Socialism, communism, capitalism etc.
Printable View
Socialism, communism, capitalism etc.
I'm rather confused by the poll.
Capitalism & Socialism are pretty much economic systems meanwhile Communism & Democracy are forms of government to an extent.
No brainer really, Capitalism is the only system which works, it's not perfect but there's nothing which is anywhere near as good. Democracy obviously works well as it's served the West very well for centuries and Communism is clearly a failure, just look at the Soviet Union.
I agree with Jordy, the options don't really make sense together. Socialism is and always has been a failure and is basically the same as communism, conservatism works socially and conservatism and liberalism work within capitalism. The failures of socialism have cost millions of lives and it is, in my opinion, the worst form of government possible.
My apologies, i meant to make it multiple choice.
Just vote on whichever one you think is most important in the salvation of the country.
Merged by Luccy. (Forum Moderator): Please don't double post within the 15 minute edit time.
We mean as in the options you have given, some conflict with others whilst others are left off. There are so many forms/mixes of political systems it can be hard to structure a poll like this, however i'd label myself as Thatcherite, Conservative, Liberal, Capitalist & Populist as my main ones. :)
Capitalism basically is democracy, capitalism allows people do set up business without government interference, and allows people to have freedom whereas socialism cripples the economy, criminalises the people and basically fails as it has in North Korea, former USSR, PROC under Chairman Mao and the United Kingdom in the 1970s. The idea of socialism sound fantastic to some, however the only thing socialism has done and will always do it spread around poverty, rather than eradicating it.
They're not views, they're systems.
And none of them work.
Capitalism works, although not perfect it creates a system where you have to work for what you want, and you can set up your own enterprise and employ your own staff, create your own products which in turn creates a diverse economy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Technologic
Downturns in capitalism are needed in an economic system, collapse of growth provides a wealth melting pot which, by the time the next boom comes, more and different people are able to take advantage of it. The boom after this recession in another ten or so years will be even greater than the last boom, however after that boom as it reaches its peak it will collapse again, as is needed.
In economics if the incentive/ability to create profit isnt there, it won't work;- hence why socialism doesnt work.
I don't think you can mix economic systems with political systems, it's too oversimplified. Extreme systems, left/ring/up/down, never work. Countries like China have gone from feudalism to communism and proven that they don't work.
Good point.Quote:
Originally Posted by Technologic
I'd say that socialism and communism are ideal, however in the words of Susan Sarandon "we don't live in that kind of a world".
Anything conservative, thatcherite, or remotely right wing in my opinion is too mediocre, and too much settling for minimum.
Isn't it better to stop a rich man from living in luxury, than to stop a more man from living?
The only way David Cameron is getting to power is by pointing out labour's faults. That's all well and good, but how can he prove he's going to do better?
It is not as simple as the point you made about a man living in luxury and a man living in poverty, hence why they (socialist states) have all failed and will continue to fail. If a man works for his luxury, its his luxary - its simple as that; no government has any right to take away that right from him.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jippz
The Conservatives have said what they are going to do, he cant prove anything unless hes in a position on power, however we can look back at history and look at 1979 under Labour and the state of the economy when the Conservatives left office in 1997.
Twice now Labour have let our economy go to ruin and failed to act to stop spiralling debt, it is now up to the Conservatives again to save us, lets just hope David Cameron succeeds.
1 word:
Forehead.
Communism sounds good in theory because it's an idealistic utopia, like most political extremes.
It's all just ideologies, communism and socialism are perfect on paper but in reality, it's clear to see it doesn't work.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jippz
I'm afraid David Cameron doesn't need to prove he's better and come out with many policies, for a very long time, politics in Britain have just been the opposition party getting in once the public gets sick of the party in government. Rarely does it ever come down to things like "Policies". Michael Howard was the one with decent policies and look where that got him :P
Yeah i completely agree. But I have to put these points forward, because i despise conservative. I couldn't vote for labour though because they are screwing things up. If i was old enough i'd vote socialist labour.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jordy
"My greatest achievement was new labour" - Margaret Thatcher
Why do you despise the conservativism yet support dangerous socialism may I ask?;- they saved the country from collapse under socialism which was rooting itself in our country. That probably was her greatest achievement, she destroyed socialism so much that Labour had to basically drop all of its core values to even seem electable.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jippz
Capitalisms a good system? Really? Hasnt this recession made people see what corruption it can lead to?
Socialisms given us the NHS and the opportunity for kids from working class backgrounds to go to Uni with funded support.
Both seem good ideas but power hungry morons twist the ideal into something its not. Blame the politicians not the concepts!
I have explained why collapse is needed for new growth, for growth you need something to stimulate that growth, prices cannot rise forever otherwise currency losses its value. Corruption is more rife in socialist countrys, USSR, North Korea - look at the state of them, millions starved. The only good thing that 'socialism' produced was the NHS however i'd far rather have all the millions who died under socialism still alive than the NHS. You don't realise how lucky you are to live in a country like this compared to a socialist country.Quote:
Originally Posted by LuketheDuke
In the words of Margaret Thatcher, would you rather the poor be poorer?
That is what socialism is, it doesnt work, never will and it is dead. We had a taste of socialism in this country in the 1970s, it led to power cuts, the United Kingdom losing influence, the economy in crisis, the country having to go to the IMF to beg for an emergency bailout, the unelected unions controlling the elected government, militantism like we saw in my home city of Liverpool. The country was crippled, more so than at any other point in its history.
gosh.Quote:
Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-
stop turning every god damn thread into another god damned argument, this thread isn't about margret pissin thatcher lol.
anyway on topic, all this political stuff aside it's obviously democracy.
You are the one asking for a debate as you wanted in the last thread hence why your trying to lure me int again right now, as for my post and the subject itself; it has everything to do with Margaret Thatcher and history, as we are discussing political systems. The 1970s to 1980s were a battle between socialism and capitalism in the United Kingdom so it has everything to do with the topic. Luke made the point about the recession, I explained it - thats the whole point of a forum, to discuss and debate.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheWolf
you dont discuss and debate, you try to ram untrue facts and crap that people arent bothered about down peoples throats.Quote:
Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-
the sooner you learn that you can't brainwash people, the better.
and the true fact is that i can't be bothered to read half of your posts, i read the first line and think oh god i can't be bothered reading this bull, you make it perfectly clear what you're saying in the first line but then you try and back it up with complete and utter nonsense.
You are still at it, you have not once attempted to prove my argument wrong and when I ask why not, you carry on mumbling on the same "you make up stuff" - prove it then. You are looking for an argument yet have nothing to argue about.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheWolf
That is the differnce between people like alexxxx, LukeTheDuke and you. They will say what they think and get their point across whereas you have nothing decent at all to say and seem determined to 'own' me over a habbo forum, when you have no idea about the orginal subject at hand hence why you are so reluctant to debate properly.
This thread is worth a read; http://www.habboxforum.com/showthread.php?t=592294
I think that thread is aimed at you mate, cough cough.
And I don't need to back up my OPINIONS, do I? no, I don't, my opinion of you would result in me probably being banned off the forum, so I'd rather keep it to myself.
Your constant arguing annoys the hell out of people in this forum, you're constantly on about the cons and thatcher, but you actually support ukip? make your mind up? not that annyone gives two flying ..... anyway.
Welcome to my ignore list.
Ciao.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheWolf
I know it wasn't, as I wasn't the one who went totally off topic in regards to the last thread. Yes you do need opinions in threads like these if you are going to ridicule other members posts, otherwise your so called verdict of my posts is worthless, as they have all been so far. You have not once been able to enter any political debate/historical debate with an ounce of evidence for your opinion, infact you haven't even shown what your views are, yet you carry on a tirade against my posts, calling them rubbish.Quote:
So when I enter this forum do I automatically need to come pre-loaded with evidence of everything I say? I may not know a fat lot about politics, but like everything else, it is mostly based on opinion, and again, I don't need to back up my opinions with evidence.
If only you knew.
See ya dude.
To what you said on my opinion on the political partys, UKIP is thatcherism and the Conservatives are a more watered down version, I can support any number of partys I want and do not have to agree with every single thing that party says, anywho since when did you decide how many political stances I can have? - your right, nobody does care so why do you keep bringing it up?
You just destoyed your own point, you say I don't back my argument up (despite the fact I do) yet you have just said yourself (which I have kindly highlighted for your reading) that you don't need to back up your side because "like everything else, it is opinion", hypocrisy at its worst.
I just asked you to explain why you disagree with my views, you failed and continue to refuse to enter a proper and decent discussion; adios my friend and thats all I have to say on the matter.
So when I enter this forum do I automatically need to come pre-loaded with evidence of everything I say? I may not know a fat lot about politics, but like everything else, it is mostly based on opinion, and again, I don't need to back up my opinions with evidence.
If only you knew.
See ya dude.
Edited by Catzsy [Forum Super Moderator]: I would be greatful if this thread could keep on-topic or it will be closed. Thanks.
No i agree with wolf, you're putting your points across and we're putting forward ours. However you seem to get very vicious every time somebody says something you don't agree with. You make good points but in an immature fashion...:P.Quote:
Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-
+rep wolf :)
Anyway on another note, you keep pressing forward the same point but not explaining. Give me an example of a way that socialism has killed, in western culture.
Edited by :Mobile (Forum Super Moderator): Please do not multiple post within the 15 minutes editing time.
haha, thanks Jippz. ;)
Were are the same wave length!
+rep :)
Nothing like good old fashioned Gommunism :P
Capitalism is possibly the only working setup, because it doesn't really target people the same way as communism etc. (hard to explain, sort of like freedom but with obvious restraints). It's a very odd discussion though, very restrictive :P There's alot governments can learn from each of them and possibly make a sort of pseudo version made up of a mixture of each system.
Yeah, in the last decade or so politicians seem to of settled for what creates less work for them. HA and look where that Golden Brown.
Undertaker you realise the irony of EVERYTHING you've said right?Quote:
Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-
Edited by :Mobile (Forum Super Moderator): Please do not multiple post during the 15 minutes editing time.
LETS ALL JUST SAY COMMYS!
not thats i like them just lets say it!
so the economys just shrunk the most its done since the 1950's yet a weak strain of socialism that fell on hard times in 70's is all of a sudden worse.
and you mention unions controlling governments but look at the number of quangos who influence political policy who neither thatcher, major, blair or brown have regulated. Their the sort of organisations who have twisted the arms of politicians to not regulate our greedy, short sighted banks who have caused this mess and are now costing tax payers massive sums to pay for the damage they caused.
What he said.Quote:
Originally Posted by LuketheDuke
Care to give us an example?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jippz
I am not being vicious at all, i'm merely discussing it. If discussing something is being vicious or questioning people on why they think socialism would work is vicious, then yes I am vicious. I am not the one being immature, I have asked Wolf time and time again that if he thinks my points are a load of rubbish, him to put some decent points across - he refuses to do so each time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jippz
Hang on, the west is capitalist so no I cannot give a proper example of how socialism has killed people in the west, as the west has never been socialist. I can point to the near socialist state the United Kingdom was in in the 1970s and point to the mass poverty at that time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jippz
Socialism has killed millions in socialist countrys, namely the Soivet Union, North Korea, Cuba and the Peoples Republic of China so I have indeed backed my side up, and none of you seem to be able to give me a reply to this.
Government interference as socialism proves does nothing good, it hampers the economy (USSR, Cuba, PROC under Mao, UK in 1970s etc) and when applied socially, creates a aura of a dictatorship because the state is the people in socialism, its like the chinese army is called Peoples Liberty Army or something, yet was deployed against the people during the Tianman Square unrest.Quote:
Originally Posted by GommeInc
It uses the argument that big business is in control, yet all socialism is is a far more extreme version of control, its like Lenin and Stalin - so called champions of the people yet ruined the economies of Russia and the east and lived in palaces and eat large state dinners while their own people died. It is the same with Tony Blair and the Kinnocks, so called socialists yet own vast property empires and accept large pay sums from their jobs, along with their vast pension packets.
I am explaining, you are now taking the same tone as Wolf is. You start putting your point across and we shall discuss it, I am waiting.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jippz
The economy is far larger now than it was years ago so the downturn will be worse, thats common sense. Business employs the people, thats why governments need to listen to business because without business you do not have an economy, in turn you do not have jobs, in turn your country is in chaos. The people themselves took out these loans from the banks, any normal person with any common sense would not take out a loan to go on holiday. It is not up to the banks or the government to tell people when to take out loans, if that person make personal error then they lose out its as simple as that.Quote:
Originally Posted by LuketheDuke
Nationalisation does not work, as proved in the 1970s, how many more winter of discontents do we need before this message sinks in?
What on earth are you talking about? This recession has been caused by banks lending massive amounts of money from one another that they couldnt pay back. If they were regulated someone would have noticed this and intervened to avoid recession.
Holiday loans? What?:S If a bank just lost a hell of a lot of money and your savings were tied up in that bank would you trust it? Id get my cash out ASAP and put it under my bed.
And can you please stop going on about the winter of discontent. It was labelled that by our sensational media because people wanted more money and the government wouldnt give it to them. So what do you blame for that, Unions which you hate or Callaghan who you hate? You cant lump both into the same argument as that doesnt make sense.
We've had one "winter of discontent" so why are you saying how many we need as its happened only once. What I dont need is high tax rates, bankers running arife with big bonus' and the good jobs going to kids whove been to private schools. All of which are the result of a capitalist Britain.
It ordepends how the system works.
The banks also lent out very easy loans to people which also led to their collapse, hence why they appealed to the banks because the banks knew they probably would not be able to pay those loans back. Banking isn't a clean business, but like all business it exists to do one thing and one thing only, make money.Quote:
Originally Posted by LuketheDuke
I would not no, the holiday loans point is nothing to do with that. I am using that as an example of how easy it was to secure loans from the banks back then. Whether or not the banks behave like this and operate like this is irrelvent, at some point or other the economy (regulated or not) will partially collapse - in a capitalist way, this allows new growth whereas in the socialist way new growth never appears, just look back, again, at the 1970s in the United Kingdom when we had to appeal to the IMF.
I will not stop going on about the winter of discontent as it is a vital point to the discussion, none of you seem to be able to explain this. Our darkest point in modern economic history and i'll continue to bring it up and explain it until you can come up with an answer to this. The winter of disconent was caused both by the Callaghan governments and the unions, the problem has slowly been growing since after the second world war. The unions controlled the Callgahan government and kept pushing for expensive pay rises, of which the country could not afford. The Labour Party was powerless against them as it has powerful union members within, and also was funded by the unions. If James Callgahan would of stood up to the unions, as Edward Heath attempted to - he would of been removed from office, its as simple as that - the unions had the government in a bear hug.
In the 1970s we had power cuts, business wouldn't open here because of high taxes, people had no money to spend due to high taxes, the government was in debt and spending money on failing industry such as the mines, whilst also funding the government owned industry. Government was over bloated at this point in time, it was in everything and that is why nobody would invest in this country.
This led to this cycle;
High government tax and regulation > no business would open/business was closing > people losing jobs > people could not find new jobs > less tax being paid to the government > taxes then have to rise elsewhere to fund that gaping hole > more business closes... it continued like that.
Indeed we only had one winter of discontent, at the point when the country was on the verge of becoming socialist, that exactly being my point; we never want to return to that stage again under socialism.
Quote:
Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-
You seem to have conveniently forgotten the Poll Tax Riots and Black Wedneday here, Dan. :eusa_whis
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poll_Tax_Riots
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Wednesday
They were not economic disasters such as the winter of discontent, in both them situations we never had to appeal to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) for an emergency bail out which is the worst scenario. The Poll Tax riots have nothing to do economics, infact if anything; they show up the true violent face of socialism.Quote:
Originally Posted by Catzsy
The topic of the European Fixed Mechanism has nothing to do with the subject of capitalism vs socialism, but i'll explain it anyway. :)
The unions fell from being the main power behind government to being beaten by the party they hated most, they lost their power and the economy recovered. My own city of Liverpool was ravaged by militantism in the 1970s and 1970s, it destroyed our reputation.
The poll tax riots were mainly organised by the unions which by that time were stripped of their powers - is that anyway to behave over taxes? - Labour introduces more taxes than the Conservatives ever did & raises taxes more than the Conservatives ever did, yet no one is protesting about it because its Labour - I think that tells us a lot, if your confused about poll tax here is it simply explained;
Before Poll Tax
Before Poll Tax, say if I and a group of five friends were living in your house but you owned the house, you would pay all of the 'council tax' for us all. That would mean the householder paying for the people who lived within the house, despite all of us equally using council services such as roads, rubbish collections and so forth.
After Poll Tax
After Poll Tax, say if it was the same scenario. We would all pay our individual taxes, meaning the unfair burden lifted from the household owner.
Which is fair?
As for Black Wednesday it just proves why I am against the European Union, the Conservatives should never have joined any European economic joint venture, however the good news was that when the Conservatives left office in 1997 - the economy was in amazing shape and government debt was very very low. Just compare this to 1979 when the economy was on its knees and around now, because at this point in time when Labour leave office in 2009/2010 they will be leaving behind a massive pile of debt which means that yet again, the Conservatives will have to clear up the mess made by Labour.
lol the first points you made reinforces the point that the banks were irresponsibly lending and not moderating what they did as in their interests it meant money. You say economies fall and decline but arguably this recession seems to get worse and worse, there was drops in 2001 and thats natural but inflation and mass unemployment are a throw back to Thatcher and worse. It isnt normal, we've been screwed as a nation by our financial so called "elite" and I say we regulate what they do to make sure this doesnt happen again.
Winter of Discontent was argued on pay dispute and living standards, dont you think its something to be admired that ordinary people stood up for themselves and ensured their quality of life improved for themselves and for their families? Impacts like that have shaped the way we live to do this day so ykno good on 'em
Also I wonder what your cycle sounds like? Oh wait yea it sounds like whats going on now!!!
It was Margaret Thatcher who brought down inflation after Labour left office, Inflation in 1975 was its highest point in modern history under Labour, at a staggering 24.2%. The 1980s saw inflation brought down by Thatcher and the Conservatives and the economy improved drastically, so much so that London became one of the leading financial capitals of the world.Quote:
Originally Posted by LuketheDuke
As for the regulation, it will happen again. Regulated or not this will happen again, again, again and again and nothing can stop that. Boom and bust are the basics of capitalism and will forever be, i'd rather weather short downturns than be living in a socialist state such as North Korea where food is scare, or even in a scenario like 1970s Britain when we had power cuts.
I do admire the winter of discontent, it is what brought down the Labour government and the ultimate downfall of the unions, and thank god we had it. It is a shame we ever reached that stage thanks to socialism, we should never have got into that situation.
The cycle is similar to what is going on now except there is one big difference, government tax has not yet reached levels as it was back in the 1970s and this downturn is a global downturn which we have weathered before, whereas the winter of discontent was this countrys economy going under because of the socialist grip on government and economy.