NationStates

I say Capitalism with some Socialism (I dislike it but it is necessary), however I won't pick democratic Socialism just because of the name, and who cares about giving power to the people? Where would all your money go when your rich and can only barely afford your expenses, then people go around saying, "look he's rich, lets tax him, afterall he has to have tons of money laying around while we are starving!', such is the thought process of Socialism, just because one is rich does not mean they don't have bills and expenses that take away all that money

Deus Ignis wrote:I say Capitalism with some Socialism (I dislike it but it is necessary), however I won't pick democratic Socialism just because of the name, and who cares about giving power to the people? Where would all your money go when your rich and can only barely afford your expenses, then people go around saying, "look he's rich, lets tax him, afterall he has to have tons of money laying around while we are starving!', such is the thought process of Socialism, just because one is rich does not mean they don't have bills and expenses that take away all that money

Uhm... that's pretty much exactly what being rich means. Having lots of disposable income, private property and savings.

Albrenia wrote:

Deus Ignis wrote:I say Capitalism with some Socialism (I dislike it but it is necessary), however I won't pick democratic Socialism just because of the name, and who cares about giving power to the people? Where would all your money go when your rich and can only barely afford your expenses, then people go around saying, "look he's rich, lets tax him, afterall he has to have tons of money laying around while we are starving!', such is the thought process of Socialism, just because one is rich does not mean they don't have bills and expenses that take away all that money

Uhm... that's pretty much exactly what being rich means. Having lots of disposable income, private property and savings.

YEs, but don't forget the huge price tag that comes with, after all for centuries the rich goes in debts that they pay with another loan which drives them into more debt. Just because you are rich doesn't mean that money is stockpiled, it just means you have a lot of money or have items of extreme value, which could be owned by someone else, thus one could seem to be rich (cause they "own" a lot of money but, in reality it isn't their's, so they are dirt poor

I personally like Capitalism.

Really In capitalism you get more rights than Communism and Socialism combined

Coradortodos wrote:Really In capitalism you get more rights than Communism and Socialism combined

Capitalism is not inherently free.

Coradortodos wrote:Really In capitalism you get more rights than Communism and Socialism combined

I would say Capitalism gives you more freedom, though more freedom is not always better. The ideal system is a balance of freedom and security, but where that midpoint lies differs person to person. Some people want/need more freedom, others more security. Hence why there is no cure-all government type or economic system.

The three are cringe. Mixed economy FTW.

Every known Communist system failed as evidenced by the fall of the Soviet Union and market-based reforms in Communist-controlled countries. Venezuela is socialist and they fell apart long before they were hit with US sanctions. Capitalist societies like America, Canada, Central and Northern Europe, the Gulf Kingdoms, Malaysia and Singapore are all still standing and doing really good.

I have to go with capitalism here, specifically the Singaporean model.

Kyundao wrote:Every known Communist system failed as evidenced by the fall of the Soviet Union and market-based reforms in Communist-controlled countries. Venezuela is socialist and they fell apart long before they were hit with US sanctions. Capitalist societies like America, Canada, Central and Northern Europe, the Gulf Kingdoms, Malaysia and Singapore are all still standing and doing really good.

I have to go with capitalism here, specifically the Singaporean model.

Singaporean model? Don't you mean venetian?

Dominioan wrote:

Coradortodos wrote:Really In capitalism you get more rights than Communism and Socialism combined

Capitalism is not inherently free.

You get the freedom to exploit under capitalism

One Big Union. Workplaces run for the benefit of workers, not bosses.

Kyundao wrote:Every known Communist system failed as evidenced by the fall of the Soviet Union and market-based reforms in Communist-controlled countries. Venezuela is socialist and they fell apart long before they were hit with US sanctions. Capitalist societies like America, Canada, Central and Northern Europe, the Gulf Kingdoms, Malaysia and Singapore are all still standing and doing really good.

I have to go with capitalism here, specifically the Singaporean model.

Capitalism has failed in every country where it has been tried. Depressions, inequality, unrest, oppression.

US-SSR wrote:One Big Union. Workplaces run for the benefit of workers, not bosses.

(Image)

No cop unions in the IWW either. A true proletarian movement.

US-SSR wrote:Capitalism has failed in every country where it has been tried. Depressions, inequality, unrest, oppression.

Tell that to countries like Canada, Ireland, Switzerland, the Scandinavian countries and Japan. Also, depressions are never permanent in a capitalist system.

To me a capitalist mainstream system with touch-ups of socialism would ensure an equal opportunity nation while keeping a lid on things to avoid wild bureaucracy and mega corporations cutting through the red tape.

Capitalism.

Since the mods got rid of the right and left discussion threads there have been multiple threads that amount to the same thing. Just an observation.

Page wrote:Since the mods got rid of the right and left discussion threads there have been multiple threads that amount to the same thing. Just an observation.

I think the forum has gotten a little better since those two megathreads were shutdown.

Page wrote:Since the mods got rid of the right and left discussion threads there have been multiple threads that amount to the same thing. Just an observation.

Regardless. I so chose to create this thread to initiate and observe debates and varied opinions on socio-economic principles and their application to the USA or in general. The whole point of this thread was to focus specifically on the given topic. Your observation has already been made prior by another member and doesn't need reiteration. Just an observation and good evening to you.

Albrenia wrote:Democratic Socialism is preferred, but I'd be happy with a Capitalist system that offers proper protections to the poor and needy. Since I can't vote twice though, I chose Democratic Socialism.

Strongly opposed to the authoritarian brand of communism, and to the sort of predatory capitalism that puts profit so far above humanity.

im on the same boat tbh. Ideally there would be some kind of Social Democratic capitalism as an option but I can only choose for one.

Nevertopia wrote:

Albrenia wrote:Democratic Socialism is preferred, but I'd be happy with a Capitalist system that offers proper protections to the poor and needy. Since I can't vote twice though, I chose Democratic Socialism.

Strongly opposed to the authoritarian brand of communism, and to the sort of predatory capitalism that puts profit so far above humanity.

im on the same boat tbh. Ideally there would be some kind of Social Democratic capitalism as an option but I can only choose for one.

If I do another poll, which I'm considering, I'll add that as an option as many seem to hold that as a viable option.

Nejii wrote:

Page wrote:Since the mods got rid of the right and left discussion threads there have been multiple threads that amount to the same thing. Just an observation.

Regardless. I so chose to create this thread to initiate and observe debates and varied opinions on socio-economic principles and their application to the USA or in general. The whole point of this thread was to focus specifically on the given topic. Your observation has already been made prior by another member and doesn't need reiteration. Just an observation and good evening to you.

be careful with that. Any form of criticism on this website can easily be taken as a personal attack to some.

Nevertopia wrote:

Nejii wrote:
Regardless. I so chose to create this thread to initiate and observe debates and varied opinions on socio-economic principles and their application to the USA or in general. The whole point of this thread was to focus specifically on the given topic. Your observation has already been made prior by another member and doesn't need reiteration. Just an observation and good evening to you.

be careful with that. Any form of criticism on this website can easily be taken as a personal attack to some.

Yes it can. I was simply stating a redundancy on Page's part and in truth I find it an irrelevant statement. This thread isn't some copy and paste clone.
Now, shall we?

Nejii wrote:

Nevertopia wrote:
be careful with that. Any form of criticism on this website can easily be taken as a personal attack to some.

Yes it can. I was simply stating a redundancy on Page's part and in truth I find it an irrelevant statement. This thread isn't some copy and paste clone.
Now, shall we?

what do you think the best answer is?

Nevertopia wrote:

Nejii wrote:
Yes it can. I was simply stating a redundancy on Page's part and in truth I find it an irrelevant statement. This thread isn't some copy and paste clone.
Now, shall we?

what do you think the best answer is?

Regarding my choice principle? I'd rather not say and keep the discussion platform neutral, though I will say all theories have their merits and relatable points. And as an open minded centrist, I'm soaking it all in.