2016 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
42
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join