The Rich get richer, much richer1

[Cyclone]

They all failed. If it were a subset, you could put it down to bad politicians. It's all of them, so it's a bad idea.

 

 

 

Capitalism goes through trouble. Usually because socialists mess with it. But it is largely immune to meltdown.

 

Some socialist ideas are absolutely vital to moderate the excesses of capitalism. Unemployment benefit, workers rights, etc...

[tinfoilhat]

Are there any countries that are 100% capitalist?

 

I am not a socialist, I just see your views as blinkered.

 

Denmark has a wide range of welfare benefits that they offer their citizens. They also have the highest taxes in the world.

 

Well, come 2020 (if corbyn is still in charge) we'll find out if the country wants a high taxation socialist utopia. I suspect it won't.

[unbeliever]

Some socialist ideas are absolutely vital to moderate the excesses of capitalism. Unemployment benefit, workers rights, etc...

 

Quite so.

But by historical standards we're very socialist already. The state being almost half of the economy.

The big question is how much socialism our economy can tolerate. And I think somewhere before that, how much socialism actually serves the greater good.

 

Clearly with zero socialism, those who are not productive would starve. That's no good. With too much, those who are most productive are lost, so that's no good either.

My own view is that we already have more socialism in the UK than serves the greater good. A targeted reduction in socialist activity would benefit everybody.

Nothing too dramatic and no great rush though, as that's how you end up hurting people who are genuinely trying their best,

[banjodeano]

Denmark is a Hamlet (geddit?) In that its tiny. Population same as Birmingham. You cannot use it as an example of anything, its too small.

 

---------- Post added 18-05-2016 at 13:32 ----------

 

 

Capitalism works, can be a bit mean and nasty sometimes but thats life.

 

Socialism can never work, it defies human nature.

well .....

https://www.quora.com/How-did-Norway-become-so-rich-despite-being-a-socialist-country

[unbeliever]

well .....

https://www.quora.com/How-did-Norway-become-so-rich-despite-being-a-socialist-country

 

I don't need that. I know why Norway is rich. They have a shed load of oil.

[tinfoilhat]

I don't need that. I know why Norway is rich. They have a shed load of oil.

 

And interestingly enough, venezuela also has lots of oil and is very very socialist.

 

Its also very very screwed at the moment. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-36318553

[unbeliever]

And interestingly enough, venezuela also has lots of oil and is very very socialist.

 

Its also very very screwed at the moment. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-36318553

 

The richer you are, the more socialism you can get away with.

Venezuela, went too far.

Norway will be in trouble once they've spent their oil money.

[El Cid]

But by historical standards we're very socialist already. The state being almost half of the economy.

The big question is how much socialism our economy can tolerate. And I think somewhere before that, how much socialism actually serves the greater good.

 

 

Any local business can tender for ANY local authority run service; seen as much of local services are run in a socialist way, that means that they must easily compete with the private sector.

Both public and private work, it all depends on the competence of the people drawing up the contracts.

[unbeliever]

Any local business can tender for ANY local authority run service; seen as much of local services are run in a socialist way, that means that they must easily compete with the private sector.

Both public and private work, it all depends on the competence of the people drawing up the contracts.

 

Government mandated and tax-funded, but contracted back out to a business. That's not private sector.

[I1L2T3]

Quite so.

But by historical standards we're very socialist already. The state being almost half of the economy.

The big question is how much socialism our economy can tolerate. And I think somewhere before that, how much socialism actually serves the greater good.

 

Clearly with zero socialism, those who are not productive would starve. That's no good. With too much, those who are most productive are lost, so that's no good either.

My own view is that we already have more socialism in the UK than serves the greater good. A targeted reduction in socialist activity would benefit everybody.

Nothing too dramatic and no great rush though, as that's how you end up hurting people who are genuinely trying their best,

 

State spending does not equal socialism.

 

And what do you mean by zero socialism?

 

And aren't you just lazily using socialism as a bucket term for things you don't like? Looks like it.