socialism versus capitalism-

[irpunkroxor]

too much missing information but from is there....

1. a privately owned bow and privately owned profits. A capitalists dream. However the land is publicly owned and thus partially a communist set up. While this does not constitute a problem in a small population, eventually there will be over population and the tragedy of the commons may become an issue and the system may become unsustainable. The little tribe may want to drift towards socialism and create a system in which they regulate all means of production, such as taking over the ownership of bows and and leasing them. Or they might want to privatize the land ownership so that the deer is not over hunted.

The second scenario has too much information left out to properly judge. Who are these few people? Who enforces their ownership? Why don't the visiting people to the land make their own bows? The only think we know it sounds like a mutually beneficial trade took place and everyone is happy.

Well since two is ambiguous and one is a primarily a capitalistic free market, and your an socialist, I can't imagine that you possibly like scenario one so I'll guess number 2.

[Carsten]

Originally Posted by irpunkroxor

too much missing information but from is there....

1. a privately owned bow and privately owned profits. A capitalists dream. However the land is publicly owned and thus partially a communist set up. While this does not constitute a problem in a small population, eventually there will be over population and the tragedy of the commons may become an issue and the system may become unsustainable. The little tribe may want to drift towards socialism and create a system in which they regulate all means of production, such as taking over the ownership of bows and and leasing them. Or they might want to privatize the land ownership so that the deer is not over hunted.

The second scenario has too much information left out to properly judge. Who are these few people? Who enforces their ownership? Why don't the visiting people to the land make their own bows? The only think we know it sounds like a mutually beneficial trade took place and everyone is happy.

Well since two is ambiguous and one is a primarily a capitalistic free market, and your an socialist, I can't imagine that you possibly like scenario one so I'll guess number 2.

actually scenario one is my ideology around a perfect society however with the bow and arrow being something you gladly pass on to others who are in need of it more than you or if you stop hunting others can use it instead of you.

the second scenarion exists in poor parts of the world where workers gets almost nothing from their work they produce and ends up sad and miserable because they own nothing. everything they get is lousy pay and not enough to ever free themselves of their position and that I can not accept.

the first one is natural.

if your so interested in economy then look at state captialim(USSR) and free marked economy (Denmark , USA and other parts of the world) and see how you can manage to get a socity that is so different from each other only related to economics.

it was not a trick question. did you want to live in a world where you can take what you need and give away to others as well or did you want to make insane rules that someone owns the earths ressurces instead of it belonging to everyone as a natural thing.

scenaria two could be the government who owns everything or few rich people who owns everything. same thing. you cant go anywhere or do anything unless you adapt into the idea that because they own everything you cant produce a bow. its on their land. you cant eat a deer because its on their land. you cant sit down somewhere without the landowner can charge rent because they own the land.

this is why the whole idea that some people can have ownership over the nature is totally fucked up. and the idea that because you accumulate captial and steal from nature (which belongs to us all ) then you automatically do not even have to work. because you own land , facoty, machine, and can use the capital to hire workers sell products increase profits and so on.

what I was asking you for was simple and not a trick question. do you want to live in a natual state or unnatural one with lots of stupid rules that you can bend in all directions and have it end with someone taking advantage of it.

in fact the capitalist steals from us all. they steal oil. claim they own the oil because they own rigths to drill it and have you work for them. then fire you when you no longer making them profit. at the same time you work hard for them they pay you very little in comparison to as how much you produced and the same time they will demand you pay for the gas they produced from your hard work. and if you claim back the oil and take it then you are the criminal same as if you took the profit from your hard work.

all the time nature belonged to you. had you lived as scenario one with respect for nature and took only what you and you tribe needed then you could also have your own bow and arrow but instead you choose to give away your rights to hunt deer and own a bow to few people who could be government or rich people who just happens to claim they own the land . interesting

you think that because I am a socialist. live in a mixed marked economy and socialist country also wants to give my natural birthright to nature away to govenment or capitalists . this I can tell you am not about to ever. in fact I am not sure you can call me a socialist other than I live in a country where we have a socialist government and welfare model because I am actually more a green anarchist in some ways.

[irpunkroxor]

green anarchist are neither green nor anarchist. They are socialist. Scenerio 1 is an example of of a hybrid capitalistic/communist state but primarily capitalistic. It is fatally flawed as well.

It doesn't matter if they share the bow or share the food. That is irrelevant. It's still a privately owned item and profit in the form of food.

[Carsten]

Originally Posted by irpunkroxor

green anarchist are neither green nor anarchist. They are socialist. Scenerio 1 is an example of of a hybrid capitalistic/communist state but primarily capitalistic. It is fatally flawed as well.

It doesn't matter if they share the bow or share the food. That is irrelevant. It's still a privately owned item and profit in the form of food.

communism neither socialism is dictated by a economic system. China which is now communism has mixed marked economy same as Denmark or the US. stalins communist Russia had state capitalism.

now in my example there is no government to tell me as hunter to do this. I hunt because I starve and also give to others what I have hunted for and caugth .

this is actually socialism or communism in its ideal. depends on how much deer I give away to the rest of the tribe . socialist ideal is that everyone can have same opportunity and also as result needs to share with the rest so they have same opportunity. there would be a goverment to handle things and also regulate that everyone has certain right of freedom and opportunity.

if it was communism then it would also be without a government to tell people anything. people would own means of production capital and profit was divided so that everyone had same result of the work being done. equally with each other. no rich or poor. just the same . this means in the example I had to give everyone the meat I hunted for as a duty to make sure they had the same result. not just the opportunity to go hunt for themselves.

if you read karl marx you will find that he talks about no government. to get control over the machines to gain freedom so the capitalist wont own the factory , your work and also he wants everyone to have the same result. however one has to work as much he can and only gets what he needs. no one gets more or less than others.

this way the example I give you in scenario one is not capitalim in any way. its the people being social with each other. so each person gets a piece of deer. no one owns the land. and can claim rights to own slaves or use workers as means of production. so he he can accumulate more capital and get more profit. which is capitalism.

also there is the fact that even if I do own my bow and arrow. private ownership. then I do not own the capital. (land) neither the profit is mine alone because I share it with others so that the ones who did not hunt with succes would have something to eat and also do the same for me some other day. this is the socialist aspect of the whole thing. me sharing so everyone has the same opportunity as me to get something to eat. however we would need a person in the tribe to divide it so no one that also hunted would get more and also the ones the needed it the most would be certain to get it.

socialims is a ideology. not a economic system as you seem to think it is. without socialism there are many things you would be without today. believe it or not.

the difference in socialim and liberal thought is subtle. they share much the same ideals however the liberal see freedom as the right NOT to be social. and give others anything at all. he want the right to be an asshole. not pay tax to support other peoples welfare check as example.

where the socialist wants equal opportunity. his freedom lies in the fact that everyone starts life in a good way. go to school so he can become smart . with hospitals and healthcare for the time he might be sick. welfare check if he is out of work. and pension if he gets old or sick so he cant work.

this is not in the interest of the capitalist at all. because your work is part of his means of production in his factory he own. in the past there has been slavery. very hard conditons for workers everywhere. as example a socialist in England changed to law so kids could no longer be used for labour at windmills or factories 11 or 12 hours a day.

that was in no interest to the capitalist who gladly would own the means of production. meaning could he without government to tell him its no legal have slaves he would his ultimate wet dream is to own everything. the land , the factory, all work put into the making of the product is calculated as means of production so if he does not buy your labour from you and could instead enslave and starve you then he would get better profits which in the end is his goal.

the capitalist is also not interested in your freedom. he only interested in getting more capital and more profit. capitalism is no gift culture as my example above is. or primitive communism or a form of socialims.

if you can have welfare check when out of work. the capitalist risc that you find other work instead of his factory and thus you end up as someone elses means of production that competes with him. thus he wants no welfare check for you. you either have to starve or be forced to work if it serves his ultimate goal .

he also does not want you to vote. say goverment working against his cause was elected. one that says he cant travel to africa and gets slaves so he can get more profit by decreasing cost of production.

or a government that says he cant be a monopoly. the only one who sells computers like bill gates tried to become. compete with apple best as he could and also try crush linux. bill gates wanted this monopoly so if you as worker voted for a government that see the economic reason to not have such monopoly present in the country then you vote against his cause.

the capitalist will also make sure that if you complaint . then there is as little as possible you can do about it. hence the many revolutions that happened in the world over time.

not all revolution been socialist..- some have been environmental or technology but the ones that has been socialist had all the common goal to gain freedom .

you see conservative politics. this can be communist or socialist or liberal or whatever kind of conservative the person that supports the structure of socity not changing. there is no economic dications in that political ideology same as there is not in either communism or socialism.

the political ideology is about how you relate to government and socity. thats all. if communist china wants free marked economy because its more effective then so be it.
same with us. we changed certain things to be able to be more effective. as example we allow private ownership (factories companies and peoples own stuff like cars and houses and so on) but the way the profit is handled is by state saying to companies we need to take something from your company in form of tax. so we can make sure all people certain rigths to freedom and same opportunity.

we are not as socialist same as communist in ideology however if you spend your time reading a other book that the economy book you read this stuff in you keep refering to you would know that ideology has nothign to do with economy. as far as the results of the economy system gives you enough profit to divide according to your ideology.

I certainly hope that if you see the scenario two as positive that you are also the one who owns the land. the means of production. the profit goes to you alone and that you only give the hunters that borrow your land , bow and arrow , and gets a little leftovers the respect that they feel they need otherwise they will take control in a revolution.

in a totally capitalist world. with no government. there nothign to prevent bill gates to take control of the army. and shoot everyone that has more capital than him and steal it. and force you to work for him as slaves so he can sell his stuff to other countries. if they let him get away with it because they are afraid to start a war.

this is no good scenario right ?.

you need a govement to control certain things. liberal govenment would only decide as few things as possible. as example in a minimal state only take control over army and also provide police. and legal system. people would then have to figure out the rest.

in a socialist government there is much more than just this. rights to free healtcare. welfare checks. education. regulations so that companies does not turn into the major coorporations that you know from the US and all sorts of things that in its effect only exist to make sure everyone has same opportunity as everyone else. rights to certain freedoms .

can you understand howcome I keep telling you now that socialism is NOT the same as everyone own everythign and its only a economic question. and that socialism is NOT a dictatur ship.

what you think of there is a goverment that could be capitalist like stalins communist regime was. and has total control over people. like there are certain countries still around that has. its a not just a wide state area in its ideology like socialism but a fascist controlling aspect in the society that controls everything. as in wide responsibilty towards to people to full control wherre the state is everything. like hitlers facsist regime was.

example of where it went wrong. industrialisation. people owns the land. the factory they own too. the profit they also own. my way of doing things.
capitalism. the capitalist own the land. (capital) he own the means of production (factory and the work that goes into the product) he also own the profit. now depend on marked and how things are regulated in his country he can make lots of profit. and accumulate more capital. and grow bigger and crush all people who competes with him and end up a coorporation which controls a lot.

this is what you compain about aint it ?- lots of people complain about coorporate Amercia but all you need to to his to take the capitalist by the neck and strangle them and take control over the means of production. e.i your bodies serving as work will now also own the product it created. now you have freedom. you can then divide the result (profit) so everyone has the same amount of rights. same amount of freedom. same amount of welfare. same amount of the profit that your self has created as people.

this what communism is about. according to karl marx. not enslaving a whole bunch of people like capitalist dreams of doing (and did in the past ) but to give people ultimate freedom.-

wont respond until monday. will adwise you to read about USSR ,China , Denmark to see difference in economic structures in communism and socialim. per examples where I live in one country