we already have socialized capitalism here in the US and capitalized socialism in China. Apparently it can be done because in reality, one system really can't work without the other. It's called equilibrium instead of extremism. Dragging society to either extreme has been proven time and again to definitely not work.
2007-03-17 17:44:20
·
answer #1
·
answered by In 2 Deep 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
The "capitalist" state decides that its economics will be purely leze faire.
10 years would see the "capitalist" country to have re-instated slavery and the poor house.
The middle class in the "capitalist" state would be about 4% of the population. The population would approximately consist of a ruling class, 1%, and a working poor, 92%.
In the "socialist" state, they decided that regulated capitalism is really the best economic model. And a parliamentary democracy is their government model.
After 10 years, the "socialist" state has an upper class encompassing 5% of the population. A poor class encompassing 5% of the population. And a vibrant middle class encompassing about 87% of the population.
I hope that helps.
2007-03-17 18:16:31
·
answer #2
·
answered by Vernon 3
·
2⤊
1⤋
So, how would you split on these economic models?
All corporations and rich people would go to the capitalist side, so they don't have to pay taxes and don't have to suffer any regulation of their activities.
Anyone needing government assistance goes to the socialist side, which has no money because it doesn't have a tax base.
Voluntary socialism only works where the interests of the community are stronger than personal greed. Corporations would not participate because it's against their profit motive.
Mandatory socialism only works where there is a large enough tax base to spread the costs around. And that doesn't work if you take away all those with financial resources.
So, everyone on the socialist side would die, and there would be nothing to merge.
2007-03-17 17:47:46
·
answer #3
·
answered by coragryph 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
Why do people think of we are going socialist. we are so some distance faraway from organic socialism. Having government carry out a little centers like police stress, infrastructure and protection isn't socialism. Obama isn't a socialist. he's a pragmatist. He knows of ways effective a capitalist device could be. He in basic terms desires to permit government help.
2016-10-02 07:40:22
·
answer #4
·
answered by herrion 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Quite literally, withdrawing all the capitalists and morally and religiously righteous from a society would leave the remaining group of people bereft of production and mental health.
Seriously, who would be around to pay the welfare bills?
And who would be around to watch their little marches up and down the streets, to hear their chants, to report their violence and slovenly dress?
2007-03-17 18:01:51
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
Do you think that is what the Government is trying to do by creating the North American Union between Mexico, Canada and the US?
2007-03-17 17:44:19
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
The exploited working class in the capitalist one would change the system.
2007-03-17 17:49:38
·
answer #7
·
answered by Longhaired Freaky Person 4
·
1⤊
1⤋
socialism and capitalism are economic systems.
2007-03-17 17:43:32
·
answer #8
·
answered by m s 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
This is a pointless exercise in unrealistic garbage.
2007-03-17 17:46:55
·
answer #9
·
answered by Zapatta McFrench 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
I would really like to see Cora show a little humor..At least once!!
2007-03-17 17:59:21
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋