Yes, it is an either or scenario. Its not for debate, that captialist systems rapidly move technology forward based of free market competition. Whereas Socialist and Communist systems can only try to keep pace under a Stalinist regime (with the blood of millions) and even then, not come close to what free societies achieve.
Whats forgotten of course, is the ability of technology, in and of itself, to raise the standard of living for the poor. With great efficiency, comes cheaper means of providing the basics. Of course, to the narrow-minded leftists, its an either or proposition. Its better for all to live in a mudpit, than some living is great wealth while the rest live in an "unequal" level of modest comfort.
2006-11-09 06:53:28 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Technology. Just look at Russia to see why socialism is a horrific idea. A generation living under the government of the USSR has created an entire country of people with entitlement minds. Since coming out from that government, they have no work ethic, and that is why you see all the dilapidated buildings that there are in Russia.
2006-11-09 06:58:19 · answer #1 · answered by djp8605 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
None of the above in & of itself. Entitlements never will. Technology only if they have the wisdom to learn it. Educating ones self is the only solution to increate your standard of living.
One has to start with what are the catagories the masses have shown they are willing to pay a premium for. The catagories are 1) Confort/convienance 2) Recreation 3) Prestige 4) Safety is in the middle, because it is a requirement for living the masses feel that business and/or government should subsidize it.
Every tax break is because the government wants to encourage some action by those that have assets.
2006-11-09 07:27:40 · answer #2 · answered by viablerenewables 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If you already have the answer, why are you asking?
But your comparisons aren't quite right. Technology is not a form of governement. Capitalism is closer to correct. Technology is developed in both forms of goverment.
Of course, we know empirically that Capitalistic economies/govs/societies work much better at developing technology and improving the lives of the "masses".
Most all communist/socialst countries have atrocious economies and questionable living environments.
And in reality-- those real-world examples (former USSR, China, Cuba, etc.) do not have equality for all in any real form. The only equality is the shared misery of those who are not in power -- gov, industry leaders, etc. China, while still very communist is only growing like wildfire becuase it has implemented economic reforms and embraced many elements of capitalism.
Now if you're suggesting the USA is one of those socialst countries or heading there, you're dead wrong. We are far from that sort of environment and not likely at all to go there.
2006-11-09 07:06:35 · answer #3 · answered by dapixelator 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The straw man argument: Tell me what my position is and then challenge me to defend it. You're argument is a fallacy. We can have democracy without every tax break, every break in general. going to the wealthiest 5% of us. Tell me that a homeless family in the snow is living in "modest comfort' and I'll tell you to open your eyes a little wider.
And who, exactly, has tried hardest to keep technology down? The Democrats or the republichrists? I'm surprised we're not back on the pre-Copernican view of the solar system!
2006-11-09 07:01:27 · answer #4 · answered by Schmorgen 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's not technology itself that is important, it is free enterprise. Technology is an effect of free enterprise. Adam Smith had said, and it's true, that more is done for the poor as a byproduct of free enterprise than from programs set up directly to help them. The reality is greed makes the world go around. If you can appeal to people's greed, you can make a lot more changes in the world than if you appeal to their altruism.
2006-11-09 06:59:11 · answer #5 · answered by Chris J 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Technology.
2006-11-09 08:29:24 · answer #6 · answered by yupchagee 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
technological know-how and technologies has incredibly helped each human beings in lots of diverse techniques-which comprise helped in bobbing up the numerous below bobbing up countries into more advantageous countries, helped in additional advantageous transportation device, additionally made it achieveable to circulate to and hit upon many places in the international as nicely as in area that become thought impossible earlier the form of the technological know-how and technologies, yet those are in basic terms reward we even have the risks such through fact the ozone layer depletion through severe use of chemical compounds, soil erosion through deforestation, etc. nicely i might incredibly prefer to end with the help of asserting that technological know-how and technologies is rather significant even with the undeniable fact that it must additionally recollect our environment
2016-11-23 12:57:56 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Reactionary conservativism is never the answer because, as you illustrated, Right wingers only think in terms of black and white.
Your stating that "it's not for debate" is irony considering that you call leftists narrow minded.
Have a Nice Day!
2006-11-09 06:58:47 · answer #8 · answered by Sherri 2 Kewl 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Neither. Good, Republican economics will.
2006-11-09 06:55:59 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Jihad
2006-11-09 06:55:09 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋