Restaurants now charging 30 dollars for a regular size pizza in NY.

[Revoltingest]

These semantic problems go away when one acknowledges that a socialist can aspire to achieve public ownership of the means of production without viewing it as feasible now and immediately. It seems that some people assume someone who advocates that is "not a real socialist" if they don't try to force public ownership immediately or don't view it as currently achievable.

One's vision of an ideal society can be quite informative about their position.

The time frame isn't really relevant.
If one wants a flavor of socialism that is devoid of capitalism,
then whether it's immediate or the product of slow evolution,
the inherent empirically observed problems remain.

 

[Alien826]

This continues to be your problem with that criticism. You're not criticizing "real socialist countries", you're criticizing Communist countries. Vaguely, without specifics, just by name dropping them and assuming that's enough to quell favor for socialism.

Also, these so called communist countries ceased to be so years ago. Oh, they may have a form of communism or sometimes just the label, but in essence they are totalitarian (def: A system of government in which the people have virtually no authority and the state wields absolute control, for example, a dictatorship).

It may be true that countries that try to implement communism will always end up as totalitarian. I'll leave that to others to argue.

 

[Debater Slayer]

The time frame isn't really relevant.
If one wants a flavor of socialism that is devoid of capitalism,
then whether it's immediate or the product of slow evolution,
the inherent empirically observed problems remain.

I disagree. Different circumstances and eras play a crucial role in determining the effectiveness of any system, and so does the method of implementation (e.g., gradual and voluntary vs. forced and immediate).

 

[Revoltingest]

There are a myriad possibilities between the communism of the USSR and the capitalism of the US. Both are extremes with deeply harmful side effects.

Was USSR really communist?
There appeared to be too much personal
property to call it that instead of "socialist".
Another wrinkle....
USSR is actually considered "capitalist" per the RF definitions
used in restricted areas because USSR had "state capitalism".
Definitions for the restricted political areas.

It seems that you realize most self-identified supporters of socialism don't support the type of government in the USSR, Cuba, or North Korea.

I favor capitalism of this variety.
Social market economy - Wikipedia
Some might all it "socialism", yet rail against capitalism.
Weird.

 

[Alien826]

Now when will he get off the pot, & actually buy
that property so that we can get on with this, eh!

Just to lighten the mood, the expression is "either **** or get off the pot". What you want him to do is to "****". Getting off the pot means he doesn't buy the property.

 

[Revoltingest]

It seems that you realize most self-identified supporters of socialism don't support the type of government in the USSR, Cuba, or North Korea.

Yet they all use the same label, "socialist".
It also appears that those who want some capitalism
see this only as a transition to full blown socialism,
ie, the people own the means of production, with
no private ownership.

 

[Revoltingest]

I disagree. Different circumstances and eras play a crucial role in determining the effectiveness of any system, and so does the method of implementation (e.g., gradual and voluntary vs. forced and immediate).

If you want the eventual elimination of capitalism,
then the only issue is how soon it happens.
Slow implementation is just the tool...not the
system..
There's no way to do it without force, because
history demonstrates that people tend to free
economic association. Under socialism, that must
be made illegal, & punished.
Examples: USSR's black markets. Cubans want
to start businesses, but are prohibited.

 

[Revoltingest]

Just to lighten the mood, the expression is "either **** or get off the pot". What you want him to do is to "****". Getting off the pot means he doesn't buy the property.

I sanitized it.
BTW, using asterisks to partially mask profanity
is specifically against the rules. Use all asterisks,
& let context inform the reader.

Better fix that ASAP.

 

[Left Coast]

***THREAD CLOSED PENDING STAFF REVIEW***