I Realized Why Socialism Doesn't Work

[eTorro]

Hello.

People who have their own companies are highly motivated to do a great job. Their love for their business is Paramount, and the competition is always stimulating — you don't want your business to go bankrupt, so you strive to improve the value of your product(s).

On the other hand, if the state takes over, nothing works properly — those who run state companies can not do a great job; they only do what's required and they almost never come up with new, practical ideas.

This is one of my insights, but there are more — you can find out other reasons why socialism doesn't work.

Your thoughts?

[Danioover9000]

@eTorro

1 hour ago, eTorro said:

Hello.

People who have their own companies are highly motivated to do a great job. Their love for their business is Paramount, and the competition is always stimulating — you don't want your business to go bankrupt, so you strive to improve the value of your product(s).

On the other hand, if the state takes over, nothing works properly — those who run state companies can not do a great job; they only do what's required and they almost never come up with new, practical ideas.

This is one of my insights, but there are more — you can find out other reasons why socialism doesn't work.

Your thoughts?

   Well, it does depend on stages of development, cognitive and moral development, personality types and traits, states of consciousness, life experiences and other lines of development per life domains to societal/cultural domains, and ideological indoctrination. It's ultimately relative, no matter how much a person doesn't like the centrist and moderate and agnostic point of view, it is more existentially correct as they're more self aware and self honest with not knowing.

   Socialism is evil though, no matter how you try to save it.

[Recursoinominado]

Socialism doesn't work because of a big mean bully called Captalism, for now...

[Staples]

@eTorro The state runs some things much better than a private company ever could. Law enforcement, basic utilities like water & electricity, public transportation, and there are many more things that in my opinion should not be privatized. 

Do some research into privatization and you will find plenty of examples of corporations making things worse. And plenty of examples when it worked effectively.

The profit motive is a tiny element of capitalism, there are hundreds of little reasons that compound which make capitalism superior to socialism. But there are also elements in socialist philosophy that capitalism ought to learn from.

Edited April 23, 2023 by Staples

[Staples]

And there are plenty of business that cut corners and lack integrity and get people killed because of it. The benefit of a government run industry is that since they are purely taxpayer funded, they must abide by legal standards and invest the required money to deliver a safe product. 

Imagine if the legal system was a corporate entity. You could be proven guilty of murder but if you had enough money, you would walk free.

Edited April 23, 2023 by Staples

[Danioover9000]

@Recursoinominado

12 hours ago, Recursoinominado said:

Socialism doesn't work because of a big mean bully called Captalism, for now...

   Socialism doesn't work because there's no value in merit, competition and competency and excellence.

[Danioover9000]

@Staples Are you a Marxist?

[Danioover9000]

@RebornConsciousness

6 minutes ago, RebornConsciousness said:

There are many legit reasons why the political, economic and fiscal systems of the currently most developed countries of the world, work the way they do and are structured the way they are. Anyone who thinks the system should significantly and drastically change right now, should pull their head out of their ass. The reality is mostly right, you are mostly wrong. You have to figure out why you're wrong.

For a socialist-like system to work, humans will have to develop themselves significantly. Otherwise it won't work.

   Which means we mostly have to be capitalists, and maximize capitalism?

[Danioover9000]

@RebornConsciousness

1 hour ago, RebornConsciousness said:

We should continue developing ourselves in all areas and continue with the carefull technological progress, and the system will change naturally. It's just not going to be a simple system such as pure capitalism or pure socialism. I expect capitalistic aspect of the system to significantly weaken over time though.

   Sure, on the collective level I agree. Personally I'd listen to a progressive/socialist/Marxist after they mastered capitalism in their way. I switch off when they talk about myths of capitalism, and saying self made millionaire don't exist, while thinking that they must've never heard of mind craft and Star Dew Valley.

[Recursoinominado]

2 hours ago, Danioover9000 said:

@Recursoinominado

   Socialism doesn't work because there's no value in merit, competition and competency and excellence.

You sr, are missinformed.

In socialism there is difference in salaries, just not the extreme difference that Capitalism promotes. This is a common myth that everyone will earn the same, if you are a lazy janitor vs a phd doctor. The doctor earns way more.

There is still entrepreneurial competition, and free market, altough more regulated at the top, holding down the power of billionaires and overpowered companies that could eventually corrupt the goverment in its favors.

China is a great example.

[Jwayne]

5 minutes ago, Recursoinominado said:

You sr, are missinformed.

In socialism there is difference in salaries, just not the extreme difference that Capitalism promotes. This is a common myth that everyone will earn the same, if you are a lazy janitor vs a phd doctor. The doctor earns way more.

There is still entrepreneurial competition, and free market, altough more regulated at the top, holding down the power of billionaires and overpowered companies that could eventually corrupt the goverment in its favors.

China is a great example.

China has developed extreme wealth inequality since introducing more capitalist elements under Deng's Reform and Opening Up and that's a primary concern that their government has moving forward.

China has a mixed socialist economy but the major parts are owned by the state, such 80% of the major banks or so are state-owned and not privatized. Which is very different than other systems.

[Danioover9000]

@Recursoinominado

1 hour ago, Recursoinominado said:

You sr, are missinformed.

In socialism there is difference in salaries, just not the extreme difference that Capitalism promotes. This is a common myth that everyone will earn the same, if you are a lazy janitor vs a phd doctor. The doctor earns way more.

There is still entrepreneurial competition, and free market, altough more regulated at the top, holding down the power of billionaires and overpowered companies that could eventually corrupt the goverment in its favors.

China is a great example.

   Really, I am misinformed?

   Okay, can you explain to me why taxi drivers here earned way more than doctors, if the assumptions in Socialism that the mean salaries and earnings are similar compared to capitalism where the means are more wider and different? Why hasn't socio economic communism economics haven't worked here for Cuba and Venezuela?

https://www.actualized.org/insights/understanding-cubas-economy

 

 

[at_anchor]

@Danioover9000 We can do without doctors to be fair. And many others as well. But labs are necessary. 

If you want a doctor, just take some kid and make a doctor from him. Anyone can be a good doctor. That is why socialism is actually superior, it just lacks the right leader and I guess people are ignorant to find one.

Socialism for me means babe that everyone will get a higher education so that the diplomas and competancies mean nothing and so that you can't feel superior for having achieved this. 

If everyone gets a doctors level of education, then you guess what happens? Doctors don't get paid any more than taxi drivers babe. 

That's how I want all children to end up, as doctors, as equals, and that is socialism in a nutshell, from that comes socialism. Got it? 

Socialism is not some bullshit money for everyone. No. It is amazing education for everyone and amazing health for everyone. It is about a king, making his people grow at the same pace. But that's hardly possible in reality. Monarchy is a socialist kind of thing I think, if the king is good enough. 

I bet we can make 90% of children grow up to be doctors if we wanted to and cared to and did everything required to protect them from wasting time, abuse, disease, obesity, noise, lack of sleep, etc. If we made sure they all get the right caregivers and so forth. 

But that's hard to do because of capitalism.

[at_anchor]

@Danioover9000 sorry for saying "babe" i'm just a bit kind of drunk or something. but yeah, I'm sure if I had resources to parent someone, you give me any child whatsoever and I'll be able to make a doctor from him or her. that is the point socialism is trying to make. in capitalism, if you get a parent like that who makes you a doctor or you get lucky in other ways and someo e else helps you, that's considered hard work, sacrifice, making the right decisions as opposed to those lazy bums who go chase sex and end up raped. "Ah, it's their responsibility! It's their decisions that brought them here." Yeah, yeah, sure... 

[Tanz]

If the entire world had the same system of governing things would not work on a macro level. Socialism or capitalism works on those country where it works because other countries are either worst off than them which allows them to function. ie some African countries, China with its low cost labor, Apple factories in China had to suicide proof their factories because workers were literally killing themselves so apple could be the most valuable company in the world. North Korea undoubtedly offers lots of resources to China which in turn creates cheap Chinese products to sell on Amazon 

When people live well, others have to suffer in return. The survival game is real ugly and I don't think anyone really has an idea to change that.

Edited April 23, 2023 by Tanz

[Leo Gura]

The key thing is markets. You cannot replace markets with a top-down centralized beauracracy. Markets are like gaint brains. They have a deep distributed intelligence which no small committee of beauracrats can replace. The economy is too complex to be governed by a handful of guys top-down. All the economic systems that failed were governed top-down, impinging on the intelligence of markets. No single human is as intelligent as the whole market.

Edited April 23, 2023 by Leo Gura

[mr_engineer]

@Leo Gura What do you think of the debate of Austrian economics vs Keynesian economics? What's your take on that debate? 

[Danioover9000]

@Leo Gura

8 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

The key thing is markets. You cannot replace markets with a top-down centralized beauracracy. Markets are like gaint brains. They have a deep distributed intelligence which no small committee of beauracrats can replace. The economy is too complex to be governed by a handful of guys top-down. All the economic systems that failed were governed top-down, impinging on the intelligence of markets. No single human is as intelligent as the whole market.

   So, in a convoluted way, does this imply that Libertarians like Vaush, and some anarchists and neo liberals, when they speak about less regulated markets, or 'free the markets!' that their intuition is correct? Before you object, I do disagree with how they speak and how they implement towards freeing the markets by scaling down the state and increasing property owner rights and being hyper individualism, I'm just asking if they're intuiting in the correct direction?

[Danioover9000]

@mr_engineer

3 minutes ago, mr_engineer said:

@Leo Gura What do you think of the debate of Austrian economics vs Keynesian economics? What's your take on that debate? 

   Do you have a link to that debate? I'll watch later as I'm not familiar with those economic modals.

[Husseinisdoingfine]

2 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

The key thing is markets. You cannot replace markets with a top-down centralized beauracracy. Markets are like gaint brains. They have a deep distributed intelligence which no small committee of beauracrats can replace. The economy is too complex to be governed by a handful of guys top-down. All the economic systems that failed were governed top-down, impinging on the intelligence of markets. No single human is as intelligent as the whole market.

How do we as a society resolve the inequalities the markets produces? Under the market system, in a hypothetical famine and shortage of milk, there will be people who are unable to afford any milk and at the same time people who are buying milk to feed their cats and then pouring the leftovers down the drain.

This is a very visible reality, the fashion industry is worth billions of dollars and meanwhile there are people who can't afford shoes.