It’s unsustainable in the long run that revolves around short term thinking of immediate profit or gratification. It revolves around military imperialism that endangers the entire planet with the proliferation of nuclear weapons. It revolves around a ridiculous assertion of infinite growth. These are just a couple of reasons why I oppose capitalism.
Bernie Sanders is a Jewish communist and Barack Obama for all his socialist rhetoric was actually a corporatist figure head with a black face.
Wendy, my only thought here is keyed in by the term ‘affordability’ some purist nations in Scandinavia are so prosperous , socially cohesive, that they can offer incredible social guarantees. But the US , a huge multiculturalism seems unlikely to foster specific kinds of social programs as sought for by progressives.
Capitalists focus on creating and inventing things. Zerosum wants to steal things from capitalists which is all socialism is, a negative to subtract from the positive of capitalism.
A capitalist does not want even one regulation, so, therefore, one regulation makes the system socialist and now it’s merely a question of where to draw the line on how much regulation is needed.
Regulations are always for the good of society, not the capitalist.
Capitalism is zero regulation
Socialism is greater than zero, but less than 100% regulation
Fascism and communism are 100% regulated.
If someone wants to argue the definitions, then show me a regulation that benefits the capitalist who believes the free market resolves everything. If that can’t be done, then the definitions stand.
Now, do you want to eat food that is not inspected by the government? No? Then you’re a socialist. So, essentially we are all socialists arguing about just how socialist we ought to be. I doubt anyone is really a capitalist.
So all these arguments based on definitions of what party affiliations we have are basically for political rhetoric, in order to stretch out boring or displaced discussions, right?
No. A capitalist is someone who uses money to make money. A socialist is someone who wants to spend money to make society better. So you can invest and make money, and then build a shelter for the homeless.
State centrally controlled capitalism does argue for a minimum of regulations, it’s only delusional libertarians that argue for a zero regulatory environment.
All socialist governments argue for 100% regulation because as socialists we understand how corruption of private individuals work like with zero oversight, I just call that common sense.
There is this tiresome narrative that socialists are against trade, investments, labor, making money, working, or running businesses. It is all of course completely unfounded.
The caricature that capitalists create for socialists is a ridiculous one.
A socialist is an individual that desires to create a levelled playing field economically in society where all people have the opportunity to succeed in life and where they’re all protected by government equally under law. This is of course much different from capitalists with their exclusive monopolies followed by a belief of exceptional entitlements where they basically don’t give a damn whatsoever about a majority of people. This is why capitalism will fail because when you throw 75% of your population under the bus into ruin it is not a winning strategy of success for society collectively as a whole.
Best chance you have at making society better is to live better yourself. If you don’t think that competition is where the cream rises to the top, then what does cause it? Think about the accumulation of wealth necessary to research cures for disease and to build shelters and to fund programs for those who can’t manage to take care of themselves. Who’s gonna accumulate that wealth? Certainly not a bunch of participation trophy hippies.