An informal discussion of Socialism vs Capitalism

This is something that was discussed via an MSN IM discussion. I'll leave the two involved anonymous


Socialism says:
People are against it because they don't understand what it means. They simply believe what their government has told them about it.

Capitalism says:
yeah, well socialism is something that never really got into the press cycle until these past few months. the fact is that nobody wants to give money to something that doesn't directly influence themselves, especially in the wake of our economic struggles. and there's no such thing as altruism in our society

Socialism says:
That's because we live in a capitalist society. It's based upon self-interest. You have to look at it from a point that, if we had a bit of socialism, we probably wouldn't have been in this economic crisis in the first place. Allowing banks to self-regulate and basically allowing a bit of unregulated capitalism is a danger to everyone. That's a part of this war we're having. While we're sitting here paying tax dollars to fuel it, the government is dishing out contracts to private companies to destroy and rebuild Iraq. Bechtel makes bombs to destroy and rebuild. Our tax dollars go to these companies. And what we're seeing is the transfer of the wealth of the middle class to the upper class because of this. And when we're in an economic crisis and don't help each other by using a bit of socialism, people become homeless and poor. Homelessness and poverty will increase the crime rate. In that way, it direct effects you. Capitalism is at fault for our current economic crisis. It creates its own problems and destroys itself. We need to cast off our societies Friedmanite vision. Solely driving for ourselves alone is destructive and evil. It can be changed.

Capitalism says:
i think we do have a slightly socialistic society anyway. After all we do pay taxes that pay for government programs. The fact that we pay taxes at all shows that we don't have a solely capitalistic society. i agree with your view of the self-regulating banks. We are having a seperation of middle and upper classes but that's lent to an inability to regulate taxes and allow upper class... citizens to by-pass the tax laws we have in place. Homelessness and poverty are not something that can be realistically fixed by socialism. What socialism would do is supposedly redistribute the wealth, but you have to look at the source of poverty in itself. We don't need to give people the money, we need to hire contracters to fix the ghetto. That one does lend itself to socialism, the... only problem is that you actually need a competant government to get that done, and based on every country ever, no government has been able to rid itself of poverty and homelessness. And the full circle leading from raising taxes to crime rate semantically speaking is definitely not a direct effect. Crime rate can otherwise be regulated. We've lived in a capitalistic country for 200 years and only 3 times in our history has there been economic struggle. the current problem is not capitalism, its incompetence in our government

Socialism says:
We have a slightly socialistic society, but only because it's necessary. The government could never get away without having social programs. But it isn't an efficient socialistic society. We pay taxes, but our taxes go towards the wrong things. And as for our companies paying taxes, those in Iraq don't. There's a bit of unregulated capitalism there, as we can't do that here. The existence of poverty is due to wealth inequality. There is no poverty if everyone makes the same wage. Homelessness can be aided with tax dollars. If we were to hire contractors to fix the ghetto, it would have to be an extremely regulated process. The rebuilding of New Orleans is an example of this situation, and it is by no means a success. Three times in our history have we had an economic struggle, because we've always had other people to exploit in order to make our own economy prosper.

Capitalism says:
"We pay taxes, but our taxes go towards the wrong things." That statement is a pro-socialist fundamental point as to why we can't have a socialistic government. Our taxes will ALWAYS be spent improperly. Because poor want it to go to rebuilding the ghettos, the middle class want it to go towards something that they actually care about, and the upper class will still find a way to not pay taxes.

Socialism says:
That's the point of wealth redistribution. To end class struggle.

Capitalism says:
"There is no poverty if everyone makes the same wage." That is a very idealistic statement. And it will never happen. A bagger won't earn the same as a garbageman who won't earn the same as a clerk, who won't earn the same as a systems analyst who won't earn the same as a doctor who won't earn the same as a CEO because it requires skill, and skill has to be rewarded
otherwise no one will take the necessary prerequisites to having the skill. another thing that crumbles the foundation of socialism is the fact that people are greedy. if they do more than another, they want more. and i maintain that the incompetence of our government makes socialism an implausible ideal