Solution to poverty - Socialism or Capitalism?

[BCEmporium]

Those who break rules and get away with it get to the top. Those who follow the rules and play by the book rarely ever get to top.

Then you've the next rule on those dynamics: once at the top the new comers will try their best to wipe the concurrence and prevent others to arrive there by the same path.
Eventually someone will find a way around and the cycle repeats itself.

[gts476]

People will NEVER comply with all rules by own will. They will always try to get the most advantage of any situation and this eventually leads to conflicts, to solve them a 3rd party has to force one of them to comply to a set of rules, otherwise the stronger one will simply get it (law of the jungle). Which means also this 3rd party has to be stronger than both.

Sorry for the shower of reality, you aren't yet able to withstand it. But before think "you've the perfect system", think about its' potential leaks and flaws.

About your racist comments and self-indulgence... I'll let it pass this time. They are just plain ridiculous.

You see the people of the world as little children incapable of reasoning so they need a daddy figure to spank them when they are naughty don't you?

Speaks volumes about your mental and emotion faculties that you desire a world where you are reduced in freedoms to the level of a little child.

Oh and you jumped over my points because you have no rebuttal.

Because if you did you would have to say that great people are worth no more to society than beggars, which is clearly insane.

Oh and my self indulgence? I guess it must seem an indulgence if you see yourself and everyone as children because what can a child accomplish....

[master-P]

to be some control; toxic waste disposals, protected species, etc.

I know what you mean but the problem of such way of thinking is that the "etc." part always expand and never shrink, except with a revolution.
So my response is : If you care about protected species, pay for their protection with your pocket and not mine by force.

That introduces the concept of "tragedy of the commons".  If there were no regulations on the fish stock then laissez faire economics  will lead to overfishing.  Then nobody can eat tuna sushi anymore

You don't solve a tragedy of the commons by creating a government which is an even larger tragedy of the commons.

Fish stocks survived for years without quotas. Government gets involved, fishing stocks are raped to death. (see Canadian fish stocks).

It is not actually quotas, it is limits to amounts of fish that can be fished that prevents them from being extinct. The issue is not the companies that fish for profit it is the fish themselves that could cease to exist because of overfishing.

[gts476]

to be some control; toxic waste disposals, protected species, etc.

I know what you mean but the problem of such way of thinking is that the "etc." part always expand and never shrink, except with a revolution.
So my response is : If you care about protected species, pay for their protection with your pocket and not mine by force.

That introduces the concept of "tragedy of the commons".  If there were no regulations on the fish stock then laissez faire economics  will lead to overfishing.  Then nobody can eat tuna sushi anymore

You don't solve a tragedy of the commons by creating a government which is an even larger tragedy of the commons.

Fish stocks survived for years without quotas. Government gets involved, fishing stocks are raped to death. (see Canadian fish stocks).

It is not actually quotas, it is limits to amounts of fish that can be fished that prevents them from being extinct. The issue is not the companies that fish for profit it is the fish themselves that could cease to exist because of overfishing.

my mistake. when I used the term quoto I used it to represent as you have described, an artificial upper limit imposed by the government on the amount of fish that may be fished. A licence to fish in government waters.

[BCEmporium]

I'm typing from my mobile and I've no will or need to go with you on a point-by-point discussion.
To keep it simple, you look like if I've 2 dimes in my pocket, one is bright and shining, the other is old and wared of. You're this shining piece who got convinced to worth more than the old coin.
And yes, about you I think you're childish... Or your father just skip all needed spanks.

[gts476]

I'm typing from my mobile and I've no will or need to go with you on a point-by-point discussion.
To keep it simple, you look like if I've 2 dimes in my pocket, one is bright and shining, the other is old and wared of. You're this shining piece who got convinced to worth more than the old coin.
And yes, about you I think you're childish... Or your father just skip all needed spanks.

You have completely misrepresented my argument (straw manned bro) I said the coin worth more would have more value. Your saying I said two coins of equal value have the same value, completely different!

Answer this.

Are the contributions to society of all people equal? Yes or No?

If no, then to a society, clearly some people are worth more than others to the society because they contribute more.

Which means I'm right and you are wrong.

I bet you daddy spanked you as a child which would actually explain sooooo much! It would explain why you believe that there must be a daddy figure to spank bad people in society at large because that is what you have been conditioned to understand.

Oh and you have not will to go on a point by point discussion because all you've done so far is straw man and present a irrational and psychopathic ideology.

[gts476]

Must use force to make people support socialism!

[clovex]

Im a socialist coz im poor, if i was rich i would be a libertarian and viceversa 

[gts476]

Im a socialist coz im poor, if i was rich i would be a libertarian and viceversa 

If you were libertarian then you would consider that without taxation (theft) your money would have many times the buying power and you would not consider yourself poor, even if your earning $20,000 it would buy you $200,000 worth of loot.

Then you would consider that because there is no subsidisation of university, people aren't being forced to get a degree to get a job! You would consider that you would be able to find many more opportunities to enter into a fulfilling career.

Then you would realise that your a libertarian and that even this was unnecessary because in a libertarian society you would never spend 12 years of your life in a school system which left you so woefully under skilled for gainful employment and you would recall that you, at the age of 15-16, you would be great at programming or accounting or building or graphic design or whatever you wanted.

But I understand you benefit from the system as is. Best of luck bro x

[giantdragon]

If you were libertarian then you would consider that without taxation (theft) your money would have many times the buying power and you would not consider yourself poor, even if your earning $20,000 it would buy you $200,000 worth of loot.

What!? Even if your total tax rate (which you pay personally and your employer pays) is, say, 50%, then $20K salary now will be worth just $30K without taxes. However you will have to pay for education, healthcare, roads, rescue services etc from your own pocket!

[BCEmporium]

"One day I will create something that will help the society, because my life worth more than of a bum" - said billions of unknown folks that are now 6 feet under while alive...

[giveBTCpls]

You should read some Jaques Fresco books. We are fucked in the future if we cannot manage the fact technology is going to keep replacing jobs NON-STOP. This is a FACT. How is the system going to cope with this, in any case?

[MightyBTC]

How would the socialism solve the poverty.Capitalism at least provides certain opportunity to survive.

[Erdogan]

There is no definition of poverty - nor can there be. It is a politican word - willfully undefined.

[Ibian]

Must use force to make people support socialism!

You know, that makes a lot of sense. People who have been conditioned right from birth to obey OR ELSE would naturally gravitate towards socialism.

[Ibian]

If you were libertarian then you would consider that without taxation (theft) your money would have many times the buying power and you would not consider yourself poor, even if your earning $20,000 it would buy you $200,000 worth of loot.

What!? Even if your total tax rate (which you pay personally and your employer pays) is, say, 50%, then $20K salary now will be worth just $30K without taxes. However you will have to pay for education, healthcare, roads, rescue services etc from your own pocket!

Go live in a socialist utopia for a few years. Citizenship and all. Go all in if you believe your own words.

Local tax is around 40-60% depending how much you make and whatever other factors. Everything has huge taxes on it (so-called hidden taxes). Cars for example has a 180% tax on top of whatever its base price is. Even if you buy a car in another country you still have to pay it, in effect tripling its price artificially.
Electricity is multiple times as expensive as in neighboring countries, real estate is 4 times as expensive compared to the US, cars 4-10 times as much. But hey, free welfare! Which is steadily being eroded. But, free! [ed: meant to say healthcare, but this works even better]

The reality is that if all our taxes on electricity, cars, houses and literally everything else was converted to income tax, it would be something like 80-90%. So yes, the guy is right.

[giantdragon]

Cars for example has a 180% tax on top of whatever its base price is.
Electricity is multiple times as expensive as in neighboring countries, real estate is 4 times as expensive compared to the US, cars 4-10 times as much.

About what country are you telling about?

[Ibian]

Cars for example has a 180% tax on top of whatever its base price is.
Electricity is multiple times as expensive as in neighboring countries, real estate is 4 times as expensive compared to the US, cars 4-10 times as much.

About what country are you telling about?

Denmark. I'm given to understand Sweden is about as bad if not worse on the whole, just a matter of which metrics are being exploited.

[Nicolas Dorier]

For the fishing stock : Does it need gov regulation ? no.
But the problem can only be solved if sea is privatized.

In a free market, a landlord has the right to impose quota on his territory to prevent over farming that would make his land worth less in the future.
If the price of tuna rises due to scarcity, the landlord have even more incentive to prevent over farming, thus equilibrium is restored.

It is like saying : do we need to protect cows ?
My response is no : On one hand you can just breed them, and on the other hand, it is not in the interest of the landlord to extinguish the treasure of his land.

You want to stop over fishing ? Privatize the sea, and see miracle happens.

There is no problem that can't be solved without relying on the free will of all parties.
It would not prevent "sea owners" to unionize with their free will to coordinate effort and impose uniform fishing quota on bigger scale.
Such union is essential to solve "prisonner's dilemna" (game theory) type of problems.

[gts476]

For the fishing stock : Does it need gov regulation ? no.
But the problem can only be solved if sea is privatized.

In a free market, a landlord has the right to impose quota on his territory to prevent over farming that would make his land worth less in the future.
If the price of tuna rises due to scarcity, the landlord have even more incentive to prevent over farming, thus equilibrium is restored.

It is like saying : do we need to protect cows ?
My response is no : On one hand you can just breed them, and on the other hand, it is not in the interest of the landlord to extinguish the treasure of his land.

You want to stop over fishing ? Privatize the sea, and see miracle happens.

There is no problem that can't be solved without relying on the free will of all parties.
It would not prevent "sea owners" to unionize with their free will to coordinate effort and impose uniform fishing quota on bigger scale.
Such union is essential to solve "prisonner's dilemna" (game theory) type of problems.

+100

Privatise EVERYTHING!