Watching a socialism for dummies lecture on jewtube.
But I have some questions.
What happens if the state provides services for poor people, like in state capitalist countries like china but those are so poor people can be hired and have a job, a basic income making the goods and services they will later buy.
What happens if next to those public sector there's also a normal private sector, like any normal capitalist country?
Has anyone tried this in history?
>What happens if next to those public sector there's also a normal private sector, like any normal capitalist country?
That's called fascism, and it worked for Italy before the Nazis invaded Russia and declared war on the US.
can we do it again?
>hired and have a job, a basic income making the goods and services they will later buy.
If you mean hired and get a job like you would be hired for a job today in the western world then it's not socialism.
>What happens if next to those public sector there's also a normal private sector, like any normal capitalist country?
It would be called Socialist Market Economy and that's exactly what China does. It's also not socialism at all.
Hopefully.
It's just an idea I was thinking about.
>China does it
It's there a youtube video explaining china system?
Seems like china mixes both systems ideas, right?
I don't know about a youtube video but the Wikipedia page is pretty concise.
en.wikipedia.org
>Seems like china mixes both systems ideas, right?
Not really, it's just capitalism with a massive public-sector. Socialism isn't just anything the government does, it's worker control of the means of production which simply does not happen in China.
You need a social market economy, I.e Germany.
I wouldn't bother giving the unemployed any old job, pay for their education so they have a better chance of finding one normally. Few regulations, but enough taxes to pay for the unemployed/disabled etc.
I never meant true socialism.
I hate socialism, but some of the ideals seems good.
I would like for capitalism to apply the good socialist ideas.
>inb4 that's social democracy
I was talking those public sector gives shitty jobs to unqualified poor people like farming or cleaning dishes or cleaning parks.
>I was talking those public sector gives shitty jobs to unqualified poor people like farming or cleaning dishes or cleaning parks.
That's simply not possible in the western world.
There are too many people and too few meaningful jobs so the capitalist system needs bullshit jobs to sustain itself and drive consumption. The fact that unqualified poor people get stuck working the till in Tesco, or working in call centres is a perfectly intentional part of the economy. Whether or not their work is meaningful or even valuable is irrelevant, what matters is they encourage consumption.
It's better to pay them to get educated so they have better chances.
how bout the state providing cheap goods for free to poor people instead of having a welfare state?
Or it's universal income cheaper?
What is a meaningful job?
Might I not find meaning at the tescos till?
It's better to give the poor cash, so they can buy what they feel is the most important, than transfers in kind.
Seems like universal income is the cheaper alternative.
It seems it's already being proposed in some countries.
seems like a cheap solution because it's just printed paper, or just an electronic account in some bank.
where does capitalism with universal income falls on the socialism spectrum?
Well I suppose a meaningful job would be one where you see your effort reflected in your work and come to enjoy it. For instance if you're a gardener and you plant some very nice flowers you can see your work reflected in that.
In most minimum wage jobs like working at Tescos you would never get an opportunity to see the work you've done as the value created through it is abstract and only exists in the consumption furthered by supermarkets. The only time you will ever see that value is when you get paid, and this monetary only concept of value makes the work only valuable so far in as money is the value.
Well the welfare state seems to be working fine as is. If anything it could do with expanding rather than being restructured if we're to remain within a capitalist system.
Just giving poor people money is ultimately more beneficial to a capitalist economy as they can decide their own allocation of resources whilst also being an important part of the economy as a consumer, just rationing them goods is Soviet-tier and probably wouldn't work very well.
Welfare capitalism.
Capitalism with universal income/negative income tax/welfare state isn't part of socialism.
I personally see a universal income/negative income tax as the justification for private property, since no one worked for the base value of land, the price of ownership ( of land, essentially rent owed to the community) ought to be a land value tax the revenue of which could be used to fund education for the poor/money for the disabled.
en.m.wikipedia.org
You don't want to be printing paper/electronic stuff too much as that will lead to inflation. It's not a bad idea atm since we have low growth ( increasing money supply has a short term boost on demand ).
But what if I find my conversations with old ladies doing their shopping meaningful?
Generally if a job is crap then wages will go up, but with the tills lots of young people looking for some money on top of what their parents give them enter, and it doesn't take much skill. Low productivity too.
That's not finding the job itself meaningful, that's finding socialization meaningful.
>Generally if a job is crap then wages will go up
I'm not saying it's the kind of job that no one wants to do but gets paid well because of that like being a binman.
I'm saying it's a bullshit job in reference to the use of the term by Stuart Jefferies
strikemag.org
socialism is for normies
capitalism is for robots
Regular capitalism is for Chads.
Social democracy capitalism is for robots.
Socialism is for normies.
The only socialist I know is the least sociable person I know. Most Normies I know only care about money and are pretty capitalistic.
Yeah but socialism is literally normie-rule. Just because normies are the most easily-convinced by anti-socialist propaganda doesn't mean they don't have the most to gain from it.
>Normies
>Gain from socialism
No
An economics professor at Texas Tech said he had never failed a single student before but had, once, failed an entire class. The class had insisted that socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer. The professor then said ok, we will have an experiment in this class on socialism. All grades would be averaged and everyone would receive the same grade so no one would fail and no one would receive an A.
After the first test the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy. But, as the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too; so they studied little ...
The second Test average was a D! No one was happy. When the 3rd test rolled around the average was an F. The scores never increased as bickering, blame, name calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for anyone else. All failed to their great surprise and the professor told them that socialism would ultimately fail because the harder to succeed the greater the reward but when a government takes all the reward away; no one will try or succeed.
>Democratic control of their workplace
>Not benefiting normies
>Implying the proletariat are not 99% normies.
The only people who can lose from socialism are bourgeois Chads and NEETs.
>Democratic
>Socialism
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
A marine was taking college classes between his deployments to Afghanistan.
One of his courses had a professor that was an atheist and a member of the ACLU. One day the professor shocked everyone by walking into class, looking up and stating "God, if you are real, I want you to come down and knock me off this platform, I will give you 15 minutes.
Several minutes tick by in silence, when the 15 min. time almost expired the Marine gets up from his seat, approaches the professor and punched him in the face knocking him off the platform and out cold. The Marine simply went back to his seat.
The professor came to, visibly shaken and asked the Marine, "What the heck did you do that for?!"
The Marine said, "God was busy protecting America's military who are out protecting your right to say stupid shit like that, so he sent me to fill in."
To be honest democracy isn't really a thing nowadays barring guys like Switzerland.
>Socialism
>Not democratic
Bourgeois shills pls go.
Republican democracies were always the best ones.
A young man working in the army was constantly humiliated because he believed in God. One day the captain wanted to humiliate him before the troops. He called the young man and said: – Young man come here, take the key and go and park the Jeep in front. the young man replied: – I cannot drive! The captain said: – Well then ask for assistance of your God! Show us that He exist!
The young man takes the key and walked to the vehicle and begins to pray…… …He parks the jeep at the place PERFECTLY well as the captain wanted. The young man came out of the jeep and saw them all crying. They all said together: – We want to serve your God!
The young soldier was astonished, and asked what was going on? The CAPTAIN crying opened the hood of the jeep by showing the young man that the car had no engine. Then the boy said: See? This is the God I serve, THE GOD OF IMPOSSIBLE, the God who gives life to what does not exist.
You may think there are things still impossible BUT WITH GOD EVERYTHING IS POSSIBLE.
Eh most of Europe has it fine, America is the place giving it a dreadful name in the West.
Representative democracy is a form of democracy.
>Europe has it fine
No we don't.
Especially not here in Bongland.
Europe has huge lobbies too.
T.Son of lobbyist who worked in europe
>Seems like china mixes both systems ideas, right?
After Deng Xiaoping's reforms, yes. It's run by a nominally Communist power bloc, but the economy is basically market-oriented.
The Chinese economy isn't exactly market-oriented, it's still majority state-controlled and in recent years they've been rolling back privatization. They just use markets in concert with otherwise state capitalist policies.
>They just use markets in concert with otherwise state capitalist policies.
Which is obviously what I meant when I said they had a nominally Communist power bloc in charge.
Woah you mean like a sort of....mixed economy? No I don't think that's ever been tried
>it worked for Italy
CITATION NEEDED
I'm not going to give you any ;^)
Fuck off James, the European Union has an even more democratic system than the retarded archaic shit your country still holds on to.
>European Union
>Democratic
The EU is a literal bourgeois dictatorship.
Even pro-EU dupes have to agree that this shitcan is at least needing of reform.
>more democratic then the UK
Not so fast, I even admitted the UK is not fine at all when it comes to democracy.
>The EU is a literal bourgeois dictatorship.
>t. Brit
Throwing rocks in glass houses.
>Hans Moneyburg cannot read
>Not so fast, I even admitted the UK is not fine at all when it comes to democracy.
-me
>European Union has an even more democratic system
It sure does Schulz, it sure does.
>I even admitted the UK is not fine at all when it comes to democracy.
When? Like 8 posts ago when you were talking with someone else? Well done. But I'm afraid to tell you I don't give a shit, I'm just pointing out how ridiculous it is that a Brit of all people would claim that the EU was undemocratic seeming as you literally come from a country that still uses First Past the Post.
And? The fact that I'm British does not make me logically inconsistent when I'm equally criticizing the EU and the British government for undemocratic practices.
Unless you're some kind of nationalist mouth-breather that thinks everyone must support their own country in every possible way I have no idea why you think it's relevant that I come from the UK.
American here, it's actually an American dictatorship.
You're always present
What the fuck are you straw manning about now you literal autist?
What does any of that have to do with anything?
Your post was:
>>Europe has it fine
>No we don't.
>Especially not here in Bongland.
You specifically mentioned the fact that you're from Britain as if it had anything to do with the level of democracy "people in Europe" have. And then you went on to say that the EU is "literally a bourgeois dictatorship" you hypocrite.
You're the real autist. Britain may not physically be part of your continent, but it's still part of Europe, especially as the UK is a member of the bourgeois dictatorship that is the European Union.
>What happens if next to those public sector there's also a normal private sector, like any normal capitalist country?
That's social democracy.
Fascism takes the central planning from socialism [i.e. the shit part] and mixes it with private property ownership under capitalism. [in factory terms, often the shit part.]
Ideally one would see social democracy with market socialist elements. [i.e. worker co-operatives or state enterprise run for market needs, with political intervention only when necessary. Somewhat similar to the China model, but with far more concern for human wellbeing.]
SNP must've been masturbating to that result all night.
>Labour wishy-washy on PR because it'd hurt them while leaving them Scotland's largest party
>SNP hit 50% and end up taking all but 3 seats, obliterating Labour who should really have got like 20%
>Students had to study to do well.
Fucking plebs the lot of them. They deserved what they got.