I don't think we wasted 65 pages of a thread, what I'm saying is that we've pretty much covered ideals, pros and cons of socialism and capitalism, and all that's happening now are random posters taking each others' comments out of context to make a point that has already been made (and probably refuted in some way, shape or form).
We can talk about the ideals and theories of socialism, but the key argument is always, "we haven't seen a true socialistic society in modern times". From my other posts, you can get a pretty good feel for the way I think Capitalism should be implemented as a hypothetical:
My thought is that it can work well if you are able to protect individual Citizens from the tyranny of the majority and the sociopath. I propose this to be done through a representative government bound to a document very, very similar to the Constitution of the United States and the Declaration of Independence. I like the concept of structure laid out by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights is great from the aspect of protecting the people from the government. I think the new document, however, would have to go farther in protecting each Individual's Natural Rights from other Individuals (sociopaths) and also lay out the Natural Responsibilities that go along with having Natural Rights. The federal government would then have ONLY the responsibility of upholding these Rights for the Citizens against the perils that may come from other Citizens, State governments, the federal government itself or from another country.
The main goal of this system is to prevent psychopaths from using the system to gain ultimate power of Individuals. We can all agree that whether done through corporatism, fascism (via Capitalism) or communism (via socialism) this would be a very bad thing. To me socialism provides a much easier path to the endgame of despotism for the sociopath, as gaining control in a socialistic society would mean gaining control of the allocation of resources. This would to lead to direct serfdom for the people. I think that capitalism, where resources are acquired and traded privately with little or no oversight, is much more difficult to hijack if a representative government limited in power but intricate in design that protects the Citizens' Rights exists.
I elaborated a bit more than I wanted to there, but this is my basic reason and idea for Capitalism, how it should be implemented, and why this implementation makes it better than socialism. My question to those who advocate socialism, then, is how you would propose to implement it from the start, in a real world country where power-hungry sociopaths exist. How would you stop them from corrupting your system? What is your mechanism for allocation of resources? For getting people to produce resources for the community? What if they decided they don't want to do anything of value for the community? How are the Natural Rights of Man, namely Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness (these are really important ideals to me) treated, respected, handled, and protected? How are people who choose not to uphold the Natural Responsibilities that stem from these Rights handled? Do you see any limits to the feasibility of your system regarding size and/or scope to your community/country? If so, how does it handle trade with other communities/countries to gain resources it can't produce or obtain on its own?
I'm curious to see any responses to this, as it is a little difficult for me to come up with those answers for socialism since I am admittedly biased toward Capitalism. However, these are a lot of the questions I answered for Capitalism when thinking about how to implement if fairly.
Originally posted by ARandomAfflictionOfSense
reply to post by ProgressiveSlayer
One problem with your Ideal 1776 costitution is Capitalism was in it's true infancy with the industrial revolution just beginning.The 1776 constitution was suitable for an agrarian society i.e it was saddly already outdated.You ask how socialism would work?I say you already see glimpses everyday eg you mow the council land strip no? .You might see more obvious cases after disasters though when everyone just moves to help everyone else and government moves in,not to help but to maintian control because workers would just operate the factories ,stores ect. ie perform services and produce.You see we arent ment to be this way scraping and scratching in a world of plenty.we labour to produce all but share so little.
Originally posted by rbnhd76
In reply to The Sword
Where did i say bums? Yes there are some bums.
There are a lot more regular people who are caught up and entangled by THE VERY SYSTEM THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO SAVE THEM!
That is entirely NOT what I meant. Not sure if you're being obtuse or ?
I said it breeds a dependant class. Even Jesus said you'll always have the poor.
I do have a heart. I haven't had steady work now for a couple years myself, being in the construction industry.
But I do anything somebody agrees to pay me for.
I don't want a union saying I can't work for less cause the guy is poor,( because I do)
and I don't care what the rich guy says when I quote him at a larger price.
If me and another agree on price, it's nobody else's business.
I keep my bills just as low as I can.
I don't have to eat steak and filet mignon.
I eat beans and rice, and rice and beans. And hamburger helper. and you get the idea.
ETA I just read your sig, I don't agree and that tells me about all I need to know. I'm out, and say what you will.edit on 18-2-2012 by rbnhd76 because: Peace! Love you guys and wish you all the best. Honestly!edit on 18-2-2012 by rbnhd76 because: (no reason given)