Re: Socialism and Capitalism

On Jul 20, 8:00=A0am, Fred <f...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> Michael Price wrote:
> > On Jul 19, 7:00 am, Fred <f...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 Capitalism doesn't demand that people be that way,
but=
 it does
> >> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 reward the
> >> practise with wealth and power.
>
> > =A0 No more, and indeed considerably less than any other system I
know.
>
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 I divide economic systems into three main categories,
(th=
ere may be more):
> Scarce money systems, plentiful money systems, and no money systems.
=A0O=
nly
> the scarce money systems reward misbehaviour, (selfishness, legalised
> cheating, etc.). =A0The other two are neutral to them I believe.

  Based on what?  What is it about "scarce money systems" (and all
money
systems have scarce money or there's no point in it being money) that
rewards "selfishness, legalised cheating etc"?  In any system there
are
way to benefit oneself at the expense of others.
>
> > To the extent that a system is capitalistic it is impossible to use
> > wealth and power to take things away from people poorer and less
> > powerful than you. =A0The mixed economy seems to specialise in
> > that.
>
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 Capitalism is *all about* taking money away from others.

  No it's about the free exchange of the products of human activity.
Money is only a means to that end.

> =A0That's how the game is played. =A0The more money you get the more
> power you have.
>
  In a free market having money only allows you the power to trade it
for things you want with the consent of the owners of those things.
In
any other system having money allows you to bribe the powerful to
force people to do things.
>
> >> =A0True, you don't have to take it, but some
> >> of the people out there are psychopaths and they will take it.
>
> > =A0 And they won't =A0be psychopaths under other systems?
>
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 It is unknown whether psychopaths are a product of the
ec=
onomic
> system.

  No it isn't, pyschopathic behaviour occurs under every economic
system.

> For instance it could be that under a universal plentiful money system,
> like an expanded LETSystem, that psychopaths don't develop.

  The New Soviet Man?

> =A0The economy is stable and it does not create class divisions.

  Well for a start why would the system be stable merely because the
government interfers in it?  So far that hasn't worked.
  Secondly class divisions are not created by capitalism, they created
by either government favours or the differences between people's
behaviour
and character.

> =A0The security that is inherant in such a system may breed better
> mental health. =A0We don't know.
> It's never been tried, and it would take at least a generation to find
ou=
t.
> My point is that there are so many horrors that fall out of scarce money
> systems, (including both capitalism & communism), that it really is
worth=
 a
> try.
>
  What horrors occur out of capitalism?  Every horror I know of came
from
people being coerced, which is not capitalism.
>
> >> =A0Those who don't take it, loose under capitalism. =A0It's the
system=
 that
> >> gave rise to the saying, "Nice guys finish last."
>
> > =A0 You're simply claiming things without evidence. =A0In fact "nice
gu=
ys
> > finish last" suits interventionism far better because under it people
> > have things taken away by the not-nice guys.
>
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 There is ample evidence. =A0Just look around you...
Watch=
 the evening news.
>
  In other words you have no evidence that will stand specific
investigation.  In
fact the evening news usually provides evidence of government
interference
making the nice guys worse off.

> >> > Profit is a necessity, not a noble goal. Capitalism often generates
> >> > much more wealth than socialist systems which means there are more
> >> > resources to help the needy.
>
> >> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 But the needy never get them.
>
> > =A0 Right, that's why the US has the greatest amount of money given to
> > charity in the world? =A0That's why capitalist societies have the
least
> > poverty?
>
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 Not true. =A0People are starving in the streets in the
U.=
S. =A0Not in Cuba.

  Very few people are starving in the streets of the US, far less than
have
emigrated to it to avoid starving.

> Factor in what Americans pay for health care, and education, and Cubans
> aren't that poor.

  Factor in that the Cuban government lies and they are.

> =A0Add that Cuba now grows organic food all over the
> country and their diet is much better than that of Americans.

  What's so great about organic food?  You're simply a propagandist
for
a regime that destroyed the economy of one of the richest countries in
the world.  Find someone who will move to Cuba to better their
economic
condition and I might start to believe you.

> =A0They have less stress and less need to compete.

  And you base this on what evidence?

> =A0I don't know if they have fewer psychopaths, and that would be a
diffi=
cult
> measurement to take. =A0There is less poverty in Cuba, and there are no
> extremely wealthy either.

  That depends on your definition of poverty of course, which you do
not make.
>
> >> =A0There are millions of homeless children
> >> going to bed in the streets every night. =A0 Many of them in the U.S.
>
> > =A0 Bull****. =A0There are not millions of homeless children in the
US.
>
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 Not what I said, is it?!

  What you said was that there were millions of homeless children
going to

> =A0There may be hundreds of thousands in the U.S.
> Nobody knows, because there are no truthful sources for such information
=
in
> the U.S.
>
  Then don't make the claim.  In fact I rather doubt that there are
that many,
and in any case you haven't got any evidence that effect was caused by
capitalism, do you?  There is after all considerable interference in
the
housing market by government.

> > If there were it would be the fault of child labor laws not
capitalism.
>
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 Capitalism breeds class divisions and ignores the poor.

  Actually capitalism destroyed class divisions to such an extent that
the idea of a "class" as imagined in say the 16th century is now
considered absurd.   Capitalism rewards productivity regardless of
"class" and so destroys "class".
  As for ignoring the poor capitalism created more op****tunities and
more products for the poor than any other system.  To claim it ignores
them is delusional.

>=A0This creates homeless families =A0and their children going hungry.

  Liar.  In fact government intervention (including the child labour
laws
I mentioned) creates the homelessness and the hungry children.

> =A0Charity never keeps up because Capitalism punishes every charitable
ac=
t.
>
  How?  Capitalism doesn't punish anything, it just makes people pay
the
cost, which charitable people by definition are prepared to do.

> >> =A0Not one,...NOT ONE, of those children lives in Cuba... for
instance=
..

> > =A0 Has anyone ever swum to Cuba to avoid poverty?
>
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 Not many know about what conditions are like in Cuba,
bec=
ause the U.S.
> propaganda machine is so huge.

  The facts about what Cuba is like are easy to get.  For instance the
tax
rates on workers are upwards of 90% in some cases, and that's not on
what we would call rich people.

> =A0They have not been made rich by the
> revolution, but they have been empowered by it.

  Empowered by a one party dictator****p?

>=A0This is far more meaningful to a healthy life than mad consumerism.

  I fail to see how life under a dictator****p is more meaningful than
under comparitive freedom.

> =A0It's  still a scarce money economy, but they are at least making the
e=
ffort to
> correct the worst of the problems.
>
> --
> Peace,
> Fred
> (Remove FFFf from my email address to reply by email).