It's A Wonderful Life - Story Of Capitalists VS Socialists. Capitalist Is The Bad Guy

[Saudade]

Interesting, I hadn’t heard about the correcting of Bernie. I haven’t followed these small European countries all that closely but my basic understanding is they were pretty capitalistic in nature for quite awhile, reached a point where a number of them turned to a more socialistic economic model and when that brought down their economic growth they turned away from it.

More or less. With Sweden, that's basically what happened. They were more socialized in the 70s and 80s, but started moving towards privatization in the 90s. They've reached a point now where you could argue that they are more open in many markets than the US is.

Denmark is more economically free than Sweden. I don't know as much about their economic history, but they've been trending towards more privatization as well.

This is a good rundown of where various nations are in terms of economic freedom: https://www.heritage.org/index/ranking

 

[PoliTalker]

Hello Woko Haram,

Bailey wasn't a socialist. He encouraged private giving. He didn't ask the state to force everyone to give.

Well, that depends on your definition of a socialist. The Savings and Loan could only operate if there were enough people in that social group to save money to cover the ones who wanted to borrow. It required a group committed to a common social goal. And they couldn't all take their money back out or it would cause it to crash. So there had to be some community trust that, together, the society could work, but if each person only thought of himself it would fail.

 

[PoliTalker]

Hello Woko Haram,

There's a big difference between socialism and having socialized amenities. None of the Scandinavian economies match a socialism by the standard definition. Venezuela is more typical of a socialist system. Very little industry is private there.

In Sweden, they've been instituting privatization for the last decade or 2. In many ways, you could describe them as having a freer market than America.

Norway is comparatively more socialized, but they're still not a socialism in the standard sense. Neither are Denmark or Finland.

Socializing certain amenities can work well, but only if you have a prosperous free market in most other parts of your economy. Without that, you can't afford socialization.

OK, sticking to the classic definition of socialism I agree. So that means we are under no threat of having socialism take over the USA, even though we have already socialized some institutions, and are considering more. I'm convinced Einstein was correct. The logical way to do it is as you say to have a balance of capitalism and socialism, because neither can endure without the other. Either extreme alone would self-destruct. It has to be the balance.

 

[PoliTalker]

Hello Woko Haram,

I wouldn't say I have an admiration for them, but they do get some things right. The problem that Sweden faces currently is that they let in too many migrants, so their system will collapse soon. Norway might face the same problem if they're not careful.

Generally speaking, the Scandinavian model's strength came from their cultural homogeneity. When everyone is on the same page with cultural priorities, you can see some impressive results with education and healthcare.

As soon as you become more diverse, the most adaptable model is capitalistic. This is part of why America is more capitalistic. We're a highly individualistic society, so there will be a wide variance in performance in the economy. Some people will excel through higher ambition, higher intelligence, and better skills. Other people won't, because they lack in at least some of these things.

However, since Sweden has mistakenly tried to apply diversity to their system, they will learn the hard way that homogeneity was one of their greatest strengths. They've been trying to adapt by becoming more capitalistic, but it might be too little too late.

Makes no sense. America is a compilation of many cultures and we've become incredibly advanced. Any notion that there is a homogenous American culture is uninformed. Cultural diversity is a source of our greatness. From many perspectives, we are wiser.

 

[cawacko]

Hello Woko Haram,



Makes no sense. America is a compilation of many cultures and we've become incredibly advanced. Any notion that there is a homogenous American culture is uninformed. Cultural diversity is a source of our greatness. From many perspectives, we are wiser.

What you leave out is the beauty of America is someone can come here from anywhere in the world and become an American. There's a diversity within America but at the core we are all Americans. Now some people would like that to change. But what makes America the greatest country on the planet is regardless of male/female, black, white, hispanic, asian etc., rich or poor, Republican, Democrat, Libertarian or Green is that we are Americans first.

 

[Saudade]

Hello Woko Haram,



Well, that depends on your definition of a socialist. The Savings and Loan could only operate if there were enough people in that social group to save money to cover the ones who wanted to borrow. It required a group committed to a common social goal. And they couldn't all take their money back out or it would cause it to crash. So there had to be some community trust that, together, the society could work, but if each person only thought of himself it would fail.

Sure, but a structure of that nature is voluntary. Taxation is not voluntary. By extension, neither is socialism.

 

[Saudade]

Hello Woko Haram,



OK, sticking to the classic definition of socialism I agree. So that means we are under no threat of having socialism take over the USA, even though we have already socialized some institutions, and are considering more. I'm convinced Einstein was correct. The logical way to do it is as you say to have a balance of capitalism and socialism, because neither can endure without the other. Either extreme alone would self-destruct. It has to be the balance.

Sure. No economy is purely capitalistic or purely socialistic. Granted, the societies that are the most socialistic don't tend to fare very well. Scandinavian countries would not fit that extreme, however. They would still be considered more capitalistic than socialistic.

 

[Saudade]

Hello Woko Haram,



Makes no sense. America is a compilation of many cultures and we've become incredibly advanced. Any notion that there is a homogenous American culture is uninformed. Cultural diversity is a source of our greatness. From many perspectives, we are wiser.

That's not what I said. I was pointing out how we're very diverse, and thus, we have to be capitalistic. By the same token, the reason why more socialization has worked for Scandinavia is because, up until very recently, they were pretty homogeneous.

I'm not criticizing diversity so much as pointing out that it requires a different approach to economics. Scandinavian countries are forced to become more capitalistic over time, partially because of the migrant crisis. Sweden currently has a lot of people living off of their system due to letting in a lot of Afghanis. It's not that most Afghanis don't want to work; it's that they don't know the local language and have no skills that Sweden needs. Eventually, this means that Sweden will have to integrate them into society better and reduce the welfare state, in order to force them off of the system.

 

[Mason Melchizedek]

"Capitalism is like a dead herring in the moonlight it shines but it stinks"

 

[PoliTalker]

Happy Holly Daze cawacko,

What you leave out is the beauty of America is someone can come here from anywhere in the world and become an American. There's a diversity within America but at the core we are all Americans. Now some people would like that to change. But what makes America the greatest country on the planet is regardless of male/female, black, white, hispanic, asian etc., rich or poor, Republican, Democrat, Libertarian or Green is that we are Americans first.

I wish that was true for Republicans, but under Trump they have become Trump supporters first, Americans second. Trump is more important to Republicans than the Constitution. That has become painfully apparent during the impeachment of President Trump.

 

[PoliTalker]

George Bailey does everything for his community and nothing for himself.

Potter the capitalist does everything for profit, no feelings nor sentimentality involved.

George gets down on his luck and Potter the capitalist is ready to seize the opportunity to profit by wiping George out.

But the town is there for George and he is saved.

If George didn't mix his socialization with his business, he would have lost everything, and so would the town.

Good thing the community pulled together and all looked out for one another, including George.