nothing yet. But when a country has a humongous, enormous, gigantic amount of resources such as food, tools, and everyday stuff, Communism is the best, when everyone gets more then what they need
many countries tried Communism before, but it didn't work. Most of them changed into a capitalism economy now, even though bearing the communist banner.
examples: China's economy is more capitalist than the typical capitalist economy, it bears a communism banner, and is becoming the second in GDP (PPP) to USA; Vietman shortly followed china's steps, not admitting the conversion to capitalism, and become a rising economy
2006-10-28 11:06:12
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
There is, since Capitalism is a system that contains within in, the possible seeds of its own destruction.
Bottomline is that Capitalism creates huge conglomerates that dominate the world.
All the Economic theories that are usually taught in schools, the 'common sense economics' that arm chair economists believe in, is mainly premised on a system which approaches perfect competition, where excesses are quickly eliminnated by competition. But when competitors are few, when barriers to entry are huge, these theories do not apply anymore.
Capitalism has created beastly conglomerates.
Two possible seeds are:
1 The Principal Agent Problem
2 The Social Principle
The principal agent problem is a simple one. Self interest means that the CEOs and Boards of Directors work for themselves, not the shareholders. Their aim is to increase bonuses and salaries. If people realise that ordinary shareholders have no power, that there is, in fact, a 'class' divide between the people at the top of society and the rest, those who live off bonuses and share options and those who live off salaries or are self employed, then things will change.
There will be a reallignment of the system, and that will modify the capitalist system to make it less along 'class' lines.
The social principle simply means that to some people, profit maximisation is simply not the aim of their lives; these are people 'with a conscience', people who are 'socially responsible'... If these people put their money where their mouths are, if they buy from organisations that behave according to the principles they espouse, and if there are enough of these people, then the aim of corporations will switch from pure profit/Bonus maximisation towards a more social form.
2006-10-31 03:34:47
·
answer #2
·
answered by ekonomix 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Time Banking is the only real and fair alternative.
I work for you for an hour you work for me for an hour.
Everyone in the time bank system has a equal worth...but at the moment there are way too many self important people bouncing around - for that to ever happen.
This system is up and running in deprived parts of britain, is areas such as cleaning and care for the elderly, and can be extended for every service sector.
2006-11-01 08:55:08
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
There probably is but it would entail far more compassion than exists today. Capitalism is driven by individual greed and a society's free choice in the marketplace. Socialism is a more dictatorial government controlling the masses by eliminating choice and competition.
In today's society there are two kinds of people, those that need to be led and those that don't. Some think that capitalism is wholly made up of people that don't need someone else to make decisions for them. That we are free to make our own decisions. When in fact the advertisers and media and government work so hard to influence how we think and how we choose to live.
At least in a democratic society, some are allowed to ultimately make our own decisions. Those that oppose a democratic society show that they don't believe the average person is capable of making decisions for themselves.
2006-10-28 11:47:47
·
answer #4
·
answered by the_pharaoh109 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Another word for capitalism could aptly be competition, The alternative to this already exists and needs to grow, the voluntary sector, and the co-operative sector. Every little child knows, we need to share the world. Share and sharing is a word which could be applied to every major crisis, war and injustice in the world. Oil crisis. global warming, israel/palestine, are land and resource sharing issues. The pyramid represents competition. The circle represents sharing. This is an age old question.
2006-10-28 16:57:09
·
answer #5
·
answered by green_womble 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
not one that has been published and discovered yet. But, we won't know the capitalistic system has been replaced until far after it has happened. A system like capitalism isn't forced or planned, it is only structured so it can develop on it's own.
2006-10-28 11:58:04
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
we need the social capitalism.
social capitalism serves the needs of the society. agriculture can be termed as example for social capitalism. agriculturists produce the goods to meet their demands and as well as to the needs of the remaining society. hence the so called capitalists
deemed to be richest among world should realize the need of the hour to cater the needs of the society as a whole irrespective of caste, creed, gender,religion,developed and undeveloped societies. that like of social capitalism alone saves the world to reduce the conflicts and wars in the world..
2006-10-28 11:52:51
·
answer #7
·
answered by prince47 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
It does not seem so in this world. Many things would have to change in order for a viable alternative to succeed.
2006-10-28 11:34:29
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Why would we want an alternative to Freedom and free enterprize. What do you suggest slavery.
2006-10-28 11:39:52
·
answer #9
·
answered by Roadkill 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
There is always a better way, it just remains to be found. I have a plan be we aren't technologically advanced enough yet.
2006-10-28 11:45:48
·
answer #10
·
answered by xenobyte72 5
·
0⤊
1⤋