442 Comments

• Digg
• Bury

Thanks for stating my point more clearly. I think I was dugg down for criticizing Stewart, which is not what I intended.

• Reply

• Digg
• Bury

"You are wrong. Association with an enterprise is voluntary in both Capitalist and Socialist economies (unless they are totalitarian). The difference is that under Capitalism, you would die if you didn't work, while under Socialism you would still have a dwelling, food, transportation, healthcare, education, and so on and so forth, paid for by the contributions that you (if and when you worked) and your fellow citizen give to society."So what do you do with those who refuse to work?"It really sounds like you are describing the Soviet Union, and not Socialism. Central planning is not an integral part of Socialism. A participatory/democratic, decentralized economy is to me, and many other Libertarian Socialists/Marxists/Communists, Anarcho-Syndicalists and Anarcho-Communists (who make up the largest group of todays Socialists and Communists) one of the most fundamental building blocks of Socialism."Whenever various socialists speak plainly, regardless of which particular little faction they represent, they advocate the same old top-down system seen in the old Soviet Union.

• Reply

• Digg
• Bury

@ andrew1193:"So what do you do with those who refuse to work?"Here in Sweden, for example, when someone refuses to work (for whatever reason, being that they are physically or psychologically unable, or just plain lazy) we give them housing, education, healthcare and all other necessities. They are also given a sum of money every month for food, clothing and whatever else they might need. The money they recieve is however much less than what a worker makes a month."Whenever various socialists speak plainly, regardless of which particular little faction they represent, they advocate the same old top-down system seen in the old Soviet Union."What are you talking about? I honestly don't understand what you are saying, because most Socialists do not advocate Soviet-style top-down planning, but rather bottom-up planning, where the citizen, worker or whoever else is involved participates in the planning.

• Reply

• Digg
• Bury

One thing no one has pointed out is that the very existence of a union obscures market prices. The purpose of a union is to raise wages by creating a monopoly. This is not inherently coercive, but it does obscure the wages that would exist in a competitive market. If the Guild did not exist, then the market would set competitive wages according to the laws of supply and demand, and the dilemma of how much an employee "deserves" would not exist. In a competitive market, individual writers could only demand what the market would bear.

• Reply

• Digg
• Bury

"i'm not advocating either way here, but to out-right dismiss socialism over capitalism smacks of foolish jingoism"Yeah...either that or a basic understanding of economics.

• Reply

• Digg
• Bury

very good of him.<a class="user" href="http://www.usfreeads.com/1399419-cls.html,&quot;&gt;http://www.usfreeads.com/1399419-cls.html,&lt;/a&gt; <a class="user" href="http://www.usfreeads.com/1405031-cls.html,&quot;&gt;http://www.usfreeads.com/1405031-cls.html,&lt;/a&gt;

• Reply

• Digg
• Bury

Don't believe in strikes.<a class="user" href="http://articlesreach.com&quot;&gt;http://articlesreach.com&lt;/a&gt; <a class="user" href="http://articlesdaily.info&quot;&gt;http://articlesdaily.info&lt;/a&gt; <a class="user" href="http://bestworldarticles.com&quot;&gt;http://bestworldarticles.com&lt;/a&gt;

• Reply