Is it ludicrous to think that the world will remain Capitalistic?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Robert_Sock
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
markomalley said:
You’ve never heard of the “dictatorship of the proletariat” before, Robert?

You, yourself, on this thread have said that smart people (presumably like you) would need to control things in a socialist state. Your words were, "A ruling minority is needed to run any government " (this in the context of ***defending ***the existence of a “nomenklatura” in every existing socialist government).

Or did you forget that part?
Click to expand...
Have it where the minority leaders are somehow elected. It probably would not be socialism with elected officials, but maybe this will save the criticism of the Catechism.
 
Robert_Sock said:
Have it where the minority leaders are somehow elected. It probably would not be socialism with elected officials, but maybe this will save the criticism of the Catechism.
Click to expand...
Have the Popes and the Catholic Church condemned Socialism or not?
 
nmgauss said:
Instead of bemoaning the weak aspects of capitalism, why not emphasize its pluses?

In a perfect world, everyone would have equal intelligence, equal bodies, and equal ability to produce goods and services. They would also have uniform distribution of resources and equal transportation. If that were to happen, then social justice would be to have everyone earn the same wages and be able to buy the same products at the same price… If they all had equal needs, then distributing wages equally would make sense.

No economic system will be perfect because humans are not perfect, and the earth was not designed specifically for imperfect uniform human habitation. Utopias have been tried and failed numerous times in human history. The only system that will prevail will rely on the natural tendencies of humanity in the face of advantages and disadvantages existing in the means of production and the markets for its products. Theory that goes against human proclivities in the face of uneven availability of resources and markets will never work.
Click to expand...
Can you give me examples on when Utopias have been tried and failed numerous times in human history?
 
Robert_Sock said:
Build a hybrid economic system which keep socialists ideals but has its leaders elected.
Click to expand...
You’re dreaming. The fact that no such thing has ever existed and never proved itself effective is the proof that no such thing can exist.
 
Robert_Sock said:
You make capitalists to be saints, when in fact they’re usually greedy. Where ever a penny is be made, the capitalist will be there to exploit it.
Click to expand...
Define ‘greedy’?

For example, suppose you were at the grocery store purchasing fruit?

How much extra money do you give over the asking price of the goods?

Do you give any extra money to the cashier for the work that they perform for you?

Or do you simply pay the cash required to complete the transaction and no more, keeping the remainder in your wallet for yourself?

if you only pay the minimum needed to acquire what you want
eed, how is that not you being ‘greedy’?
 
Everyone!!!

We all know its Bush’s fault…conversation over! Goodguys 1 Satan 0
 
Brendan said:
Define ‘greedy’?

For example, suppose you were at the grocery store purchasing fruit?

How much extra money do you give over the asking price of the goods?

Do you give any extra money to the cashier for the work that they perform for you?

Or do you simply pay the cash required to complete the transaction and no more, keeping the remainder in your wallet for yourself?

if you only pay the minimum needed to acquire what you want
eed, how is that not you being ‘greedy’?
Click to expand...
What about the role of the grocer?

Are they charging only what is necessary to pay their costs?

Are they paying the cashier a good and generous wage?

Or do they take the cash tendered, pay the minimum costs, keeping the remainder in their wallet.

Greed is a human activity. It has nothing to do with the economic system, it has everything to do with people.

And yes, we have all, at one time or another, been greedy. For money, for food, for posessions, for someones attention. It is what we do unless we work real hard at it.
 
sallybutler said:
Or do they take the cash tendered, pay the minimum costs, keeping the remainder in their wallet.it.
Click to expand...
And my point is, how would that be different from anything any of us do when we make a transaction.

We pay the minimum necessary and keep the remaining cash in our wallet.

Most even ‘shop around’ to make sure that they are getting the most goods or services with their money.

If it is ‘greedy’ for a shop keeper to do that with payroll, why is it not ‘greedy’ for us to do that with OUR own money and what WE spend it on.

Is shopping around and getting the best value on a good or service being ‘greedy’?
And yes, we have all, at one time or another, been greedy. For money, for food, for posessions, for someones attention. It is what we do unless we work real hard at it.
Click to expand...
So what is the solution then? Should we give extra money, above what the item is worth to us, as a sign of not being greedy?
 
I’m unsubscribing. There really is no edifying conversation to be had here.
 
dshix said:
You can’t say it, can you? You are so attached to your dreamy ideology that you just can’t answer the question.
Click to expand...
Is there something bothering you? Why be in ‘attack mode’ all the time?
 
holyreyes said:
5 out of my past 8 employers are listed among the socialist services agencies listed above. The socialist salaries and benefits I received was way, way more than the miniscule salaries I received from the capitalistic companies where they didn’t even provide healthcare insurance and I was overworked. Nope, Capitalism didn’t work for me in the USA.
Click to expand...
It is capitalism that provided the funds for those salaries and benefits, friend. That is the great irony - you espouse the virtues of socialist services which are funded through capitalist means.

Where do you think the funds a government spends on its people comes from?
 
Robert_Sock said:
The system need not be socialist, but socialism lends itself to humanitarianism, which is congruent with LOVE.
Click to expand...
Socialism leads to humanitarianism the same way taxation leads to charity. Silly me; I though love was freely given.
 
Robert_Sock said:
Is there something bothering you? Why be in ‘attack mode’ all the time?
Click to expand...
People tend to appear to be in attack mode when the person they are arguing with is constantly in retreat mode.

You can’t start a topic then refuse to defend a position, and when pressed, accuse someone else of being in attack mode. That is wholly unfair.
 
What part of socialism are the popes condemning? Why not build a hybrid economy with socialistic ideals but with freely elected officials?
 
Robert_Sock said:
What part of socialism are the popes condemning? Why not build a hybrid economy with socialistic ideals but with freely elected officials?
Click to expand...
Going back to your original question of “Is it ludicrous to think that the world will remain Capitalistic?”…it is far more ludicrous to think that we, as imperfect humans, would ever be able create your perfect utopian hybrid economy.

Here is the point that you continue to ignore: Socialism puts the power (of darned near everything) into the hands of a few. And, since we are imperfect humans, this power corrupts us. Worse yet, such power draws those who are most corruptable.

This is why socialism has always failed at humanitarianism. The most ludicrous part of this whole discussion is your continual ignoring that historical fact.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top