We haven't had any socialism. The Eastern Europe dictatorships weren't socialism, nor communism. They were just fiefs ran by a bunch of opportunists.
That experience (and the subsequent collapse of all Iron Courtain regimes) has biased people's views on socialism.
The reality is that socialism hasn't been given a chance. Real socialism is superior than capitalism in that all people are given a chance. Socialism does not mean equal revenue for all people, it just means that the people who would normally do bad under a capitalist regime (or the least "adapted" to use a Darwinist term) would be given a chance to progress. That's socialism.
2006-12-17 12:18:58
·
answer #1
·
answered by zap 5
·
1⤊
1⤋
Socialism is a state of choice. The person sometimes chooses this envoirment because it is safe to them. It also may not really be exactly what they really want. It is easier and safer. Many people and doctors of the field have a tendency to label.
I think that lots of persons that suffer from aloneness, really want a mate. There is just a factor called lack of the know how. The general chit chat some folks just do not know how to do. It also is lots of the time, pure-d-nonsence. So why bother. I am a deep person and look to why and what of others actions. I will not say on the other hand, "He or she has a problem just because. Many people are like a magnet and attract others and the keep them. Many do not attract others to come over and talk.
People notice a person sitting alone, but never try to greet or be polite. The loner then decides to never put them self in this position. They go to the safe place again. Time passes, they forget and go back out again. People are alot of the cause of others lonliness. The popular never have time to slow down to think inside and feel their own feelings. I think they are the ones that should be afraid. The value of their happy times are based many times on the making fun of the ways of the deep think.
What is it with beings, I thought they are suppose to be human.
2006-12-17 20:33:00
·
answer #2
·
answered by memphistnhomeboundhaircutter 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
If you're talking about democratic socialism with a mixed market system, I say bring it on.
Wait a minute... it's already here. Most modern democracies already have lots of socialist mechanisms. Socialism is NOT the same as communism.
Pure capitalism doesn't work because of inevitable market failures. Government is needed to step in to assist in fixing these failures and regulating markets to prevent them.
And unless you want poor houses of the last century for seniors, government needs to supply some services and safety nets beyond just defence.
Peace
2006-12-19 08:10:03
·
answer #3
·
answered by zingis 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
Socialism goes against human social nature.
2006-12-17 20:13:46
·
answer #4
·
answered by InTROLLigent 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
only place socialism works is in team sports all for one one for all. As a way of government it sucks.
2006-12-17 20:16:23
·
answer #5
·
answered by crusinthru 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
until theres a way to expose and root out corruption at the top that revolves around international bankers and their control of money , no system truley works ... the common people are always under their heel and they fleece them of their wealth.
2006-12-17 20:16:08
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
It's been tried and failed. It doesn't respect human freedom and goes against natural human instincts.
And no, an all-knowing supercomputer ain't going to solve the problem either!
2006-12-19 02:27:29
·
answer #7
·
answered by Uncle Pennybags 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
Well...It's certainly working out for Britian.
2006-12-17 20:14:18
·
answer #8
·
answered by Raï 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Redistribution of the wealth is not a good idea.
2006-12-17 20:26:18
·
answer #9
·
answered by JudiBug 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Not a good system,but I and my liberal cronies would love to implement it in the U.S.A.
2006-12-17 20:15:38
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋