Socialism fails again. This time in South America.

[unbeliever]

Argentina socialist?

http://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/082515/argentina-socialist-country.asp

 

It's worth remembering at this point that we are still experiencing the aftermath of one of the greatest ever failures of capitalism, or at least the greatest failure since 1929: the global crash of 2008

 

No system is perfect.

 

This was a serious problem, but hardly a total failure.

Were the shelves empty of food?

Did the hospitals run out of basic medicine.

Did inflation make your pay all but worthless?

 

It's also worth remembering that mis-regulation played a large part in it.

There was a lot of regulation, so the banks were not under-regulated. The regulatory regime provided a lot of perverse incentives.

 

You're quite right to say that no system is perfect. Socialism aspires to be perfect. Capitalism has no such delusions. It's designed to work in an imperfect world with imperfect people. That's why it endures.

 

You're saying Argentina doesn't count. I find that unconvincing, but still you make no similar comment about Venezuela. If you did, I think you'd be at odds with Mr Corbyn.

Edited December 9, 2015 by unbeliever

[I1L2T3]

This was a serious problem, but hardly a total failure.

Were the shelves empty of food?

Did the hospitals run out of basic medicine.

Did inflation make your pay all but worthless?

 

It's also worth remembering that mis-regulation played a large part in it.

There was a lot of regulation, so the banks were not under-regulated. The regulatory regime provided a lot of perverse incentives.

 

You're quite right to say that no system is perfect. Socialism aspires to be perfect. Capitalism has no such delusions. It's designed to work in an imperfect world with imperfect people. That's why it endures.

 

You're saying Argentina doesn't count. I find that unconvincing, but still you make no similar comment about Venezuela. If you did, I think you'd be at odds with Mr Corbyn.

 

I'm not saying Argentina isn't inclined to socialism. I posted an article to a respected financial site that suggests your case may be over-stated.

 

Venezuela, you may have a case, but that was a lunatic one-off driven by an insane personality cult. Corbyn has no such ambition and his policies are nothing like Chavez's. To compare is a bit over the top.

 

Capitalism did fail in 2008, to an extent. Posner's book gives a superb insight into what went wrong. Worth a read!

[unbeliever]

I'm not saying Argentina isn't inclined to socialism. I posted an article to a respected financial site that suggests your case may be over-stated.

 

Venezuela, you may have a case, but that was a lunatic one-off driven by an insane personality cult. Corbyn has no such ambition and his policies are nothing like Chavez's. To compare is a bit over the top.

 

Capitalism did fail in 2008, to an extent. Posner's book gives a superb insight into what went wrong. Worth a read!

 

To an extent, you may have a point about the financial crisis, but not on anything like the scale what's happened in Latin America.

 

Venezuela was hardly a one-off. North Korea, USSR, Zimbabwe, the list is endless and the pattern of failure consistent.

Socialism requires the state to become too large. The balance of power between the state and the people is destroyed. It fails because it must.

 

Corbyn's own words show his support for the Venezuelan model. It doesn't seem plausible that his goals are as modest as you suggest.

Edited December 9, 2015 by unbeliever

[999tigger]

Did capitalism ever fail?

 

#justaskin

 

This is a good point.

 

How many countries are there in SA?

 

How many capitalist and how many left wing or subscrive to socialism?

China, Norway?

[unbeliever]

This is a good point.

 

How many countries are there in SA?

 

How many capitalist and how many left wing or subscrive to socialism?

China, Norway?

 

China took off when it started converting to capitalism.

Norway is insanely rich in oil and practises only very mild socialism.

[999tigger]

China took off when it started converting to capitalism.

Norway is insanely rich in oil and practises only very mild socialism.

 

They are still socialist countries though.

 

When is a socialist country not a socialist country?

 

Back to Mlars point of how many countries fail the voters with capitalism?

[Bob Arctor]

Socialism means making the state more powerful. Power corrupts.

 

That's such a simplified definition of Socialism as to be not much use. One of the key points of Socialism is 'social ownership' of the means of production and either the removal of the concept of profit or the equal sharing of profit among all. It does involve making the state more powerful, but it is quite possible to have an enlarged state managing a capitalist economy (usually badly). Capitalism, Socialism and Communism are all fundamentally economic models of production and are about the relation of workers to what they produce.

 

It's quite common, particularly in South America, to have Socialists or "Socialists" in office but presiding over an economy that is capitalist. I don't believe there is any Socialist economy anywhere in the world.

[unbeliever]

They are still socialist countries though.

 

When is a socialist country not a socialist country?

 

Back to Mlars point of how many countries fail the voters with capitalism?

 

On the scale of Venezuela, Argentina, North Korea and Zimbabwe? I can't think of any.

Let them down at all? Every country at one time or another.

 

---------- Post added 09-12-2015 at 18:15 ----------

 

That's such a simplified definition of Socialism as to be not much use. One of the key points of Socialism is 'social ownership' of the means of production and either the removal of the concept of profit or the equal sharing of profit among all. It does involve making the state more powerful, but it is quite possible to have an enlarged state managing a capitalist economy (usually badly). Capitalism, Socialism and Communism are all fundamentally economic models of production and are about the relation of workers to what they produce.

 

It's quite common, particularly in South America, to have Socialists or "Socialists" in office but presiding over an economy that is capitalist. I don't believe there is any Socialist economy anywhere in the world.

 

 

Then there is no capitalist economy anywhere in the world as that would imply an absence of government.

It's all relative. The point is that when you do good sounding statist things that Corbyn and his ilk like such as nationalising industries and introducing price controls, it all ends in tears. That's what Venezuela and Argentina have just learned the hard way.

[Bob Arctor]

This was a serious problem, but hardly a total failure.

Were the shelves empty of food?

Did the hospitals run out of basic medicine.

Did inflation make your pay all but worthless?

 

It's also worth remembering that mis-regulation played a large part in it.

There was a lot of regulation, so the banks were not under-regulated. The regulatory regime provided a lot of perverse incentives.

 

 

2007/8 was very nearly a critical failure. Many investment bankers will tell you that the entire global banking system came very close to disintegrating, some say it was hours away. What saved it was intervention and financial guarantees from governments - the State! Including in the UK and the US. We nearly did run out of food and basic medicine. It would have been horrendous.

 

I would be interested to know which regulations were 'mis-regulations'. From what I've read, the problem was that the investment banks invested in hedge funds and the rest of the shadow banking sector specifically to circumvent the Basel II set of banking regulations, which looks very much like under-regulation.

 

---------- Post added 09-12-2015 at 18:24 ----------

 

On the scale of Venezuela, Argentina, North Korea and Zimbabwe? I can't think of any.

Let them down at all? Every country at one time or another.

 

---------- Post added 09-12-2015 at 18:15 ----------

 

 

 

Then there is no capitalist economy anywhere in the world as that would imply an absence of government.

 

I don't know where you get that idea from, no-one thinks that. No disrespect, I think you have some basic economics reading to do.

[unbeliever]

2007/8 was very nearly a critical failure. Many investment bankers will tell you that the entire global banking system came very close to disintegrating, some say it was hours away. What saved it was intervention and financial guarantees from governments - the State! Including in the UK and the US. We nearly did run out of food and basic medicine. It would have been horrendous.

 

I would be interested to know which regulations were 'mis-regulations'. From what I've read, the problem was that the investment banks invested in hedge funds and the rest of the shadow banking sector specifically to circumvent the Basel II set of banking regulations, which looks very much like under-regulation.

 

There was a lot of regulation. The book of regulations would have been hard to lift.

There were 2 big problems. 1. Capital ratios. The banks were allowed to become over-leveraged. 2. The state in the UK and US actively encouraged the banks to give mortgages to people who would not normally qualify.

When problem 2 exploded, the banks were unable to cope because of problem 1.

 

The bail-out was unnecessary. The states could have bailed out depositors and let the weak banks fail.

 

---------- Post added 09-12-2015 at 18:37 ----------

 

I don't know where you get that idea from, no-one thinks that. No disrespect, I think you have some basic economics reading to do.

 

If true socialism means that everything is collectivised, then true capitalism means that nothing is.