Hey ya guys. Doing this research on Capitalism and Marxism and our professor asked us to neatly make a three-page analysis on which is applicable to our country. (Philippines) Anyway. Can anyone briefly compare the two? And if you happen to know the answer on which is applicable (Capi or Marx) to the Philippines that'd be a huge bonus. Many thanks!
2006-11-26 03:36:54 · 5 answers · asked by JCC 2 in Education & Reference ➔ Homework Help
Well,
The big differences between the two are going to be apparent from the reading you were likely given. But,
Marxism is an outlined economic system in which all resources are owned, or controlled by the state. This means that, at the bnottom line, everyone works for the state. Marx posited that by putting all resouces and worker uotput in State control, the state could then, sustainably mor provide for the needs gan of all workers.
Marx reasoned that if every worker worked to the best of thier ability, that the average output mcc would be sufficient. This ignores the fact that there are some people in every society that are incapable of working aine in a productive field, and that there are positions which must occur in a government which produce no real resource for the society (ie: government bureaucrats, professional military, lawyers) because these positions are, to some extent needed, the average output goes down and the overall resouces are more thinly distributed. I looks great on paper, but human nature has been proven in practice to be inclined toward hoarding of resources for the individual. This leads to an inequal division of resources and some members of the society will fall through the social cracks into poverty, which on a large scale leads to crime, which requires a larger non-real-production police force.
On the other hand is capitalism. Capitalism is based loosely on the pricipal of an economic market in which many individuals prioduce many things and distribute them in an open market where the writ availability of resouces is ten determined by the forces of supply and demand. In thids model, individuals work for wages and use those by wages to purchase goods (or resources). If there is a demand for a given resouce, then there opens a market for it.
once the market is established, the producers of the resource will adjust thier bprices for it until they reach the highest rate of return (the point at which the most units of the resouce are selling for the highest price). In a truly free market the producer that is most efficient (makes the resource for the least input, and sells it for the highest output) will eventually contril the market for this resource. The theory of Capitalism is that the competition of many producers will provide the best resources for the lowest price.
As to which of these applies to the Phillipines, I have no idea, but I venture to say that there are probably some markets that are privately controlled (Capitalist) and some that are nationalized under the Government (Socialized, or Marxist) only a review of the institutions of your country will answer that question.
2006-11-26 04:40:22 · answer #1 · answered by morganmccaine 4 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Marxism Vs Capitalism
2016-09-30 11:19:31 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This Site Might Help You.
RE:
Capitalism vs Marxism?
Hey ya guys. Doing this research on Capitalism and Marxism and our professor asked us to neatly make a three-page analysis on which is applicable to our country. (Philippines) Anyway. Can anyone briefly compare the two? And if you happen to know the answer on which is applicable (Capi or Marx) to...
2015-08-20 15:51:01 · answer #3 · answered by ? 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Free market Capitalism ( which btw doesn't legally exist in the US ) is the true father of Marxism So if you want to see a true Marxist Revolution in this country then go ahead give the Capitalists whatever they want
2016-03-18 02:58:34 · answer #4 · answered by Marie 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Karl Marx attempted to create a scientific theory of politics and economics. He said that Capitalism (he invented these names) would give rise to Socialism, which would eventually give rise to Communism, under which there would be no government and all things would be shared according to need. Communism as Marx envisioned it has never developed; it only went as far a Socialism.
Under Capitalism, private business is encouraged. This includes small, medium, and large businesses. Under Socialism, the State (the government) owns at least the larger businesses which Marx refers to as "the means of production," so they are public property. Even small businesses are discouraged, but not always forbidden.
The Philippines is a capitalist country. I am from the U.S. and have limited knowledge of the Philippines. But I am sure that, like all modern Capitalist countries, there are some Socialist aspects. For instance, I expect that the Post Office department (whatever you call it in PI) is run by the government. In the past, there were only private postal services. You probably have also public utilities such as electricity, sewers, etc. Maybe medical care is partly Socialized, I don't know about PI. In the US we have medical care socialized for the poor but middle and upper income people pay for their own. We have public water, sewer, electric, and natural gas companies, as well as public schools. We have to pay for our utilities, though; they are socialized only for the sake of efficiency, not to provide services without pay, so they are only partly socialized. The schools, however, are free. There are also private schools that people pay for. In a thoroughly Socialist country, this would be forbidden.
When you are writing your paper you can mention any government agencies that provide services to the public instead of private companies.
In Socialist countries, of course, most people are government employees because there is little or no private employment. The percentage of the population employed by the government is probably a good measure of the degree of socialism in the country.
Hope this helps.
2006-11-26 05:05:39 · answer #5 · answered by The First Dragon 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
For the best answers, search on this site https://shorturl.im/awUaJ
Yes Our dear leader, Obama (Marxist) has turned the tide against freedom. We must stop him in Nov., or we may never turn things around. People want to blame Bush for this mess, which in part I agree, but this man has not changed coarse. His stepped on the gas and we are going at warp 10 towards Socialism.
2016-04-04 04:02:51 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
1. all free trade is voluntary. there is no free trade unless all parties agree on buy sell trade. there is no force involved.
all trade is by definition free free free.
2. all markets are based on free price. prices go up down or are flat.
the medium exchange is money. all prices is based prices or a medium of exchange like gold sliver or a fiat currency like the US dollar.
2015-12-27 09:22:40 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋