A socialist system does not allow ?

Question

A. use of money

B. private ownership of capital goods

C. inequality of incomes

D. private ownership of consumer goods.

Answer 1

I know of several which allow all four.

It's hard to define "private," "capital," and "inequality" to classify the others, e.g.:

1. Are worker-owned cooperatives "private?"

2. Are a repairman's tools "capital?"

3. Is one person getting a higher income for a harder or risker job "unequal?"

Answer 2

SOME socialist systems do not allow inequality of incomes - but the UK or Sweden are pretty socialist, and there is plenty of inequality of incomes there.

Answer 3

One must be careful to make one's intended meaning
known when using the terms "socialism" and "capitalism"
(as well as related terms) because they have undergone
polemic re-definition over the decades that causes a great
deal of confusion.

In the traditional sense, "capitalism" means the ownership
and control of the means of production by a class of
"capitalists" (in the traditional sense, the owners of capital,
or means of production used by workers other than the
capitalists/owners themselves) and an economic and political
system that favors this.

In the traditional sense, "socialism" means the ownership
and control of the means of production by the workers
themselves, whether as individuals, cooperatives, collectives,
communal groups, or through the state, and an economic
and political system that favors this. One should note that
this does not necessarily mean by the people as a whole,
nor does it necessarily mean state ownership, nor does it
necessarily imply a non-market form of organization;
historically, anarcho-individualism (e.g., in the free-
market form advocated by Benjamin Tucker) has been
an important form of socialism.

In the later re-definition, "socialism" means the ownership
and control of the means of production by the people as a
whole, generally by means of the state, or simply the
ownership and control of the means of production by the
state, or more broadly any form of central planning by
the state.

In the later re-definition, "capitalism" means the private
(non-government) ownership of the means of production,
and more generally the absence of central planning by the
state.

Matters have become especially confused because these
terms have been used in ways that include both the
traditional sense and the later re-definition of the terms.
Thus, Marxist-Leninists will define "socialism" in the
traditional sense, but at the same time refer to examples
of "socialism" in the later re-definition, in order to gain
support for totalitarian Bolshevik regimes that actually
destroy any examples of "socialism" in the traditional
sense; likewise, their "capitalist" opponents will do the
same, in order to support the belief that There Is No
Alternative (TINA) to "capitalism" other than a tyrannic
despotism. (In this connection, one should note that
according to Marx and Engels, the "dictatorship of the
proletariat" is a transitional stage between capitalism
and socialism/communism, which will not exist until
the state has withered away to nothing.)

In the same way, advocates of "capitalism" will define the
term with the later re-definition, but actually refer to concrete
examples that instead fit the original sense, even citing as
positive examples dictatorships such as Pinochet's in Chile.
And just as with "socialism", some opponents of
"capitalism" will do likewise in order to discredit it in the
sense of the later re-definition. At present, state-corporate
globalization, in which there is rule by states, corporations,
international financial institutions (IFIs), and the like, is
the typical form of "capitalism" actually advocated by
most avowed capitalists, rather than a truly free market.
This effectively means that there are (at the least) three
common usages of the terms "socialism" and "capitalism",
and so it behoves one to make clear in what sense one is
using these and related terms, and to what empirical examples
one refers.

One should also note the term "state-capitalism", used
by socialists (in the traditional sense) to refer to state
ownership and control of the means of production in
varying degrees ranging from capitalist dictatorships
such as Pinochet's through to Marxist-Leninist
dictatorships such as the Bolshevik regimes. This
extends the traditional sense of "capitalism", as the
state (at least partially) replaces the traditional "private"
capitalist class to varying degrees.

News & Views for Anarchists & Activists:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/smygo/

Answer 4

it is supposed to be c), but what is the context of inequality?

Answer 5

the answer is B.