Message boards :
Politics :
so·cial·ism
Message board moderation
Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · Next
Author | Message |
---|---|
Sarge Send message Joined: 25 Aug 99 Posts: 12273 Credit: 8,569,109 RAC: 79 |
put money on it Place your bets, ladies and gents. |
betreger Send message Joined: 29 Jun 99 Posts: 11361 Credit: 29,581,041 RAC: 66 |
put money on it But it is such low hanging fruit. |
Intelligent Design Send message Joined: 9 Apr 12 Posts: 3626 Credit: 37,520 RAC: 0 |
1 in 7 on foodstamps. Socialist. Must not conflict resolve by suggesting that someone should go sit on an ice pick... |
Gary Charpentier Send message Joined: 25 Dec 00 Posts: 30648 Credit: 53,134,872 RAC: 32 |
put money on it Huh, I thought it was lower than a bottom feeder in the Mariana Trench. |
betreger Send message Joined: 29 Jun 99 Posts: 11361 Credit: 29,581,041 RAC: 66 |
The low hanging fruit was picked and tossed into the Mariana Trench. |
Sarge Send message Joined: 25 Aug 99 Posts: 12273 Credit: 8,569,109 RAC: 79 |
The low hanging fruit was picked and tossed into the Mariana Trench. Self-picking fruit? |
betreger Send message Joined: 29 Jun 99 Posts: 11361 Credit: 29,581,041 RAC: 66 |
The low hanging fruit was picked and tossed into the Mariana Trench. Astute observation. |
musicplayer Send message Joined: 17 May 10 Posts: 2430 Credit: 926,046 RAC: 0 |
Oh, snooping around using Google Earth, at least I know that most Americans own a car and a home. So who then built the cities? Most everything that shows up are roads and buildings. The rest of the wealth is supposed to be found in everyones homes. The United States is neither socialist or communist, but still most of it (as usual) is owned, handled and administered by the state (or really, the Federal Government). Your way of becoming rich, I guess. Still I reckon there are many others which choose to be doing these things in the same way as you. |
betreger Send message Joined: 29 Jun 99 Posts: 11361 Credit: 29,581,041 RAC: 66 |
Your'e on topic. |
Es99 Send message Joined: 23 Aug 05 Posts: 10874 Credit: 350,402 RAC: 0 |
The low hanging fruit was picked and tossed into the Mariana Trench. I missed the harvest, should I be giving thanks? Reality Internet Personality |
betreger Send message Joined: 29 Jun 99 Posts: 11361 Credit: 29,581,041 RAC: 66 |
Probably not, just watch in awe. |
Sarge Send message Joined: 25 Aug 99 Posts: 12273 Credit: 8,569,109 RAC: 79 |
The fruit, present and absent, both bittersweet. |
Sarge Send message Joined: 25 Aug 99 Posts: 12273 Credit: 8,569,109 RAC: 79 |
http://www.snopes.com/college/exam/socialism.asp. Somebody got it right. Anyone that has actually read Marx would know this. Hint: you do not need to be socialist to read Marx. And for those 100% opposed to it, shouldn't you actually read his work, instead of taking someone else's definition, so that you really "know your enemy"? Many critics have maintained that if anyone in the original scenario were to receive a failing grade, it should have been the economics professor who clearly didn't understand the difference between socialism and communism. Socialism is a system that advocates social ownership of production and distribution, not an equal distribution of resources. (The socialist motto "To each according to his contribution" reflects the principle that members of a socialist society are still rewarded based on how much they contribute to society, not on some more egalitarian basis.) Communism, not socialism, advocates the principle of distributing resources based on an individual's needs rather than the level of his contribution to society ... ." This is directly the opposite of IDs claim in the opening post. Now, why in the WORLD would Marx have EVER suggested this. Hmmm? We like to think in our society that we'll be rewarded for our hard work and good contributions, right? Well, how well have you REALLY contributed? Do your rewards REALLY match YOUR contributions? |
dancer42 Send message Joined: 2 Jun 02 Posts: 455 Credit: 2,422,890 RAC: 1 |
Socialism refers to an economic system characterised by social ownership of the means of production and co-operative management of the economy.[1] "Social ownership" may refer to cooperative enterprises, common ownership, state ownership, or citizen ownership of equity.[2] There are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them.[3] They differ in the type of social ownership they advocate, the degree to which they rely on markets or planning, how management is to be organised within productive institutions, and the role of the state in constructing socialism.[4] so there is not just one kind of socialism i have yet to see anyone here in america advocating socialism as your definition states it to be. |
Sarge Send message Joined: 25 Aug 99 Posts: 12273 Credit: 8,569,109 RAC: 79 |
Socialism refers to an economic system characterised by social ownership of the means of production and co-operative management of the economy.[1] "Social ownership" may refer to cooperative enterprises, common ownership, state ownership, or citizen ownership of equity.[2] There are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them.[3] They differ in the type of social ownership they advocate, the degree to which they rely on markets or planning, how management is to be organised within productive institutions, and the role of the state in constructing socialism.[4] You are using someone else's definition (perhaps some UK website), not looking at Marx's original writings. What I quoted squares with what I remember reading, from his original, while an undergrad. Many people I have met from various walks of life who know what Marx said state it is a "good idea that will never work" because of human nature. Marx was responding to abuses of capitalism. Ever since, his ideas have been vilified by those who stand to lose something. What do they stand to lose? Ill-gotten gains; rewards that do match their contributions. Twist the story, and those who stand to lose something can make it sound even worse and convince much larger amounts of people that they, too, stand to lose something. |
Es99 Send message Joined: 23 Aug 05 Posts: 10874 Credit: 350,402 RAC: 0 |
http://www.snopes.com/college/exam/socialism.asp. Thanks for posting that here, Sarge. When I saw that going around facebook my first thought was "well that's a load of bollox", just from my own experience of how a class of pupils actually behave. You've pointed out that the allegory doesn't represent socialism or even Communism and shows a basic lack of understanding of those ideologies. I would however love to perform this "experiment" myself, however it would be unethical (something that clearly didn't cross the mind of the original "Professor.") I suspect the actual results would show an over improvement on the average grade for several reasons. Firstly those students who wanted a higher grade would have to help those who were underperforming. This might take the form of collaborative study sessions which would actually help the top students as well as lower achieving students. Also, there are plenty of students who don't try because there is no accountability. The enormous peer pressure would ensure that those students who couldn't be bothered to hand in assignments or turn up to class would have to alter their behaviour or face the wrath of the other students. So that is why it was obvious to me that this wasn't a real experiment, because it predicted an overall lowering of achievement rather than an average improvement in grades over the whole class. Not fair on the highest achievers, but an improvement for everyone else, including the middle achievers. However, the premise of socialism is that there is a collaborative effort to improve access for everyone of the basic necessities of life. Food, shelter and healthcare. The comparison and worth of a pass grade or an A grade simply do not apply in this context. If a person gets a fail grade in life they end up starving and homeless and in real life this is not based on merit or hard work. Lots of people who work very hard are very poor. A closer comparison of Communism would be that instead of there being a lecturer who controls the grades and bestows them as he or she sees fit, the whole class would be responsible for assigning grades. They would come to an agreement as a collective about how grades should be assigned. Reality Internet Personality |
betreger Send message Joined: 29 Jun 99 Posts: 11361 Credit: 29,581,041 RAC: 66 |
Instilling the ethic of community that you describe has never been done on a large scale. The kind of widespread change in commonly held short term values required would probably require something like a new religion. |
Gary Charpentier Send message Joined: 25 Dec 00 Posts: 30648 Credit: 53,134,872 RAC: 32 |
Lots of people who work very hard are very poor. Define what makes work "hard" or "easy" How do you compare if a dishwasher's work is harder or easier than a bank CFO? |
betreger Send message Joined: 29 Jun 99 Posts: 11361 Credit: 29,581,041 RAC: 66 |
All work is hard, that is why they have to pay you to work. |
betreger Send message Joined: 29 Jun 99 Posts: 11361 Credit: 29,581,041 RAC: 66 |
Lots of people who work very hard are very poor. Gary, that is a fundamental question in micro economics. Each person has their own set of marginal utilities. |
©2024 University of California
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.