• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Sticks and carrots, socialism and capitalism.

aociswundumho

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 6, 2019
Messages
4,087
Reaction score
1,583
Location
Bridgeport, CT
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Capitalism relies on positive incentives. Create a better or cheaper product or service, and people will voluntarily give you their money in exchange for it. If enough people give you their money in exchange for what you are producing, you might get rich.

Socialism relies on negative incentives. People who work for the state are primarily interested in keeping their jobs. They are paid the same amount regardless of what they produce or how they produce it, because the money for their pay is taken from people coercively, via taxation.



capitalism-bread-is-lined-up-waiting-for-people-socialism-people-line-up-waiting-for-bread.jpg
 

Lisa

Salem ac Leporem
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 3, 2019
Messages
10,174
Reaction score
4,421
Location
NE Ohio,
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Progressive
Capitalism relies on positive incentives. Create a better or cheaper product or service, and people will voluntarily give you their money in exchange for it. If enough people give you their money in exchange for what you are producing, you might get rich.

Socialism relies on negative incentives. People who work for the state are primarily interested in keeping their jobs. They are paid the same amount regardless of what they produce or how they produce it, because the money for their pay is taken from people coercively, via taxation.



View attachment 67264214
This argument is such a lie that the person making it has brown eyes because he is so full of " bleep"

Socialism means that the workers own and control the means of production. Socialism doesn't mean handouts.

Before you reply to me educate yourself about market socialism. Do you also understand the social democracy is different from the cow dung heap that you are shoveling to the unlearned masses?
 

SonOfDaedalus

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 13, 2017
Messages
11,617
Reaction score
6,724
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Capitalism relies on positive incentives. Create a better or cheaper product or service, and people will voluntarily give you their money in exchange for it. If enough people give you their money in exchange for what you are producing, you might get rich.

Socialism relies on negative incentives. People who work for the state are primarily interested in keeping their jobs. They are paid the same amount regardless of what they produce or how they produce it, because the money for their pay is taken from people coercively, via taxation.



View attachment 67264214
Do you know what a false dichotomy is? Do you know how that relates to your post?
 

nitroexpress

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 15, 2018
Messages
1,093
Reaction score
285
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
This argument is such a lie that the person making it has brown eyes because he is so full of " bleep"

Socialism means that the workers own and control the means of production. Socialism doesn't mean handouts.

Before you reply to me educate yourself about market socialism. Do you also understand the social democracy is different from the cow dung heap that you are shoveling to the unlearned masses?
Paste any label you want in front of Socialism and the target is the same. Tweaking the Socialism label is only meant to make it more palatable.
 

Outlook

DP Veteran
Joined
May 27, 2019
Messages
3,582
Reaction score
1,063
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
This argument is such a lie that the person making it has brown eyes because he is so full of " bleep"

Socialism means that the workers own and control the means of production. Socialism doesn't mean handouts.

Before you reply to me educate yourself about market socialism. Do you also understand the social democracy is different from the cow dung heap that you are shoveling to the unlearned masses?
It sounds so good, the workers own and control the means of production. The reality is that the government or government elites own and control everything.
 

Lisa

Salem ac Leporem
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 3, 2019
Messages
10,174
Reaction score
4,421
Location
NE Ohio,
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Progressive
Paste any label you want in front of Socialism and the target is the same. Tweaking the Socialism label is only meant to make it more palatable.
How is the workers owning and controlling the means of production in a market economy the same as your claims of handouts and bread lines? You're spreading typical fear mongering nonsense to people who could not pass a 100 level course on economics or poli-sci. I doubt that you could take part in a rational discussion of the subject so I am wasting my effort trying to reply to you.
 

Lisa

Salem ac Leporem
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 3, 2019
Messages
10,174
Reaction score
4,421
Location
NE Ohio,
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Progressive
It sounds so good, the workers own and control the means of production. The reality is that the government or government elites own and control everything.
Your idea would not be socialist. That would be neo-fascist. They are opposing ideas. The fact that socialist is not necessarily an authoritarian government is beyond your understanding and many people who makes similar arguments.
 

Checkerboard Strangler

I'm the Leon Russell guy.
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 8, 2005
Messages
36,199
Reaction score
19,610
Location
Los Angeles
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Capitalism relies on positive incentives. Create a better or cheaper product or service, and people will voluntarily give you their money in exchange for it. If enough people give you their money in exchange for what you are producing, you might get rich.

Socialism relies on negative incentives. People who work for the state are primarily interested in keeping their jobs. They are paid the same amount regardless of what they produce or how they produce it, because the money for their pay is taken from people coercively, via taxation.



View attachment 67264214
There is only one kind of car. ALL CARS are the same.
Hmmm, that argument doesn't work either.

You need to get a refund from PragerU.
 

Hondo

Active member
Joined
Sep 1, 2019
Messages
473
Reaction score
198
Location
Pocono Mountains
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Two friends of mine started a cave diving light business in the garage. They worked extremely hard for the past 17 years to develop, build, advertise, sell, ship, repair and continue to develop products. They built up staff. They moved through 3 manufacturing facilities. At this point, I doubt their business will grow beyond their current location and the number of staff they have. Why should their staff own any of their blood, sweat, tears and family sacrifice just because they specialize in a job and sometimes don't feel motivated to work? If you don't like getting paid X then open your own company. My friends had been employees at another dive gear business when they decided to go off on their own. They built a great life for their wives and kids through long hours and total dedication. They now are a major scuba gear manufacturer.
 

HIP56948

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 29, 2018
Messages
1,165
Reaction score
673
Location
Sarasota, Florida and Sydney, Australia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Capitalism itself isn't the problem. Unbridled Capitalism means that your person who creates something to sell is also paying slave wages in order to amass great wealth. Then this entrepreneur pays off the politicians...(just like the person who paid off the politicians before our entrepreneur ..in order to keep wages low and pay less taxes then he should. That's part of the reason why we have the greatest wealth gap in the world.
Capitalism is not evil. It's the sociopaths that make it evil. It's the governments job to keep the Asshole-sharks from eating all the fish. I'm all for someone getting wealthy but not on MY damn back and hard work.
 

AlbqOwl

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 12, 2005
Messages
22,769
Reaction score
11,834
Location
New Mexico
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
This argument is such a lie that the person making it has brown eyes because he is so full of " bleep"

Socialism means that the workers own and control the means of production. Socialism doesn't mean handouts.

Before you reply to me educate yourself about market socialism. Do you also understand the social democracy is different from the cow dung heap that you are shoveling to the unlearned masses?
I'm afraid you've got that wrong. In socialism, the STATE owns and controls the means of production. You described the unicorn like end results of Marxism as Marx described it. Unfortunately no nation that became socialist in order to achieve communism has ever moved past that point. Far too many have extended socialism into dictatorship/totalitarianism.
 

Integrityrespec

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 28, 2018
Messages
6,972
Reaction score
2,495
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Capitalism relies on positive incentives. Create a better or cheaper product or service, and people will voluntarily give you their money in exchange for it. If enough people give you their money in exchange for what you are producing, you might get rich.

Socialism relies on negative incentives. People who work for the state are primarily interested in keeping their jobs. They are paid the same amount regardless of what they produce or how they produce it, because the money for their pay is taken from people coercively, via taxation.



View attachment 67264214
Socialism is about providing equal outcome for the masses. Therefore those at the top, who don't follow the same rules, determine what each needs and what each gets. In a capitalist system opportunity is limitless for those who refuse to give up or give in. Each person gets to decide how far up the ladder they want to go and at which point the are satisfied with their level of success and wealth. In the socialist system someone else decides that for you.
 

Jesse Booth

we live in a society
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 12, 2014
Messages
11,036
Reaction score
6,696
Location
https://www.debatepolitics.com
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
Capitalism itself isn't the problem. Unbridled Capitalism means that your person who creates something to sell is also paying slave wages in order to amass great wealth. Then this entrepreneur pays off the politicians...(just like the person who paid off the politicians before our entrepreneur ..in order to keep wages low and pay less taxes then he should. That's part of the reason why we have the greatest wealth gap in the world.
Capitalism is not evil. It's the sociopaths that make it evil. It's the governments job to keep the Asshole-sharks from eating all the fish. I'm all for someone getting wealthy but not on MY damn back and hard work.
That's a nice sentiment and all, but the sociopaths always rise to the top under capitalism, and every single one of them has a strong economic incentive to undermine regulations that impede their amoral practices.
 

Jesse Booth

we live in a society
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 12, 2014
Messages
11,036
Reaction score
6,696
Location
https://www.debatepolitics.com
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
I'm afraid you've got that wrong. In socialism, the STATE owns and controls the means of production. You described the unicorn like end results of Marxism as Marx described it. Unfortunately no nation that became socialist in order to achieve communism has ever moved past that point. Far too many have extended socialism into dictatorship/totalitarianism.
The Chiapas Autonomous Region in Mexico has been doing pretty damn well as an anarchist society for nearly 30 years, and the Incans had a farmer's commune for their entire civilization for centuries before the Spaniards arrived & started butchering them all; those were just off the top of my head. Worker owned production has worked perfectly fine multiple times throughout human history.
 

Lisa

Salem ac Leporem
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 3, 2019
Messages
10,174
Reaction score
4,421
Location
NE Ohio,
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Progressive
I'm afraid you've got that wrong. In socialism, the STATE owns and controls the means of production. You described the unicorn like end results of Marxism as Marx described it. Unfortunately no nation that became socialist in order to achieve communism has ever moved past that point. Far too many have extended socialism into dictatorship/totalitarianism.
That is only one form of socialism. You are incorrectly believing all all forms of socialism have a command economy where the government owns and controlled the means of production. This is a common myth in the US. Private control of the means of production in a market economy is just as easy to do and it is much more stable.

Socialism is not the same as Communism. Communism means that all goods are owned communally by the people who also benefit from them. Socialism is ownership by the people who are the workers. We could have a market socialist economy in the US and it would not look very different from what we have no except for a much higher standard of living because the workers would also be the owners. There are many businesses in the US where the workers are already the owners. Publix supermarkets, W.L. Gore, Davey Tree Co. and King Arthur flour are just a few of them.

The Employee Ownership 100: America's Largest Majority Employee-Owned Companies | NCEO

I'm a market socialist and a civil libertarian.
 

Irwin Corey

Proud AmeriCAN
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2018
Messages
7,490
Reaction score
2,788
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Capitalism relies on positive incentives. Create a better or cheaper product or service, and people will voluntarily give you their money in exchange for it. If enough people give you their money in exchange for what you are producing, you might get rich.

Socialism relies on negative incentives. People who work for the state are primarily interested in keeping their jobs. They are paid the same amount regardless of what they produce or how they produce it, because the money for their pay is taken from people coercively, via taxation.
I think all good American children of the 50's, 60's and into the 70's were taught basically that. Early on in that period we had "regulated" capitalism that had guard rails built in to prevent trusts, monopolies and runaway multinationals. Most business was small where the owner's office was above the shop or sales floor. The owner knew each of his employees and the employees knew him their family's got together at company pic-nic's each depended on the other. And there were UNIONS to make sure that bigger business didn't take advantage of their employees.

Then Regan and voodoo tinkle down (piss on you) economics took over, regulations went out the window, business grew, politicians were bought and laws were passed that allowed and even incentivized the off shoring of jobs and capital. Profits were hidden in transfer corporations and revenue for schools, roads, public buildings and other infrastructure disappeared. Instead of profits remaining in local economies they were shipped off to corporate and hidden as previously mentioned. Lifetime jobs with benefits and retirement disappeared and so did the middle class. Once mighty bastion cities of industry for decades turned into slums. People no longer had any security in their futures. The whole litany of inner city blight, decay and poverty took over.

And it ALL came about because Americans were sold and enough of them bought the lie that anything else was SOCIALISM or worse COMUNISUM. Progressives or Liberals were branded as socialists and Conservatives were made to believe that they alone stood for "the American way", defenders of the Constitution. We became two Americas instead of the U.S. … the US that was the America I grew up in.

And the TRUTH is Socialism and Communism have NEVER existed. Totalitarian Dictatorships, like the ones dear leader tRump so admires, CLOAKED in the disguise of Socialism and Communism are what have oppressed people all over the world and most often fail. And are what we have been conditioned, like Pavlov's dogs, to hate and fear.

And while all that took place "Regulated Capitalism" that had Made America Great was being replaced by Plutocracy and Oligarchy which is every bit as dysfunctional and a failure as the Totalitarian Dictatorships we FEAR.

totalitarianism.jpg

It's not "Socialism" it's TOTALITARIAN DICTATORSHIP and Donald Judas Trump wants "to give it a shot".
 
Last edited:

HIP56948

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 29, 2018
Messages
1,165
Reaction score
673
Location
Sarasota, Florida and Sydney, Australia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
That's a nice sentiment and all, but the sociopaths always rise to the top under capitalism, and every single one of them has a strong economic incentive to undermine regulations that impede their amoral practices.
I have to say, your logic is impeccable. I wish for a much better system than what we're experiencing but am afraid it's too late to change the the fact that money/power are so ingrained into our country that our reality will continue down the same unfair road. I have no answers, only questions.
 

aociswundumho

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 6, 2019
Messages
4,087
Reaction score
1,583
Location
Bridgeport, CT
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Socialism means that the workers own and control the means of production.
No, socialism means public ownership/control of the means of production. "Public" typically means state. That's how economists define it, that's how politicians define it, that's how all of the dictionaries define it. For example, England's NHS is socialism and was created by Clement Attlee, who was a socialist.


Merriam-Webster:
any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods

Oxford English A political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.

American Heritage: Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy.

Collins: an economic theory or system in which the means of production, distribution, and exchange are owned by the community collectively, usually through the state.

Macmillan: a political system that aims to create a society in which everyone has equal opportunities and in which the most important industries are owned or controlled by the whole community

Cambridge: any economic or political system based on government ownership and control of important businesses and methods of production

Wiktionary: Any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods.

Infoplease: general term for the political and economic theory that advocates a system of collective or government ownership and management of the means of production and distribution of goods.

Dictionary.com: a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.

Allwords: Any of various political philosophies that support social and economic equality, collective decision-making and public control of productive capital and natural resources, as advocated by socialists.

MnemonicDictionary: a political theory advocating state ownership of industry

FreeDictionary: Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy.


Socialism means public ownership/control of the means of production. It is not welfare statism, which is a different, disastrous idea from the left.

Before you reply to me educate yourself about market socialism.
If a group of people own a company and are working for profits in a market economy, then they are capitalists.
 

aociswundumho

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 6, 2019
Messages
4,087
Reaction score
1,583
Location
Bridgeport, CT
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
And while all that took place "Regulated Capitalism" that had Made America Great was being replaced by Plutocracy and Oligarchy which is every bit as dysfunctional and a failure as the Totalitarian Dictatorships we FEAR.
Regulated capitalism describes the healthcare market in the US. The regulations allow companies to privatize profits while socializing their losses. How anyone could think this model is a "success" is beyond my comprehension.
 

Irwin Corey

Proud AmeriCAN
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2018
Messages
7,490
Reaction score
2,788
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Regulated capitalism describes the healthcare market in the US. The regulations allow companies to privatize profits while socializing their losses. How anyone could think this model is a "success" is beyond my comprehension.
I'm sure it is … beyond your comprehension; hint, no they are NOT the same thing. Nice dodge away from the meat of my post though. :2rofll:

Which was that Socialism has NEVER existed only Totalitarian Dictatorship disguised as socialism, which, Donald Judas Trump would like to give a shot.
 

aociswundumho

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 6, 2019
Messages
4,087
Reaction score
1,583
Location
Bridgeport, CT
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
That's a nice sentiment and all, but the sociopaths always rise to the top under capitalism,
Is Bill Gates a sociopath? How about Warren Buffett?

and every single one of them has a strong economic incentive to undermine regulations that impede their amoral practices.
Right, and they do that via lobbying. But it takes two to tango. The politicians and bureaucrats who run the regulatory state are just as self-interested as any capitalist. They also have a strong economic incentive to help the capitalists you despise.
 

aociswundumho

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 6, 2019
Messages
4,087
Reaction score
1,583
Location
Bridgeport, CT
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
no they are NOT the same thing.
Why, because you don't like the healthcare system that government regulation has created?

Which was that Socialism has NEVER existed only Totalitarian Dictatorship disguised as socialism
No, socialist institutions exist in every country on the planet. With socialism the dose makes the poison. Totalitarianism is the logical outcome in a country with no economic freedom.
 

Irwin Corey

Proud AmeriCAN
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2018
Messages
7,490
Reaction score
2,788
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Why, because you don't like the healthcare system that government regulation has created?
It beats 45,000 Americans dying because the lacked health insurance … every year. Which, btw, since tRump's meddling we're headed back to that again.

No, socialist institutions exist in every country on the planet.
Your confusing social programs that prop up a society (not state owned anything) and Socialist government (state owned everything); not the same thing.

... Totalitarianism is the logical outcome in a country with no economic freedom.
But; my point is socialism has never existed, only Totalitarian Dictatorships cloaked in a Socialism disguise; and according to Donald Judas Trump that is what he has in mind for These United States.
 

AlbqOwl

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 12, 2005
Messages
22,769
Reaction score
11,834
Location
New Mexico
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
The Chiapas Autonomous Region in Mexico has been doing pretty damn well as an anarchist society for nearly 30 years, and the Incans had a farmer's commune for their entire civilization for centuries before the Spaniards arrived & started butchering them all; those were just off the top of my head. Worker owned production has worked perfectly fine multiple times throughout human history.
It works when it is via social contract. When it is dictated by the state, not so much.
 

AlbqOwl

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 12, 2005
Messages
22,769
Reaction score
11,834
Location
New Mexico
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
That is only one form of socialism. You are incorrectly believing all all forms of socialism have a command economy where the government owns and controlled the means of production. This is a common myth in the US. Private control of the means of production in a market economy is just as easy to do and it is much more stable.

Socialism is not the same as Communism. Communism means that all goods are owned communally by the people who also benefit from them. Socialism is ownership by the people who are the workers. We could have a market socialist economy in the US and it would not look very different from what we have no except for a much higher standard of living because the workers would also be the owners. There are many businesses in the US where the workers are already the owners. Publix supermarkets, W.L. Gore, Davey Tree Co. and King Arthur flour are just a few of them.

The Employee Ownership 100: America's Largest Majority Employee-Owned Companies | NCEO

I'm a market socialist and a civil libertarian.
Try looking up the definitions and the history of socialism. Do not confuse social contract with socialism. According to Marx, socialism--the actual definition of socialism--is necessary in order to get to communism. What he didn't calculate in his theory, however, is that once the government is socialistic, those in power will not willingly give up that power.
 
Top Bottom