| Jaicee said: I've long considered myself to be a socialist, and personally, when I use that term, I refer to a general system of social ownership and management, to put it simply. More specifically, I would count myself a communalist, which is a type of socialism that is based on local community ownership and management (collective economic planning, etc.) and participatory democracy. The fact of the matter is that the main reason why both poverty and the global average temperature are on the rise in the world today is precisely because there is too much production going on as things are; so much that it is not even ecologically sustainable! So much that weaponry has become affordable to almost every bad actor on the planet, which has resulted in a fairly steady increase in the amount of warfare going on this century. We could stand to have a more egalitarian distribution of wealth at the expense of a level of productive efficiency that is doing more harm than good anyway in my opinion. |
poverty is not on the rise, people are the wealthiest they have ever been and living the best lifestyles they have been in the history of the world because of capitalism
the gap between the rich and the poor is widening sure but i don't think that's a problem if people are living better lives ( relative to previous conditions ) and have more opportunities to become wealthy if they wish to pursue those paths
" We could stand to have a more egalitarian distribution of wealth at the expense of a level of productive efficiency that is doing more harm than good anyway in my opinion."
that's not how it works... if you tax the rich to the point where they don't receive a certain level of profit for their efforts... why would they bother?, i know i wouldn't
what socialists don't get is if you take out the rich productive people then everyone suffers because the advancements they produce that improve life for everyone are stifled as a result
"The most common argument that I hear against socialist systems is that they are inefficient."
no the most common arguments are that they result in more suffering for communities as a whole because standards of living fall, individuals lose opportunities to advance themselves and in extreme cases like in nazi germany it results in genocide
" In fact, I tend to favor a no-growth economy because the callous and reckless efficiency of the capitalist system is precisely its problem."
"I refer to a general system of social ownership and management, to put it simply. More specifically, I would count myself a communalist, which is a type of socialism that is based on local community ownership and management (collective economic planning, etc.) and participatory democracy."
that someone with an account on a video game forum(which means you have a tv, video game consoles, a computer etc etc etc) is typing this is either very sad or very amusing
so you don't have a problem with going back to living in the bush?
