Capitalism vs. Socialism

[Rishi]

---

Socialism is the better economic system...in paper, but dismal in actual implementation. Capitalism is a heartless economic system, driven solely by sole interest not only by the businesses themselves, but most especially by the consumers.

Was there any perfect socialist country? Some would defend no. Is there any perfect capitalist country? I would say no as well. Absolutism of any of these economic systems are non existent. However, countries who pursue a greater degree towards a capitalist system reap better benefits in the big picture as compared to those who pursue socialism (or communism, a higher degree of socialism). Capitalism relies on a greater degree of freedom, Socialism relies a greater degree of government control.

Let's take for example China. During the Mao era, the government dictated everything, food, production, benefits and even personal behavior. Entrepreneurship was illegal. Millions of chinese died of starvation and atrocities implemented to protect Mao's ideology. When Deng Xiao Peng took over, he deviated from Mao by slowly implementing capitalist policies in select areas of the country, and gradually within a fraction of the time, millions rose out of poverty. Though the communist party still controls the country, but they have exponentially deviated from the system of Mao.

Capitalism is not perfect, nothing is. It can be distorted into something we call, Crony Capitalism. It is when the country allows the power of government to involve within the free market so much so as to distort the price mechanisms and voluntary exchanges that favors a certain group in the economy. Social Capitalism is necessarily a Crony Capitalism as well, wherein, the purchase of the society's safety nets are reduced to profit making machines in favor towards a particular party or agenda. The reason i mentioned this is just to establish a combination of the two economic systems. United States became a social capitalist under the leadership of FDR. Ever since then, the socialist policies have expanded to the point of risking the collapse of the dollar, a worldwide crisis if that happens.

I would categorize Greece as a socialist country, benefits aplenty for all citizens. It resulted in diminishing work ethics and pleasure seeking attituteds of the greeks, boasting high paid long vacations and were once the envy of many first world nations. But eventually, the cards showed themselves, the greeks have borrowed too much money to support their affluent lifestyles ending in crisis. Did the greeks understand why they needed to control public spending? Nope. They were so used to the benefits that sacrificing them would feel like a human rights violation.

In a high degree of capitalist country, the government is limited in its role in the free market. Businesses are forced to compete without the help of legislation, therefore there's no point of bribing government officials if they have no role. However, when government has the power to legislate the market, then the cost of bribing is far cheaper than engaging in the market competition. In the Philippines, big businesses often engage in influencing legislation that tries to limit competition by imposing higher entry barriers, price fixing, and excluding foreign competitions. It is not entirely the fault of the businesses because the system the people enforced provide a big incentive for both businesses and politicians to buy each other.

If you believe in freedom as the highest political end, you would tend to lean towards Capitalism. If you believe in social safety nets and charity, then you would lean towards Socialism.

Thank you kaayo ani nga input boss. Maayo pagka present nimo sa mga epekto sa duha ka models.

what about the idea of merging the two models boss?

naa gihapon FREE MARKET but create socialist nga mga programa?

- - - Updated - - -

Ana na sya brad, problemaha sa ang imong kaugalingon before problemahon nimo ang uban. Help yourself first. Once you're in the pedestal, you can help them too.

unsa imo pasabot ani sir in relation sa atong topic?

[<SMILE>]

mao pod ni ang disadvantage sa Socialism if dako og role ang State.

but let's say naa gihapon ng FREE MARKET ... BUT... taasan ang taxes sa mga companies then kini nga mga taxes itabang sa mga less fortunate, or create social programs nga makatabang sa masa like e subsidize partly ang mga basic needs sa mga tao?

maayo kaha ni? Capitalism gihapon, but with socialist programs?

Maayo gyud kayo,
pero ang problema ug ang bottom line, we need a dependable people to run the government.
Singapore was under a draconian rule under Lee Kuan Yew but it works perfectly kay the dictatorial rule's goal benefits everyone not only the people who handles governance.

[Rishi]

Maayo gyud kayo,
pero ang problema ug ang bottom line, we need a dependable people to run the government.
Singapore was under a draconian rule under Lee Kuan Yew but it works perfectly kay the dictatorial rule's goal benefits everyone not only the people who handles governance.

Pero naa man sila'y Parliament di ba?

Sigoro ang dictatorial aspect mosolod na sa pag implement sa balaod? di ko sure kaayo ani kay di ko sweto sa politics sa Singapore. Pero kung naa silay Parliament I think ang mga balaod nila ni agi pod ug deliberations.

Anyway, as long as ang progress mo agas sa obos nindot kaayo na nga sistema, and so far ang system man gud nga akong nakita nga mo sympathize sa obos naa man gud sa Socialism nga theory.

Sa Capitalism man gud mag iyahay man gud, then ang mag dictate sa market katong mga gamhanan na daan, looy ang mga bago nga mga players nga mosolod kay ma bully man jud. mao ng ang small percentage nga mga elites nagka anam ka powerful hehe.

[emow]

Thank you kaayo ani nga input boss. Maayo pagka present nimo sa mga epekto sa duha ka models.

what about the idea of merging the two models boss?

naa gihapon FREE MARKET but create socialist nga mga programa?

- - - Updated - - -



unsa imo pasabot ani sir in relation sa atong topic?

I suspect if the two systems are fused, the the vices of socialism will erode the virtues of capitalism. Take again the United States, its housing assistance to low income earners thru Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac distorted the real estate prices. Price is a very vital signal for the proper allocation of resources. To summarized, the real estate in the united states became hot after many programs were implemented to help the low income bracket. This sent an impression that the demand was high and thus the surge in housing loans. However, the low income bracket were high risk in defaulting their payments, and majority of them did. 2008 real estate crisis was the bursting of the illusion of the bullish real estate. The financial sector was devastated the most as loans are being sold and repackaged as investment instruments. The crisis quickly spread to other sectors as investments drop and banks were strapped in cash. The effects of that crisis affected the entire global economy, including the EU crisis and the bankruptcy of Greece.

Social Capitalism is otherwise known as "Robinhood system," viewing the rich sectors in the country as milking cows to redistribute their wealth to other people. Therefore, it reduces the incentive to become productive more than necessary, causing them to either relocate or redirect their investments elsewhere.

[<SMILE>]

Pero naa man sila'y Parliament di ba?

Sigoro ang dictatorial aspect mosolod na sa pag implement sa balaod? di ko sure kaayo ani kay di ko sweto sa politics sa Singapore. Pero kung naa silay Parliament I think ang mga balaod nila ni agi pod ug deliberations.

Anyway, as long as ang progress mo agas sa obos nindot kaayo na nga sistema, and so far ang system man gud nga akong nakita nga mo sympathize sa obos naa man gud sa Socialism nga theory.

Sa Capitalism man gud mag iyahay man gud, then ang mag dictate sa market katong mga gamhanan na daan, looy ang mga bago nga mga players nga mosolod kay ma bully man jud. mao ng ang small percentage nga mga elites nagka anam ka powerful hehe.

Yup, naa silay tigpanday ug balaod same as the other form of governance, but the rule is also absolute, lisud gani if you say something bad against the Singaporean government. Pero contented kayo ang mga tawo sa standards of living.

In the other hand I'm not so sure if socialism guarantees equality for each and everyone, sorry but I beg to differ.

The Gini coefficient — an index which measures social mobility and equality — hit a low 0.474 last year, just slightly below the warning level of 0.4 set by the United Nations, China’s National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) said on Friday. The Gini index ranges from 0, which represents perfect equality, to 1, for absolute inequality. The index stood at 0.473 in 2004, but after the financial crisis in 2008, it gradually dropped from its peak of 0.491 that year

.
Forbes Welcome

[Rishi]

I suspect if the two systems are fused, the the vices of socialism will erode the virtues of capitalism. Take again the United States, its housing assistance to low income earners thru Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac distorted the real estate prices. Price is a very vital signal for the proper allocation of resources. To summarized, the real estate in the united states became hot after many programs were implemented to help the low income bracket. This sent an impression that the demand was high and thus the surge in housing loans. However, the low income bracket were high risk in defaulting their payments, and majority of them did. 2008 real estate crisis was the bursting of the illusion of the bullish real estate. The financial sector was devastated the most as loans are being sold and repackaged as investment instruments. The crisis quickly spread to other sectors as investments drop and banks were strapped in cash. The effects of that crisis affected the entire global economy, including the EU crisis and the bankruptcy of Greece.

Social Capitalism is otherwise known as "Robinhood system," viewing the rich sectors in the country as milking cows to redistribute their wealth to other people. Therefore, it reduces the incentive to become productive more than necessary, causing them to either relocate or redirect their investments elsewhere.

I see. Pero naa'y nindot nga model ani boss, ang Germany. Free Market gihapon, hands off ang State sa production, ownership, sales, work force. but mosolod ang state sa policies, in other words ang state mo serve as mediator para di kaayo bully si Free Market.

- - - Updated - - -

Yup, naa silay tigpanday ug balaod same as the other form of governance, but the rule is also absolute, lisud gani if you say something bad against the Singaporean government. Pero contented kayo ang mga tawo sa standards of living.

In the other hand I'm not so sure if socialism guarantees equality for each and everyone, sorry but I beg to differ.

.
Forbes Welcome

ang ako position sir is fusion sa duha ka theory. I am not pro Socialist ug Capitalist.