CreateDebate


Debate Info

Debate Score:239
Arguments:144
Total Votes:283
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
  (144)

Debate Creator

joecavalry(34873) pic



Does Socialism work?

One day last year a Texas Political Science Professor was teaching his class about the failures of Socialism in world governments. A bright young student arose to challenge the Professor and insisted that Socialism does work in certain areas of the world and indeed is working now in the good ole US of A as well!

The Professor said "Ok class if you all agree we will conducted a live experiment in the merits of Socialism, but you must all agree to accept the results of this experiment". The class all agreed, they were very eager to precipitate in the Professor's experiment; which was:

1. Quiz on Wednesday, Test on Friday, the grade will be on an average.

 If the average score in the class was an A then everyone gets an A.
 If the average score in the class was a B then everyone gets a B.
 If the average score in the class was a C then everyone gets a C.
 If the average score in the class was a D then everyone gets a D.
 If the average score in the class was an F then everyone gets a F

2. This experiment in Socialism would last for one month.


The first grade on the Quiz was a B, so everyone in the class got a B. Some of the A students were complaining, but the C students were happy to get a B. The A students started to study less and complain more.

The results of the Test on Friday was a C, now the A students were really complaining to the other students about studying and they were trying to encourage the C students to bring up their grades, but the C students did not respond.

The next week the grades were a C and D, the former A students lost interest and did not bother to study because now there was no incentive for them to excel and the former C students were mad at the A students for not helping the C students with their studies, so the C students just quit studying.

The result was that at the end of the month the whole class got a F. The Texas Professor said, "This is perfect example of how Socialism does not work and why Socialism fails people as a whole!"

Add New Argument
7 points

I think a better example of Socialism is there are two kids:

kid 1 has a 100 on a test

kid 2 has a 0 on a test

The teacher decides to take 30 points away from kid 1 and give it to kid 2.

now kid 1 has a 70 and kid 2 has a 30. Kid 1 went from A-C and kid 2 went from F-F.

In socialism, people don't seem to realize that all it does is hurt the hard working and create a pseudo-assistance for the non-hard working. The class room went from having an F student and an A student to an F student and a C student. Now the class seems more stupid than it really is.

A country under Socialism will not thrive, but only result in less wealth.

5 years ago | Side: No it doesn't work
Akulakhan(2547) Disputed
5 points

In your scenario, the teacher acted poorly. To obtain a socialist grade system, the teacher would need to respond in a manner that is true to socialist ideals. In that, I mean the teacher should have focused on properly educating the F student. And by not disiplining the faliure of the student, the student does not feel as though the system is against him/her. In other words, socialism is not an attempt to squish all of the classes to the middle, instead it is a system that eliminates the proletariate by means of prosperity.

-

I am aware you mentioned nohting of dicipline. My addition to your story was a method of which I could explain to you another Social concept.

4 years ago | Side: It works if you try
TPARTY(31) Disputed
2 points

This also is just form of idealism and does not actually work. Socialism does squish everyone to the middle, in the form of capped salaries and high taxes. There is only so much money to be made because you can't make more that your neighbor. Where in the world has everyone in the population been millionaires (Sweden is economically capitalist by the way). In a socialist system, or any system focusing on social justice in the real world, there isn't prosperity save those in the governing body, becuase that is who those systems favor. Under what system has every modern dictator risen to power?

3 years ago
copycat042(159) Disputed
1 point

The intent of a policy is irrelevant. The effect of socialism (collectivism) is to reduce the incentive to produce. The effect is less aggregate wealth, and a society where the more productive are more worse off than the least productive are improved.

1 year ago
Bohemian(3464) Disputed
2 points

No, you're confusing wealth redistribution and socialism. Wealth redistribution does not require Socialism, nor does socialism require wealth redistribution.

Redistribution of wealth is the transfer of income, wealth or property from some individuals to others.

Socialism is the collective ownership of the means of production.

3 years ago
TPARTY(31) Disputed
1 point

They're one in the same. Your money is my money so I can take your money when I don't have as much as you, therefore I'm redistributing your wealth to me. Correct? But...its not me or you who's redistributing, it is the State who owns the means, at least in the real world. Socialism leads to wealth redistribution and wealth redistribution is Socialism, they can't be separated. You can't have a free market but have everyone own everyone elses money. Granted the wealth redistribution in Socialism isn't in the form of money but in handouts and benefits. The distribution occurs in taxes. I pay for your unemployement. Correct? (that was an example, not saying you're unemployed)

3 years ago
NuclearFish(181) Disputed
1 point

This operates under the assumption that we don't have the means to distribute resources adequately. That's a 20th Century lie. In the late 20th Century, mankind became capable of adequately feeding its entire populace. This prosperity transitioned into every aspect needed to sustain society, all except oil. Even George Orwell acknowledged this (I should also note that he, Eric Blair, was a socialist).

3 years ago
TPARTY(31) Disputed
2 points

Do you think, then, that any government, Socialist or not, could adequately distribute resources to their population? You cannot keep a population happy by destributing what is rightfully one's to another. Social justice has to come in the form of charity otherwise it isn't truly just, because some way or another the surplus is being taken from somebody.

3 years ago
Banana_Slug(845) Disputed
1 point

that's why it's not applied on high school grading. .

1 year ago
4 points

of course it doesn't work in this case. socialism cant just be applied in a second like that. everyone should struggle and work together to achieve the equality from the first place.

it is important to remember that mass education is an important element of socialism. the teacher needs to educate everyone on how essential to work with each other instead of to compete. what has been done in the class is still embedded on the capitalists' idea of competition.

when this thing is done for a much longer time, with the teacher keeps encouraging the A-students to share their knowledge with the rest of the class, then everyone can get equally good grades!

5 years ago | Side: Yes in some circumstances
Pessimist(181) Disputed
4 points

Yeah, but Machiavelli was right. People as a whole are lazy. Socialism would only work in reverse, per say. The lazyiness of some would cause others to be lazy, which would cause others to be lazy, and so on until everyone does nothing.

4 years ago
Turtle(12) Disputed
2 points

The teacher is going to "educate" me (or is that indoctrinate me) to work harder since some are not willing to work (or work as hard as they can). Please take off your "rose" colored glasses.

5 years ago | Side: No it doesn't work

So that's what teachers are doing to our kids? I knew there was something funny about that new math and i ain't laughing.

5 years ago
kilgoretrout(1) Disputed
1 point

right.. but just because the teacher tells everyone to work equally hard, doesnt mean that everyone will..

there will always be people who want to go above and beyond

there will always be people who despite the capability to go above and beyond, will not.

hitherto,lets say im in the second category.. and in this example all i have to do is half ass the test.. and the people who want a good grade (in real life people who want to start a business or want a high paying job) will help bring my average up despite my mediocre attempts.

4 years ago
TPARTY(31) Disputed
1 point

Yes, everyone should try to work hard and work together to achieve or accomplish anything. (mass education sounds like indoctrination by the way). The fact is that the real world does not work with idealistic views of anything because there are always those who don't want to work that take advantage of the "A students" who do. In virtually every country that socialism has been implemented it has caused the same problems:

A populous dependant on their government, an extinguishing of innovation due to lack of competition (which is not evil despite what proponents of social justice theorists suggest), lowered standards of living and a general as well as generally unhappy people.

And to the student who challenged the teacher, it is clearly not working in the U.S. nor has it worked anywhere and nor will it ever. That is the fact.

3 years ago | Side: No it doesn't work
4 points

The real issue with socialism is the American mind. Your story fails to recognize the common ideals of socialism. Afterall, you cannot place basketball players into a game of ice hockey.

-

Socialism comes with a mentality that, as opposed to American thought, is not introverted. If these A students assisted these lower grade students, they too would have a higher grade. But no, in America it's MY money, MY country, MY religion. We don't need to be that way! Come on people look at yourselves! You want your pyramids built on the backs of poverty! Stop I say! If you cared for humanity as much as you cared for yourselves, there may not even be poverty.

-

NOTE: the accusative case in this post is not directed at any individual, but rather the entirety of the average philosophy of the American population.

4 years ago | Side: It works if you try

I do not wish to be part of a commune. I believe in myself and I have trust in my abilities. I do not need a cult leader.

4 years ago | Side: No it doesn't work
2 points

I am not sure where you derived your comment from. I don't believe I mentioned anything about communism, let alone cultist govern. It doesn't seem that you are responding to me, it seems you are responding to yourself over your disposition towards communism and cults.

-

I wish I understood, but being as I don't, I ask you clarify your statement. Thank you.

4 years ago | Side: It works if you try
itsnotright(24) Disputed
1 point

That is what a Constitutional Republic does. Everyone is born with the ability to do great things, on their own accord. It is whether or not they wish to persue their endeavors and bring themselves up out of adversity. We have Socialistic programs in this Country already. They are flawed. Why? There is always someone that wants something for nothing. Those that milk the system. But what does Government do... They create more rules and regulation to try to bandage the wound instead of doing what needs to be done. Set limits on how much and how long these programs can be used. I am not implying they don't have any merit. They were meant as a hand up, NOT a HAND OUT.

As far as your comment about caring for humanity and doing good to others so there might not be poverty. HA. Do you actually believe that? You are either very young or very blind. There is always going to be poverty. For this one very simple reason... This World is full of people that refuse to do for themselves. And, no mater how much you try to help them, they will never, EVER lift their own finger to better themselves. They feed off of those of us that scratch and claw and sweat and bleed to get what we have rightfully earned. Through hard work and devotion. Now, having gotten that out in the open. I'll give you two examples of what I am talking about. 1: Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to fish and he can feed his entire village. Open a chain of fish stores, resturants, bait & tackle shops, guided fishing trips. By doing this you have created a basis for competition between the two fisherman. And at the same time, become an example to someone else that might wish to better themselves, so they apply for a job to help, Stay the course, has a job, makes money all the while learning how to fish and one day starts his own business. 2: Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to fish and you just lost a big business opportunity.

But I have a better example of Socialism and it's effects. A boy in college asks his professor why he thinks Socialism does not work. The professor tells the boy that it is better to demonstrate than to simply tell how. So he tells the boy to come by his house later that afternoon, the boy agrees. The boy arrives, goes around back and the professor is sitting in a chair and has placed a bucket by the pool. The boy asks the professor to explain Socialism, he replies he will, but first, take that bucket, get water from the deep end of the pool and pour it into the shallow end The boy agrees and starts transferring water from the deep end to the shallow. After about 5 times the boy asks when he can have Socialism explained to him and the professor again tells the boy to keep dipping into the deep end and pour it tinto the shallow. The boy throws the bucket down, looks at the professor with a very disgusted look on his face and says nothing is getting done, the level of water is staying the same. It is niether gaining nor losing the amount of water. Nothing is getting accomplished. The professor looks at the boy with a smile on his face and says, and that my boy is why Socialism does not work.

4 years ago
2 points

itsnotright: Well said! I agree and your examples are spot-on! Many who argue for socialism are forgetting to take 'human nature' into account. It is our basic human nature to find the easiest way to accomplish a task. It is our basic human nature to find a way to survive. Socialism provides a way for people to take the easy way out by accepting handouts to survive. Capitalism encourages people to rise above basic human instinct to achieve. In encouraging achievement, you encourage a person to succeed. By encouraging laziness, you allow a person to be less than they can be.

As for poverty...it is every person's choice to help those who are less fortunate. It should NOT be forced by government. In allowing people to make the choice themselves, you allow them to do the right thing, to rise above their animal natures, and to make better their own souls.

4 years ago
Akulakhan(2547) Disputed
1 point

I'm glad you've taken the time to respond to a post I've so long forgotten about. Reguardless, I will refute your parables.

-

Fisherman story: Your underlined theme is competition. You claim that competition; A) provides jobs, B) improves products/services, and C) improves the overall quality of life.

If this is incorrect, inform me of such before I proceed.

-

Student story: Your underlined theme is capitalist economics. You claim that a capitalist economy; A) is self contained, B) naturally balances itself, and C) needs no regulation.

If this is incorrect, inform me of such before I proceed.

4 years ago
Ki19(5) Disputed
1 point

"This World is full of people that (omitted text) feed off of those of us that scratch and claw and sweat and bleed to get what we have rightfully earned. Through hard work and devotion."

This statement reminds me of another group of people, except the people that I'm thinking of are not poor at all, in-fact they hoard most of the wealth generated by a nation between them and their exclusive friends. these are the top 1% of people, the filthy rich (well beyond reason and need) that capitalism produces, I'm thinking these billionaires can help out the economy/society that allowed them to prosper in the first place. Its a win win situation. they receive healthier more educated employees and everyone gets the opportunity to become that healthy educated employee.

3 years ago
3 points

Oh, he teaches at Texas? This sounds a lot like something people forward to each other in emails. The truth is that a country is not like a college class, and that there has been no Socialist experiment on earth that hasn't been the target of capitalist sabotage. So I couldn't tell you, nor you me, that it does or doesn't work in the real world. It's not as simple as this analogy would have you believe.

5 years ago
JakeJ(3232) Disputed
1 point

"It's not as simple as this analogy would have you believe."

How? How is it different?

5 years ago | Side: No it doesn't work
HGrey87(749) Disputed
3 points

How is running a country anything like running a college course? How is production of goods anything like scores on a test? And why should I bother explaining if you downvote me AS you ask for an explanation?

5 years ago
CommonSense(1) Disputed
1 point

It is just as simple as that. It is simple cause and effect in respect to the whole idea of socialism.

5 years ago
TPARTY(31) Disputed
1 point

Please explain capitalist sbatoge? The first country to successfully, and not fully, use capitalism is the United States and that country, in 200 years, propelled itself to the most prosperous nation on earth. A feat that takes most countries thousands of years and most never get there. Even under crippled capitalism, our nation still did this. Tell me that would've happened under a Socialist system. Those parables mentioned are completely correct. Competition isn't evil!!!! who comes up with this stuff? oh yeah, the text books, written by Marxists. All fellow Americans should start educating themselves about what this place is about and stop getting it from these textbooks and teachers who...wait for it...WORK FOR THE GOVERNMENT.

3 years ago
3 points

and this is why I'm against welfare......:) Goddammit Reach 50 characters!!!

5 years ago | Side: No it doesn't work
3 points

This is a great example on how and why we dislike the idea of socialism. It is in our very nature to compete and to try to be better than one another. Just like in the animal kingdom, where males compete for mates.

This idea really shows how socialism eats itself away. Very creative!

5 years ago

Damn Socialists! :)

This could only happen in Texas ;)

fifty characterish

5 years ago | Side: No it doesn't work
2 points

In the contrived example, of course it fails, and I'd agree it would be difficult if not impossible to make work on a national level (although Europe seems to be doing reasonably well).

I'd argue socialism works better in niche areas where the skill sets are more uniform (e.g. a class with nothing but A and B students).

5 years ago | Side: Yes in some circumstances
Johndoe205(2) Disputed
2 points

True Europe is doing well when it comes to the welfare of its people but as you say that socialism will work better in areas where people generally have the same skill set is also very true. due to that the muslims are having a very difficult time in Europe to progress out of slums. In terms of economy the European nations have been going through an economic stagnation for some time now. although good on the outside looking in the question is how long will it last?

5 years ago
TPARTY(31) Disputed
1 point

It isn't working in Europe...at all. Greece and Ireland have been bailed out. Portugal and Spain will follow. The UK as well. Sweden according to many economists is a ticking time bomb, for they cannot afford their programs for much longer. Their programs cannot fund themselves. Germany is the only place where is is working in Europe, however, they're set up the same way so its probably a matter of time.

3 years ago
2 points

This truly is the perfect example for why it doesn't work. The people who are higher up will not feel the incentive to work as hard, while at the same time the people who are lower than them will not feel the incentive either, since they will rely on the richer people (in this case smarter) to carry them through. That's why capitalism is good: we are each responsible for ourselves. No body will be there to carry you, so you must actually work, just like everyone else, to make a living.

5 years ago | Side: No it doesn't work

To say that Socialism works is like saying that Hamas is a peaceful organization.

5 years ago
darkpuccino(4) Disputed
1 point

To say that Capitalism works is like saying that Bush is a pacifist man.

Socialism may work, so far most countries failed their socialist system because it is run by corrupted government, who are mostly hypocrites. They havent run the ideal Socialism

5 years ago
Johndoe205(2) Disputed
1 point

so since Bush proved to us that we as human beings are subject to mistakes by electing irresponsible leaders how can we be sure that it won't happen again?

5 years ago

But you can't have an ideal system (including capitalism) because of human nature. You need a system that takes into account human nature and then corrects for it. The problem is that as far as we currently know, humans are the only ones that can create this "ideal" system and we already said, "you can't have an ideal system (including capitalism) because of human nature"

5 years ago
2 points

I'm not precisely sure how this experiment justifies the conclusion. Socialism is an attempt to uproot historical class antagonisms by transferring the means of production, therefore resulting in the dissolution of classes as such.

This:

If the average score in the class was an A then everyone gets an A.

If the average score in the class was a B then everyone gets a B.

If the average score in the class was a C then everyone gets a C.

If the average score in the class was a D then everyone gets a D.

If the average score in the class was an F then everyone gets a F

isn't Socialism any more than Pacifism is Fascist. On the face of things, the experiment isn't even analogous.

But to the question itself: does Socialism work?

It's never been practiced.

5 years ago
2 points

the only way socialism would work if we have the technology to allow for it..here is an example if we had replicators like in star trek i know and no i'm not a trekkie in my moms basement. but if we had one and could replicate anything we needed to survive then there is no need for a monetary system in which turn there is really no need for socialism either. it would be a society where you would trade for services like a carpenter trades his services for some electrical work by an electrician and so on.............what if we wake up tomorrow and there is no more money or precious metal,diamonds and so on...anywhere on earth what then? something to think about.... i have an idea why not run everything like an Amish community...and why wouldn't it work? i mean when a family in a Amish community needs help the whole community pitches in and helps the family it used to be that way in the past..Have we become so self centered that we could care less about our neighbors? well...looking around i guess we have. what would have happened is Jesus or what ever your religion is demanded payment for the good deeds he or his counter parts did? i would love to be around when when gaining knowledge and the good feeling of helping others was payment enough

4 years ago | Side: No it doesn't work

Hmmm...., interesting thought. If I had a replicator I would probably also have a force field. Then I would put a force field around my home, claim that my home is its own country and refuse to pay taxes. I would also refuse to work for anyone but myself in the service of my home withing the boundaries of my home. I would live withing the boundaries of my home and not deal with the outside world. Total isolation because I wouldn't need anyone. ;)

4 years ago | Side: No it doesn't work
2 points

The college professor 'experiment' with his students does not accurately represent socialism and its ideas. Of course it isn't fair for the A students and they would be less motivated. How bout this instead...

Student A has good loving parents who support his eduction. They have money so that they can afford private tutors. They make sure that their son/daughter studies every night and does not get distracted. Student A of course generally gets good grades because he has all the opportunity and tools he needs.

Student B comes from a broken home. Lets say he doesn't know his father and his mother works two jobs to pay the rent. His parents don't put alot emphasis on education. His mom obviously cannot afford tutors. Though student B is smart and if channelled properly could get as good of grades as Student A, he simply doesn't have the opportunity that Student A has.

Is this fair for Student B? He/She doesn't get to pick his environment. We're all to a certain extent products of our environment. Socialism aims to give Student B more opportunity and a framework for he/she to exceed.

A social democracy can work. Its worked in Europe for hundreds of years. Despite what you hear in the media, Europes economy is vibrant and growing. Their GDP is larger than the US and China combined. The cost of living in Europe is about the same as that in the US. And there are more fortune 500 companies in Europe than there are in the US.

This is really about the elites dislike for progressive taxes. They do not feel that they should have to pay more. Ever since Regan began cutting taxes for the wealthiest Americans and degregulating, wages for you and I have stagnated, and the gap between the rich and middle class has risen dramatically.

4 years ago

My experience has been that Socialism tends to reduce everything to its lowest common denominator. A class room, now a days, tends to go as fast as the slowest kid in an effort to be "fair." I've even seen every child in every league of every game get a trophy at the end of the season so that they don't feel bad.

I recognize that the world is NOT fair and i don't try to fight it. I just go with it ;)

4 years ago
3 points

A class room, now a days, tends to go as fast as the slowest kid in an effort to be "fair."

As someone who can destroy the school system given the chance, this infuriates me.

4 years ago
mskin(4) Disputed
3 points

but it hasn't worked for 100s of years in Europe. France, Spain, Italy, Germany certainly can't be cited as having hundreds of years of success... the french revolution, the fall of the fourth republic, Spanish civil war in the 30s, fascist italy and nazi germany.... i mean come on?!?! You call that working? Meanwhile, spains credit ranking has just been downgraded, and did you miss the rioting in greece? not to mention their broke! Socialism has never and will never result in anything other than mile ling breadlines.

lets look at some of the socialist success stories in the united states.... social security - BROKE. medicaid - BROKE.

4 years ago
imho(2) Disputed
2 points

I respectfully disagree with you. I had supportive, loving parents. My father was a college professor. My 2 sisters and I could not have been more different than if we had been raised in completely different environments. Each of us had the same opportunities for education...however...we did not all embrace the opportunities provided.

The strive to succeed comes from within. You cannot ignore this basic human condition, and try to make everything 'fair and equal for all'. It will not work. That is the reason that Socialism will never work. It crushes the will to succeed in those who wish to better their own situation. It rewards those who have no drive to succeed.

Capitalism provides rewards for those who have the will and the desire to succeed. That is why it works.

4 years ago
itsnotright(24) Disputed
1 point

NO it is not the Governments fault that this kid is not excelling in his class. It is his parents. It is their responsibility to see that he tries to make better for himslef. Encourage him to do better so he has a better chance. This is being accountable as a parent. The same thing goes for the kid that has everything handed to him on a silver platter. He has no incentive to do better because he knows it will be handed to him. This, however, is the exact same as those that are on already installed Socialistic programs. They know they will get a handout, so they do nothing to better themselves. They just ride on the backs of the people that let it continue. It's just too bad there are so many dead beat parents out there. BUT, instead of forcing others to do things against their will just to make it a little easier for a few, there are alot of programs and associations out there that were formed to help out both parent and child, free of charge. This is called being charitable. And there is nothing in this world that does not allow charity. It is encouraged. I am all for showing someone how to do something so they may be able to do it themselves. But I refuse to give handouts. If you need money, I'll show you how to frame a house, paint, trim out, build cabinets, finish concrete, grow a garden, work on an automobile, or anything else I might know how to do. And while your there, I'll pay you for helping me. But, you will not get something for nothing.

Oh, and I guess that since there is still quite a lot of class based crime over there is due to....What? You know, since wealth is evenly distributed among the people.

4 years ago
1 point

1. socialism isn't nearly that simple, and this sounds like an attempt to prejudice kids against a system at a young age, when instead they should be allowed to learn the complexities of any political system before making a judgement.

2. it's been shown that human nature does not allow this kind of government to work, but indoctrinating kids against anything is dumb, because then you get a situation where people can yell "socialism" at any proposed solution, and people will ignore it's merits based strictly on that... sound familiar?

3. there is nothing inherently wrong with socialism if it were the case that each is employed and trained to their ability. again though, human nature will not allow this, and nepitism will eventually take over as those with power use their power to get more power.

4. The exact same could be said for a Capitalist system, if companies are not held to the law, if oversite isn't present, and if the actual government becomes beholden to these companies and their money, instead of the people.

5 years ago | Side: No it doesn't work
JakeJ(3232) Disputed
3 points

"they should be allowed to learn the complexities of any political system before making a judgement."

Did they not?

"indoctrinating kids against anything is dumb"

I agree. So you dislike most liberal collage professors? Hey me too!

But how is trying something and letting it fail indoctrination? Thats nature. Failure is needed for success.(think of socialism as one of Edison's many failed light bulbs) See the teacher didn't fail the kids. They failed themselves. It is sometimes good to learn something first hand then to only learn about it. What this teacher did was not indoctrination.

5 years ago | Side: No it doesn't work
iamdavidh(4848) Disputed
0 points

college kids are a bit too old to be indoctrinated don't you think?

5 years ago
1 point

Where capitalism is not established, you have a feudalistic or totalitarian society. Socialism has never been provided in a feudal or totalitarian society. Revolution never moves a population towards socialism, but independence and freedom. Capitalism has, also, never been provided in a feudal or totalitarian society and can only come about after freedom and independence has been won. Socialism, as we know it, can only come about after capitalism has been established. Once capitalism is destroyed, socialism can not be maintained because the government does not generate a profit. Totalitarianism is the end result and can only be overcome by revolution so we start all over again.

“A wise and frugal government … shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government.”

-Thomas Jefferson, First Inaugural Address, March 4, 1801

“To take from ... See Moreone, because it is thought his own industry and that of his fathers has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers, have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, the guarantee to everyone the free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it.”

-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Joseph Milligan, April 6, 1816

4 years ago
dwheel465(18) Disputed
2 points

I think you are right, that socialism has to come from capitalism, but that doesn't mean that it will bring the government down. What happened in other counties, was that they went right to communism, and then a dictatorship. When people finally found out they were being horribly controlled, of course they revolted.

4 years ago | Side: It works if you try

the professors "experiment" isn't a example of socialism.

a better example would be the following, keep in mind i would argue that it is better to share ideas even with a curve.

There is a curve in the class, a student knows something which increases his grade above the average and thus keeps it to himself for it increases his own grade even more. ie capitalism. This results in alienation, resentment and anxiety socially. Think of the grade as money and his secret as the means of production.

Then lets consider a second case:There isn't a curve in a class, students share everything they know because it improves their own grade, lets say there is a efficient means of doing this; i can think of a few awesome utilities which are completely possible and easy enough to implement this website shares some of them(would be more advance though), and they also experience a social incentive for sharing. ie socialism.

The graphical flow chart one person makes will complement the lists another student made; the combination of which will allow for comprehensive flash card sets to be made and shared. well the flash animation someone with to much time made bases its equations on another students equation sheets and the flash is redistributed back out and peer reviewed as well. you could get a chaotic system which moves in a increasing spiral of development. wait...isn't this the process of science? opensource development? ... how has this failed?

4 years ago
Cobrax30(22) Disputed
2 points

What you are really failing to understand is that in capitalism people share and collaborate to mutual benefit. Working together and organization improves our ability to compete.

Socialism removes that incentive to work together. In order to get people to work together and share it requires a Cult like brainwashing mechanism to strip away the basic nature of self interest.

If I'm not allowed to own what I produce, I lose my motivation to share and collaborate. It would be telling professional sports teams that they are now playing just for fun and that their scores will be distributed throughout the league, and that the government will now pick who wins.

2 years ago
1 point

If Socialism removes the incentive to work, then why did the USSR win the space race? Why did Cuba develop the lung cancer vaccine? Why did the USSR invent laser eye surgery? Why did the USSR, send a man, dog, woman and satellite into space? You are allowed to own what you produce, in fact, you get healthcare, education and food for free. Your understanding of Socialism cannot get more incorrect.

2 years ago
1 point

SIMPLE: the only reason Socialism does not work in its true form (tried first by the Soviet Union) is because it does not address the issue of SCARCITY! Secondly, the reason it works in relatively small countries (save for Canada?) is because, well, they don't have a big population to deal with and don't seem to be expection an increase in immigrants anytime soon.

4 years ago
dwheel465(18) Disputed
1 point

The soviet union was definitely communist... and socialism isn't communism, I think that much people can agree on.

4 years ago | Side: It works if you try
1 point

The Soviet Union was not communist, no communist country ever existed, only communes.

2 years ago

The professors example isn't socialism. Think matrix download instead of studying for hours, that would be more appropriate.

4 years ago
1 point

The grade argument at the top of the page doesn't work. It only represents the socialist economy, not its ideals as a whole. The ideals are better and sure, the economy sucks, but if you can tell me that the recession wasn't even a little bit caused by capitalism, then.... wow.

4 years ago

Socialism does not work. You need an incentive to get people working. Also it goes against our private property rights. People should have a say about what goes on, on their property with out interference..

3 years ago | Side: No it doesn't work
1 point

They do have a say actually........................................................................................

2 years ago
1 point

This scenario simplifies the issues to an extent but it still accurately demonstrates the problems associated with socialism. Socialism does eliminate incentive and innovation because it begins to reduce the monetary rewards (such as profit) that businesses and entrepreneurs experience in capitalist systems.

3 years ago | Side: No it doesn't work
1 point

No amount of capitalism or socialism will ever compare to the pleasures of cocaine. I don't care what country I live in as long as coke is legal.

2 years ago

- First this story can be seen on "I want your money"

-Socialism is not distributing everything among everyone.

-socialism is when the extra value goes to the Gov. to be spent on healthcare , food and education for everyone (free). You get to keep the labor value to buy luxuries.

2 years ago

Socialism has worked great. Just asked Portugal, Italy, Greece, and Spain (Also known as PIGS ;).

2 years ago
0 points

Under Socialism, what purpose do grades serve at all? Why not just have folks show up and attend classes and then at the end of the semester give them all a "pass" grade (even if they really deserved an 'F' or 'D').

Just think of the benefits of:

a. having a pilot flying you on a plane who "passed" his course(s)

b. having an emergency room physician help you who "passed" his course(s)

c. having an investment adviser who "passed" his course(s)

d. having emergency equipment, of any kind, designed and tested by individuals who "passed" their course(s)

e. how rapidly technological innovation would occur

f. how fast and safely drug innovation would occur

g. performing safety checks of work sites or materials or food or ????

i. need I say more?

5 years ago | Side: No it doesn't work
Mahollinder(897) Disputed
3 points

Under Socialism, what purpose do grades serve at all

Plenty.

Why not just have folks show up and attend classes and then at the end of the semester give them all a "pass" grade (even if they really deserved an 'F' or 'D')....

But that's not Socialism.

5 years ago
marrtinigirl(1) Disputed
1 point

You ask many good questions, however, they really don't carry any weight. Right now, under our capitalist government, we are already experiencing pilots who just passed, doctors who just passed, etc. These things have nothing to do with socialism. We have high school graduates who can't read, for crying out loud. What does this have to do with socialism? Nothing.

Everyone wants to bark about how socialism would never work, however, the system we have now isn't working all that well, either.

It isn't socialism that is bad, it's people. And until we get that straightened out, no system will ever fully work.

4 years ago
TPARTY(31) Disputed
1 point

Well as far as high school students who can't read...public schooling...mass education...socialist policy. We've turned into the farthest thing from a true capitalist society. Most of our policies have over time adopted big government style. The policies that all have failed have involved government and have been as a result of the rise of progressivism.

3 years ago | Side: No it doesn't work
AltonSmith(108) Disputed
1 point

As a metaphor, it demonstrates the lower quality that is inevitably generated in a socialist society.

3 years ago
0 points

Mercy and compassion always "work". Socialism never has. Pretending that socialism works is pretending that all people are prepared to put their neighbor ahead of their own interests. If you want people to be productive they need an incentive. Why do people think it unfair to reward the most productive? There is no way to make it "fair".(IE exactly equal) but we can keep working to provide opportunity. When I say mercy and compassion always work I mean they always work for the one showing them. They may or may not have an effect on the recipient but they always work for the one being merciful. If you want to help the less fortunate then help. If you want to force someone else to carry your load or someone else's that is ultimately destructive to society and individual relationships. In my limited experience those most interested in implementing Socialism are the least generous with their own time and money.

5 years ago
dwheel465(18) Disputed
1 point

Actually, mercy and compassion are not the way of capitalism. In fact, what makes capitalism bad is that corporate masters rise up, and end up with almost more power than the government. In capitalism, everyone is working for themselves. If their at the top, they won't give it up for "mercy" and "compassion". Then again, with socialism, there is at least more "mercy" and "compassion" than capitalism. So If those two do actually work, socialism would be the better choice. Socialism is forcing only the richest and most powerful businesses to help the poor and the hungry. It won't effect the middle class except in a good way. And the companies won't even mind. It would be like a little prick. You think about it for a while, and then it's gone from your mind. So since the corporate masters are capitalism, then CAPITALISM is the least generous with their time and money.

4 years ago

And the companies won't even mind. It would be like a little prick.

Companies are like women, they don't want a little prick ;)

4 years ago | Side: No it doesn't work
dwheel465(18) Disputed
1 point

The corporate masters are the only people getting ahead. They are the one's that have almost more power than the government. That is not "fair" and not even close to "justified". Socialism would force them to back off a bit. If they gave a little money to the poor, than small businesses would thrive, jobs would be created, and the corporate masters would just be big stores again. "Mercy" and "Compassion" aren't even in their vocabulary. They want everything for themselves, and they get it through capitalism. What you said, is exactly what they do. To quote you, "They may or may not have an effect on the recipient but they always work for the one being merciful." The only "mercy" that they show is not creating a total monopoly.

4 years ago | Side: It works if you try
AltonSmith(108) Disputed
1 point

Actually, in a capitalist system, everybody has the capability to start a business and become affluent, unlike socialist systems in which everybody (except for the government), is limited by the economic regulations.

3 years ago | Side: No it doesn't work
0 points

Socialism does not work it. The analogy of the grades was perfect. Socialism only creates more poverty. If you look to true Socialist countries they have extreme poverty and most of the black markets are because of it. The great economist Mises always has said this.

4 years ago

Have you ever noticed how when liberals are losing they say your argument is a strawman ;)

4 years ago
wforcier(97) Disputed
3 points

They say that because it is. The liberal form of government advocated by the left is not socialism. Since people may miss what I said, I will repeat: Liberals are not advocating for socialism. The capitalist system that Liberals suggest is light-years away from socialism. Further, since a straw man is completely ignoring the opponents argument, twisting it into something new, and refuting the new twisted point. That is a straw man. The opponents of liberalism take the liberal ideas and pretend it is socialism. Then they say socialism does not works. <- Definition of straw man

4 years ago
1 point

If you look at my latest arguments on fiscal policy and what the deficit means and the FED to our liberal friends I have had no rebuttals at all. Sometimes making too much sense of things actually sinks through.

4 years ago
Mahollinder(897) Disputed
2 points

The analogy of the grades was perfect.

The example in the OP is really only a strawman.

4 years ago
1 point

Oh yeah, Cuba has extreme poverty, how stupid. That is not Socialism the ON:Y thing you share in Socialism is The surplus Value, which no one deserves, the Gov. uses it to but free life necessities. The labor value is something you deserve for your labor and you get to keep it because it is yours. You buy luxuries with it.

2 years ago
-1 points

Some ideas that socialist believe are great and some are very very bad but in order to achieve them it is hell.

I stand by that and don't wish to be disputed.

4 years ago | Side: Unsettled


About CreateDebate
The CreateDebate Blog
Take a Tour
Help/FAQ
Newsletter Archive
Sharing Tools
Invite Your Friends
Bookmarklets
Partner Buttons
RSS & XML Feeds
Reach Out
Advertise
Contact Us
Report Abuse
Twitter
Basic Stuff
User Agreement
Privacy Policy
Sitemap
Creative Commons
©2014 TidyLife, Inc. All Rights Reserved. User content, unless source quoted, licensed under a Creative Commons License.
Debate Forum | Big shout-outs to The Bloggess and Andy Cohen.