Solution to poverty - Socialism or Capitalism?

[twiifm]

Neither.

Probably a regulated Capitalism with progressive tax to avoid exaggeration of inequality

[Ibian]

What still baffles me is that although many Governments has been giving away welfare aids to people below a certain income level, this does not help solve poverty at all.
Poor people can now fulfill their basic needs, but they have now become dependent on the Govt to give them the necessary resources for life. I think this is a gross misallocation of resources which could have been put to better use to create jobs instead of making poor people dependent.
It doesn't take a genius to figure out that this solution is only beneficial in the short run so why is it still being done?

In Denmark less than half the population works. Half their income is taken from them before it even hits their bank accounts and redistributed to those who do not work. It's even worse than that since government employed get their saleries from taxes, and that sector is ever-growing.

Think how it would be if there were no welfare checks. Taxes could be low, maybe 15% instead of 50, wages would go down while actual buying power would go up due to less taxation. Everyone who works would be wealthier, and more people would work out of necessity so the country would be more productive. The only downside is that people who can't or won't work would be worse off, but there is no perfect system. It's really a matter of, do we want a functioning country where the majority benefits or do we want 0% of the population to live in the street?

[zimmah]

What if we all stopped comparing our wealth with others. And only look at how much someone else has to check if that person has enough. And instead of demanding something back for your services, why not share your skills and knowledge with those who need your skills and knowledge? If we humans would care less about ourselves and more about our surrounding, it would solve 99.99% of our problems.

[Ron~Popeil]

What if we all stopped comparing our wealth with others. And only look at how much someone else has to check if that person has enough. And instead of demanding something back for your services, why not share your skills and knowledge with those who need your skills and knowledge? If we humans would care less about ourselves and more about our surrounding, it would solve 99.99% of our problems.

There is a huge difference between human kindness and government mandated redistribution. One makes a better world while the latter is slavery no matter what clever word they use to describe it. 

[cbeast]

What if we all stopped comparing our wealth with others. And only look at how much someone else has to check if that person has enough. And instead of demanding something back for your services, why not share your skills and knowledge with those who need your skills and knowledge? If we humans would care less about ourselves and more about our surrounding, it would solve 99.99% of our problems.

There is a huge difference between human kindness and government mandated redistribution. One makes a better world while the latter is slavery no matter what clever word they use to describe it. 

Government mandated redistribution is done for the greater good and usually with only minor inconvenience. Human kindness only exists in children. Do you expect children to build roads? Are you a child slaver?

[RomertL]

Capitalism can never solve the problem of poverty, it is in fact going to exaggerate it.. In this system it is the capitalist class which keeps growing as it makes profit at the expense of the working class.. It is actually the workers who create wealth and the masters take away a lion's share..

Capitalism create more wealth than planned economy because the market always makes better decicions than political leaders. Survival of the fittest in work means only the most efficient at creating wealth survives. Without too many rules the wealth will also be better distributed as successful companies have to outbid each others when hiring workers on all levels. Governments are always corrupt, the only variation is to what degree. Power corrupts as we all know. Also companies in a planned ekonionomy are more corrupts because they have more ways to be corrupt, i.e. making the governments apply rules to their competitors that don't apply to themselves etc. There's really not that many ways to be corrupt in a free market with many players. Not sure what you mean when you say the workers create wealth? Capitalism means everybody get compensated according to the wealth they create. If not, the worker will go to a competitor that recognices that

[bitsmichel]

Hey everyone. In today's developed world where we have glasses that can access the internet and robots that can think on their own, it is a shame that there are still people in parts of the world living under 1$ a day.
What can governments do to end poverty in their countries? Is a solution possible under capitalism? Or did Karl Marx had the right idea with his recommendation of a socialist government?

First you have to define poverty. I will take this definition : deprivation of basic human needs, which commonly includes food, water, sanitation, clothing, shelter, health care and education.

In capitalism, the availability of these services is directly correlated with your money.
In socialism, these services are available to all, but other people pay for it. The pile of money has to be large enough for all society.

Either way, both are correlated with money - if there is not enough money, people get into poverty.
In the end, all persons have x money to distribute over these services. No matter the systems.
I would define wealth W, money x and a set of elements {food f, water w, sanitation s, clothing c, shelter s, health care h ,education e}

Then:
 W = fX1 + wX2 + sX3 + cX4 + hX5 + eX6

x has to be large enough for the individuals in the group, to not be poor. In practice, x is not large enough in both capitalism and socialism.

the solution is to increase x for all individuals, or to share the elements.
 
Humans are not alone in these problems. Animals daily look for food, water and shelter - but depending on the animal they solve it differently. For example, bats and ants sleep together in one huge "apartment".Beavers make their "apartment" based on what they learn from others. Others sleep together in open air;

Governments can do so many things, but they are interested in their individual careers and wellness. No matter if you look in the east or west governments. If you want specific examples, they could build large complex for homeless people to share - in the same way as ants or bats. That way, you spend few X_total to solve the shelter problem.

[DoomDumas]

Neighter...

The sloution to end povrety is a Ressource based economy.  We are one on a spaceship, profit and endless growth economy is not sustainable..  lookup RBE and learn about it.  Imo, its THE solution to a healtier and better life for everyone aboard spaceship earth.

[cbeast]

Neighter...

The sloution to end povrety is a Ressource based economy.  We are one on a spaceship, profit and endless growth economy is not sustainable..  lookup RBE and learn about it.  Imo, its THE solution to a healtier and better life for everyone aboard spaceship earth.

But how do you get from here to there? That's is the question that tuned me into Bitcoin. This may be an important part of the transition.

[neofelis]

Capitalism can never solve the problem of poverty, it is in fact going to exaggerate it.. In this system it is the capitalist class which keeps growing as it makes profit at the expense of the working class.. It is actually the workers who create wealth and the masters take away a lion's share..

If a man trades a days worth of labor working for another man, he is paid in some form of money. Money is capital.  That is all he gets and that is all he deserves. If he wants to save his money, he can start a business too.  Having a job does not entitle a worker to an ownership piece of the company he works for.   Nobody is being taken advantage in this arrangement.

[lemfuture]

no poll?

[Ibian]

What if we all stopped comparing our wealth with others. And only look at how much someone else has to check if that person has enough. And instead of demanding something back for your services, why not share your skills and knowledge with those who need your skills and knowledge? If we humans would care less about ourselves and more about our surrounding, it would solve 99.99% of our problems.

There is a huge difference between human kindness and government mandated redistribution. One makes a better world while the latter is slavery no matter what clever word they use to describe it.  

Government mandated redistribution is done for the greater good and usually with only minor inconvenience. Human kindness only exists in children. Do you expect children to build roads? Are you a child slaver?

Having half your income confiscated is not a "minor inconvenience". Especially under threat of imprisonment. And you will have to come up with a very good and justifiable definition of "greater good" now. Fuck your children, they are the worst monsters of us all.

[cbeast]

Capitalism can never solve the problem of poverty, it is in fact going to exaggerate it.. In this system it is the capitalist class which keeps growing as it makes profit at the expense of the working class.. It is actually the workers who create wealth and the masters take away a lion's share..

If a man trades a days worth of labor working for another man, he is paid in some form of money. Money is capital.  That is all he gets and that is all he deserves. If he wants to save his money, he can start a business too.  Having a job does not entitle a worker to an ownership piece of the company he works for.   Nobody is being taken advantage in this arrangement.

If the labor that is paid for is ideas: after the ideas are shared with the employer, who then owns the thoughts of the laborer?

[RagnarDanneskjold]

What if we all stopped comparing our wealth with others. And only look at how much someone else has to check if that person has enough. And instead of demanding something back for your services, why not share your skills and knowledge with those who need your skills and knowledge? If we humans would care less about ourselves and more about our surrounding, it would solve 99.99% of our problems.

There is a huge difference between human kindness and government mandated redistribution. One makes a better world while the latter is slavery no matter what clever word they use to describe it.  

Government mandated redistribution is done for the greater good and usually with only minor inconvenience. Human kindness only exists in children. Do you expect children to build roads? Are you a child slaver?

[cbeast]

[Ron~Popeil]

What if we all stopped comparing our wealth with others. And only look at how much someone else has to check if that person has enough. And instead of demanding something back for your services, why not share your skills and knowledge with those who need your skills and knowledge? If we humans would care less about ourselves and more about our surrounding, it would solve 99.99% of our problems.

There is a huge difference between human kindness and government mandated redistribution. One makes a better world while the latter is slavery no matter what clever word they use to describe it. 

Government mandated redistribution is done for the greater good and usually with only minor inconvenience. Human kindness only exists in children. Do you expect children to build roads? Are you a child slaver?

Bull shit. It isn't yours to take. The very idea that you have some divine right to the product of my work is abhorrent. I earn my money through hard work and the use of my meager talents. No one has a right to take it simply because they believe someone else needs it more than I do. I pay my taxes simply because if I don't men with guns will come to my door and put me in a cage.

I do kind things quite often and I am a grown man. If you feel that only children demonstrate kindness you really have a cynical view of the world.     

[btcxyzzz]

What can governments do to end poverty in their countries? Is a solution possible under capitalism? Or did Karl Marx had the right idea with his recommendation of a socialist government?

Governments can do many things to end it, but they don't want to do it because by definition they serve first to elite which would never be elite if there were no poverty in the world. Neither socialism or capitalism is solution, solution is perhaps first in spiritual revolution and possibly in resource based economy.

[cbeast]

What if we all stopped comparing our wealth with others. And only look at how much someone else has to check if that person has enough. And instead of demanding something back for your services, why not share your skills and knowledge with those who need your skills and knowledge? If we humans would care less about ourselves and more about our surrounding, it would solve 99.99% of our problems.

There is a huge difference between human kindness and government mandated redistribution. One makes a better world while the latter is slavery no matter what clever word they use to describe it. 

Government mandated redistribution is done for the greater good and usually with only minor inconvenience. Human kindness only exists in children. Do you expect children to build roads? Are you a child slaver?

Bull shit. It isn't yours to take. The very idea that you have some divine right to the product of my work is abhorrent. I earn my money through hard work and the use of my meager talents. No one has a right to take it simply because they believe someone else needs it more than I do. I pay my taxes simply because if I don't men with guns will come to my door and put me in a cage.

I do kind things quite often and I am a grown man. If you feel that only children demonstrate kindness you really have a cynical view of the world.     

You got one thing right. The men have very big guns that you paid for.

[Ron~Popeil]

What if we all stopped comparing our wealth with others. And only look at how much someone else has to check if that person has enough. And instead of demanding something back for your services, why not share your skills and knowledge with those who need your skills and knowledge? If we humans would care less about ourselves and more about our surrounding, it would solve 99.99% of our problems.

There is a huge difference between human kindness and government mandated redistribution. One makes a better world while the latter is slavery no matter what clever word they use to describe it. 

Government mandated redistribution is done for the greater good and usually with only minor inconvenience. Human kindness only exists in children. Do you expect children to build roads? Are you a child slaver?

Bull shit. It isn't yours to take. The very idea that you have some divine right to the product of my work is abhorrent. I earn my money through hard work and the use of my meager talents. No one has a right to take it simply because they believe someone else needs it more than I do. I pay my taxes simply because if I don't men with guns will come to my door and put me in a cage.

I do kind things quite often and I am a grown man. If you feel that only children demonstrate kindness you really have a cynical view of the world.     

You got one thing right. The men have very big guns that you paid for.

Not by choice. I am no pacifist but I abhor violence. Especially central planner mandated violence.

[ReserviorHunt]

The basic premise of this thread and it's questions are shallow and misleading.

Poverty is also a state of mind and a symptom of a larger issue. Key solution to poverty is not a political ideology, but progress in national and individual character, in addition to economic policies. Framing poverty as a root cause rather than a symptom that it is can whitewash the problem.

Problem and its root cause are always the ones you have most trouble accepting, or even contemplating that it exists. Some of the 'poor' in US, for example, get a rude awakening when they go abroad and try to lecture real poverty stricken people with their sob stories of 'discrimination', 'oppression', or better yet, 'unfathomable poverty'.

Socialism and pure capitalism are two side of the same rotten coin - but i'd say properly implemented capitalism at least gives people a chance, while socialism is even a bigger fairy tail of failure and denial while giving people the illusion of equality.

Differences in talents, circumstances of birth, or economic background, unless strictly caste based, are natural character of a society no matter when and where you are. Key problem is whether they are surmountable or actively and willfully suppressed by the state.

Relative disparity is not poverty.

Socialism is a childish fairy tail, and capitalism is a merciless and cold reality. But only one of them deals with reality of human nature, and that is certainly not socialism.