[Oilgood]

See

http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/112504X.shtml

I hope you enjoy the read. Any comments?

[Guest]

Sounds a helluva lot like socialism. You might want to check out Cuba.

[Oilgood]

If this is socialism, then maybe socialism isn't such a bad thing.....

[jato]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')f this is socialism, then maybe socialism isn't such a bad thing.....

[trespam]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('jato', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')f this is socialism, then maybe socialism isn't such a bad thing.....

[jato]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')n 1776, personal freedom was available for white male landholders

[TrueKaiser]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('jato', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')f this is socialism, then maybe socialism isn't such a bad thing.....

[jato]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'j')ust don't get to angry when the people who have the same freedoms now but didn't have them back then demand them back when you take it from them.

[jato]

And before this evolves into a flame war...

What does 1776 stand for in US history?











Hint: It does not involve slaves or race.

[Guest]

Lets clarify something

Socialism DOESN'T mean no freedom
Capitalism DOESN'T automatically mean freedom

They are two different things

The lie is that only free market systems bring personal freedom
That is a lie

In Europe we have socialist governments and we have as good if not better democracy than the US does
(Proportional representation, so power is shared among smaller parties too, e.g. the greens)

What Bush is trying to do is make everyone glory in their power, to give power to the American people, and make them like politicians

In Europe we want no power, we want to share round the denial of power

If we let the economy run our lives we are being dicatated to as much as Castro dictates to Cuban people

Martin

[Oilgood]

My understanding of socialism, correct me if I'm wrong, is that it is about acheiving a more equitable distribution of wealth in society; however, socialism, like capitalism, (correct me if I'm wrong) works under the implicit assumption that there is access to unlimited, infinite resources from the environment, and the factors of production are considered to be basically inexhaustible in the theory of both systems. Both systems are based around perpetual growth and improvements in living standards for the wealthy in particular (capitalism) or the masses (socialism).
The article I linked was suggesting a system in which sustainability and the environement have primacy, so I don't know if such an "Ecotopia" could be called socialism, though it may look like socialism to the untrained or glancing eye.

[jato]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'S')ocialism DOESN'T mean no freedom
Capitalism DOESN'T automatically mean freedom

[Oilgood]

Sorry, about the last post:

I said that both systems assume infinite resources, but let me clarify this. Yes, I know that all economics starts from the basic Economic Problem of scarcity, but what I meant by the infinite resources remark was that both systems seem to make perpetual economic growth (and population growth) their ideal, and that both systems believe that in long run resources are ultimately infinite in their avaliability thanks to "technology" and "human ingenuity" (eg the implications of Solow-Swan theory) . As such, neither system seems to be too concerned about sustainability or the environment as they both seem to assume we can invent or grow our way out of environmental problems (again, correct me if I'm wrong).

So their seems to be a very fundamental logical contradiction in the economic theory underlying both socialism and capitalism, don't you think ? In that case, how could an "Ecotopia" be socialism?

[jato]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')n that case, how could an "Ecotopia" be socialism?

[Oilgood]

I'm not sure that such an "Ecotopia" would meet those criteria. This Ecotopia system seems to be based on the idea that ultimately the means of production are the property of nature, and that the economy is a sub-system of the environment, not vice versa, like capitalism and socialism.
As Australian Aboriginals might say, "the land does not belong to us, we belong to the land".

[Guest]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('jato', 'W')hat does 1776 stand for in US history?

[Guest]

>Socialism generally means less freedom.
Capitalism generally means more freedom

I can't agree

I just don't see that logic

As far as personal freedom goes I think both potentially can allow a maximum, potentially socialism could give more freedom
IE More time off work, hence more freedom

Capitalism in the sense - free to make money any way with minimum government interferance, yes theres less of that kind
But personal freedom is what matters

Take France, no limits on freedom there, yet socialist

Martin