- Joined
- Jun 22, 2013
- Messages
- 20,271
- Reaction score
- 28,078
- Location
- Mid-West USA
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Other
What part of socialism says everyone has to get the same thing? yes, i know some people may think that is the way socialism works, but it could also work with a rewards system which allows for the people with drive to have something more to work for.
Socialism IS that drive.The problem I have with Socialism is the failure to answer the question…how does it deal with human selfishness?
We tend to forget that humans are merely “greedy monkeys;” more intelligent perhaps, but typically unwilling to let go of the orange in the gourd trap.
The difference being that a human will figure out how to break the gourd and keep the orange. This translates into each persons drive to get as much out of their labors as they can, and then enjoy them without needing to share with others. Socialism does not address this drive.
Actually, that's more what Socialism says Capitalism says. Always important to consider the source.Most humans seek personal gain because with wealth comes freedom and security. The wealthy man is one who can live a life of unlimited choice, with the ability to satisfy all his wants and needs without further labor. Just about every human desires this, with relatively rare exceptions. At the same time, if they see that others can have the same benefits without as much effort, the motivation for personal effort diminishes. Why become a doctor if you can get the same return on your labor investment as a sales clerk or ditch digger? Capitalism says: "To each according to his ability...period!"
Again, best to consider the source before repeating its nonsense. Socialists gleefully use the term "hoarding wealth" because characteristically, it's so intellectually dishonest. But your average person of whatever economic strata knows it as "SAVING." And your average person knows too the power of saving, of suspending one's base human urges to instantly gratify and "buy now" in favor of something better in the future for them or for their families. It's called common sense. It's called rational thought. It's called responsible behavior.The problem I have with Capitalism is the short-sightedness of hoarding wealth. Instead of using excess wealth to build up a shared society so that more citizens can obtain disposable wealth to perpetuate the system, the wealthy only care about amassing more personal wealth out of fear they may lose their freedom and security. They then claim that when they have more than they really need they might be willing to share some with others. The motive is not to share, but simply to buy a little more security from those have nots they give to. That’s why so many Capitalists push “charity” rather than social welfare programs.
Bill Gates? :thinking: As the wealthiest man in the world, it would seem he's the epitome of your objection to Capitalism and its best example of "greed." He's got so much wealth, he can't give it away fast enough - even if he wanted to. And understand this, please, he doesn't want to - which also fits your example of "greed."But for every Bill Gates who gives we have the Koch brothers, Walton family, and the Hiltons who take and hoard. Societies don’t need “charity” they need industry and development options for everyone to feel a valid part of the “opportunity to succeed.” Capitalism fails to address this because the "greedy monkeys" at the top simply don't want to share.
The shortest and most obvious answer: enlist as many people as it can with their hands in the gourd. Promise them more if they keep their hands inside (a wonderful propagandistic trick, that), vilify and demonize those who won't put their hands in the gourd. Demonize people who work hard and save to better their own lives. Demonize people who give to others - not to broadcast their giving so the world can see and pronounce them wonderful people. Demonize the very notion of wealth while pretending to be its champion on behalf of "the poor."So what is the answer in Socialism?
Socialism IS that drive. Actually, that's more what Socialism says Capitalism says. Always important to consider the source.
Again, best to consider the source before repeating its nonsense. Socialists gleefully use the term "hoarding wealth" because characteristically, it's so intellectually dishonest. But your average person of whatever economic strata knows it as "SAVING." And your average person knows too the power of saving, of suspending one's base human urges to instantly gratify and "buy now" in favor of something better in the future for them or for their families. It's called common sense. It's called rational thought. It's called responsible behavior.
For Socialists however, any notions of common sense and responsible behavior seem to be governed less by their intellects and more by their emotions - their self-righteous altruism clouding all rational thought, raining judgment after judgment down on people and matters and concepts they willfully know not. They love to exercise their holier-than-thou compassion for anyone with a dollar less than them by stealing it at the point of a gun from those who have a dollar more than they so they can distribute it under the greedy caveat that they will only give it if the recipient understands it is they who are giving it: 1) out of their intense love for mankind; 2) out of their own ability; and 3) if they will vote for them.
Bill Gates? :thinking: As the wealthiest man in the world, it would seem he's the epitome of your objection to Capitalism and its best example of "greed." He's got so much wealth, he can't give it away fast enough - even if he wanted to. And understand this, please, he doesn't want to - which also fits your example of "greed."
The shortest and most obvious answer: enlist as many people as it can with their hands in the gourd. Promise them more if they keep their hands inside (a wonderful propagandistic trick, that), vilify and demonize those who won't put their hands in the gourd. Demonize people who work hard and save to better their own lives. Demonize people who give to others - not to broadcast their giving so the world can see and pronounce them wonderful people. Demonize the very notion of wealth while pretending to be its champion on behalf of "the poor."
How does Socialism deal with Human Selfishness? It reminds humans that they are nothing but greedy monkeys so it can maintain the gourd.
eace
I appreciate that, I am aware of Mr. Chomsky's work. However, how does turning over the means of production to the working class...work?
The running complaint about Socialism is that it takes from the haves and provides for the have nots. This is anathema to a Capitalist, who believes that his wealth is his to dispose of. Since social welfare programs in Socialism are supported by taxes, and most people think the rich can afford to be taxed more heavily, of course the wealthy balk. You are attacking their freedom and security.
They also fight back by pointing out to the "middle class" and the "taxable poor" that THEIR minor wealth is also going towards social welfare for those who have not "earned it." Why do you think so many people who are not wealthy oppose social welfare???
A bit dated but the Walton family aren't hoarders Walton Family Ranks 37th In Charitable Giving » Making Change at Walmart
Thanks, however as I've expressed to another member "charity" is not what our society needs. Remember, give a man a fish is not as good as teaching a man to fish. Americans don't need handouts, they need decent jobs and a lot of them. If Wal-mart really cared about the American economy they would build factories and produce real jobs HERE and not in China or Bangladesh. We've talked about this before.
The problem I have with Socialism is the failure to answer the question…how does it deal with human selfishness?
We tend to forget that humans are merely “greedy monkeys;” more intelligent perhaps, but typically unwilling to let go of the orange in the gourd trap.
The difference being that a human will figure out how to break the gourd and keep the orange. This translates into each persons drive to get as much out of their labors as they can, and then enjoy them without needing to share with others. Socialism does not address this drive.
Capitalism plays to human greed.
Most humans seek personal gain because with wealth comes freedom and security. The wealthy man is one who can live a life of unlimited choice, with the ability to satisfy all his wants and needs without further labor. Just about every human desires this, with relatively rare exceptions. At the same time, if they see that others can have the same benefits without as much effort, the motivation for personal effort diminishes. Why become a doctor if you can get the same return on your labor investment as a sales clerk or ditch digger? Capitalism says: "To each according to his ability...period!"
The problem I have with Capitalism is the short-sightedness of hoarding wealth. Instead of using excess wealth to build up a shared society so that more citizens can obtain disposable wealth to perpetuate the system, the wealthy only care about amassing more personal wealth out of fear they may lose their freedom and security. They then claim that when they have more than they really need they might be willing to share some with others. The motive is not to share, but simply to buy a little more security through good P.R. from those have nots they give to. That’s why so many Capitalists push “charity” rather than social welfare programs.
But for every Bill Gates who gives we have the Koch brothers, Walton family, and the Hiltons who take and hoard. Societies don’t need “charity” they need industry and development options for everyone to feel a valid part of the “opportunity to succeed.” Capitalism fails to address this because the "greedy monkeys" at the top simply don't want to share.
So what is the answer in Socialism?
You could say the same thing about most any company. Walmart, however, is not a producer of the goods it sells--it is a retailer.
The problem I have with Socialism is the failure to answer the question…how does it deal with human selfishness?
We tend to forget that humans are merely “greedy monkeys;” more intelligent
perhaps, but typically unwilling to let go of the orange in the gourd trap.
The difference being that a human will figure out how to break the gourd and keep the orange. This translates into each persons drive to get as much out of their labors as they can, and then enjoy them without needing to share with others. Socialism does not address this drive.
Capitalism plays to human greed.
Most humans seek personal gain because with wealth comes freedom and security. The wealthy man is one who can live a life of unlimited choice, with the ability to satisfy all his wants and needs without further labor. Just about every human desires this, with relatively rare exceptions. At the same time, if they see that others can have the same benefits without as much effort, the motivation for personal effort diminishes. Why become a doctor if you can get the same return on your labor investment as a sales clerk or ditch digger? Capitalism says: "To each according to his ability...period!"
The problem I have with Capitalism is the short-sightedness of hoarding wealth. Instead of using excess wealth to build up a shared society so that more citizens can obtain disposable wealth to perpetuate the system, the wealthy only care about amassing more personal wealth out of fear they may lose their freedom and security. They then claim that when they have more than they really need they might be willing to share some with others. The motive is not to share, but simply to buy a little more security through good P.R. from those have nots they give to. That’s why so many Capitalists push “charity” rather than social welfare programs.
But for every Bill Gates who gives we have the Koch brothers, Walton family, and the Hiltons who take and hoard. Societies don’t need “charity” they need industry and development options for everyone to feel a valid part of the “opportunity to succeed.” Capitalism fails to address this because the "greedy monkeys" at the top simply don't want to share.
So what is the answer in Socialism?
The problem I have with Socialism is the failure to answer the question…how does it deal with human selfishness?
We tend to forget that humans are merely “greedy monkeys;” more intelligent
perhaps, but typically unwilling to let go of the orange in the gourd trap.
The difference being that a human will figure out how to break the gourd and keep the orange. This translates into each persons drive to get as much out of their labors as they can, and then enjoy them without needing to share with others. Socialism does not address this drive.
Capitalism plays to human greed.
Most humans seek personal gain because with wealth comes freedom and security. The wealthy man is one who can live a life of unlimited choice, with the ability to satisfy all his wants and needs without further labor. Just about every human desires this, with relatively rare exceptions. At the same time, if they see that others can have the same benefits without as much effort, the motivation for personal effort diminishes. Why become a doctor if you can get the same return on your labor investment as a sales clerk or ditch digger? Capitalism says: "To each according to his ability...period!"
The problem I have with Capitalism is the short-sightedness of hoarding wealth. Instead of using excess wealth to build up a shared society so that more citizens can obtain disposable wealth to perpetuate the system, the wealthy only care about amassing more personal wealth out of fear they may lose their freedom and security. They then claim that when they have more than they really need they might be willing to share some with others. The motive is not to share, but simply to buy a little more security through good P.R. from those have nots they give to. That’s why so many Capitalists push “charity” rather than social welfare programs.
But for every Bill Gates who gives we have the Koch brothers, Walton family, and the Hiltons who take and hoard. Societies don’t need “charity” they need industry and development options for everyone to feel a valid part of the “opportunity to succeed.” Capitalism fails to address this because the "greedy monkeys" at the top simply don't want to share.
So what is the answer in Socialism?
Greedy Monkeys ? LOL !!
No, I'm no monkey, not even close and your fatalistic
Personally, I find pure capitalism (which hasn't existed in this country for a while) to be the system that doesn't adequately address the problem of human selfishness.The problem I have with Socialism is the failure to answer the question…how does it deal with human selfishness?
That's the best you can do? I provide a humorous turn of phrase (humans being both primates and selfish) to illustrate a point (hence the picture)
and you respond to that instead of the issue? Thanks for your lack or participation.
That's the best you can do? I provide a humorous turn of phrase (humans being both primates and selfish) to illustrate a point (hence the picture)
and you respond to that instead of the issue? Thanks for your lack or participation.
Check again, as I did and I think you'll find that is not quite the case. Or not, and continue to believe they are just a friendly retailer like any local supermarket.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?