On the thoughts of our countries...
k, so after learning from the BBC personality test that I'm a big thinker, I guess I should start to act like one. :)
I was posting a comment to my buddy Dan's blog, and it turned out to be a full post for myself, so I'll throw it up here. First, read his post on his thoughts on Capatalism in America and where it has gone/where it is going.
After reading his questions and ideas: here's my thoughts...
I've definitely toyed with the idea of a socialism/capatalism hybrid, but I think I have come to the conclusion that it is not sustainable. If the hybrid were to exist, they would have to exist on different scales (which, I suppose, is what Canada is trying to acheive). The biggest problem I see is that fundamentaly, capitalism is required to promote growth, the bottom line, profits at every quarter. Socialist programs (ie Canada's health care system) is designed to continually be at a loss, monetarily.
The discrepancy between this 'constant growth' and 'constant loss' may come in the social/intellectual benefits that a social program would promote.
Let's take education: as much as it costs the government billions per year to make sure the program functions properly, and all it's citizens are educated, the benefits from this 'monetary loss' is hopefully made up by an intelligent, well-educated population, which could turn around and make wiser choices regarding their country, giving a greater 'worth' to the system that capatalism alone would have spent more money on to acheive.
The key to this is something that is starting to be seen in Canada, and very rarely in America: social responsibility. Living in Europe, I have heard this term alot, and it really is essential for this hybrid to exist. Everyone must understand that they are not just an individual amongst the masses (which we are), but a key in a larger movement of people. You see it here with general attitudes of one person towards another. Every action is preceded by a simple thought: "what if everyone took this same action, what would the larger ramifications be?". Often, considering the masses, and considering the self are, in fact, two completely different choices.
But I am still not convinced that a hybrid such as this can survive sustainably. There is always underlying factors, that rants such as this cannot take into account. Chaotic factors that can balloon out of control and destroy any or all of the initial dream.
But my original suggestion would have to be to try having a socialist government (although I see true socialism as having no government, similar to anarchism), while trying to maintain a capatalist way of life for the individual. This, of course, has already been tried in countries such as Canada, Sweeden, Finland, Germany, a few other European countries, and recently, Venezuela. Having talked personally to citizens from all these countries, there is one predominant thought...it can't keep itself going.
For social programs to be funded monetarily, the cash has to come from somewhere, taxes. In Sweeden and Finland, for example, the tax rate is so high that no one has the opportunity to enjoy the commodities that, say, Americans, get to enjoy. It worked for some time, but is starting to crumble in amongst itself. Venezuela, with their leader, Chavez, has these ideas for the country, but is way too poor to keep these programs available and reasonable. They have oil money, but extremely impovershed masses. This case is one I did not know about until personally talking to an intelligent Venezuelen exchange student here .
I guess this is one issue that really cannot be resolved by debating alone, and may seem to be showing to fail over time in practice. Any comments from anyone? This is a topic that I feel everyone should have some opinion on, as it will someday affect each and everyone of our live's directly.
Ciao
I was posting a comment to my buddy Dan's blog, and it turned out to be a full post for myself, so I'll throw it up here. First, read his post on his thoughts on Capatalism in America and where it has gone/where it is going.
After reading his questions and ideas: here's my thoughts...
I've definitely toyed with the idea of a socialism/capatalism hybrid, but I think I have come to the conclusion that it is not sustainable. If the hybrid were to exist, they would have to exist on different scales (which, I suppose, is what Canada is trying to acheive). The biggest problem I see is that fundamentaly, capitalism is required to promote growth, the bottom line, profits at every quarter. Socialist programs (ie Canada's health care system) is designed to continually be at a loss, monetarily.
The discrepancy between this 'constant growth' and 'constant loss' may come in the social/intellectual benefits that a social program would promote.
Let's take education: as much as it costs the government billions per year to make sure the program functions properly, and all it's citizens are educated, the benefits from this 'monetary loss' is hopefully made up by an intelligent, well-educated population, which could turn around and make wiser choices regarding their country, giving a greater 'worth' to the system that capatalism alone would have spent more money on to acheive.
The key to this is something that is starting to be seen in Canada, and very rarely in America: social responsibility. Living in Europe, I have heard this term alot, and it really is essential for this hybrid to exist. Everyone must understand that they are not just an individual amongst the masses (which we are), but a key in a larger movement of people. You see it here with general attitudes of one person towards another. Every action is preceded by a simple thought: "what if everyone took this same action, what would the larger ramifications be?". Often, considering the masses, and considering the self are, in fact, two completely different choices.
But I am still not convinced that a hybrid such as this can survive sustainably. There is always underlying factors, that rants such as this cannot take into account. Chaotic factors that can balloon out of control and destroy any or all of the initial dream.
But my original suggestion would have to be to try having a socialist government (although I see true socialism as having no government, similar to anarchism), while trying to maintain a capatalist way of life for the individual. This, of course, has already been tried in countries such as Canada, Sweeden, Finland, Germany, a few other European countries, and recently, Venezuela. Having talked personally to citizens from all these countries, there is one predominant thought...it can't keep itself going.
For social programs to be funded monetarily, the cash has to come from somewhere, taxes. In Sweeden and Finland, for example, the tax rate is so high that no one has the opportunity to enjoy the commodities that, say, Americans, get to enjoy. It worked for some time, but is starting to crumble in amongst itself. Venezuela, with their leader, Chavez, has these ideas for the country, but is way too poor to keep these programs available and reasonable. They have oil money, but extremely impovershed masses. This case is one I did not know about until personally talking to an intelligent Venezuelen exchange student here .
I guess this is one issue that really cannot be resolved by debating alone, and may seem to be showing to fail over time in practice. Any comments from anyone? This is a topic that I feel everyone should have some opinion on, as it will someday affect each and everyone of our live's directly.
Ciao
posted by SunPowered at
9:37 AM
1 Comments:
good post man! I enjoy these kinds od threads tho I think people are afraid to put their opinions for fear of being impolite or having it seen as a personal attack. I personnaly think that's nuts. If you can't share your opinions with your friends you might as well build a time machine and travel to a more oppressed/censored era because your mind is wasting our "freedom of expression" society's ressources.
Chavez and Venezuela are a truly fascinating example. It is true that most of the country is quite poor, but that's mainly due to the elites having kept all of the oil wealth for themselves. They are among the top 5 oil exporters of the world, but most of their population lives in poverty by our standards. However, Chavez is beginning to change this. He was elected by a non-apathetic lower class and is literally a hero to most of the country - except of course the elite as well as the USA (he has raised the price of oil). He is reinvesting the oil wealth into social programs and is attempting to reduce the disparity that exists between the haves and the have-nots in Venezuela. Many things have happened there in the last 5 years: He drafted a new constitution, held a referendum on the constitution, won 3 elections and was kidnapped in a US-backed coup (later reinstalled by his loyal army). It is amazing that he is as popular as he is, considering that his only access to the media is through a 1 hour weekly radio broadcast all while the mainstream media (run by the elite) continues their propaganda campaign against him. It was funny when Pat Robertson said that Chavez should be assasinated because “he poses a significant threat to America”. There really is no excuse for that kind of stupidity in a grown man. Chavez has no history of warfare nor of any other kind of violence. He is a diplomatic President who is an international player (he could maybe exercise a bit more tact at times – especially with respect to America, but they did try to oust him so I would be pissed too!). The only possible threat to America which Robertson can seriously mean is the threat that Americans will have to pay more for their oil. I don’t know, but that doesn’t seem like a threat worthy of assassination. Fucking stupidity. And to make things even worse for slutface Robertson’s case is that Chavez has recently secured plans to provide cheap oil to lower class America. For fuck sake’s Robertson, he is probably doing more for your country than your own “no-talent ass-clown” of a president; educate that wasted evangelical mind of yours before you open your mouth.
Perhaps this post has been a bit off topic from our initial qualms about capitalism and socialism, but fuck it, it’s not like there are rules to this.
Cheers
Dano
By
Dano, at 6:29 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home