13 ms·

[citation needed]

by elros 11y ago

[citation needed]

cbeach 11y ago
The USSR, Cuba, Vietnam, Communist China, North Korea, Venezuela, Argentina...
- bottled_poe 11y ago
  There are plenty of "free market" countries where the economy has failed too, so I think a little more evidence is required...
  - afsina 11y ago
    Tell me some of those plenty. When there is little to no coercion from government I doubt any free-market society will fail. And even if it fails, it cannot be as miserably as those socialist ones. Freeing markets almost-always brings better economy.
    - bottled_poe 11y ago
      I guess that depends how we define failure. Some might say 14.8% poverty in a western country would be a failure. https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2015/demo/p60-252.pdf https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publicatio...
      - afsina 11y ago
        Looking at the many definitions of poverty, historical living standards and global averages, I say it is quite ok.
      - mineshaftgap 11y ago
        I make $70,000, pay little in taxes, except property, and the government pays for my children's healthcare. People misunderstand the US. Hell, I qualify for public housing, I guess I am considered as living in poverty, which is fairly ludicrous.
- realusername 11y ago
  so it's either full communist dictatorship or wild west capitalism ? I thought the cold war propaganda was over by now.
  - kolbe 11y ago
    It's pretty convenient for him to call the China that struggled several decades ago "communist" while that same country today, whose growth is one of the most impressive economic events in history, is credited with being capitalist (lol).
- afsina 11y ago
  They will say, "They did not fail because of socialism." or "They were not true socialists." Anarcho-Capitalist Hoppe explains this in the book "A theory of Socialism and Capitalism" (Bear in mind that he puts russian style socialism, social-democracy, conservatism and social engineering in "Socialism" category with varying degrees.): "....Nonetheless, socialism is very much alive and well, even in the West where social-democratic socialism and conservatism have remained powerful ideologies. How could this come about? One important factor is that its adherents abandoned the original idea of socialism's economic superiority and instead, resorted to a completely different argument: that socialism might not be economically superior but is morally preferable. This claim will be considered later . But that is certainly not the end of the story. Socialism has even regained strength in the field of economics. This became possible because socialism combined its forces with the ideology of empiricism, which traditionally has been strong in the Anglo-Saxon world and which, in particular through the influence of the so-called Vienna-circle of positivist philosophers, became the dominant philosophy-epistemology-methodology of the twentieth century, not only in the field of the natural sciences but also in the social sciences and economics...." "....No matter what the charges brought against socialism are, then, as long as they are based on empirical evidence the empiricist-socialist could argue that there is no way of knowing in advance what the results of a certain policy scheme will be without actually enacting it and letting experience speak for itself. And whatever the observable results are, the original socialist idea—the “hard-core” of one’s “research programme” as the neo-Popperian philosopher Lakatos would have called it —can always be rescued easily by pointing out some previously neglected, more or less plausible variable, whose noncontrol is hypothesized to be responsible for the negative result, with the newly revised hypothesis again needing to be tried out indefinitely, ad infinitum. Experience only tells us that a particular socialist policy scheme did not reach the goal of producing more wealth; but it can never tell us if a slightly different one will produce any different results, or if it is possible to reach the goal of improving the production of wealth by any socialist policy at all."

[citation needed]

by elros 11y ago

[citation needed]

cbeach 11y ago

The USSR, Cuba, Vietnam, Communist China, North Korea, Venezuela, Argentina...

bottled_poe 11y ago
There are plenty of "free market" countries where the economy has failed too, so I think a little more evidence is required...
- afsina 11y ago
  Tell me some of those plenty. When there is little to no coercion from government I doubt any free-market society will fail. And even if it fails, it cannot be as miserably as those socialist ones. Freeing markets almost-always brings better economy.
  - bottled_poe 11y ago
    I guess that depends how we define failure. Some might say 14.8% poverty in a western country would be a failure. https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2015/demo/p60-252.pdf https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publicatio...
    - afsina 11y ago
      Looking at the many definitions of poverty, historical living standards and global averages, I say it is quite ok.
    - mineshaftgap 11y ago
      I make $70,000, pay little in taxes, except property, and the government pays for my children's healthcare. People misunderstand the US. Hell, I qualify for public housing, I guess I am considered as living in poverty, which is fairly ludicrous.
realusername 11y ago
so it's either full communist dictatorship or wild west capitalism ? I thought the cold war propaganda was over by now.
- kolbe 11y ago
  It's pretty convenient for him to call the China that struggled several decades ago "communist" while that same country today, whose growth is one of the most impressive economic events in history, is credited with being capitalist (lol).
afsina 11y ago
They will say, "They did not fail because of socialism." or "They were not true socialists." Anarcho-Capitalist Hoppe explains this in the book "A theory of Socialism and Capitalism" (Bear in mind that he puts russian style socialism, social-democracy, conservatism and social engineering in "Socialism" category with varying degrees.): "....Nonetheless, socialism is very much alive and well, even in the West where social-democratic socialism and conservatism have remained powerful ideologies. How could this come about? One important factor is that its adherents abandoned the original idea of socialism's economic superiority and instead, resorted to a completely different argument: that socialism might not be economically superior but is morally preferable. This claim will be considered later . But that is certainly not the end of the story. Socialism has even regained strength in the field of economics. This became possible because socialism combined its forces with the ideology of empiricism, which traditionally has been strong in the Anglo-Saxon world and which, in particular through the influence of the so-called Vienna-circle of positivist philosophers, became the dominant philosophy-epistemology-methodology of the twentieth century, not only in the field of the natural sciences but also in the social sciences and economics...." "....No matter what the charges brought against socialism are, then, as long as they are based on empirical evidence the empiricist-socialist could argue that there is no way of knowing in advance what the results of a certain policy scheme will be without actually enacting it and letting experience speak for itself. And whatever the observable results are, the original socialist idea—the “hard-core” of one’s “research programme” as the neo-Popperian philosopher Lakatos would have called it —can always be rescued easily by pointing out some previously neglected, more or less plausible variable, whose noncontrol is hypothesized to be responsible for the negative result, with the newly revised hypothesis again needing to be tried out indefinitely, ad infinitum. Experience only tells us that a particular socialist policy scheme did not reach the goal of producing more wealth; but it can never tell us if a slightly different one will produce any different results, or if it is possible to reach the goal of improving the production of wealth by any socialist policy at all."