NationStates

Eurasies wrote:

Kowani wrote:...Define "prosperity"

Higher quality of life, higher life expectancy, higher human development index, less corruption, strongest economies in the world, higher nominal GDP?

Then none of the countries named win on any of those scales.

Phaenix wrote:

Eurasies wrote:Higher quality of life, higher life expectancy, higher human development index, less corruption, strongest economies in the world, higher nominal GDP?

Then that's not the US.

The US, UK, Canada and EU, which are all capitalist, have the highest marks on all of these.

Eurasies wrote:

Phaenix wrote:Then that's not the US.

Canada, United Kingdom, Switzerland, Germany, Netherlands?

That's more like it!

Kowani wrote:

Eurasies wrote:Higher quality of life, higher life expectancy, higher human development index, less corruption, strongest economies in the world, higher nominal GDP?

Then none of the countries named win on any of those scales.

GDP is rather silly measure anyways...I doubt the majority of people in Qatar (GDP per capita of over 100,000) are enjoying a good standard of life.

I say we should replace the government with corporations, abolish the minimum wage, ban those socialist run charities and soup kitchens, and exile every registered democrat and the unemployed to internment camps in New Mexico to die of heat stroke. With all the pinkos and their ideology dead we'll enter a capitalist golden age!

Kowani wrote:

Eurasies wrote:Higher quality of life, higher life expectancy, higher human development index, less corruption, strongest economies in the world, higher nominal GDP?

Then none of the countries named win on any of those scales.

And perhaps the socialist paradises yes?

-Ra- wrote:

Phaenix wrote:Then that's not the US.

The US, UK, Canada and EU, which are all capitalist, have the highest marks on all of these.

The average American lifespan is much shorter than what is normal. The US, if you haven't seen the news, if on fire right now with arguably the most corrupt president to take office bungling everything. The quality of life in the US is also piss-poor, with most of the poorer population unable to feed their children without public school lunch systems. The US is by no means an exemplar of the capitalist ideology.

Pepsi Co wrote:I say we should replace the government with corporations, abolish the minimum wage, ban those socialist run charities and soup kitchens, and exile every registered democrat to internment camps in New Mexico to die of heat stroke. With all the pinkos and their ideology dead we'll enter a capitalist golden age!

I am liberal, but this is already very extreme

Eurasies wrote:

Kowani wrote:...Define "prosperity"

1)Higher quality of life, 1)higher life expectancy, 3)higher human development index, 4)less corruption, 5)strongest economies in the world, 6)higher nominal GDP?

1) Top three countries according to GDP (PPP) per capita: Qatar, Singapore, Luxembourg
2) Life expectancy top three: Hong Kong, Japan, Singapore
3) Top three HDI: Norway, Switzerland, Ireland
4) Corruption: New Zealand, Denmark, Finland
5) GDP (PPP): China, USA, India
6) GDP nominal: US, China, Japan

You'll note the US only appears on the last two, which should be givens, and neither the UK nor Canada appear in any of them.

Sanghyeok wrote:

Kowani wrote:Then none of the countries named win on any of those scales.

GDP is rather silly measure anyways...I doubt the majority of people in Qatar (GDP per capita of over 100,000) are enjoying a good standard of life.

Qatar has a pretty high HDI score (0.848) and is 29th on the World Happiness Report. You are right that GDP does not always correlate with standard of living, but it is a good indicator.

-Ra- wrote:

New haven america wrote:1. Those are socialist policies and this is an anti-socialism thread, so...
2. They are not.
3. A capitalist system of resource management says its way is the best and everything else is wrong. Who could've guessed?

1. They are not socialist policies. Kinda telling that you don't know what socialism is.
2. They are.
3. Economics is not capitalism. This is like saying that science prefers vaccines, therefore science is biased towards vaccines and against anti-vaxxers. Socialism is the anti-vaxx movement of economics.

1. They are, as they caame about during the Industrial Revolution and the rise of the USSR, 2 major periods of time where socialism took off.
2. YouTube is not a source.
3. Economics is the study of resource management through a capitalist lens. Even my economics professor admitted this.

The Marlborough wrote:

Eurasies wrote:1)Higher quality of life, 1)higher life expectancy, 3)higher human development index, 4)less corruption, 5)strongest economies in the world, 6)higher nominal GDP?

1) Top three countries according to GDP (PPP) per capita: Qatar, Singapore, Luxembourg
2) Life expectancy top three: Hong Kong, Japan, Singapore
3) Top three HDI: Norway, Switzerland, Ireland
4) Corruption: New Zealand, Denmark, Finland
5) GDP (PPP): China, USA, India
6) GDP nominal: US, China, Japan

All of these countries bar China are capitalist.

Kowani wrote:

VlaRiSsiA wrote: I’m directing my message to the inevitable swarm of toxic nations. It’s not happening yet, but always threads get jacked

You...don't spend a lot of time on NSG, do you.

Sanghyeok wrote:
They are a libertarian socialist from my conversations with them.
There is no need to friendly fire, comrade.

It is not "friendly fire" when I point out that they're attacking socialists for a position taken by nobody.

You actually think I’m an anti-socialist capitalist? If you see my posts, you will not see anti-socialism(unless you interpret anti-Stalinism/Authoritarianism as anti-socialism which is a shitty take). I am a massive critic of authoritarianism and capitalism, and how both lead to injustice and oppression, hence the ‘libertarian socialist’. Also, my nation itself is a parody of Stalinism/Juche, not communism, and how supporters of Stalin are no different from reactionaries.

Also, I’ve spent enough time on NSG to know how toxic people can get. Like really toxic. And it doesn’t take many threads to see how often threads go way off topic.

-Ra- wrote:

Cloud-Cuckoo-Land wrote:Prosperity is not a highest priority, though. It is essential to have a working economy, sure, but sufficient is enough, or even better than superior, if other things are also taken into account. You can say prosperity is of highest importance to you and you have every right to do so. But most people don't really care about numbers but just the ability to live their life in peace. As long as an average person can manage, their economy can be inferior to some other country's economy.

You can live off 200K dollars annually. Just because someone else earns 300K does not automatically mean they are better in every single regard than you are.

Thankfully we live in a capitalist system that lets most people live their lives in peace. That's kind of the point. The people of Mao's China or Pol Pot's Cambodia didn't get to live their lives in peace. They were starved to death or hacked up by machetes in open fields.

You are purposefully picking the most extreme examples of governments which don't even necessarily have to be socialist. They only asserted themselves as socialist. North Korea also calls itself a democratic republic. This is a fallacy known as "mistaking the map for territory".

There was a capitalist country which oppressed some people just as much. It was called United States, way back in 1864 and before.
But using that example to prove that capitalism is inherently wrong and socialism is god is not going to be intellectually honest on my part. I am not going to play your game, because it invariably leads to a gathering of people who engage in self-indulgment rather pursuing an intellectually rigorous discourse.

-Ra- wrote:

The Marlborough wrote:1) Top three countries according to GDP (PPP) per capita: Qatar, Singapore, Luxembourg
2) Life expectancy top three: Hong Kong, Japan, Singapore
3) Top three HDI: Norway, Switzerland, Ireland
4) Corruption: New Zealand, Denmark, Finland
5) GDP (PPP): China, USA, India
6) GDP nominal: US, China, Japan

All of these countries bar China are capitalist.

That wasn't the original bar set.

Eurasies wrote:

Pepsi Co wrote:I say we should replace the government with corporations, abolish the minimum wage, ban those socialist run charities and soup kitchens, and exile every registered democrat to internment camps in New Mexico to die of heat stroke. With all the pinkos and their ideology dead we'll enter a capitalist golden age!

I am liberal, but this is already very extreme

You're just thinking too small pinkie. Embrace the Ancap way.

The Marlborough wrote:

Eurasies wrote:1)Higher quality of life, 1)higher life expectancy, 3)higher human development index, 4)less corruption, 5)strongest economies in the world, 6)higher nominal GDP?

1) Top three countries according to GDP (PPP) per capita: Qatar, Singapore, Luxembourg
2) Life expectancy top three: Hong Kong, Japan, Singapore
3) Top three HDI: Norway, Switzerland, Ireland
4) Corruption: New Zealand, Denmark, Finland
5) GDP (PPP): China, USA, India
6) GDP nominal: US, China, Japan

You'll note the US only appears on the last two, which should be givens, and neither the UK nor Canada appear in any of them.

Qatar, Singapore, Luxembourg, Hong Kong, New Zealand are capitalists

What do you mean?

New haven america wrote:1. They are, as thy come about during the Industrial Revolution and the rise of the USSR, 2 major periods of time where socialism took off.
2. YouTube is not a source.
3. Economics is the study of resource management through a capitalist lens.

1. This is incorrect. Social insurance existed since Bismarck. Not the USSR, which had a laughably weak social security net that let millions die.
2. MIT Economics Department certainly is
3. No it isn't. It's the study of resource management using data and scientific reasoning. It's possible to study the USSR's policies in terms of economics, for instance. But we know that socialism has an aversion to data and scientific reason, so what does it matter?

-Ra- wrote:

Phaenix wrote:Then that's not the US.

The US, UK, Canada and EU, which are all capitalist, have the highest marks on all of these.

The EU is not a single country, so we'll discard that. Unless you want to claim that living in Hungary is as good as living in Denmark, in which case, you can be safely ignored.
Anyway.
Quality of life winner: Denmark.
Life Expectancy Winner: Japan
Corruption Winner: New Zealand
I will admit I was wrong, the US does win on the most useless metric, Nominal GDP.

Would you like to try again?

Cloud-Cuckoo-Land wrote:

-Ra- wrote:Thankfully we live in a capitalist system that lets most people live their lives in peace. That's kind of the point. The people of Mao's China or Pol Pot's Cambodia didn't get to live their lives in peace. They were starved to death or hacked up by machetes in open fields.

You are purposefully picking the most extreme examples of governments which don't even necessarily have to be socialist. They only asserted themselves as socialist. North Korea also calls itself a democratic republic - is it one?

There was a capitalist country which oppressed some people just as much. It was called United States, way back in 1864 and before.
But using that example to prove that capitalism is inherently wrong and socialism is god is not going to be intellectually honest on my part. I am not going to play your game.

You're comparing apples to oranges. The US has done a lot of bad things in its history, but its policies did not result in the slaughter of one-third of its population or the deaths of up to 55 million people.

-Ra- wrote:

New haven america wrote:1. They are, as thy come about during the Industrial Revolution and the rise of the USSR, 2 major periods of time where socialism took off.
2. YouTube is not a source.
3. Economics is the study of resource management through a capitalist lens.

1. This is incorrect. Social insurance existed since Bismarck. Not the USSR, which had a laughably weak social security net that let millions die.
2. MIT Economics Department certainly is
3. No it isn't. It's the study of resource management using data and scientific reasoning. It's possible to study the USSR's policies in terms of economics, for instance. But we know that socialism has an aversion to data and scientific reason, so what does it matter?

1. It's not, but considering how uninformed you are about socialism I'm not surprised this is your take.
2. An entire department dedicated to saying "Capitalism is better because capitalism says so!"
3. Yep, it is. Even my economics and business professors have admitted it.

-Ra- wrote:

New haven america wrote:1. They are, as thy come about during the Industrial Revolution and the rise of the USSR, 2 major periods of time where socialism took off.
2. YouTube is not a source.
3. Economics is the study of resource management through a capitalist lens.

1. This is incorrect. Social insurance existed since Bismarck. Not the USSR, which had a laughably weak social security net that let millions die.
2. MIT Economics Department certainly is
3. No it isn't. It's the study of resource management using data and scientific reasoning. It's possible to study the USSR's policies in terms of economics, for instance. But we know that socialism has an aversion to data and scientific reason, so what does it matter?

Let me correct you. Socialism is not averse to data and scientific reason. On the contrary, it looks at the very reasonable problem that some people don't have enough, while some have more than enough. The solution? Take some from the rich, and give it to the poor. The rich won't go hungry because they lost a small percentage of their wealth, and the poor won't become layabouts just because their not dying.

-Ra- wrote:But we know that socialism has an aversion to data and scientific reason

Lol wut.

-Ra- wrote:

New haven america wrote:Capitalism: "Universal healthcare and social safety nets are evil because they steal money from the pockets of hard workers and socialism would never work because humans are inherently too selfish!"

Ok, so how do we deal with people who can't afford healthcare or food?

Capitalism: "IDFK. Charity or something?"

Nobody's saying that you have to get rid of universal healthcare and food. Markets are the best allocator of goods. That's a fact of economics and the reason why socialist countries fail. However, a certain amount of government intervention in the economy is good. So sometimes the government should step in, but for most cases it's unnecessary.

Quite ironic that healthcare and food tend to be the shittiest in socialist countries.

The market is such an efficient allocator of goods that some people end up with millions of times more goods than other people and some end up with no goods at all.

Kowani wrote:

-Ra- wrote:The US, UK, Canada and EU, which are all capitalist, have the highest marks on all of these.

The EU is not a single country, so we'll discard that. Unless you want to claim that living in Hungary is as good as living in Denmark, in which case, you can be safely ignored.
Anyway.
Quality of life winner: Denmark.
Life Expectancy Winner: Japan
Corruption Winner: New Zealand
I will admit I was wrong, the US does win on the most useless metric, Nominal GDP.

Would you like to try again?

And yet all of the countries you've cited are capitalist. New Zealand is the most business friendly country in the world. I don't really advocate for American style free marketeerism, but I am a stern capitalist, and I thank you for demonstrating that capitalism does indeed work mate.