North Korea proves you can't stop capitalism

[SteamWake]

Dident read the article but this is somethin that strikes me on a grander scale.

Socialisist countrys are running towards capitolisim while the capitolist country (USA) is running away from it.

[Schroeder]

Maybe they will meet in the centre and use the best of both.

[SteamWake]

Originally Posted by Schroeder

Maybe they will meet in the centre and use the best of both.

Well when you consider one is running to capitolisim since they realized socalisim doesent work and the other is running to socialisim because they hope it will work

Its very confusing to me.

[Letum]

If NK is socialist, then it's socialist with out the public spending.

[Sea Demon]

Originally Posted by Letum

If NK is socialist, then it's socialist with out the public spending.

Well, at least they are all equally miserable.

[Max2147]

Originally Posted by Letum

If NK is socialist, then it's socialist with out the public spending.

They may not have public spending, but they do have lots of government spending. Ferraris, Mercs, Hollywood movies, elaborate parties, and I'm sure a fair dose of hookers don't come cheap.

The reality is that all of these Communist countries were always as socialist as they were democratic. In other words, not at all.

Under ideal socialism, goods are produced and distributed for the good of the people. In the Communist bloc, goods were produced for the good of the leaders. For example, in Mao's China food was grown to sell to the Soviets/Eastern Europeans in return for weapons and military technology to feed Mao's ego. In North Korea the people work so Kim Jong Il can enjoy fine dining and nuclear tests (if he's still alive). The list goes on. In these economies, consumer goods are only distributed to the people on a subsistence level (or below) to keep them working and prevent revolts.

[bookworm_020]

Originally Posted by Max2147

In North Korea the people work so Kim Jong Il can enjoy fine dining and nuclear tests (if he's still alive). The list goes on. In these economies, consumer goods are only distributed to the people on a subsistence level (or below) to keep them working and prevent revolts.

But when the people with guns find it hard to get enough food and medical treatment, you know that things have got real bad!

[Sea Demon]

Originally Posted by Max2147

Under ideal socialism,

No such thing exists. Statism through socialism always seems to do nothing more than water down human initiative, and subordinate human beings to the state. It's hell any way you put it. And there's nothing ideal about it.

[Max2147]

Originally Posted by Sea Demon

No such thing exists. Statism through socialism always seems to do nothing more than water down human initiative, and subordinate human beings to the state. It's hell any way you put it. And there's nothing ideal about it.

Dictatorships that falsely claim to be socialist do that. We've never seen pure socialism at work. Ideally it wouldn't water down human initiative, it would just use that initiative to benefit society as a whole instead of the individual. Unfortunately human nature can't seem to tolerate that, so full socialism probably won't work.

The reality is that the 'ideal' of any system doesn't work. Pure socialism doesn't work. Pure Communism/Marxism doesn't exist - Marx never really explained what would happen after the Revolution. Pure capitalism is hellish for everybody except the titans of industry. Even Adam Smith said that capitalism had to be moderated ("People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public").

In my mind, the best system is the Scandinavian-style hybrid system. They provide a strong social safety net, but on a per capita basis their economies are just as strong, if not stronger than ours.