"Those who advocate socialism often point out that in a capitalist system the "for whom" decision is...

Question

determined by the distribution of income. If someone has more money they not only get more of the goods and services
produced but they are also able to cast more "dollar votes" in determining "what gets produced." Whereas, in a democratic socialist state where a democratic government controls what is produced and who gets it, every person has an equal say because each person can cast only one vote in the democratic process. Therefore, some socialists argue that socialism is more "just" than capitalism. What do you think?"

Answer 1

I wouldn't say there is nothing "good" about socialism. In theory, it is definitely more fair and "just" than capitalism, as economic decisions on what should be produced, as well as "for whom" as you say, are made by the people as a whole, not simply those who have the money (and thus economic power).

However, what socialism fails to correct are the economic incentives removed in a socialistic society to work your hardest. Take, for example, tin production. Suppose you are a tin producer, and you come upon a method of producing tin that cuts costs dramatically and simultaneously increases the quality of your tin. In a capitalistic society, you would gain a huge advantage in the tin market, and would reap many financial and economic rewards (such as increased market share, more control over the market).

In a socialistic society, however, finding this new method would also require you share it with everyone else. Soon, every single tin producer in the country would have benefited from your discovery, and you would receive no market benefits. At the same time, guess who would be responsible for teaching all the other producers how to use this new method. You. Will you receive additional compensation for instructing the other tin producers to manufacture tin in this much more efficient manner? Not in a socialistic society. As a result, most people wouldn't find it worth it to begin using this new method, as they wouldn't get only a small economic benefit and have to work very hard sharing the new information with the rest of their country.

While this new method is clearly a positive thing for society and the country as a whole, economically, socialism removes incentives for these innovations and inventions to be sought out and/or utilized. These are simply the economic incentives that socialism misconstrues, and I have not even begun to address the incentives for people to cheat and/or leave a socialistic society.

Hope that helps.

Answer 2

the line of socialism and a unfastened u . s . a . is a central authority's administration over the guy. there is not any defined cut back, via fact each thing has a modicum of socialism. as an occasion, welfare is a socialist theory. that doesn't make the rustic socialist, however the government does prepare socialist ideals. finished socialism is that 2d once you go searching, and you already know the the government has administration of your cash, your activity, and ultimately your life. it fairly is perceived as a robust factor via many, via fact they have the protection of the government in the back of them, whether it is likewise very risky, via fact the government has a potential over you and your life. Defining a precise line or time that socialism takes over is a confusing theory. you're on the acceptable music once you're conversing appropriate to the remoted circumstances i.e. taxes, wellbeing care, etc. This incorporates Europe, via fact the government has administration over wellbeing care, has administration of money (via exponentially increasing revenues taxes), or perhaps has administration over the quantity of electric energy, gas, and water the citizen makes use of. it fairly is the factor of finished administration that defines socialism. As reported earlier, there are some socialist innovations that have matriculated into the US, yet we are actually not a socialist u . s . a . (yet) via fact the government does no longer have finished possession over the voters of its u . s . a .. i'm hoping this solutions your question

Answer 3

Capitalism is a pejorative invented by Karl Marx to denigrate free enterprise.
There is nothing good about socialism. It does not work every time it is tried.
In a free enterprise/free market system. Everyone has equal opportunity. What you make of the opportunity is up to you. Countries where free enterprise is employed do the best.
After WWII Japan and Germany went from nothing to world leaders. Countries like Cuba and North Korea went down to nothing after dictators took over.