Socialism

[FleetFox]

What is interesting to note is how defensive many working class people are of their capitalist keepers.  They believe in this myth of social mobility because of all the rags to riches stories in the media.  It's the kind of mass hysteria which takes place when people buy lottery tickets.  They're absolutely blind to their own captivity...I think there is a Platonic analogy like this.  Plato's cave?

Absolutely mate, you are completely correct, the media who is all owned by corporate elites with their own vested interests spend huge amounts of money in keeping the public ignorant of the real systemic problems. The whole "American Dream" is just that, a dream. But you know, most people are sheep who like to follow the herd (crowd) for a mix of reasons, and if the News on TV says something is bad, well it must be! They actually believe that they too could one become a big manager with a big house and fancy car. Like you say it is a sorry state of affairs when people are so trapped in their own bubbles they completely disregard any thinking that might oppose their comfortable lives, or the opposite when they have all of society it seems against their very existence.

Edit: nice reference to Plato's cave ha ^^
Rousseau: "Man is born free, but forever find himself in chains" and with George Monbiots modern version "Man is born free, but forever finds himself in Chain-stores"

[[ptx]]

Because, y'kno, state controlled media (as it is in anything remotely socialist) totally does not do propaganda.

[Nightmare798]

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

Would not bang.

[Kafein]

Well thank god, its hard for me to even think how bad that would be, I mean capitalism is all about making profit and having growth and more growth (GDP wise as most economists like to use), the planet would be seriously fucked because it can't support infinite growth. What am I saying... the planet is already fucked unless serious changes are made and countries get a bloody grip and realise how devastating Climate Change is and will be in the next 5-6 decades. Not enough is being done...

You have no idea what capitalism means.

[FleetFox]

You have no idea what capitalism means.

Feel free to enlighten me

[Osiris]

Capitalism is a style heavily favoured by our own Pepe. It means the constant and total use of vapitals. WHEN PEPE TALKS LIKE THIS ALL THE TIME NON STOP PRESS 1 TO KICK PEPE its because he is just a hardcore capitalist

[Teeth]

There's never been a pure Marxist revolution.  Lenin's vanguard party and his successors reactions to Leninism eschewed many of the principles making up Marxist thinking.  You admit they perverted the ideology and still go on to claim that socialism is at fault?   Besides this, I find it very cheap of you to do like so many do when they refer to socialism as some cheap idealism, it denotes an impatient lack of understanding of the subject.  This brings me to your next remark

The bad rep that socialism has gotten is indeed unfair because it is mostly based on what people have seen of the crappy versions actually carried out in nations. My point is that those crappy versions are the best we are going to see of socialism because it is an unrealistic idea. How is referring to socialism as idealism showing a lack of understanding when we have never seen true socialism, we have only seen a few dozen attempts which all gave very poor results. How is it not ideallism when so many have actively pursued a proletarian revolution, yet we have never seen a true one? In fact Marxist writing speaks about the proletarian revolution as if it is the natural next step in social-economic development, yet we haven't seen one. How is it not ideallism to have everyone get his share from the production of goods, when we have never such a thing work? Explain to me why socialism is not ideallistic please.

I admit this is pretty troll-y.  It presupposes that the centre politics of Europe and America are at all relevant to modern scholasticism.  Do you honestly think those that have spent their lives studying this care what Tony fucking Blair or François Hollande say?  If how the world is currently operating is any indication of the practicality of moderatism it couldn't hurt to try something new.

European socialist parties were hardline Marxists when they started, now they are just moderate leftist capitalists, which is because they have seen socialism getting less and less realistic. I hate to break it to you, but mid-19th century Europe had the highest class awareness we have seen anywhere in the world ever. If in European nations governments managed to diffuse class tensions from that precarious situation, other nations all over the world can surely do the same, as there is much less class awareness anywhere outside of Europe now. If the proletarion revolution didn't happen in the mid-19th century it sure as hell is not going to happen now, not in Africa, not in South America and not in Asia.  Explain to me how you foresee actual socialism happen anywhere please.

[Kalam]

Marxism works in groups of 25 or less.

[Awea]

<3

[Kafein]

Feel free to enlighten me

Free market economy.

[Rumblood]

The man came from nothing, and built himself up to where he is. Still, from a quick glance at the above picture, it is unlikely that his daughters will run the house as well as he did, and likely spend millions on luxury (Effectively real waste, yes the money trickles down, but the resources spent don't), and much much worse: Bad business decisions, which are really just an incredible amount of wasted resources, which in the hands of someone competent would actually benefit society and all of us.

So, I'm for a meritocracy, but tax the dead, especially those that are accumulating enough money and businesses that they pose a risk of extreme luxury and resource waste for the inheritors. (50m USD+?) Gvnmt should simply take the businesses, and immediately sell them, by law.

You want meritocracy but lament it in action? If those girls can't manage that wealth, they will lose it to those with merit. It may take their lifetime to run the well dry, but it will be run dry, and who knows? THEIR kids may not be quite as dumb as they are, having been raised seeing what a waste their mothers are making of things, and therefore bring the wealth management back to where their grandfather had it. And if not? If they lose it? Meritocracy at work.

Oh yes, I'm pretty sure both of those girls are duckfaces and so may qualify for the inheritance after all 

The real problem isn't that such large amounts of capital are concentrated in so few hands. In fact, that is actually the solution for world changing projects that those 3 billion poor would never accomplish the way the top 85 can. No, the real problem is so few are actually doing the things they need to do. Any of those 85 could finance a Moon colony, or send men to Mars, or find the cure for any number of diseases, but in general, they don't. I do like the Gates Foundation and Warren Buffet, and I like what the new kids on the block like Google's founders, Elon Musk, and John Cormack are doing. But the others could be doing so much more. The REAL problem is how to inspire those folks to do more than just compete for rankings on Forbes 500.

[SixThumbs]

The real problem isn't that such large amounts of capital are concentrated in so few hands. In fact, that is actually the solution for world changing projects that those 3 billion poor would never accomplish the way the top 85 can. No, the real problem is so few are actually doing the things they need to do. Any of those 85 could finance a Moon colony, or send men to Mars, or find the cure for any number of diseases, but in general, they don't. I do like the Gates Foundation and Warren Buffet, and I like what the new kids on the block like Google's founders, Elon Musk, and John Cormack are doing. But the others could be doing so much more. The REAL problem is how to inspire those folks to do more than just compete for rankings on Forbes 500.

And the fact that they're more or less ordinary individuals who are also subject to folly from time to time like everyone else, except in their case they wield incredible influence and a mistake holds a little more weight. That's on top of the fact that it would be difficult for them to come together under a common ideology that would cause any real change nor do they have much of an incentive to help Joe Smoe out in the street.

[Berserkadin]

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

[FleetFox]

Free market economy.

Exactly 

[Thomek]

You want meritocracy but lament it in action? If those girls can't manage that wealth, they will lose it to those with merit. It may take their lifetime to run the well dry, but it will be run dry, and who knows? THEIR kids may not be quite as dumb as they are, having been raised seeing what a waste their mothers are making of things, and therefore bring the wealth management back to where their grandfather had it. And if not? If they lose it? Meritocracy at work.

Well you fail to realize that the greatest loss for society is not the luxury yacht or plane for 100m$. It is the billion dollar factory that doesn't have the sound reason to exist, or any kind of other failed business decision. Yes, they loose the money, but worse, society loose ACTUAL VALUE (or whatever its called). It is effectively WASTE from a society PoV.  (as in that workpower and materials could have been used to make a sound factory, or schools, or whatever that somehow produces value)

This is why it is so important, that an actual meritocracy is put in place. Not one based on inheritance. We need to give the best people the chances they deserve.

(FYI Soros and Buffet even think along the same lines, although not as extreme as I propose. They are probably far more in the know about what is good and realistic, and how to present it though)
http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterjreilly/2012/12/11/warren-buffett-and-george-soros-want-higher-estate-tax-than-obama-proposes/

Edit: Also, googles founders and Elon Musk didn't inherit anything worth mentioning afaik. Those stories are even more likely in Death Tax world, because there will simply be more opportunities spread more out, lower taxes for all, and possibly more free assets to develop. Believe me, there will still be super-rich in the proposed system, the difference is that they have made that wealth themselves.

The idea sounds like socialism, but it's actually just a fix to make capitalism/meritocracy work better and as intended.

Now I would love to vote for the right wing in Norway, but the first thing they did was to cut inheritance tax to zero...   good for me I guess.. No. Take the big companies when the owners die and sell them to people who made their own money. Then we will see effective, dynamic companies, not dying behemoths/milk cows.