|
Nominations and Campaigning for the 2024 RationalWiki Moderator Election are now open |
Essay talk:What is socialism?
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
So, don't you think that it is time to include socialism in the political spectrum ? Toss out the Social Democrats, who never amounted to much and plot socialism there instead? Carptrash 09:52, 3 September 2008 (EDT)
- No, because socialism = communism. -Sρΐяαl.Дгсђıτέςτstand up and shout 14:33, 29 October 2008 (EDT)
- Yeah, it should. Bazer63 (talk)
- Socialism isn't communism... it's a method towards communism. Communism is the utopian sort of world that a socialist would ideally like to see in place... however, a socialist doesn't necessarily expect utopian ideas to become reality. There's a difference between believing that production should be owned by the workers (say... a factory should be owned by the labor union that runs it.) and believing that production should be owned by the government (totalitarianism).
- I think the biggest thing to point out is what the ultimate goal of production is... this is what drives the particular ideologies. In Capitalism, the ultimate goal is profit. So, to a Capitalist the idea that someone shouldn't profit as much as possible from an idea is ludicrous. Likewise, in Socialism (as the SP USA holds it to be) the ultimate goal of production is to satisfy a need. That there is no need for a company to strive to make more profit than it needs. In many ways, holding "profit" as the ultimate goal, results in people taking short term actions that impact long term issues. Such as this whole house-price crash. These banks were targeting out to make as much profit as they possibly could, throwing away mortgages to people, because they were just going to sell that debt to someone else. However, notice that even though all these banks and investment firms are failing, that Credit Unions are doing fine? I wonder why? Oh, that's right... Credit Unions are owned by the members that have money in the bank. Taking actions like giving out bad debts just to sell it off, or buying debt from others just doesn't make sense... it's not necessary to do what they're there to do... which is supply a need (banking) to its members. They didn't get caught up in this profit chase pitfall, because they weren't being capitalistic. --Eira omtg! The Goat be praised. 03:11, 9 December 2008 (EST)
- NZ's government-owned bank also did pretty well by comparison... and now the new centre-right government has a leader who has said he wants to get rid of it... WazzaHello? Is there anybody in there? Just nod if you can hear me... 03:25, 9 December 2008 (EST)
- I think the biggest thing to point out is what the ultimate goal of production is... this is what drives the particular ideologies. In Capitalism, the ultimate goal is profit. So, to a Capitalist the idea that someone shouldn't profit as much as possible from an idea is ludicrous. Likewise, in Socialism (as the SP USA holds it to be) the ultimate goal of production is to satisfy a need. That there is no need for a company to strive to make more profit than it needs. In many ways, holding "profit" as the ultimate goal, results in people taking short term actions that impact long term issues. Such as this whole house-price crash. These banks were targeting out to make as much profit as they possibly could, throwing away mortgages to people, because they were just going to sell that debt to someone else. However, notice that even though all these banks and investment firms are failing, that Credit Unions are doing fine? I wonder why? Oh, that's right... Credit Unions are owned by the members that have money in the bank. Taking actions like giving out bad debts just to sell it off, or buying debt from others just doesn't make sense... it's not necessary to do what they're there to do... which is supply a need (banking) to its members. They didn't get caught up in this profit chase pitfall, because they weren't being capitalistic. --Eira omtg! The Goat be praised. 03:11, 9 December 2008 (EST)