Fantastic response: Lets review
1. You agree that you currently can't enact the plan set forth.
2. 35 million people dying every year. Thats a big number. It is sad for any loss of life. I wonder of the people of the 35 million. How many live in capitalist countries. Are you referring to the 3rd world countries? Are you attributing all the world deaths to capitalism? By your own comments there are socialist countries and did the mortaility rate go down?
3. Competition is a good thing. It means that you need to better yourself. But as I stated before capitalism has a built in wage increaser. It is the employee who can opt to not take a job. Or the employee can choose to leave a job. It is cheaper for an employeer to keep an employee and pay them more than to allow a trained employee to walk out the door. When the need for a certain trade increases the price goes up. The work force is supply and demand. In the US the unemployment rate is about 4-5% which means you dont have a whole lot of competition for jobs. But there are tons of jobs out there. So the wage goes up in the attempt to try and entise workers. Construction is a good example.
4. I'm fine with the state pension I was just wondering if you where attempting to force people to do something.
5. I wonder about your Venezuela example. It is true they nationalized the petrolium industry. But Citgo functions worldwide. And even though it makes up 80% of the governments revenue has it really changed the country. You would figure these radical changes might help them but when you read their statistics you are left lacking:
Infant Mortality 21.54 to every 1000. Child malnutrition is 17%. In the Amacuro Delta it is 30%. 32% without addequet sanitation. 5,000,000 without drinking water. 37% poverty rate. It ranks poorest of all South American Nations. (And its Socialist). The list goes on and on.
5. Your right if everyone owned everything there would not be a need for a surplus. But that is not the state at which we live.
6. As stated before. Venezuela is a extremely poor country. Did reducing the work week do anything to alleviate that?
7. I love how you try to make a worker employee relationship seem like slavery. It is not you are free to go when you choose. You are free to work when and where you choose. And if the education system is working properly you will have the same opportunity to succeed if you choose.
8. Fahrenheit 451. The temperature in which freedom burns.
1. I agree with you
2. I would like to see the figures for 35,000,000 deaths that are directly caused by capitalism. (I'm assuming your meaning starvation)? I dont know tell me so I can figure it. According to the CIA the birth rate is 20.09 to every 1000 and death rate is 8.37 to every 1000.
3. Competition is good because it makes you better yourself. If you want a high paying job you must become more educated... more skilled... have more experience.
4. I'll sit tight for your response
5. we can close this one. Your right it is possible if there was a revolution. but its not the state that we live in.
6. No there is nothing wrong with spending time with your family. But we are talking about a work week of 40 hrs. Do you honestly think that 4 hrs a week is going to change the social makeup of a family?
7. I agree that places like mcdonalds will still need workers. But they will pay them more because the need will increse. Even without the government intervention. Where I live due to the small amount of people willing to work fast food the starting wage is $9 and hr. The minimum wage is $5.15. Education is about knowledge. And utilizing that knowledge in a succesful buisness or job persuit. Education as I said before is about giving people the best possible opportunity to succeed.
2. I was wrong the figure isn't 35 million. It's 36 million, counting only hunger and preventable disease from Jean Ziegler, United Nations, April 2001.
3. What you say is true for an individual, but it won't change the situation. Let's take society as it is today and give everybody a degree in any field they wish. Nothing changes, the percentage of high-skill jobs won't increase. All an individual is doing by getting trained for a high-skill job is under-cutting the wages of somebody who already has one, or boosts surplus value for the capitalist (or both) as he attempts to "compete" for the position.
6. As socialism transforms into communism the working week would vanish, employment would resemble nothing like it does under capitalism. Under socialism productivity increases would go into boosting wages and reducing the working week, not bloating a capitalist's pockets.
Comment from: James Visitor
There are no Capitalist countries either....just mixed economies dominated by stagnant State bureaucracy.Capitalism is free markets(free people)with the State only acting to protect the individual rights to life ,liberty, property and pursuit of happiness of every individual person.35 million people did not die in Capitalist countries...but well over 180 million did in Socialist murder holes from the USSR to Cuba last century.Socialism is a debunked system that leads to mass death and impoverishment.
180 million!!! Hahaha good one, that's greater than the population of Russia and Cuba put together, don't be so stupid.
36 million people die *every year* due to capitalism, in capitalist countries. In the last minute 24 children died from preventable diseases. Fact, if you disagree go and moan at the United Nations. Seriously, where do you learn economics and politics? The Ladybird Pop-up Book of Politics?
The state letting the market run around and do things is why we've got 65000 homeless families in London, up from 40000 a decade ago. The market needs to be thrown in the bin, the landlords need to be kicked up the ass and the local government needs to build houses. The market will only cause a growing gap between the rich and the poor. Hell just look at America, the average wage has dropped 5%, yet wages for CEOs have increased 500% in the last 20 years. In Britain the rich are three times richer than they were a decade ago, yet the people aren't any better off.
Although I dont dispute the fact that millions of people die every year due to things that are preventable I also understand it is the responsibility of the local government to help combat these things. For instance how many millions are spent on aid that never reach the people due to corrupt governments.
I also agree that a government should take a more active roll in helping the homeless. But I dont believe building tons of "free" housing is the answer as the houses will have to be paid for. And who would pay for them? You and I of course. But rather I believe they should try to get these people into trades so they can make a decent living and earn a home. (Living in an appartment isnt very bad). As for your stats I'll just say (because I'm to lazy to look anything up) you are correct. Here are a couple things to look at. First how many homeless are really homeless? This is an interesting question because here in the US there are many "homeless" people who are not really homeless because they actually live with a relative but seek government aid. Also how many people are homeless due to thier own choices? Finally how much larger is the population from 10 yrs ago? Did the per capita raise significantly?
I dont know where you get your average american wage has dropped % because even looking at production workers in the last 10 yrs thier wages have gone up from $12.35 to $17.16.
In fact check the forbes article out
It talks about many of the ideas you are putting forth and speaks about some of the hidden facts.
Now onto the whole communists killed 180 million people. Well I would not attest the 180 million to communists any more than I would the 36 to capitalists. But I believe he was talking about. Communist democide.
Anyway dont know if I agree with all the stats but I would understand thats where he is getting his information from.
Nobody said anything about free housing, just affordable housing, which means no private owners renting them out for extortionate prices. Although free housing is perfectly achievable, in the USSR students who finished university with high grades were given an apartment and they were given first choice as well. In the UK a house only costs perhaps 1/10th of its retail value to actually build, nationalising housing were wipe out large amounts of that surplus almost overnight.
You need to factor in cost of living increases. Which has on average lowered wages 5%. Manufacturing workers generally suffer less as they have better union coverage.
Well Stalinists killing whoever is irrelevant to this conversation, I'm talking about socialism. The numbers are still off by orders of magnitude. Even the most insane bourgeois put the total figure at 100 million for the same countries, and that's been widely debunked and shown to be probably at least 100% larger than in reality and in a lot of those cases its hardly the Stalinists doing the killing, its rich farmers burning everything to starve people to death that are doing it.
Even if we believe those numbers, captialism manages to kill 20 times as many, despite only having 4 times the population.
As I said. I don't believe it was socialism or communism that killed those people it was the people who were in power. Just as I don't believe it is capitalism that starves those people you are talking about.
In the US we have the fair housing act. Which basically makes it against the law to charge ridiculous amounts for housing. We also have section 8 housing and government aid to people who cannot afford proper housing. All these factor in when looking to get a place to live. Wow your housing is pretty good for 1/10 I bet its actually a lot more. Probably 1/20. But that is for a contractor to build your house. There is nothing stopping you from building it yourself. My grandfather's house was built by his own hands. At the time it cost him $2000. Out here where I live most people still build it themselves. They will rent any heavy equipment needed (usually for the pad and the grading) and then frame and do all the rest themselves. It does reduce the cost by a truck load.
Comment from: Sun Tzu Visitor
Paul, I live in Venezuela, and work in the Venezuelan oil industry. I wish to introduce two comments regarding your discussion in which you mentioned Venezuela:
First, the Venezuelan oil industry wasn't nationalized by the Chavez government. What they did was modify the legal and commercial structure, and in the process increase the fraction of gross earnings received by the government.
Second, your point that it's possible for a modern economy to function as a fully "socialist" economy in which the state owns all of private enterprise isn't supported by the statement that "Venezuela recently nationalized the oil industry". The Venezuelan economy is much more than just the "oil industry" - which in any case wasn't nationalized as I mentioned above. The Chavez government has been nationalizing some companies, quite haphazardly and apparently without a clear plan, but the bulk of the national wealth creation engine is still in private hands. Interestingly, surveys carried out by Datanalysis, a local polling company, indicate the majority of the population is against the socialism preferred by Chavez, and private property is enshrined in the Constitution.
Hope this helps improve the quality of your debate. Regards, Tzu Sun.
Comment from: Sun Tzu Visitor
Capitalism does work better than socialism. To understand this, one must understand human nature as well as how a modern economy works.
@ Sun Tzu, human nature is above all else altruistic, not competitive.