Post the political idealogy that you align yourself with the most, and what you believe in in relation to society.

I am a capitialist, b/c I believe in creating personal gains over the advancement of society/more equal distribution of wealth.

I believe in low taxes, a small, non-intrusive central government, and a more powerful local government. I believe that everyone should create and build their own financial interests for the present and for later in life instead of relying on government handouts like social security.

discuss.

Capitalism all the way. It has a proven track record, and it seems to be working out just fine.

I live in Canada, so it's not surprising to anybody that I'm socialist.

I believe you should work hard to get where you want to go, but that everybody should start off at the same level. You shouldn't have to go bankrupt to pay medical bills. You shouldn't have to go under your ears in debt to pay for school. Everyone should have an equal chance.

Whichever one sounds best with "pig" or "devil" after it.

Socialist.

Communist. Duh.

I wish to rule a world where a person's status in society is based on how cool I think their name is.......but seriously, socialist

however, that doesn't really solve the problem. The way I see it if everyone starts out equal and gets and education equally, then the bar is raised really high and you will have more professionals than is required. The extra people are not needed, so they either have to go back to school and get extra education so they can look better to potential employers, or take their chances with less education and be beaten out by the people that have more. . This creates people with more education vs. people with less education, so it's no longer equal. the stakes have merely been raised. Correct me if I'm wrong.

You can pretty much get by with just the required education for the job. Just because "free" education is available, doesn't mean that everyone takes advantage of it.

Exactly.

okay, so what happens to these people?

Sounds like these people have no ambitions and motivation.
Here in America, some of the unmotivated are the poor people that just sit back and leech off of the system. To them, welfare is a way of life, not a safety net. They also work under the table to earn a few extra bucks but are mostly living off of my dime and the money of middle class taxpayers. My personal feelings on this matter is that I would deprive no one of temporary welfare aid to get them back on their feet, but if they don't want to work and expect people to take care of them, then they deserve to STARVE.

Yet, a socialist society tends to take care of these people indefinitely, and that's one of the main things that I have against it. In order for socialism to work, virtually everyone involved must be highly motivated at all times and must be willing to make it work. Obviously, this is not a realistic expectation.

Well, a capitalist society encourages growth and advancement. The human race will never advance if we have a communist system where no one has any incentive to work hard or do anything beyond the norm. Now maybe that would be a good thing (for us not to advance) but I won't get into that. I think capitalism is by far the better system.

@Page:

It's definitely an aspect of a socialist society that I strongly dislike. But when you think about it, these people were already without motivation when they first went on welfare. They're getting free money. What's motivating them to go out and get a job? Nothing. It really pisses me off, because in my hometown, a lot of the welfare junkies are also drug dealers, making dirty money and being a lot richer than the mid-class citizens. What pisses me off even more is that while these bastards leech off the system, people who CAN'T work and really need the assistance can't get it because the governement tightened up the program. The same goes for unemployment insurance.

But there are many other advantages to a socialist society that I am glad to have.

The system we use, a mixture of capitalism and socialism, I guess.

I pay about 60 bucks a month for health insurance, and my income is low enough that I was able to get grants for school.

You don't need to have a lot of money to live.. :p

Yeah, for you.

hate to break it to you, but insurance doesn't pay for everything. most plans have a big deductible that you have to pay when you go to the hospital or for expensive tests that you pay before the insurance will kick in benefits. additionally, some plans only pay a percentage of the cost of a treatment/whatever. if the thing costs 50,000 and they only pay 70%, you have to pay 15,000 bucks. medical bills add up fast, especially if you have a chronic illness. I work in a hospital, and some patients i've taken care of take over 15 medications. medications get real expensive real fast.

Does the phrase "aleatory factors" mean anything to you? Probably not. Otherwise you'd be advocating more socialistic tendencies, rather than hiding behind the individual responsibility motif. I admit, it does feel good to say "Look at me, I worked hard and deserve everything I've earned," but that's a sham and you know it, whether you want to admit it or not.

There are so many chance factors that affect our development, there are so many lucky moments that alter where we are at today, that to simply put all your success (or failure) on individual responsibility is ludicrous. That's not to say that motivation and ambition don't play an important role - they do! But are they the only factor? Of course not. I would even argue that they're not the most important factor.

Think about your life: did you choose to be born in the United States (or Britain, or any other relatively affluent developed nation), to your particular family, with its particular income level and living environment? Of course not. You could just as easily have been born in Ethiopia, and statistically speaking, would probably be dead from starvation or lack of clean drinking water.

My point is, selfishly insisting that it is possible for anyone to "pull themselves up by their bootstraps" regardless of where/when they were born and their development environment is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. Put yourself in other people's shoes and at least try to understand where they're coming from. And don't even try to tell me that aleatory factors are not huge, because they're everywhere.

Good god people, have at least a little compassion. Once you start recognizing the part that chance plays in our lives, then comes the empathy for people that get the bad breaks (note: not empathy for EVERYONE, including the small percentage of lazy poor slobs who live on welfare, and who serve as fodder for every conservative who wishes to bag on the welfare system despite not actually knowing anything about it other than what they want to believe), and then comes the desire for socialistic programs.

Is it any wonder that people with higher educations statistically lean more than a little bit toward liberal thinking? Could it be that once a person becomes aware of these aleatory factors, through such education, they realize the importance of acknowledging them and not clinging to the always self-assuring value (at least, for those who have been successful) of individual responsibility? I don't know - I doubt if anything conclusive can ever be decided. But it is interesting, is it not?

Socialism tries to take what is natually unequal and forces it to be equal. In this case, economies. In our history, any instances of forced anything have often met with great resistance. Communism, the apex of socialism's goals, met with disaster in some governments. Not to mention that all of the communist governments had dictatorships. I would argue that they weren't entirely communist but more so totaltarians.

We were from the get-go a capatalist nation founded on principles of limited government. Our roots are capatalist. It will be a long time before we ever abandon capalistic nature if ever.

I do not believe in socialism whatsoever. I think a government deciding that you've made to much and this guy has made too little and then taking your money and just giving it to them is not right. I've worked for that money. I put effort into earning that money. And now the government is going arbitrarily take that money and just give it to some other person? If I walk up to you, grab your money (forcibly if need be), see someone who has a few bucks less than you, and just give it to them, I'm sure you would not be pleased. You might ask why I did that. I would reply "I felt that you didn't need that money so I took it from you and gave it to him." This is what socialism is at its roots. And I don't like it.

Jipe: If "poor lazy slob" is trying to get on their feet and restore/renew their lives, then I have no problem giving a hand. But if they are just going to remain "poor lazy slobs" living off of welfare, then no. I don't want one dime going to pay for them. Compassion is not government handouts, I'm sorry.

Capitalism – The oldest form of economic based society. Motivation is driven by the individual for personal gain. It encourages indulgence into "luxury" items (items that are not necessary to live. This does not include "convenience" items). Crime rates are generally much higher then in other societies due to the huge social class gaps. No attempt is made for unified social goals. It is more *successful then Socialism. Currently, no society is fully Capitalist at this time.

Socialism – Any stage of transition between Capitalism and Communism. It is often mistaken for Capitalism or Communism when the ideals and principles are closes to those types of Societies. Socialism uses various government intervention programs to help stabilize the lower economic classes. Often times these programs go unregulated for various reasons and eventually results in the destabilization of the societies’ economy. It was once believed that Socialism was the “gateway” to Communism. Split popular support prevents this from ever occurring. Currently, all forms of government regulated economies are Socialist. This includes the ‘proclaimed’ “Capitalist and Communist” as well.

Communism – The youngest form of economic based society. Motivation is driven by unified social goals. Everyone works for the “common good” of its society. It encourages moderation in living so as to not use up valuable resources. The class status for the entire society is raised as the societies’ success (economically speaking) with other countries increases. As this occurs some types of “luxury” items are introduced as a main stream item that is used by everyone in the society. Ideally, no form of currency is used thus resulting in generally very low crime rates (hypothetically speaking). It is the most *successful form of economic society. To date, no society has ever become fully Communist.

*Success here is measure not by wealth but by the survival and overall contentfulness of the society.

You forgot to mention those who decide to take 6 month vacations because their unemployment benefits allow them to. People do abuse the welfare system and taxpayers suffer for it.

Capitalism all the way.

I'm caucasian

if(getThingFlags(source) & 0x8){
  do her}
elseif(getThingFlags(source) & 0x4){
  do other babe}
else{
  do a dude}

So much hate towards welfare, yet so little understanding of what welfare actually covers...

Welfare is not just unemployment benefits.

Yes there is a very small minority who abuse welfare and potentially ruin it for the rest of us, but there are a very large number of people in our society who would be completely screwed if it were not for the services our governments and your taxes subsidise.

Health care
Education
Aged care
Anyone with a handicap or disability
Orphans and children in foster care
Child care and support services
Victims of domestic violence
The homeless
Immigrants
Substance abusers
Veterans

And probably heaps more I cant think of right now. There are those who legitimately rely on the welfare system.

Masochist.


Seriously, I can't really settle on one term to define me. I just prefer common sense.

The choice isn't really between a country ruled by 'private individuals' and and a country ruled by a government.
The choice is between a country ruled by massive corporations, or a country run by a government.
A government has got accountability, which corporations don't.

Socalist

I'm pretty sure everyone here is socialist without realizing it. But on a scale of 0 - 10 with 0 being communism and 10 being capitalism i'd be a 9.3 or so. Going closer to approx 5 from there would yeild a situation where giant corporations can thrive without threat of smaller companies coming up, as pure captilism and a lack of government rules is ideal for a small business to start.

And 6 months vacations are.... bad?

I'm sorry, I just dont buy into the entire "I'm an American! I'm an individual! **** everybody else!" rationale.

Nobody is an island and our interactions within society do have an impact upon our lives. I believe that the reason many Americans, me being one of them, are such arrogant bastards who only look out for themselves is almost completely due to our embrace of ruthless capitalism. Americans will do anything for the almighty dollar because we're fueled by the American Dream that we MUST pull ourselves up by our bootstraps. But you know what? There's no more bootstraps to pull up on because the wealthiest 10 percent now control our government and are destroying the bootstraps the poor have to pull up on!

No one has complete control over their destinies as they are influenced and indirectly controlled by our relationships with others. Dont give me this **** about "I can get by, why cant you?" It's because of the factors that Jipe mentioned.

It's just like Congress passing the Bankruptcy reform bill. The rhetoric was "ABUSES! ABUSES!"... ya, because everyone who files for bankruptcy is doing it for the sole purpose of ruining their credit and evading debt. It's because the American system of ruthless capitalism ruined their lives. They have no insurance, they're ****ed if they get hurt at their new low-income jobs. Oh, those cheap prescription drugs they spent all their money on, they can afford those too, so that must mean that they can afford healthcare too!

Give me a break.

And CadetLee, just dont injure yourself with something that would require more than a one-night hospital stay, even that might kill your finances.

Capitalism is freedom. I am therefore a capitalist.

Six months vacation is bad... when tax money is going toward it.

Capitalist, I suppose, with some socialism mixed in to boot.

Pretty much with schming thus far...

Interestingly no one has really gone into the cons of capitalism...

I think the communist cons are probably easier to see. However, money, although central to making people co-operate and build the world up, is a very selfish attribute.

Money is used to bribe, to kill, to steal and to cheat. People are murdered for money.

I also think its quite a good idea to note the amount of people who do anything to gain a quick buck and skip to the luxury money can afford. I don't mean welfare scams, I mean the hundreds, if not thousands, of people who sue for slipping on the smallest bit of water or for just being idiots and slightly scratching their recently manicured nails.

I'm not going to say that communism would make things different, all i'm saying is I loathe both systems as they are so reliant on money and its distribution.

I'm gonna go socialist.

Wouldn't the world be a better place if money wasn't as important, and we could live our lives doing the things we want instead of trying to earn some cash?

Honestly, I think Canada's system is the best.

I disagree. Anyone, and I mean ANYONE, can build wealth. If you take it upon yourself to do what the rich do and learn what they know and learn to see the world the way they do, you too can be rich. people stay poor b/c they are averse to risk. the vast majority of the poor are poor because they choose to be (or rather they choose not to do what it takes to get themselves out of their situation), not because they are helpless pawns downtrodden by the "opressors". Americans are poor because their beer and lottery tickets are more important than their future. Get out and travel the world a little more and you will see what TRUE poverty is.. Poor people cling to what they have and are afraid to rock the boat, so they avoid risk and stay poor. Rather than embracing socialism and hating the rich for having so much power and being so sucessful, I'm going the other way.



I actually APPRECIATE the rich b/c since they influence government so much, they have set up tax benefits and loopholes that I too can use and benefit from. They make it easy for anyone to follow in their footsteps and establish wealth the way they did. (A lot of millionaires hit it big with Real estate) They did it for themselves, mostly, but I appreciate it b/c they made it so I could do it too.

Pretty much what Page said is why I like our ruthless capalist system. If you have the cojones to take risks in the markets and private sector, more often your risks will pay off. It takes patience and courage. It also shows that you have ambition and desire. You want to become more and are not afraid of the challenges that capitalism brings.

Socialism just forces everyone on the same playing field and that level is usually the lower brackets. I can work really hard at my job or business yet the government will force me to be on the same bracket as the poor guy. I will then do less work because I either a) don't want to work that hard for so little income or b) realize that I can be less productive and still have someone pay for me. It stagnates ambition. Socialism ignores the competitive aspect of human nature. I sure as hell like to compete against the next guy. I always want to test my abilities and skills against others. Capatalism offers that.

Capitalist, but I believe that we should put a strong emphasis on educating our population to be caring and generous towards their fellow man. We can accomplish many of our compassionate goals simply by volunteering and making donations. Sadly, generosity and compassion aren't ideas that you'll hear much in the education system of a capitalist society.

I find the lack of compassion and understanding of the issues that is evident in this thread to be disturbing. I didn't realize that there were still people on this planet that actually believe that there is equal opportunity for all, and that their success was achieved by them, and them alone. The logic escapes me. Some of you obviously can't fathom the intricacies of such an issue, and should therefore refrain from participating.

I think most of you pretty much don't understand anything. What you describe as failed communism has never reasonably described itself as communism. Most of you have never lived even in those kinds of societies. Consider all those poor bastards in the developing countries who work for pennies a day (who work harder than most of you could ever dream of working) and still get nowhere. I suppose, ideally anyone can do anything, but some people need to do much more than others to achieve the same goals, so it isn't reasonable to expect them to when you yourself would not (and I guarantee you, most of you would not).

Don't be so naïve. Your precious capitalism is far from its ideal state. American capitalism is pretty much as corrupt as (if not more than) Soviet socialism. Communism is hard work, but hard work doing what you love doing.

If the risks 'more often' pay off, then it obviously isn't much of a risk.

For every one success story, there's a hundred failures.

'Poor are poor because they choose to be'? If that were true, then countries that were more tough on the poor, so less welfare, would have less poor - if they have more welfare, then there's less incentive to work, and they'd choose to be poor.. right?
Well, that simply isn't the case. America, which is very tough on the poor, has ridiculous rates of poverty in comparison to the welfare states of Europe.

The simple fact is you don't have control over your life. You don't have control over what your employer pays you, you don't have control over what the consumar buys at.

If capitalism allowed everyone to be rich if they wanted to, it would quite obviously fail. Capitalism requires there to be a lot more working class than middle class.

'Poor choose to be poor' is one of those naïve fantasies that middle class neo-conservatives delude themselves to. Why would anyone want to be poor, especially in a country such as America, that has virtually no poverty welfare? Why would anyone want to live in a trailer park, or a ghetto? If they actually had the chance, don't you think they would take it immediately?

Poverty breeds poverty. If you are born to a poor family, you are very likely to stay poor, if not poorer.
Yes, there is the odd random success story, where an individual attainted wealth through pure chance, usually through music, and these are often quoted as examples of the wonders of capitalism. But it's the statistics that tell the real story.