NATION

PASSWORD

Economics Discussion Thread

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

To which school of economics do you personally prescribe?

Monetarist/Chicago-School
7
3%
Keynesian/Neo-Keynesian/New Keynesian/Post-Keynesian
51
24%
Neoclassical
6
3%
Austrian-School
31
14%
Mercantilist
6
3%
Classical
5
2%
Corporatist
11
5%
American/National
15
7%
Marxian/Socialist
60
28%
Other
23
11%
 
Total votes : 215

User avatar
Sanctissima
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8486
Founded: Jul 16, 2014
Ex-Nation

Economics Discussion Thread

Postby Sanctissima » Wed Nov 29, 2017 1:49 pm

Haven't seen one of these done before, and I figure it's a reasonably interesting enough subject to garner discussion, so I've decided to give this a shot.

So... *clears throat Friedmanistically*, without further adieu, I'd like to humbly accept the honour of being OP for:


*insert drumroll*



THE ECONOMICS DISCUSSION THREAD

Image
"Man is an animal that makes bargains. No other animal does this. No dog exchanges bones with another."
-Adam Smith, British economist & philosopher




Economics is a very diverse subject with multiple conflicting schools, theories and systems. For the poll options, I've created a list of several different schools of economics. Naturally, due to poll limits, not all options are available, and some similar-albeit-different schools have been merged together for convenience's sake. I figure it would be interesting if we could discuss our thoughts on the subject. Personally, I consider myself a Monetarist with some dirigiste influences. I'm quite in favour of a relatively unrestricted market economy, and I'm not particularly fond of most welfare programs, but I do nonetheless consider myself quite nationalist, and as such favour state-ownership of some sectors of the economy (notably transport, energy/natural resources and banking), so as to stabilize the economy and provide a supplementary government income that allows for taxes to be kept relatively low.

But that's just me. What your your thoughts? Please, discuss.
Last edited by Sanctissima on Wed Nov 29, 2017 1:53 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
The of Japan
Minister
 
Posts: 2562
Founded: Jul 30, 2016
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby The of Japan » Wed Nov 29, 2017 1:58 pm

Can someone give a good definition of Austrian school of economics?

User avatar
Constantinopolis
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 7501
Founded: Antiquity
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby Constantinopolis » Wed Nov 29, 2017 2:01 pm

Marxian socialist here, obviously. I strongly advocate a socialist planned economy, with state ownership of all the means of production, labour vouchers instead of closed-circuit money, and heavy use of computer networks in planning.
The Holy Socialist Republic of Constantinopolis
"Only a life lived for others is a life worthwhile." -- Albert Einstein
Political Compass: Economic Left/Right: -10.00 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -1.64
________________Communist. Leninist. Orthodox Christian.________________
Communism is the logical conclusion of Christian morality. "Whoever loves his neighbor as himself owns no more than his neighbor does", in the words of St. Basil the Great. The anti-theism of past Leninists was a tragic mistake, and the Church should be an ally of the working class.
My posts on the 12 Great Feasts of the Orthodox Church: -I- -II- -III- -IV- -V- -VI- -VII- -VIII- [PASCHA] -IX- -X- -XI- -XII-

User avatar
MERIZoC
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 23656
Founded: Dec 05, 2013
Left-wing Utopia

Postby MERIZoC » Wed Nov 29, 2017 2:02 pm

Good to see a clear consensus emerging in the polls.
FUTBOL GANG
Somewhere to the left of Attila the Hun
Social Juchetice Warrior
More cool stuff

Pizzagate expert
Guinean Unionist

So you think it’s in the child’s best interest to be raised by YOU and not by the POTUS?

User avatar
Sanctissima
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8486
Founded: Jul 16, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Sanctissima » Wed Nov 29, 2017 2:09 pm

The of Japan wrote:Can someone give a good definition of Austrian school of economics?


Basically, the economic component of Anarcho-Capitalism, although it is a bit more nuanced than that since there are two broad sub-schools within Austrian-School economics. Them being:

-Misesian economics: Based on the philosophy of Ludwig von Mises, who was basically the epitome of AnCapistani. The most notable modern Misesian Austrian-School economist would probably be Hans-Hermann Hoppe.

-Hayekian economics: Based on the philosophy of Friedrich Hayek. Arguably the more popular of the two, Hayekian Austrian-School economics is more extreme libertarian than outright Anarcho-Capitalist, and tolerates a certain level of state-intervention in the economy, notably with social safety nets. The most notable influence Hayek's intellectual heirs have on modern society is probably best seen in the Cato Institute.

User avatar
The Portland Territory
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14195
Founded: Dec 12, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby The Portland Territory » Wed Nov 29, 2017 2:12 pm

Laissez Faire capitalism is the best route for economic prosperity and equality. Though I do worry about the environmental and materialistic components of it
Korwin-Mikke 2020
Տխերք հավակեկ բոզերա. Կոոնել կոոնելով Արաչ ենկ երտոոմ մինչեվ Բակու

16 year old Monarchist from Rhode Island. Interested in economics, governance, metaphysical philosophy, European + Near Eastern history, vexillology, faith, hunting, automotive, ranching, science fiction, music, and anime.

Pro: Absolute Monarchy, Lex Rex, Subsidiarity, Guild Capitalism, Property Rights, Tridentine Catholicism, Unlimited Gun Rights, Hierarchy, Traditionalism, Ethnic Nationalism, Irredentism
Mixed: Fascism, Anarcho Capitalism, Donald Trump
Against: Democracy/ Democratic Republicanism, Egalitarianism, Direct Taxation, Cultural Marxism, Redistribution of Wealth

User avatar
Sanctissima
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8486
Founded: Jul 16, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Sanctissima » Wed Nov 29, 2017 2:20 pm

The Portland Territory wrote:Laissez Faire capitalism is the best route for economic prosperity and equality. Though I do worry about the environmental and materialistic components of it


Personally I prefer Monetarism, since Friedman more or less take into account the inherent unwieldyness of an unrestricted market (without falling into the Keynesian trap of stagflation through excessive government intervention), by advocating a more nuanced approach to monetary policy whilst simultaneously proposing a negative income tax to prevent people from falling through the cracks.

I tend to advocate a bit of French dirigisme on top of that, with some nationalization of key industries, but then again I'm not a libertarian and my views are a bit heterodox as far as Chicago-school economics goes.

User avatar
The Portland Territory
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14195
Founded: Dec 12, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby The Portland Territory » Wed Nov 29, 2017 2:24 pm

Sanctissima wrote:
The Portland Territory wrote:Laissez Faire capitalism is the best route for economic prosperity and equality. Though I do worry about the environmental and materialistic components of it


Personally I prefer Monetarism, since Friedman more or less take into account the inherent unwieldyness of an unrestricted market (without falling into the Keynesian trap of stagflation through excessive government intervention), by advocating a more nuanced approach to monetary policy whilst simultaneously proposing a negative income tax to prevent people from falling through the cracks.

I tend to advocate a bit of French dirigisme on top of that, with some nationalization of key industries, but then again I'm not a libertarian and my views are a bit heterodox as far as Chicago-school economics goes.

There should be little to no taxes on the people nor their organizations at all. And with a negative income tax comes the redistribution of wealth. Anyways, I do have a few exceptions where currency is under the control of a central government-run bank to prevent artificial depressions, banning of certain immoral goods and services, and yeah
Korwin-Mikke 2020
Տխերք հավակեկ բոզերա. Կոոնել կոոնելով Արաչ ենկ երտոոմ մինչեվ Բակու

16 year old Monarchist from Rhode Island. Interested in economics, governance, metaphysical philosophy, European + Near Eastern history, vexillology, faith, hunting, automotive, ranching, science fiction, music, and anime.

Pro: Absolute Monarchy, Lex Rex, Subsidiarity, Guild Capitalism, Property Rights, Tridentine Catholicism, Unlimited Gun Rights, Hierarchy, Traditionalism, Ethnic Nationalism, Irredentism
Mixed: Fascism, Anarcho Capitalism, Donald Trump
Against: Democracy/ Democratic Republicanism, Egalitarianism, Direct Taxation, Cultural Marxism, Redistribution of Wealth

User avatar
The of Japan
Minister
 
Posts: 2562
Founded: Jul 30, 2016
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby The of Japan » Wed Nov 29, 2017 2:24 pm

Sanctissima wrote:
The Portland Territory wrote:Laissez Faire capitalism is the best route for economic prosperity and equality. Though I do worry about the environmental and materialistic components of it


Personally I prefer Monetarism, since Friedman more or less take into account the inherent unwieldyness of an unrestricted market (without falling into the Keynesian trap of stagflation through excessive government intervention), by advocating a more nuanced approach to monetary policy whilst simultaneously proposing a negative income tax to prevent people from falling through the cracks.

I tend to advocate a bit of French dirigisme on top of that, with some nationalization of key industries, but then again I'm not a libertarian and my views are a bit heterodox as far as Chicago-school economics goes.

Stagflation sure does inspire change

User avatar
Valgora
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5625
Founded: Mar 23, 2016
Ex-Nation

Postby Valgora » Wed Nov 29, 2017 2:29 pm

I'm some form of Marxian/Socialist.

I'm a (Marxist-)Luxemburgist; however, that ain't really just about economics. But anyways, I'm also a (Revolutionary) Syndicalist which is arguably more concerned about economics but it ain't just about economics because it does involve politics as well (although, I believe just syndicalist is much more focused on economics than politics).

Luxemburgism ain't like Leninism (and Marxism-Leninism), it is very different compared to Leninism/Marxism-Leninism.
The Reverend Tim
Ordained Dudeist Priest
Libertarian Marxist
Not state capitalist

MT+FanT+some PMT
Multi-species.
Current gov't:
Founded 2023
Currently 2027

DISREGARD NS STATS
Link to factbooks-Forum Factbook-Q&A-Embassy
The Reverend Tim
Ordained Dudeist Priest
IRL Me
Luxemburgist/Syndicalist, brony, metalhead
Valgora =+/-IRL views
8 Values

Pro - Socialism/communism, Palestine, space exploration, left libertarianism, BLM, guns, LGBTQ, Industrial Hemp
Anti - Trump, Hillary, capitalism, authoritarianism, Gun Control, Police, UN, electric cars, Automation of the workforce
Thermodolia wrote:Nah I’m Stalin

User avatar
Sanctissima
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8486
Founded: Jul 16, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Sanctissima » Wed Nov 29, 2017 2:30 pm

The Portland Territory wrote:
Sanctissima wrote:
Personally I prefer Monetarism, since Friedman more or less take into account the inherent unwieldyness of an unrestricted market (without falling into the Keynesian trap of stagflation through excessive government intervention), by advocating a more nuanced approach to monetary policy whilst simultaneously proposing a negative income tax to prevent people from falling through the cracks.

I tend to advocate a bit of French dirigisme on top of that, with some nationalization of key industries, but then again I'm not a libertarian and my views are a bit heterodox as far as Chicago-school economics goes.

There should be little to no taxes on the people nor their organizations at all. And with a negative income tax comes the redistribution of wealth. Anyways, I do have a few exceptions where currency is under the control of a central government-run bank to prevent artificial depressions, banning of certain immoral goods and services, and yeah


Eh, there needs to be some kind of substantial budgetary revenue so that a government can actually run its country effectively. Without taxes, that only leaves you with tariffs and side-income from nationalized industries (which I assume you aren't in favour of). That's really not enough to make the cut, and tends to result in an unhealthy, unstable system, as was seen in 19th-century Britain (particularly major urban centers), along with several other countries at varying points in time.

User avatar
Liriena
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 50612
Founded: Nov 19, 2010
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Liriena » Wed Nov 29, 2017 2:30 pm

Socialist here. I really like worker's self-management and the labor theory of value.

The of Japan wrote:Can someone give a good definition of Austrian school of economics?

IIRC, they're what happens when you totally misread Adam Smith, make up a bunch of unrealistic stuff to compensate, and proclaim that you now own economics as a science and everything else is evil politics. *nod*
The Fabulous Pope of NS


I am:
A pansexual, pantheist, green socialist
An aspiring writer and journalist
Political compass stuff:
Economic Left/Right: -8.13
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.92
For: Grassroots democracy, workers' self-management, humanitarianism, pacifism, pluralism, environmentalism, interculturalism, indigenous rights, minority rights, LGBT+ rights, feminism, optimism
Against: Nationalism, authoritarianism, fascism, conservatism, populism, violence, ethnocentrism, racism, sexism, religious bigotry, anti-LGBT+ bigotry, death penalty, neoliberalism, tribalism,
cynicism


⚧Copy and paste this in your sig
if you passed biology and know
gender and sex aren't the same thing.⚧

I disown most of my previous posts

User avatar
Major-Tom
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 7852
Founded: Mar 09, 2016
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Major-Tom » Wed Nov 29, 2017 2:31 pm

Some sort of dreaded New-Keynesian over here with a preference towards sound macroeconomics and a social market economy.

Waiting on TLT to come in here and yell "dammit libling."
White Trash Hipster- Flagstaffer - Swimmer - Hiker - Powered by Caffeine and Nicotine
Factbooks
Pro: Social Democracy, Unions, Gun Control, Civic Nationalism, Environmentalism, Anti-Establishment Politics, Higher Minimum Wage, Anti-Interventionism, Marijuana Legalization, Progressivism.

User avatar
The Portland Territory
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14195
Founded: Dec 12, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby The Portland Territory » Wed Nov 29, 2017 2:34 pm

Sanctissima wrote:
The Portland Territory wrote:There should be little to no taxes on the people nor their organizations at all. And with a negative income tax comes the redistribution of wealth. Anyways, I do have a few exceptions where currency is under the control of a central government-run bank to prevent artificial depressions, banning of certain immoral goods and services, and yeah


Eh, there needs to be some kind of substantial budgetary revenue so that a government can actually run its country effectively. Without taxes, that only leaves you with tariffs and side-income from nationalized industries (which I assume you aren't in favour of). That's really not enough to make the cut, and tends to result in an unhealthy, unstable system, as was seen in 19th-century Britain (particularly major urban centers), along with several other countries at varying points in time.

Tariffs and a low sales tax. I believe that the government's revenue should always be higher than it's expenditure to create some form of reserve in cases of national crisis. The issue with those nations is that they too were still high spenders and didn't budget correctly.

The only industry that should be nationalized, to an extent, be education.
Korwin-Mikke 2020
Տխերք հավակեկ բոզերա. Կոոնել կոոնելով Արաչ ենկ երտոոմ մինչեվ Բակու

16 year old Monarchist from Rhode Island. Interested in economics, governance, metaphysical philosophy, European + Near Eastern history, vexillology, faith, hunting, automotive, ranching, science fiction, music, and anime.

Pro: Absolute Monarchy, Lex Rex, Subsidiarity, Guild Capitalism, Property Rights, Tridentine Catholicism, Unlimited Gun Rights, Hierarchy, Traditionalism, Ethnic Nationalism, Irredentism
Mixed: Fascism, Anarcho Capitalism, Donald Trump
Against: Democracy/ Democratic Republicanism, Egalitarianism, Direct Taxation, Cultural Marxism, Redistribution of Wealth

User avatar
The Portland Territory
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14195
Founded: Dec 12, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby The Portland Territory » Wed Nov 29, 2017 2:35 pm

Valgora wrote:I'm some form of Marxian/Socialist.

I'm a (Marxist-)Luxemburgist; however, that ain't really just about economics. But anyways, I'm also a (Revolutionary) Syndicalist which is arguably more concerned about economics but it ain't just about economics because it does involve politics as well (although, I believe just syndicalist is much more focused on economics than politics).

Luxemburgism ain't like Leninism (and Marxism-Leninism), it is very different compared to Leninism/Marxism-Leninism.

Might as well start some debate

Why do you believe socialism or anything in that umbrella is an economically sound idea? Not the ideas of equality or that, but that it will actually work?
Korwin-Mikke 2020
Տխերք հավակեկ բոզերա. Կոոնել կոոնելով Արաչ ենկ երտոոմ մինչեվ Բակու

16 year old Monarchist from Rhode Island. Interested in economics, governance, metaphysical philosophy, European + Near Eastern history, vexillology, faith, hunting, automotive, ranching, science fiction, music, and anime.

Pro: Absolute Monarchy, Lex Rex, Subsidiarity, Guild Capitalism, Property Rights, Tridentine Catholicism, Unlimited Gun Rights, Hierarchy, Traditionalism, Ethnic Nationalism, Irredentism
Mixed: Fascism, Anarcho Capitalism, Donald Trump
Against: Democracy/ Democratic Republicanism, Egalitarianism, Direct Taxation, Cultural Marxism, Redistribution of Wealth

User avatar
Constantinopolis
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 7501
Founded: Antiquity
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby Constantinopolis » Wed Nov 29, 2017 2:41 pm

The Portland Territory wrote:Why do you believe socialism or anything in that umbrella is an economically sound idea? Not the ideas of equality or that, but that it will actually work?

Define "work". A socialist system can obviously exist, because socialist systems have existed in the past. A socialist system can also obviously create a society with full employment, a high degree of economic equality and also high (or at least decent) rates of economic growth. That has also happened in the past.

So, what do you mean by "work", and what makes you think socialism can't do it?
The Holy Socialist Republic of Constantinopolis
"Only a life lived for others is a life worthwhile." -- Albert Einstein
Political Compass: Economic Left/Right: -10.00 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -1.64
________________Communist. Leninist. Orthodox Christian.________________
Communism is the logical conclusion of Christian morality. "Whoever loves his neighbor as himself owns no more than his neighbor does", in the words of St. Basil the Great. The anti-theism of past Leninists was a tragic mistake, and the Church should be an ally of the working class.
My posts on the 12 Great Feasts of the Orthodox Church: -I- -II- -III- -IV- -V- -VI- -VII- -VIII- [PASCHA] -IX- -X- -XI- -XII-

User avatar
Sanctissima
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8486
Founded: Jul 16, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Sanctissima » Wed Nov 29, 2017 2:42 pm

The Portland Territory wrote:
Sanctissima wrote:
Eh, there needs to be some kind of substantial budgetary revenue so that a government can actually run its country effectively. Without taxes, that only leaves you with tariffs and side-income from nationalized industries (which I assume you aren't in favour of). That's really not enough to make the cut, and tends to result in an unhealthy, unstable system, as was seen in 19th-century Britain (particularly major urban centers), along with several other countries at varying points in time.

Tariffs and a low sales tax. I believe that the government's revenue should always be higher than it's expenditure to create some form of reserve in cases of national crisis. The issue with those nations is that they too were still high spenders and didn't budget correctly.

The only industry that should be nationalized, to an extent, be education.


That barely even allows a nation to maintain a decent military, let alone other government functions. And education would always be a net-loss profit-wise, so chances are you'd have to almost completely cut the military budget in favour of maintaining a decent education system if the government's only revenue is tariffs and minimal revenue from sales taxes.

19th century Britain's primary economic issue was that it's almost complete disinterest in managing the economy beyond lingering Mercantilist sentiments resulted in extreme worker exploitation, child chimney sweepers, and the rise of Socialism within England proper.

User avatar
The of Japan
Minister
 
Posts: 2562
Founded: Jul 30, 2016
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby The of Japan » Wed Nov 29, 2017 2:43 pm

Constantinopolis wrote:
The Portland Territory wrote:Why do you believe socialism or anything in that umbrella is an economically sound idea? Not the ideas of equality or that, but that it will actually work?

Define "work". A socialist system can obviously exist, because socialist systems have existed in the past. A socialist system can also obviously create a society with full employment, a high degree of economic equality and also high (or at least decent) rates of economic growth. That has also happened in the past.

So, what do you mean by "work", and what makes you think socialism can't do it?

Sweden and Denmark are not socialist

User avatar
Constantinopolis
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 7501
Founded: Antiquity
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby Constantinopolis » Wed Nov 29, 2017 2:45 pm

The of Japan wrote:
Constantinopolis wrote:Define "work". A socialist system can obviously exist, because socialist systems have existed in the past. A socialist system can also obviously create a society with full employment, a high degree of economic equality and also high (or at least decent) rates of economic growth. That has also happened in the past.

So, what do you mean by "work", and what makes you think socialism can't do it?

Sweden and Denmark are not socialist

Obviously. I know that. I was talking about the Soviet Union circa 1950-1980. Full employment, high economic equality, and also high (or at least decent) rates of economic growth.
The Holy Socialist Republic of Constantinopolis
"Only a life lived for others is a life worthwhile." -- Albert Einstein
Political Compass: Economic Left/Right: -10.00 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -1.64
________________Communist. Leninist. Orthodox Christian.________________
Communism is the logical conclusion of Christian morality. "Whoever loves his neighbor as himself owns no more than his neighbor does", in the words of St. Basil the Great. The anti-theism of past Leninists was a tragic mistake, and the Church should be an ally of the working class.
My posts on the 12 Great Feasts of the Orthodox Church: -I- -II- -III- -IV- -V- -VI- -VII- -VIII- [PASCHA] -IX- -X- -XI- -XII-

User avatar
Socialist Union Of Deutschland
Envoy
 
Posts: 322
Founded: Aug 05, 2017
Ex-Nation

Postby Socialist Union Of Deutschland » Wed Nov 29, 2017 2:46 pm

Socialism.
Supporter Of: Environmentalism, Labourism, Militarism, Nationalism, Populism, Rationalism, Socialism, Unionism, Nationalization of Economics, Universal Basic Income.

Opposed To: Capitalism, Conservatism, Corporatism, Empiricism, Fascism, Imperialism, Monarchism, Neo-Liberalism, Neo-Nazism, Objectivism, Separatism, Wahhabism, Zionism, Religious Fundamentalism, Anarchy, Democracy, Oligarchy, Ignorance, Slavery.

User avatar
Telconi
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 17575
Founded: Oct 08, 2016
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Telconi » Wed Nov 29, 2017 2:46 pm

Nordic model capitalist.
-2.25 LEFT
-3.23 LIBERTARIAN

PRO:
-Weapons Rights
-Gender Equality
-LGBTQ Rights
-Racial Equality
-Religious Freedom
-Freedom of Speech
-Freedom of Association
-Life
-Limited Government
-Non Interventionism
-Labor Unions
-Environmental Protections
ANTI:
-Racism
-Sexism
-Bigotry In All Forms
-Government Overreach
-Government Surveillance
-Freedom For Security Social Transactions
-Unnecessary Taxes
-Excessively Specific Government Programs
-Foreign Entanglements
-Religious Extremism
-Fascists Masquerading as "Social Justice Warriors"

"The Constitution is NOT an instrument for the government to restrain the people,it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government-- lest it come to dominate our lives and interests." ~ Patrick Henry

User avatar
Liriena
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 50612
Founded: Nov 19, 2010
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Liriena » Wed Nov 29, 2017 2:50 pm

Constantinopolis wrote:
The of Japan wrote:Sweden and Denmark are not socialist

Obviously. I know that. I was talking about the Soviet Union circa 1950-1980. Full employment, high economic equality, and also high (or at least decent) rates of economic growth.

There's an argument to be made that what ultimately doomed the Soviet Union was focusing so much on heavy industries and expanding its military power instead of consumer goods and agriculture.
The Fabulous Pope of NS


I am:
A pansexual, pantheist, green socialist
An aspiring writer and journalist
Political compass stuff:
Economic Left/Right: -8.13
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.92
For: Grassroots democracy, workers' self-management, humanitarianism, pacifism, pluralism, environmentalism, interculturalism, indigenous rights, minority rights, LGBT+ rights, feminism, optimism
Against: Nationalism, authoritarianism, fascism, conservatism, populism, violence, ethnocentrism, racism, sexism, religious bigotry, anti-LGBT+ bigotry, death penalty, neoliberalism, tribalism,
cynicism


⚧Copy and paste this in your sig
if you passed biology and know
gender and sex aren't the same thing.⚧

I disown most of my previous posts

User avatar
The of Japan
Minister
 
Posts: 2562
Founded: Jul 30, 2016
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby The of Japan » Wed Nov 29, 2017 2:50 pm

Constantinopolis wrote:
The of Japan wrote:Sweden and Denmark are not socialist

Obviously. I know that. I was talking about the Soviet Union circa 1950-1980. Full employment, high economic equality, and also high (or at least decent) rates of economic growth.

Why did is start stagnating in early 1980s?

User avatar
The Portland Territory
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14195
Founded: Dec 12, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby The Portland Territory » Wed Nov 29, 2017 2:51 pm

Constantinopolis wrote:
The Portland Territory wrote:Why do you believe socialism or anything in that umbrella is an economically sound idea? Not the ideas of equality or that, but that it will actually work?

Define "work". A socialist system can obviously exist, because socialist systems have existed in the past. A socialist system can also obviously create a society with full employment, a high degree of economic equality and also high (or at least decent) rates of economic growth. That has also happened in the past.

So, what do you mean by "work", and what makes you think socialism can't do it?

High standards of living, high wages, good employment rates, economic growth, "work" as in it's the best economic system for all people

Why can't socialism do that? Simply because there is a lack of motivation for innovation, for investing in the economy. Why would an investor ever want to put money in a system where he is regulated beyond belief, has to pay workers high wages for many jobs that aren't worth their hourly rate, high tax rates, and even capping his earnings where money is literally stolen from him by the government in the name of "equality"? Most people may have jobs in socialism but it will lead to recession because of a lack of investment
Korwin-Mikke 2020
Տխերք հավակեկ բոզերա. Կոոնել կոոնելով Արաչ ենկ երտոոմ մինչեվ Բակու

16 year old Monarchist from Rhode Island. Interested in economics, governance, metaphysical philosophy, European + Near Eastern history, vexillology, faith, hunting, automotive, ranching, science fiction, music, and anime.

Pro: Absolute Monarchy, Lex Rex, Subsidiarity, Guild Capitalism, Property Rights, Tridentine Catholicism, Unlimited Gun Rights, Hierarchy, Traditionalism, Ethnic Nationalism, Irredentism
Mixed: Fascism, Anarcho Capitalism, Donald Trump
Against: Democracy/ Democratic Republicanism, Egalitarianism, Direct Taxation, Cultural Marxism, Redistribution of Wealth

User avatar
Sanctissima
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8486
Founded: Jul 16, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Sanctissima » Wed Nov 29, 2017 2:51 pm

Constantinopolis wrote:
The of Japan wrote:Sweden and Denmark are not socialist

Obviously. I know that. I was talking about the Soviet Union circa 1950-1980. Full employment, high economic equality, and also high (or at least decent) rates of economic growth.


I don't think it can reasonably stated that the USSR had high economic growth, especially when compared to other more economically liberalized countries like the USA.

Image

One of the USSR's main problems, arguably even its death-knell, was that its level of economic growth was almost stagnant (or at least, extremely gradual), which became extremely pronounced and evident in the 80's, contributing quite significantly to the social unrest that eventually caused the whole system to come crashing down.

Next

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baltic Union, Dooom35796821595, Ethel mermania, Exabot [Bot], Fractalnavel, Gallade, Great Aletia, Harelia, Holy Tedalonia, Idzequitch, Ifreann, Internationalist Bastard, Jolthig, Kingfu, Len Hyet, Majestic-12 [Bot], Nanatsu no Tsuki, Petrasylvania, Post War America, Proctopeo, Republic of Turbin, Scomagia, Shrillland, The Censorate, Thermodolia, Uiiop, Valrifell, Vassenor, Xadufell

Remove ads