Greece looking to the right for solutions ?

[Aus22]

Then, in "relative terms", what do you think about a plan to give the bottom 33% of Americans a guaranteed government income of $80k a year? Wouldn't that completely eliminate all poverty in the US at the low, low cost of racking up massive debt? Of course, with the "multiplier" effect of Keynesian economics, wouldn't all that government spending cause an economic boom that would cover the cost of such a program?

Perhaps you could explain your use of this non-sequitor... 'Debt only matters in relative terms and that's why the recession started in the USA'... Our recession started because our debt is relative? That statement simply doesn't make sense.

I am having difficulties getting on this forum. All I can say that gap beteen Gen Senca amd me is so wide I do not think there is much point responding

 

[Pandora]

I am having difficulties getting on this forum. All I can say that gap beteen Gen Senca amd me is so wide I do not think there is much point responding

Perhaps the gap between you and anyone who is not a socialist is wide?

 

[dogtowner]

Perhaps the gap between you and anyone who is not a socialist is wide?

more that he feels he cannot argue his side unless you already accept it. not unusual among the left.

 

[Aus22]

The gap between a man who thinks capitalism is a moral concept and anyone else who thinks it is just an economic system is wide. Also with anyone who thinks the left is all of one mind and someone who is familiar with the different trends of left wing thinking is wide. At least there is now good news in Greece. The conservative and Socialist parties who favour a bail out by the EU is growing in the pools while the Nationalist anti EU party is falling.

 

[Gipper]

The gap between a man who thinks capitalism is a moral concept and anyone else who thinks it is just an economic system is wide. Also with anyone who thinks the left is all of one mind and someone who is familiar with the different trends of left wing thinking is wide. At least there is now good news in Greece. The conservative and Socialist parties who favour a bail out by the EU is growing in the pools while the Nationalist anti EU party is falling.

So, do you believe Socialism is a moral economic system and Capitalism is not? If so, could you please explain why?

 

[GenSeneca]

The gap between a man who thinks capitalism is a moral concept and anyone else who thinks it is just an economic system is wide.

Capitalism is the ideological philosophy, the Free Market is the economic system under Capitalism. Your confusion comes from the fact that these two concepts are inseparable; The Free Market exists only under Capitalism and vice versa. You really should take the time to learn about what Capitalism really is, and what it really stands for, if you hope to mount a plausible argument against it.

Also with anyone who thinks the left is all of one mind and someone who is familiar with the different trends of left wing thinking is wide.

All Leftist ideologies stem from one basic principle - Forced Collectivism. The "trends" are merely a disagreement about the degrees of force, and redistribution, that should be employed in the abolition of volitional consent.

 

[dogtowner]

Capitalism is the ideological philosophy, the Free Market is the economic system under Capitalism. Your confusion comes from the fact that these two concepts are inseparable; The Free Market exists only under Capitalism and vice versa. You really should take the time to learn about what Capitalism really is, and what it really stands for, if you hope to mount a plausible argument against it.


All Leftist ideologies stem from one basic principle - Forced Collectivism. The "trends" are merely a disagreement about the degrees of force, and redistribution, that should be employed in the abolition of volitional consent.

there are various sorts of chocolate but they're all chocolate

 

[Aus22]

So, do you believe Socialism is a moral economic system and Capitalism is not? If so, could you please explain why?

Gipper, I will have to give the same answer as Gen Senca did about Capitalism, Socialism is a belief in equality but when it operates in an economic model is does not always ensure equality. this is due to the nature of Capitalism which it has to operate and also to human nature.

 

[GenSeneca]

Gipper, I will have to give the same answer as Gen Senca did about Capitalism, Socialism is a belief in equality but when it operates in an economic model is does not always ensure equality. this is due to the nature of Capitalism which it has to operate and also to human nature.

The Free Market is based on the volitional consent of market participants and the absence of government interference in the market. Socialism abolishes volitional consent, replaces it with forced collectivism, and places government in control of the market. So it doesn't make sense that you would blame the failures of Socialism on something that does not, and cannot, exist under Socialism.

 

[Aus22]

The Free Market is based on the volitional consent of market participants and the absence of government interference in the market. Socialism abolishes volitional consent, replaces it with forced collectivism, and places government in control of the market. So it doesn't make sense that you would blame the failures of Socialism on something that does not, and cannot, exist under Socialism.

Gen Senca you are talking about Communism not Socialism. There have been few pure Communist economies. Socialism usually acts in a capitalist economy and tries to restrict some of the extremes. Most Socialist or Labor parties are elected by the people in a democratic election. Any controls introduce are in the party platform so are not without the consent of the majority. It has many sucesses including Australia which avoided the recession and even China the leading economy in the world . China has a mixed economy , using the capitalist model but having some socialist elements. It is not a democracy.

 

[Gipper]

Gen Senca you are talking about Communism not Socialism. There have been few pure Communist economies. Socialism usually acts in a capitalist economy and tries to restrict some of the extremes. Most Socialist or Labor parties are elected by the people in a democratic election. Any controls introduce are in the party platform so are not without the consent of the majority. It has many sucesses including Australia which avoided the recession and even China the leading economy in the world . China has a mixed economy , using the capitalist model but having some socialist elements. It is not a democracy.

Is possible that Socialism is NOT a workable economic system? As you state, it goes against human nature. All of us have the desire for self preservation and self interest. Socialism demands we give this up, which would appear to be impossible.

You again make an incorrect statement. China is not the leading economy in the world...not even close. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)

And regarding Aussieland, the housing bubble you have built is popping just as has occurred in most western nations and happening in China too. http://www.whocrashedtheeconomy.com/blog/category/australian-economy/

 

[dogtowner]

Gen Senca you are talking about Communism not Socialism. There have been few pure Communist economies. Socialism usually acts in a capitalist economy and tries to restrict some of the extremes. Most Socialist or Labor parties are elected by the people in a democratic election. Any controls introduce are in the party platform so are not without the consent of the majority. It has many sucesses including Australia which avoided the recession and even China the leading economy in the world . China has a mixed economy , using the capitalist model but having some socialist elements. It is not a democracy.

If we're talking textbook there have been zero pure communist economies. There are more and less Marxist socialist ones only. You even pointed this out somewhere around here. When people vote for socialism they are voting in their parasitic interests. Why not take somebody else's money as opposed to working for it yourself ?

 

[Aus22]

Is possible that Socialism is NOT a workable economic system? As you state, it goes against human nature. All of us have the desire for self preservation and self interest. Socialism demands we give this up, which would appear to be impossible.

You again make an incorrect statement. China is not the leading economy in the world...not even close. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)

And regarding Aussieland, the housing bubble you have built is popping just as has occurred in most western nations and happening in China too. http://www.whocrashedtheeconomy.com/blog/category/australian-economy/

It appears the sources you give are American or European, The The world Bank and IMF are American institutions with some European input . How reliable has the CIA being lately. In any case your table still shows China Number 3 not a fail economy and with very prospect than Noi EU or NO 2, the USA> Your Graph shows that Hosing prices are growing that why they are a large part of the debt of Households.
The bubble has not burst yet despite average house prices being over$ 400,00o, The more expensive houseover a $million have falling. But the average Australia still wants to own his own house.
I am not saying house prices will not fall, if demand falls because we can not afford the prices they will fall. However I do not think we will have the hosing collapse you have in the USA because we have better controls

 

[GenSeneca]

Gen Senca you are talking about Communism not Socialism.

I am very well read and fully comprehend the subject matter being discussed. Socialism and Communism operate on exactly the same principle, only the degree of force utilized in the pursuit of that principle separates them and it is that use of force that is BANNED under Capitalism. Perhaps you need an analogy to understand what I mean by "degree"....

A light bulb is either ON or it is OFF, there is no third option.

Hook up a dimmer switch to the light bulb and you can control the brightness (force) of the bulb but it does not change the fact that the light will either be ON or it will be OFF (either force is being used or it is not). Now, that light represents government interference into the economy, the brighter it is, the greater the force that is being used.

So long as the light is OFF, the Free Market and Capitalism exist. If the light is turned ON, even to the lowest possible setting, Capitalism ceases to exist, the Free Market no longer exists. Why do they no longer exist? Because volitional consent has been abolished and replaced by force. Now, if you crank the light to it's maximum brightness, you have Communism, a totalitarian level of force.

I hope that helps you to understand.

Socialism usually acts in a capitalist economy and tries to restrict some of the extremes.

The Free Market is the economic system of Capitalism. Once there is even one single government intrusion into the economy, it is no longer a Free Market, it is no longer a "Capitalist" economy... It is now a Mixed Market economy that has, to some degree or another, abolished volitional consent and replaced it with the use of force.

Most Socialist or Labor parties are elected by the people in a democratic election. Any controls introduce are in the party platform so are not without the consent of the majority.

"Just as the notion that “Anything I do is right because I chose to do it,” is not a moral principle, but a negation of morality—so the notion that “Anything society does is right because society chose to do it,” is not a moral principle, but a negation of moral principles and the banishment of morality from social issues." - Ayn Rand, The Virtue of Selfishness​

​

It has many sucesses including Australia which avoided the recession and even China the leading economy in the world . China has a mixed economy , using the capitalist model but having some socialist elements. It is not a democracy.

Do you consider any nation that allows some degree of private property to be using the "capitalist model"? That's a serious question, I would like to know exactly what you perceive the "capitalist model" to be. What is it you believe determines whether the economic model is "capitalist" or not?

 

[Aus22]

I am very well read and fully comprehend the subject matter being discussed. Socialism and Communism operate on exactly the same principle, only the degree of force utilized in the pursuit of that principle separates them and it is that use of force that is BANNED under Capitalism. Perhaps you need an analogy to understand what I mean by "degree"....

A light bulb is either ON or it is OFF, there is no third option.

Hook up a dimmer switch to the light bulb and you can control the brightness (force) of the bulb but it does not change the fact that the light will either be ON or it will be OFF (either force is being used or it is not). Now, that light represents government interference into the economy, the brighter it is, the greater the force that is being used.

So long as the light is OFF, the Free Market and Capitalism exist. If the light is turned ON, even to the lowest possible setting, Capitalism ceases to exist, the Free Market no longer exists. Why do they no longer exist? Because volitional consent has been abolished and replaced by force. Now, if you crank the light to it's maximum brightness, you have Communism, a totalitarian level of force.

I hope that helps you to understand.


The Free Market is the economic system of Capitalism. Once there is even one single government intrusion into the economy, it is no longer a Free Market, it is no longer a "Capitalist" economy... It is now a Mixed Market economy that has, to some degree or another, abolished volitional consent and replaced it with the use of force.

"Just as the notion that “Anything I do is right because I chose to do it,” is not a moral principle, but a negation of morality—so the notion that “Anything society does is right because society chose to do it,” is not a moral principle, but a negation of moral principles and the banishment of morality from social issues." - Ayn Rand, The Virtue of Selfishness​

​

Do you consider any nation that allows some degree of private property to be using the "capitalist model"? That's a serious question, I would like to know exactly what you perceive the "capitalist model" to be. What is it you believe determines whether the economic model is "capitalist" or not?

Any country that has private ownership is partly Capitalist. If it has a mixture it is a mixed economy. Unlike your light bulb example there are more than two switches, off and on but also up and down. The word Free in a free market is not a moral concept. Some markets are more Free than others. But this does not mean the more Capitalism the more free you are. Extreme un regulated capitalism is not free except for a few. Mercantalism operated in a Capitalist economy and was the opposite to benig free.