3 ms·
>Simply having a welfare state or some nationalized industries is not socialism. Yes it is. It is a matter of degree. When you have an income tax, you have soc
by thelastuser 13y ago
>Simply having a welfare state or some nationalized industries is not socialism.
Yes it is. It is a matter of degree. When you have an income tax, you have socialized income. If you have a "workers factory", you have socialized the means of production.
Your first paragraph seemed like you had the right insights, yet you contradicted yourself by the second.
- kungfooguru 13y agoNo, I didn't. Even co-ops that exist today must sell on the capitalist market. There is no use-value based economic planning today.
- dnskw 13y agoCould they not exchange goods with other co-ops?
- thomasz 13y agoWell, yes. But that could only provide for a tiny amount of goods - at least if theco-op doesn't want to live in a primitivist hell.
- dnskw 13y agoThere could be coops around the world that trade with each other to get everything they need?
- thomasz 13y agoYes, if we agree on a primitivist definition of "everything they need", which most likely includes food, shelter entertainment and some artwork - perhaps even basic medicine. But no electric energy, electronics, cars, farm machinery, refrigerators, antibiotics and so on. Building this stuff requires massive amounts of capital.