Free market vs socialism? which is better?

Question

In a free market, the corporations dominate and power is taken from the people.
In a socialist society the government has more power than the corporations and often redistributes wealth from the highest income earners to help the lowest, for the good of the whole society....less crime etc...

The problem lies in, who is more corrupt? the government or the profit driven corporations,,,
Sometimes when the government has to much power they become corrupt... I do admit, but we do elect them.... that can be fixed......
also note that the government can provide services much cheaper with no need to maximize profits,,,, would you prefer your electric company to be for profit? or a service handled by government? Which do you think would be cheaper?

Corporations have way too much power, even over our media.

are you for the free market or government control?
which corrupts the fastest and which one is easiest to replace

People choose through their forced purchase decisions... the corps corner the industry to force us in the direction that is profitable for them, rather than what is best for the people, government control is needed to aid us...

Maybe this is the difference between you cons and i. You do not see the corruption. I blame that on the media that keeps you confused as to what IS in your best interest.

actually i am a white redneck from southern alabama..lol..

Answer 1

old question. same answer.

Answer 2

Your comparison starts with a false comparison. You choose to juxtapose an idealistic, naive view of socialism with your own inaccurate view of what happens in capitalist societies.

In reality, the corporations are dominated by customers and must submit totally to their will or go out of business. Take a look at Ford and GM. Giant, evil, powerful companies, right? Well, too bad for them that they ignored consumer demands and made cars that we don't like. They've been losing billions and billions of dollars every single year.

As for socialist countries, the wealth of rich is indeed taken. However, it is not redistributed to the poor necessarily. It is really the case that everyone becomes poor except for the ruling political elite. Further, the utter economic destruction wreaked on nations who commit to these asinine policies is so great these nations just do not have the money to better the lives of anyone. Take a look at every single socialist nation on the earth, if you will. Vietnam, Russia, China, certain Middle Eastern nations, North Korea, Poland, East Germany, Romania, Cambodia, Laos, India, Cuba or Zimbabwe. What do all those countries have in common. Socialism and complete, utter poverty.

The problem is not who is more corrupt, but what system better serves the demands of the people and provides a higher standard of living to the citizens of the country. The very clear answer is capitalism.

The case of power companies is different than most situations due to reasons that you don't seem to grasp. Power companies are what some economists might call a natural monopoly. That is, they are company whose service requires such a large infrastructure that it would be cheaper for the government to impose a monopoly and regulate the profits they earn. It generally doesn't work out quite that well, buts another story. It is not the case with most companies that the government will either a) make the products that people want or b) make it cheaper.

I have included a portion from a book regarding myths about capitalism that you should read by Thomas Sowell. He is a world renowned economist at Standford. He is formerly a Marxist who converted after years of studying and graduate school.

Answer 3

A free market, regulated by an open, democratic government, will outperform any command economy, any day,without many major abuses of power.

Notice I didn't say "without ANY abuses of power". It's human nature to want more than you have, and some people will always find ways around the laws, or will break them. But they are almost always caught, eventually.

And an open, democratic government will either be able to control the excesses of the free market most of the time, or else the voters will replace their elected officials with someone else who can do the job.

And if you think that "the government can provide services much cheaper" because of "no need to maximize profit", then you haven't seen a free market in action. A little competition will do wonders to bring down costs, and drive up quality.

From your user name, I'm guessing you might be in China. If so, you haven't seen either a well-regulated free market, OR an open, democratic government. I sincerely hope that you do see both some day, as it would be a major improvement over what I see there now.

Answer 4

You can go on and on about 'corporate power' as much as you like, and maybe if you repeat it enough some 'useful idiots' will be persuaded, but the fact is all "power and control" exists through the government.

A corporation cannot enforce taxes by threat of imprisonment.
A corporation cannot declare a war on a foreign nation.
A corporation cannot make laws regulating a competing media outlet.
A corporation simply does not have the infrastructure to control the population like government does.


Guess what though, when corporations want to do those things, they will tell you the government needs more power and money for your own good. Some really smart politicians like Clinton will speak out against the corporations while taking their donations and seeking to expand government power so as to do their bidding.

So what you end up with is what we have, a highly regulated market where corporations buy and own the government mechanisms of societal control. Anything that gives more power to the government gives more power to the select few corporations who are in on the game.

A free market is the only way to PREVENT corporations from gaining the power to impose prison sentances, taxes, and war. What are they going to do, raise prices? They already do that now, and WORSE! Its the government itself that allows it and facilitates it.

Answer 5

I'm for free choice, so i would have to support the free market. I'd have to say the government is more corrupt. The government has more money than any corporation would ever dream of and they have no competition. Where do you get off on government services are cheaper? Have you ever thought of all the sales, excise, income, and property taxes you pay. I wouldn't say that is necessarily cheap.

You sound like a communist, maybe you should take a trip to North Korea so that you can see what real government control is like.

Answer 6

Why must it be one way or the other?

A libertarian free market would turn this country into a third-world, polluted cesspool where only the rich had safety, security, education and options.

A state-controlled socialist economy would dry up and collapse, destroying opportunity, and in the end, make just about everyone do without something.

Free market capitalism with government oversight, standards, and regulation designed to protect the public from the potential abuses of corporations works best.

Answer 7

We are all members of the 9/11 generation.

The defining challenges of the twentieth century ended with the fall of the Berlin Wall. Full recognition of the first great challenge of the twenty-first century came with the attacks of September 11, 2001, even though Islamist terrorists had begun their assault on world order decades before. Confronted with an act of war on American soil, our old assumptions about conflict between nation-states fell away. Civilization itself, and the international system, had come under attack by a ruthless and radical Islamist enemy.

America and its allies have made progress since that terrible day. We have responded forcefully to the Terrorists' War on Us, abandoning a decadelong -- and counterproductive -- strategy of defensive reaction in favor of a vigorous offense. And we have set in motion changes to the international system that promise a safer and better world for generations to come.

But this war will be long, and we are still in its early stages. Much like at the beginning of the Cold War, we are at the dawn of a new era in global affairs, when old ideas have to be rethought and new ideas have to be devised to meet new challenges.

The next U.S. president will face three key foreign policy challenges. First and foremost will be to set a course for victory in the terrorists' war on global order. The second will be to strengthen the international system that the terrorists seek to destroy. The third will be to extend the benefits of the international system in an ever-widening arc of security and stability across the globe. The most effective means for achieving these goals are building a stronger defense, developing a determined diplomacy, and expanding our economic and cultural influence. Using all three, the next president can build the foundations of a lasting, realistic peace.

Answer 8

Neither mixed systems always operate best, so the best factors of each strengthen the whole.
In a solid capitalist system, the goal is to wipe out the competition to create monopoly and prevent choice.
In a solid socialist system the goal is to cut out the middle man so to speak, and limit choice from the get-go.

so to install minor factors of each to prevent the bad aspects of both is the best and most efficient route to a truley free market.

Answer 9

Last time I checked the Government runs very little cheaply or efficiently. - But apparantly from your comments- those who don't agree with you are unable to think for themselves and are just the pawns of propaganda.

Wake-up. Life is struggle- that is the only constant- there will never be utopia, and the concept of "fairness" is a childish and unrealistic notion.

Answer 10

the free market is the best. why?
because if you think a corporation is too corrupt then you can start your own and if your corporation, you can not start your own government here in America

Answer 11

relatively, Socialism is extra on the communist facet (the government controls you and tells you what to do), and loose industry is linked with a democracy (to no longer be puzzled with democrats, because of the fact they have a socialist coverage). as an occasion, government wellness care is socialist, and fairly some different international locations had it in the past the U. S. accompanied it. it is Socialist because of the fact the government is telling human beings what to do and giving it to human beings for loose, even with the incontrovertible fact that it won't be loose because of the fact human beings pay for it with taxes. It means that a hardworking man or woman spends his money on somebody who's in simple terms too lazy to aim to get a activity because of the fact he's getting what he desires for loose besides. This creates a rustic with very undesirable cities with fairly some crime, to no longer point out inflation (money being properly worth much less). Socialists mean to do good, even with the incontrovertible fact that that is like giving a homeless man or woman money. that isn't help him interior the long-term. What could incredibly help is to aim to help him hit upon a activity. Socialists could supply him the money, whilst somebody who believes in a loose industry (a Republican) could help him discover the activity. long tale short, socialism tells you what to do and and a loose industry facilitates you back to a selection the way you desire your life to be. So i'm going to assist you to come back to a selection which sounds extra perfect. in my opinion, I want balloting (loose industry) and making my own alternatives.