Skip to comments.Capitalism vs. Socialism
Posted on 05/30/2018 6:23:38 AM PDT by Kaslin
Several recent polls, plus the popularity of Sen. Bernie Sanders, demonstrate that young people prefer socialism to free market capitalism. That, I believe, is a result of their ignorance and indoctrination during their school years, from kindergarten through college. For the most part, neither they nor many of their teachers and professors know what free market capitalism is.
Free market capitalism, wherein there is peaceful voluntary exchange, is morally superior to any other economic system. Why? Let's start with my initial premise. All of us own ourselves. I am my private property, and you are yours. Murder, rape, theft and the initiation of violence are immoral because they violate self-ownership. Similarly, the forcible use of one person to serve the purposes of another person, for any reason, is immoral because it violates self-ownership.
Tragically, two-thirds to three-quarters of the federal budget can be described as Congress taking the rightful earnings of one American to give to another American -- using one American to serve another. Such acts include farm subsidies, business bailouts, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps, welfare and many other programs.
Free market capitalism is disfavored by many Americans -- and threatened -- not because of its failure but, ironically, because of its success. Free market capitalism in America has been so successful in eliminating the traditional problems of mankind -- such as disease, pestilence, hunger and gross poverty -- that all other human problems appear both unbearable and inexcusable. The desire by many Americans to eliminate these so-called unbearable and inexcusable problems has led to the call for socialism. That call includes equality of income, sex and race balance, affordable housing and medical care, orderly markets, and many other socialistic ideas.
Let's compare capitalism with socialism by answering the following questions: In which areas of our lives do we find the greatest satisfaction, and in which do we find the greatest dissatisfaction? It turns out that we seldom find people upset with and in conflict with computer and clothing stores, supermarkets, and hardware stores. We do see people highly dissatisfied with and often in conflict with boards of education, motor vehicles departments, police and city sanitation services.
What are the differences? For one, the motivation for the provision of services of computer and clothing stores, supermarkets, and hardware stores is profit. Also, if you're dissatisfied with their services, you can instantaneously fire them by taking your business elsewhere. It's a different matter with public education, motor vehicles departments, police and city sanitation services. They are not motivated by profit at all. Plus, if you're dissatisfied with their service, it is costly and in many cases even impossible to fire them.
A much larger and totally ignored question has to do with the brutality of socialism. In the 20th century, the one-party socialist states of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, Germany under the National Socialist German Workers' Party and the People's Republic of China were responsible for the murder of 118 million citizens, mostly their own. The tallies were: USSR 62 million, Nazi Germany 21 million and PRC 35 million. No such record of brutality can be found in countries that tend toward free market capitalism.
Here's an experiment for you. List countries according to whether they are closer to the free market capitalist or to the socialist/communist end of the economic spectrum. Then rank the countries according to per capita gross domestic product. Finally, rank the countries according to Freedom House's "Freedom in the World" report. You will find that people who live in countries closer to the free market capitalist end of the economic spectrum not only have far greater wealth than people who live in countries toward the socialistic/communist end but also enjoy far greater human rights protections.
As Dr. Thomas Sowell says, "socialism sounds great. It has always sounded great. And it will probably always continue to sound great. It is only when you go beyond rhetoric, and start looking at hard facts, that socialism turns out to be a big disappointment, if not a disaster."
I haven’t seen millionaire and billionaire advocates for Socialism (think Ted Kennedy and John Kerry and Bernie Sanders) and explicitly named Communism (think Jane Fonda) give up their wealth or status or move to a Socialist or Communist nation.
It’s really simple:
Capitalism vs socialism is well demonstrated in Boeing B-29 vs Tupolev Tu-4
Socialism can’t create it. They copy it.
Blah blah blah
Capitalims produces everything socialists/communists wish to “redistribute.”
Socialism/communism produces nothing socialists/communists wish to “redistribute.”
Socialism/communism can only exist as a parasite of a capitalist host.
Once a parasitic infection becomes large enough, both the host and parasite die.
It never sounded great to me ever since I heard classmates in elementary school say "I want to be in Karl's group so I don't have to work." F### from each according to his ability.
Socialism is completely de humanizing.
The give-away? Telling people they are not individuals but rather, ‘part’ of one huge, undifferentiated mass of ‘being’.
Sorry, pal...but I’m convinced that humanity is much better than that. Individuality is the most precious and essential aspect of life on earth without which there’s no point to existence. That’s just me, though
Comparing capitalism to socialism is flawed.
The flaw is comparing an economic form to a form of governance.
Capitalism exists in all forms of government including socialism.
The difference is in who owns and controls the capital, the people or the government.
The problem arises when the policy begins to cover those who are unwilling to contribute. This is a problem with the culture not with the concept. Government is too generous and some people are too lazy. Eventually the entire enterprise collapses. Socialism is the decaying of capitalism.
Walter Williams is a brilliant man, but he’s speaking into the roar of a hurricane. Only the banning of illegal public employee unions and the nationwide implementation of school choice will change the calculus.
Because so many people think they can get something for nothing.
And when they realize they can’t, it’s to late for them.
A few weeks ago, my pastor said God didn’t care about economic systems, socialism vs capitalism. Humans argue about such things, but God is above all this.
It might be time for a new pastor.
The Soviets produced about 50,000 T-34s....we produced around 49,000 Shermans.
The difference being we also produced 300,000+ planes while the Soviets produced ~136,000.
The US produced 6,771 large ships, plus 35,000 landing craft....the Soviets, around 79 ships of all types.
US GDP by 1945 was 1,474 compared to the Soviets at 343.
Simply put....we would have overwhelmed the Soviets in a war.
Capitalism would have spanked Socialism.
Only the historically ignorant can believe Socialism is a good thing.
Stefan Molyneux: I HAD A THOUGHT...
Socialists like to conflate society with government. In fact, that idea is very far from new:SOME writers have so confounded society with government, as to leave little or no distinction between them; whereas they are not only different, but have different origins. Society is produced by our wants, and government by our wickedness; the former promotes our happiness POSITIVELY by uniting our affections, the latter NEGATIVELY by restraining our vices. The one encourages intercourse, the other creates distinctions. The first is a patron, the last a punisher.Since government exists only because of the imperfection of society, cynicism towards society corresponds to naiveté towards government. Cynicism towards society is therefore necessary and sufficient to motivate someone to be a socialist.
Society in every state is a blessing, but Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil. . .
were the impulses of conscience clear, uniform and irresistibly obeyed, man would need no [government] . . .
security being the true design and end of government, it unanswerably follows that whatever form thereof appears most likely to ensure it to us, with the least expense and greatest benefit, is preferable to all others. - Thomas Paine, Common Sense (1776)
For that reason any one whose business is criticism - most certainly including journalists - will tend towards a socialist bent.
The problem is that the vast majority of Americans are socialists to one degree or another. And, to a very large extent, the
Of course, virtually every government employee and virtually every government contractor believes that the function of his bureau either provides an essential public good that markets will not supply or is inherently a natural monopoly that must be socialized. That holds whether the function is national defense, the Post Office, the production and display of great art such as “Piss Christ”, or research into the mating habits of fruit flies under the influence of cocaine.
Once hooked on welfare, and facing astronomical marginal income tax rates if they attempt to earn their own way, recipients of Medicaid, food stamps, Section 8, AFDC, SSDI, etc. have almost insurmountable incentives to favor maintenance of the socialist status quo.
But these two groups are not adequately large or influential to demand government expansion, nor do they provide the resources necessary to fund the government. So, Americans typically receive thirteen to seventeen years of socialist indoctrination in government schools. Continuously reinforced by propaganda in the news and entertainment media, this socialist indoctrination causes the vast majority of Americans to believe all sorts of nonsense about the benevolence and wisdom of government and its public servants.