"Thanks to Indian media who has over the period of time swiped out intellectual taste from mass Indian population." - Chetan Parekh
MH
Originally posted by Capablanca Kepler:
Globalization with protection to masses is the need.Socialists cum capitalists have been telling this for years that pure globalization won't work in long run without neglecting majority.
"Thanks to Indian media who has over the period of time swiped out intellectual taste from mass Indian population." - Chetan Parekh
Originally posted by R K Singh:
Socialism, the evil of all ism, exist everywhere and finds excuse for anything,
Originally posted by Joe King:
Socialism is most definatly not evil. Neither is capitalism(, or even communism for that matter). Its the currupt people in charge who do evil things in the name of an economic theory who are evil.
"Thanks to Indian media who has over the period of time swiped out intellectual taste from mass Indian population." - Chetan Parekh
Originally posted by Joe King:
Read this socialist principles and tell be exactly which bits are evil. Socialism is most definatly not evil.
Originally posted by Frank Silbermann:
...
The only thing that distinguishes governmental organizations from private organizations is that governmental organizations have their policies enforced ultimately by the threat of legal, organized violence.
...
But it seems to me that a civilized people will try to minimize the number of social institutions that require the threat of organized violence to function. Socialism, in contrast, seeks to increase them.
Associate Instructor - Hofstra University
Amazon Top 750 reviewer - Blog - Unresolved References - Book Review Blog
Originally posted by Thomas Paul:
Every government operates the same way... by threatening to kill you if you "get out of line". Different governments define "get out of line" differently, of course.
BUT capatilism cant live without socialism and communism cant live without capatilism.
And here evil wakes up. Socialism can be seen as a mid way of both other isms but most of the time one of the ism has more affect on it.
It does not allow any other ism to exist in purest form
Any crime, any atrocity, against the individual, or minority, is allowed, permitted, and in fact, encouraged, if it benefits the collective.
From a conceptual standpoint, why should rights be subject to democratic nullification? If I am walking down the street and 2 thieves demand my money, must I give it to them because they outnumber me and can outvote me at their impromptu meeting? What gives me the right to my property; is it simply a legislative conveinance that allows me to keep my property and not a more fundamental moral right?
Does not the same concept apply when it is done in a more sophisticated way when when masses of people decide they will confiscate the work and earnings of others through the electoral process (democracy in action) ?
Taking the collectivist ideology of socialism to its ugly and logical conclusion, we would forcibly remove the organs of healthy people to benefit
more numerous sick people. New lungs for the cigarrete addict, a new liver for the alcoholic, new kidneys for 2 diabetics who neglected their insulin levels, and new corneas for those with Down's syndrome who accidently stared into the sun too long. Utopia at last, by taking from the right owners, all their legitimate economic, property, and personal rights....
In the old days, organized religion controlled public prayer, charity (alms and medical care for the poor), education of the young, and the promulgation of moral/ethical standards. And the government controlled religion.
Despite the intended separation of church and state or freedom of religion, socialism has restored all these institutions to the state.
But it seems to me that a civilized people will try to minimize the number of social institutions that require the threat of organized violence to function.
Socialism means more "lines", both literally and metaphorically. Even more insideous is the fact that the "lines" can be redrawn and shifted with remarkable rapidity with little restraint to serve various power groups for political gain but ostensibly to serve "the people".
Originally posted by Joe King:
For a TOTAL capitalist economy everything would be in the private sector, including police, hospitals, the army etc.
[ November 26, 2003: Message edited by: Joe King ]
Originally posted by Joe King:
...
Capitalism assumes that people are rewarded in relation to how much effort they put in.
...
[ November 26, 2003: Message edited by: Joe King ]
Originally posted by Joe King:
Socialists (at least the non-nutty ones) believe in upholding the law. Society is made up of individuals, and crimes against individuals damage society.
[ November 26, 2003: Message edited by: Joe King ]
Originally posted by Joe King:
It seems that, particularly in the US, it is thought (and taught?) of as being evil. I dont think it is anywhere near as radical as many people think[ November 26, 2003: Message edited by: Joe King ]
Originally posted by Jason Menard:
[QB It promotes classism and stifles mobility between the classes.[/QB]
Originally posted by Joe King:
Are you having a laugh? The whole point of socialism is to stop classism not create it!
Originally posted by Joe King:
The whole point of socialism is to stop classism not create it!
From each according to his ability to each according to his needs
Originally posted by Jason Menard:
A company director, can do 2 hours work, contributing nothing to society and get payed a lot more than a teacher, working 10 hours in a vital job.
You mean contributing nothing to society other than jobs and products/services and greasing the wheels of the economy. The market has dictated that his job demands more compensation than the teacher's.
Originally posted by Tony Collins:
I can't believe this comment, teachers are developing our future wealth. Without them we have no skilled workers. Teachers are paid poorly because of a massive weakness of capitalism, short-term-ism.
Originally posted by Joe King:
For me this means that we should be happy to work in order to help other people. If we have the ability to acrue a lot of capital, what possible justification do we have for not helping people not as well off as us.
Originally posted by Tony Collins:
I can't believe this comment, teachers are developing our future wealth. Without them we have no skilled workers. Teachers are paid poorly because of a massive weakness of capitalism, short-term-ism.
Tony
[ November 27, 2003: Message edited by: Tony Collins ]
Originally posted by HS Thomas:
Reminds me of this comment :
It's the little farmers who are feeding the world's poor not the World Bank or IMF. Democracy and market economies are the foundation of equitable and self organising societies.Democracy and capitalism do not go hand in hand. Globalisation is a very personal issue.
regards
[ November 27, 2003: Message edited by: HS Thomas ]
Originally posted by herb slocomb:
Its the little farmers that relatively speaking, are so incredibly inefficient and less productive that their very existence is practically blightful. Not only are they themselves and their farming supplies a terrible misallocation of resources, but anyone who is forced to rely upon them (for example by non-global closed markets) is getting gouged and being made poorer by paying more money for food. Open the markets to global trade so consumers have a choice on who will feed them. Freedom and free markets are two aspects of the same ideal.
Originally posted by herb slocomb:
Liberty vs Theft is the choice between capitalism vs socialism.
"Thanks to Indian media who has over the period of time swiped out intellectual taste from mass Indian population." - Chetan Parekh
Originally posted by HS Thomas:
Globalisation will have to be looked at from both angles.
[ November 27, 2003: Message edited by: HS Thomas ]
Originally posted by Tony Collins:
Teachers are paid poorly because of a massive weakness of capitalism, short-term-ism.
Originally posted by Tony Collins:
Personally I'd give you 5 minutes in my neigbourhood.
Originally posted by Tony Collins:
Herb, I would like you to come to Toxteth Gun or no gun and spout your opinions. Please be my guest.
Originally posted by herb slocomb:
Let consumers have the freedom to choose.If they want to pay more for food produced by the inefficient local farmer then that is their choice.If they want cheaper food produced more efficintly by larger corporations,give them that choice.Its their life, do not dictate to them how they should spend their money. Give them freedom, give them choice,that's what free markets and globalisation are all about.
Originally posted by herb slocomb:
Its their life, do not dictate to them how they should spend their money. Give them freedom, give them choice, that's what free markets and globalisation are all about.
"Thanks to Indian media who has over the period of time swiped out intellectual taste from mass Indian population." - Chetan Parekh