Socialism correlates with higher living standards

Author: Benjamin

Posts

Total: 99
#31
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Benjamin
Is it ethical or wise that the individual's sovereignty is supplanted with the states' 
Are you an anarchist? If not, this argument is incompatible with your existing beliefs. You see, society and the state in general is by definition suppressing the sovereignty of individuals.
ANARCHY = NO KINGS
ANARCHY = DEMOCRACY
ANARCHY = NO PRIESTS NO PROPHETS NO OLIGARCHS
ANARCHY = NO "LEADERS" ONLY "PUBLIC SERVANTS"

ANARCHY = BLOCKCHAIN
ANARCHY = HOLACRACY
ANARCHY = TRANSPARENCY
ANARCHY = PROCRUSTEAN LAW

(1) PROTECT YOURSELF
(2) PROTECT YOUR FAMILY
(3) PROTECT YOUR PROPERTY
#32
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@CoolApe
Carl Marx often thought that the factory owner's exploited the poor to increase their profits. He believed it was in the best interests' of the factory owners' to suppress wages and keep the poor impoverished to increase the supply of cheep labor. 
Dodge v. Ford Motor Company, 204 Mich. 459, 170 N.W. 668 (Mich. 1919)[1] is a case in which the Michigan Supreme Court held that Henry Ford had to operate the Ford Motor Company in the interests of its shareholders, rather than in a charitable manner for the benefit of his employees or customers.

#33
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@CoolApe
The short answer is an entrepreneur knows that improving the living conditions of their workers may cost them a little in the short-run but save them more money in the long run.
unless you happen to be building a railroad

or running a coal mine

it is somehow cheaper to close a microchip fabrication facility in the united states and build a new one from scratch in malaysia and then setup a training program to teach the native citizens to run the place

all the while giving large kick-backs to the local authorities to act as your de facto private union-busting goons

pretty soon AGI will be running these things and us humans will be obsolete
#34
CoolApe
CoolApe's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 87
0
1
6
CoolApe's avatar
CoolApe
0
1
6
-->
@3RU7AL
Modern coal mining and railroading are much safer than it was in the Gilded Age. While I don't condone the actions of the robber barons, it seems like there was no liability back then if someone got hurt. If anyone has a workplace injury nowadays, its the employer's responsibility to pay. Entrepreneur's have incentives to prevent work place accidents and keep their employees healthy for health-insurance reasons.

In addition, as the wealth of society grows, employees can ask for different kinds of compensation for their work, for instance, health-insurance or better work conditions. Most coal miners today make good money. Its not a profession for just the dirt poor anymore. I also don't agree that health-insurance should be mandated for employers to supply. However, employees should be able to chose if they want health insurance or prefer to be compensated in wages.

Furthermore, capitalism has nothing to say about moral issues, however, the legal and justice system is the proper place to determine the moral obligations that employer's have to employees, while that could be anything from health, treatment and safety. 

Lastly, capitalism is not a complete system. Its only most effective and prosperous when its regulated by a good justice system. If these conditions are met, entrepreneur's have incentives to treat their employees' properly. Moral problems would exist under communism and socialism, however, these systems are just as unequipped to deal with them. The justice systems' in socialism and communism seem that they would be far less impartial too.

Response to Malaysia problem

While I don't think we should punish companies for moving into foreign countries, the United States ought to ban products from foreign companies that were made under highly immoral circumstances. For instance, companies that pay immoral bribes to officials to avoid their responsibilities or prevent their criminal prosecution.  


#35
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@CoolApe
Entrepreneur's have incentives to prevent work place accidents and keep their employees healthy for health-insurance reasons.
The official's revelations come as a former safety inspector aboard the ship is suing his past employer, claiming he was fired just before the accident because he argued with his bosses for more inspections in the fuel tank.

#36
CoolApe
CoolApe's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 87
0
1
6
CoolApe's avatar
CoolApe
0
1
6
-->
@3RU7AL
My argument isn't that these don't happen or that greed and incompetence don't exist. Already this issue is a legal matter. If the punishments are commensurate with the crimes then integrity is rewarded. The opposite can also exist. We need a good justice system as I've already pointed out. 

Capitalism needs free enterprise, but free enterprise doesn't mean we should permit corporations or individuals limited liability for all their actions. That's an issue with our screwed up laws and justice system.

Capitalism under ideal conditions works well (not necessarily perfect), however, socialism and communism under any conditions work poorly.
#37
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@CoolApe
ought to ban products from foreign companies that were made under highly immoral circumstances
i agree
#38
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@CoolApe
That's an issue with our screwed up laws and justice system.
true

justice has a pretty steep "barrier to entry" in terms of $$$
#39
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@CoolApe
however, socialism and communism under any conditions work poorly.
how do you account for examples like denmark ?
#40
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@CoolApe
My argument isn't that these don't happen or that greed and incompetence don't exist.
are you perhaps familiar with HOLACRACY ?
#41
CoolApe
CoolApe's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 87
0
1
6
CoolApe's avatar
CoolApe
0
1
6
-->
@3RU7AL
however, socialism and communism under any conditions work poorly.
how do you account for examples like denmark ?
Denmark isn't really socialist. They have really free market policies for the most part. 

I'm talking mostly in relative terms more government and central planning would be considered more socialist. If we accept mostly ideal justice to be carried out (not that it exists in United States for corporations), capitalism works even better than these systems.

Regulations mostly create economic moats. Patents are mostly anti-competitive. Laws are made to favor corporations. Government protects business monopolies and conspires with them. This is the reason that the United States isn't really free enterprise. Its not socialist but its crony capitalist. Any decent capitalist country that isn't mostly crony should thrive.

Not familiar with holacracy or what you mean by it.
#42
CoolApe
CoolApe's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 87
0
1
6
CoolApe's avatar
CoolApe
0
1
6
-->
@Benjamin
Are you an anarchist? If not, this argument is incompatible with your existing beliefs. You see, society and the state in general is by definition suppressing the sovereignty of individuals. If you cannot murder people then you have been restricted and your freedom violated -- but society is all the better for it. 
I'm not an anarchist because I believe their are legitimate reasons for government to exist. If you murder someone your freedom is forfeit, this is a universal moral law held by all reasonable people. You never had the right to murder someone in the first place. That is true whether or not government existed. Government exists to protect the rights of individuals so that individuals are not deprived of them. Judges, jurors, law enforcement and military are all necessary to protect people's rights. If you live in society you must respect the freedoms of others, you can not live in society with people otherwise.

 Literally only the rich loose their freedom, by which I mean the freedom to dominate society and the economy with money not earned through labour. For everyone else, socialism means more economic autonomy, less worries, higher standard of living and more free time. Especially the poor, ethnic minorities and women benefit from socialism.
Socialism always involves central planning and taxes. A people who are burdened to support a government are limited in their capacity to make autonomous choices for themselves. For instance, if parents were not taxed to send their kids to public school or not, then most would choose to send their kids to private schools. The fact that their income is taken away from them denies them this choice. A capitalist becomes rich as a result of providing something that is valuable to his society. If he became rich through immoral means, it is the responsibility of the justice system to determine if owes anything to any individuals. Otherwise it is not your call to say he does not deserve profit from the money he is entitled to that he had to work for at some point or inherit. 

Thats the point. Nobody can get rich by providing free healthcare and education, and so under capitalism nobody will do it. Socialism puts the needs and wants of the people above the profit motive. A more productive society is only a byproduct of a happier healthier one. A central tenant of socialism is improving people's material conditions. 
The needs and wants of society are clearly expressed in the way people spend their money. If you spend your money on food instead of a fancy house, you clearly indicated that you thought food was more important to your needs and wants than a fancy house. People always make choices of best or better for themselves with their own money. Entrepreneurs are rewarded with money if they produce things that people want and at the price they want it. Socialism (Central Planning) is clearly not obligated to produce things at a reasonable cost that people would actually prefer if they could spend money on things as they wished. Companies have expenses and they can produce more if they can charge more. This is true even for socialism, however, socialism charges a societal tax to produce more product. Higher taxes mean other companies need to produce less and charge more. If everyone had to pay higher prices for everything else they needed, then they would not want the healthcare or education you were providing them with socialism.
#43
Reece101
Reece101's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,973
3
2
2
Reece101's avatar
Reece101
3
2
2
-->
@CoolApe
I think it’s good developed countries have systems they can compare themselves to. Though it doesn’t really matter if oligarchs get into power. 
#44
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,062
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Benjamin
If you think about it, every regime is basically the same....Based upon natural hierarchy and inherent selfishness.

It's simply a case of where you choose to stick your ism.


Marxist socialism was a hypocritical delusion of the bourgeoise and has never successfully been implemented.....Good intentions immediately became the same old grind for the proletariat, more than likely brutally so.

Can you think of any truly socialist States?.....Where everyone is equal and everything is shared......Nope it just doesn't work like that, to implement and maintain such a State, also requires a system of governance and enforcement.....Same old, same old.
#45
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@CoolApe
Patents are mostly anti-competitive.
2017 · 1 hr 49 min
TV-14
Documentary · Crime
A documentary exploring the unknown, multi-billion dollar industry that is an offshoot of the U.S. Patent system, where trolls thrive on corruption.

#46
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@zedvictor4
Where everyone is equal and everything is shared
Top 10 Countries with the Highest Human Freedom Indexes (2021):

  1. Switzerland — 9.11
  2. New Zealand — 9.01
  3. Denmark — 8.98
  4. Estonia — 8.91
  5. Ireland — 8.90
  6. Canada — 8.85
  7. Finland — 8.85
  8. Australia — 8.84
  9. Sweden — 8.83
  10. Luxembourg — 8.80

The 12 Categories of the Human Freedom Index:

  • Rule of Law
  • Security and Safety
  • Movement
  • Religion
  • Association, Assembly, and Civil Society
  • Expression and Information
  • Identity and Relationships
  • Size of Government
  • Legal System and Property Rights
  • Access to Sound Money
  • Freedom to Trade Internationally
  • Regulation

#47
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Reece101
Though it doesn’t really matter if oligarchs get into power.
would you call yourself "pro-oligarchy" or just "oligarchy-tolerant" ?
#48
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@CoolApe
Socialism (Central Planning)
"central planning" is just another term for "hierarchy"

japan's economy was extremely centrally planned after ww2 and it took a major hit when the central planning was somewhat loosened

the european union's economy is also centrally planned

heck, even in the united states, the "federal reserve" has been buying the market in order to distort recession signals

central banking is central planning
#49
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@CoolApe
I'm not an anarchist because I believe their are legitimate reasons for government to exist.
rules without rulers doesn't preclude the existence of public servants

#50
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@CoolApe
Not familiar with holacracy or what you mean by it.
many people think that authoritarian hierarchy is the most efficient form of governance (some even call it "natural order")

the most common corporate model is basically a military model

however, there is an alternative

#51
Reece101
Reece101's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,973
3
2
2
Reece101's avatar
Reece101
3
2
2
-->
@3RU7AL
would you call yourself "pro-oligarchy" or just "oligarchy-tolerant" ?

How did you arrive at those options, or are you just trying to gaslight? 

#52
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Reece101
would you call yourself "pro-oligarchy" or just "oligarchy-tolerant" ?

How did you arrive at those options, or are you just trying to gaslight? 
perhaps you remember post 43

#53
Reece101
Reece101's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,973
3
2
2
Reece101's avatar
Reece101
3
2
2
-->
@3RU7AL
You didn’t quote me in full. You only responded to the second half.
#54
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Reece101
it's a pretty simple yes or no question
#55
Reece101
Reece101's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,973
3
2
2
Reece101's avatar
Reece101
3
2
2
-->
@3RU7AL
No.
#56
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@SirAnonymous
You are ignoring the fact that India had a legally enforced caste system for years. Even now that it is illegal, the caste system endures in their culture.
great point

As a general commentary on the USSR, it did not have freedom of speech, religion, press, or assembly. And when freedom of speech was finally introduced in the late 1980s, the USSR fell apart shortly thereafter. You may want to think about why that is.
also a great point
#57
CoolApe
CoolApe's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 87
0
1
6
CoolApe's avatar
CoolApe
0
1
6
-->
@Reece101
I think it’s good developed countries have systems they can compare themselves to. Though it doesn’t really matter if oligarchs get into power. 
If you mean oligarchs exist in any system, then I would agree.  

If I follow your logic if country A and B are developed nations and A is more socialist and has a better and cheaper healthcare system, then the more capitalist B country should adopt a similar system. 

However, the power and the extent of oligarchs in countries can be very different. If the healthcare system in a mostly capitalist country has become mostly crony, then a socialist healthcare system could be better than its current healthcare. However, this doesn't mean that a better capitalist healthcare system with fewer monopolistic legal barriers and more legal patient protection could not exist if we spent time changing laws to encourage free enterprise. 
#58
Reece101
Reece101's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,973
3
2
2
Reece101's avatar
Reece101
3
2
2
-->
@CoolApe
If you mean oligarchs exist in any system, then I would agree.
I mean oligarchs having control over legislation. It’s antithetical to the democratic will of the people. There’s a reason many politicians avoid talking about policy when they would rather talk about culture war bullshit.

If I follow your logic if country A and B are developed nations and A is more socialist and has a better and cheaper healthcare system, then the more capitalist B country should adopt a similar system.
If it’s implemented correctly and trials go well, sure. 

However, the power and the extent of oligarchs in countries can be very different. If the healthcare system in a mostly capitalist country has become mostly crony, then a socialist healthcare system could be better than its current healthcare. However, this doesn't mean that a better capitalist healthcare system with fewer monopolistic legal barriers and more legal patient protection could not exist if we spent time changing laws to encourage free enterprise. 
When it comes to oligarchical legislative influence America is second only to Russia, Putin being the biggest oligarch. 

Which politician best represents what you stand for? Or would you try running yourself?
#59
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,062
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@3RU7AL
Ten reasonable places to live for sure.

Same hierarchical systems, but with a fairer collective mind set.

Nothing truly socialist though.


I'm perfectly happy here in the U.K.
#60
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@zedvictor4
Nothing truly socialist though.
do you think it might be fair to perhaps consider them "more" "socialist" (than the united states) ?