Stalin called his party the Communist party because he did not want to be associated with the existing socialist parties. They were not socialist enough for him so he wanted to set his own party apart. Socialism and communism are synonyms.
You are right, there are a lot of socialist parties around the world and they can significantly differ one from another. Communist party was just USSR version of socialism. As you know its ideology had a lot of drawbacks and offering this model unchanged again is stupid. Also with the word "socialist" many people associate modern welfare states (which are even worse than USSR's model IMHO). To remove ambiguity, I prefer to use words "capitalism"/"free market" and "planned economy". |
|
|
|
|
@gts476, the term "socialism" (Marxism) typically describes state ownership on the means of production combined with planned economy, however communism assumes elimination of the money altogether (i.e. everyone can take everything without have to work). Also, good luck to you fighting back desperate unemployed crowd, stupid insane libertarian!
|
|
|
|
But having a planned economy means that I will not have my free will to do what I want, the time I want and for who I want.
In other word pure slavery, if that happen, I would quickly dive into the black market for trading my skill.
Most likely countries with planned economies won't repeat USSR's mistake in the future and grant you no-return exit visa. It's better to lose 1 non-loyal man than to fight 1 enemy on own territory. Also, a free market have all the information it needs to adapt itself. Even if temporary disturbance to equilibrium are felt, a planned economy in an excel spreadsheet would miss most of the information and would make disturbance even wider.
State-wide information system (e.g. Cybersyn) will collect and process all information needed. You should read this book: http://ricardo.ecn.wfu.edu/~cottrell/socialism_book/However, I don't agree with the premise (the graph).
Even if machine are autonomous, in the meaning that they don't need to be maintained, or can be automatically replaced, we would have jobs.
The invention of trucks have not create lots of job for car repairers.
You, as many other people, miss the total number of jobs destroyed vs jobs created. A machine can't adapt itself to the market condition and to the human knowledge that keep expanding, and never will.
Universal robots like Baxter which can be easily reprogrammed to perform another task will completely crush your argument! So many communists here, wtf bitches, THIS IS BITCOIN!
I don't think so. Socialism ≠ Communism! |
|
|
|
I remember reading about computers replacing bankers... That doesn't seem to have happened so far.  Past performance does not guarantee future performance. |
|
|
|
Capitalism will evnetually collapse. Automatization is very real and more and more jobs are going to be pushed out of market, leaving thousands and millions of people unemployed for LIFE. Have fun dealing with that.
Why is it then, since tractors where invented, and other automation of fields that destroyed agriculture jobs, people always found jobs ? I want your reason. Explained very well in this thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=318001.0 |
|
|
|
I live in Finland, which is one of the most socialistic countries in the world, along with other scandinavian countries.
Finland and other Scandinavian countries have so called "capitalist socialism", i.e. a market economy and private entrepreneurship combined with high taxes and welfare. True socialism is completely different and assumes planned economy with state-owned enterprises. Socialism is evil and hurts the average working person the most.
I would completely agree that Scandinavian "capitalist socialism" ("welfare state") is the worst system ever existed! But a version of socialism with planned economy is completely different and can be suitable for some people who simply will never fit into market system. |
|
|
|
Can anyone recommend some good books on this topic, Im really interested in what are predictions by people from economic and technological circles, about the coming robotization of everything, also people working on AI believe we will get there in our life time. AI will bring bigger revolution than internet.
For solutions, right-wingers should read Martin Ford's "Lights in the tunnel" and socialists of course Karl Marx's "Capital". |
|
|
|
The only way to solve this mess is redistribution of wealth, it doesnt take being a rocket scientist.
Why would people who earn it the hard way want to give away their money? Why a mother would care her children and spend resources on them absolutely for free?!!! |
|
|
|
In a world where technology is increasingly replacing human power, there are more and more manpower that is not needed.
...
good way to decrease poverty would be to implement rule of regulating birth rate, similar what china has.
Birth rate control will have catastrophic consequences in long term (due to skewing of the young and old people ratio)! Even Chinese govt understand this and cancelled "One child family" laws. Also low birth rate won't change average IQ of these children born, therefore technological unemployment will increase even if population drop by factor 10. |
|
|
|
Anyone who is saying Capitalism is just silly that's the system which is currently in place within most countries and it is working? so how can you argue that it will work if it isn't working as of now?
In many EU countries capitalism works VERY VERY BAD!!! |
|
|
|
I think it would really need to be one or the other. Socialism and Capitalism are really not compatible with each other. Some would likely say that they are polar opposites of each-other.
Absolutely true! Mixed economy welfare states will definitely fail on the long run. Look at the EU now and compare it's economic performance to the "more capitalist" U.S., Hong Kong, Singapore, New Zealand, Taiwan. Capital owners will simply fly away from the countries with high welfare(=tax) burden. Therefore at some moment in the future only minarchic capitalist and pure socialist (Marxist) states will exist. And no one between them! |
|
|
|
Hypotheticals are not useful. I concern myself with what is possible now, not far into the future.
I would say it is possible using current technology level. As more libertarians will cry "human nature" the faster leftist biohackers will find a solution!  Several problems with this. First, automation leads to unemployment. A factory that once employed hundreds of people can now be run by robots and a few overseers and a repair crew. This would not be a problem if the reduced costs and increased profits were passed on to the formerly employed, but this is not the case. Rising overall production does not necessarily lead to a higher standard of living for the average person.
Second, a man without some form of work is a social pariah. Especially one living in a western nation who is forced to move in with someone else. It's another factor in why the fertility levels are dropping and the increasing levels of dysfunction in society. We don't need more productivity as much as we need employment, even if the overall national production falls as a result.
Technological unemployment problem is a redistribution issue. In the state with citizen's ownership on means of production (i.e. socialist-Marxist one) low birth rates and high productivity growth will offset each other. |
|
|
|
The solution is not to get rid of greed. Because greed is not a problem, and it's not possible anyway.
Are you really sure that greed cannot be eliminated in principle (even counting technology advancements in the future)? Can you bet your own Bitcoins to protect this argument? A welfare state that depends on taking money from those who work and giving it to those who do not requires a constant influx of young taxpayers, and we do not have it. Every western nation will collapse as a result of this. That's the problem we need to find a solution to, and there are only two ways. Either we need to have more kids, or we need to dismantle the welfare system. There are no other ways out at this point.
Population decrease is not a problem while growth of productivity (automation and robotics) offset it. |
|
|
|
|
@Nicolas Dorier, you repeat a common fallacy ignoring the total number of jobs automated vs pittance of new intellectual positions created.
|
|
|
|
Socialists want to see profits too. The difference is long term or short term profits. Libertarians only care about immediate profits. This is false, libertarian protects the self-interest of human nature. Immediate profit is not always good for your Self-interest. You libertarians should be more quiet when mentioning "human nature" to protect your ideas! Just because it must be not in your interests to provoke leftist biohackers! |
|
|
|
That's probably plausible but any sane person/people should reject this.
When tech unemployment will hit hard desperate masses will simply pitchfork this "sane" person! |
|
|
|
I don't believe this will be an issue. The economy will need to restructure, but overall technological advanced benefit the economy. As costs are reduced in the industries in which labor is replaced by machines, resources will be freed up for new markets.
Your argument is known as "Luddite fallacy" and have been discussed many times in this thread. Unfortunately for you, there is no law of physics saying it will last forever! Honestly, both of your proposals are horrible. Both will hurt the market and cause dead-weight loss in addition to making government more powerful and invasive.
No action will have much worse effect! If labor was completely replaced by machines, which is unlikely, then maybe a guaranteed income would be appropriate.
You don't need 100% automation to destroy capitalist economy. I think just 20% of permanent unemployment will be enough! |
|
|
|
Send me 100 people with anything but bows, and I will send you a tank.
You can't produce as efficiently as in a capitalist country. At this point, war is not about number but about technology.
You are right about technology, but absolutely wrong about type of economy! USSR had comparable military technology level to the U.S. (and even exceeded in some areas). Also modern weapons will be available almost to everyone when metal 3D-printers will become more advanced and cheaper. Size of army again will have big importance. Anyway, if the capitalist country lacks labor, its door are open to buy it from outside. There is nothing to protect anyway. (No welfare)
Mercenaries always fight less passionately than idea-motivated people! |
|
|
|
Socialist country don't usually do a good job of raising children. Teachers do not really care if they do a good job or not. And the education system do not have accountability.
Scandinavian countries are not purely socialist, but rather close to this term in areas of child support and education. And contrary to your opinion, in most ratings these countries took top positions. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
