MLM Directory

How many of you really know what Socialism is?

Also known as Marxism. Following is an excerpt from Wikipedia. Health care reform (by Obamas Definition), etc is socialism at its finest. Read below and tell me why you want to vote for Obama. [edit] Socialism as an economic system See also: Socialist economics Economically, socialism denotes an economic system of state ownership and / or worker ownership of the means of production and distribution. In the U.S.S.R., state ownership of the means of production was combined with central planning – what goods and services to make and provide, how they were to be produced, the quantities, and the sale prices (cf. Economy of the Soviet Union). Soviet economic planning was an alternative to allowing the market (supply and demand) to determine prices and production. During the Great Depression, socialists considered Soviet-style planned economies the remedy to Capitalism's inherent flaws – monopoly, business cycles, unemployment, unequally distributed wealth, and the economic exploitation of workers. In the West, neoclassical liberal economists, e.g. Friedrich Hayek and Milton Friedman, said that socialist planned economies would fail, because planners could not have the business information inherent to a market economy (cf. economic calculation problem), nor would managers in Soviet-style socialist economies match the motivation of profit. Consequent to Soviet economic stagnation in the 1970s and 1980s, socialists began to accept parts of their critique. Polish economist Oskar Lange, an early proponent of "market socialism", proposed a Central Planning Board establishing prices and controls of investment. The prices of producer goods would be determined through trial and error. The prices of consumer goods would be determined by supply and demand, with the supply coming from state-owned firms that would set their prices equal to the marginal cost, as in perfectly competitive markets. The Central Planning Board would distribute a "social dividend" to ensure reasonable income equality.[53] In Western Europe, particularly in the period after World War II, many socialist parties in government implemented what became known as mixed economies.[54] These governments nationalised major and economically vital industries while permitting a free market to continue in the rest. These were most often monopolistic or infrastructural industries like mail, railways, power and other utilities. In some instances a number of small, competing and often relatively poorly financed companies in the same sector were nationalised to form one government monopoly for the purpose of competent management, of economic rescue (in the UK, British Leyland, Rolls Royce), or of competing on the world market.[55] Typically, this was achieved through compulsory purchase of the industry (i.e. with compensation). For example in the UK the nationalization of the coal mines in 1947 created a coal board charged with running the coal industry commercially so as to be able to meet the interest payable on the bonds which the former mine owners' shares had been converted into.[56][57] These nationalized industries would frequently be combined with Keynesian economics and incomes policies in order to guide the entire economy (see indicative planning and dirigisme).[58] Nevertheless, most economists, and many socialists, consider that these economies were (or are) capitalist economies, and the aspirations of those who believed the mixed economy would abolish boom and slump, mass unemployment, and industrial unrest, were disappointed with the onset of the first world wide recession of 1973–4, the oil crisis of this period, and the monetary instability which followed. Some far left socialists, as well as some workers in the nationalised industries, also criticised the nationalisations for not establishing workers' control of the nationalised industries, through elected representatives, and the amount of compensation paid to the previous owners. Some socialists propose various decentralized, worker-managed economic systems. One such system is the "cooperative economy," a largely free market economy in which workers manage the firms and democratically determine remuneration levels and labor divisions. Productive resources would be legally owned by the cooperative and rented to the workers, who would enjoy usufruct rights.[59] Another, more recent, variant is "participatory economics," wherein the economy is planned by decentralized councils of workers and consumers. Workers would be remunerated solely according to effort and sacrifice, so that those engaged in dangerous, uncomfortable, and strenuous work would receive the highest incomes and could thereby work less.[60] Some Marxists and Anarcho-communists also propose a worker managed economy based on workers councils, however unlike participatory economics in Anarcho communism workers are remunerated according to their needs (which are largely self determined in an anarcho communist system Justagirl....obviously you didn't study as hard as you might have.

Public Comments

1. Very few. People are still living in the Cold War days and some would have you arrested for even discussing it.
2. The plan john mccain announced last night during the debate, to have the US government buy $300 BILLION worth of bad mortgages is socialism, as was the bailout bill last week. And conservatives claim socialism is "bad".
3. Well, I was prepared to give you props until you wrote "also known as Marxism." As someone with a degree in history, I'm here to tell you, they are not the same thing. And I suggest you return to Wikipedia and do some more reading. Better yet, get thee to the nearest library. Edit: LOL! You’re cute. Here, this should get you started. "Socialism, as envisioned by Marx and Engels was, ideally, a where everyone would share the benefits of industrialization. Workers would do better than in the English system at the time (The Communist Manifesto was published in 1848) because there were more workers than bosses and the majority would rule. As a purely economic system, socialism is a lousy way to run a large scale economy. Socialism is not a political system, it's a way of distributing goods and services. At their ideal implementation, socialism and laissez faire capitalism will be identical as everyone will produce exactly what's needed for exactly who needs it. In practice, both work sometimes in microeconomic conditions but fail miserably when applied to national and international economies. And they fail for the same reason: Human pervserity. Too many people don't like to play fair, and both systems only work when everyone follow the same rules. Socialism is liberal. More people (preferably everyone) have some say in how the economy works. Democracy is liberal. More people (preferably everyone) have some say in how the government works. "Democracy," said Marx, "is the road to socialism." He was wrong about how economics and politics interact, but he did see their similar underpinnings. Communism is conservative. Fewer and fewer people (preferably just the Party Secretary) have any say in how the economy works. Republicans are conservative. Fewer and fewer people (preferably just people controlling the Party figurehead) have any say in how the government works. The conservatives in the US are in the same position as the communists in the 30s, and for the same reason: Their revolutions failed spectacularly but they refuse to admit what went wrong. A common mistake is to confuse Socialism, the economic system, with Communism, the political system. Communists are "socialist" in the same way that Republicans are "compassionate conservatives". That is, they give lip service to ideals they have no intention of practicing." http://www.romm.org/soc_com.html
4. Other forms of socialism; Medicare Fire Departments Armed Services Police What do you think taxes pay for?
5. Thanks for the history lesson, now make your point how is Socialism and Obama's health care related?
6. I know what all of them are being I have a degree in business management and another in secondary education/Social Studies both which required economics courses. Many people do know what it is but socialist often get defensive and throw out the "you dont even know what socialism is" line. If you are a socialist be proud of it and stop being defensive, not everyone has to agree with you
7. You`re really deep. Socialism means simply put: Ironing flat of the social/economic differences as far as possible. It`s like fair sharing of all things. Now suppose that you lived in a neighborhood where things were owned/shared by all members there, tools for gardenwork etc. What do you think would happen to those tools? They`d be embezzled for sure. Materialism runs deep in humankind.