23 Mar 11
Originally posted by FMFWell, one, I was trying to explain something and its useful to simplify things when you do so.
Well according to savage4731, economically speaking, there's ONLY two alternatives: Alternative #1: is a centrally planned economy. And Alternative #2- is a market economy.
And two, there's not really any middle ground in the long run. Countries that allow some socialism eventually will become entirely socialist. Don't believe me? Try taking social security away from an old person.
23 Mar 11
Originally posted by Bosse de NageNobody really knows what kind of ecnomic system the Minoans had. Linear A has never been deciphered and most of what is known is only inferred by what's been found.
A more nuanced response can be found in Kim Stanley Robinson's Mars trilogy. Capitalism takes people to Mars; on Mars they get cured of capitalism and society becomes more 'Minoan' ...
I did find this though:
" Multiroom constructions were discovered in even the ‘poor’ areas of town, revealing a social equality and even distribution of wealth."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minoan_civilization
Hmmm.. could it be? Another socialist society that died out?
23 Mar 11
Originally posted by Bosse de NageI thought they drowned in bull faeces (bull... get it? hahaha... well, I thought it was hilarious anyways... minotaurs... *sigh*)
A little joke ... this thread is full of them.
The leading theory is that Minoan civilisation was shattered by volcanic eruptions.
24 Mar 11
Originally posted by savage4731Various forms of the 'middle ground' are going on out there almost everywhere, as we speak. 'Politics' and 'democracy' are pretty much all about tweaking and fiddling with this middle ground thing.
...there's not really any middle ground in the long run. Countries that allow some socialism eventually will become entirely socialist. Don't believe me? Try taking social security away from an old person.
24 Mar 11
1 edit
Originally posted by FMFThe point is that they're moving towards socialism. You cant just stay in the middle forever. Socialist policies are real easy to implement but almost impossible to get rid of. Eventually those countries will become completely socialist unless something intervenes like the government being overthrown or the economy collapsing. Thats why I said in the long run there is no middle ground.
Various forms of the 'middle ground' are going on out there almost everywhere, as we speak. 'Politics' and 'democracy' are pretty much all about tweaking and fiddling with this middle ground thing.
24 Mar 11
Originally posted by savage4731I don't agree with any of your assertions.
The point is that they're moving towards socialism. You cant just stay in the middle forever. Socialist policies are real easy to implement but almost impossible to get rid of. Eventually those countries will become completely socialist unless something intervenes like the government being overthrown or the economy collapsing. Thats why I said in the long run there is no middle ground.
24 Mar 11
Originally posted by savage4731Agreed savage.
The point is that they're moving towards socialism. You cant just stay in the middle forever. Socialist policies are real easy to implement but almost impossible to get rid of. Eventually those countries will become completely socialist unless something intervenes like the government being overthrown or the economy collapsing. Thats why I said in the long run there is no middle ground.
From direct observation over the last 20+ years there has been a steady growth in size and scope of gummint here in NZ and Australia there is constant pressure being applied by career busybodies with a never ending stream of ideas for meddling in the life of average Joe, while average Joe simply makes a career out of getting by. So you see how lop sided the battle is, one side, the paid bureaurats wanting to make your business their business and on the other side people trying to get on with their own lives.
Bastiat saw it very clearly:
"When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies it."
The sad thing is young folk coming through that have not known better actually start to believe it is necessary, the other group that think it's necassary are those questing for the unearned, looking to make a grab for another piece of your life and property.
24 Mar 11
Originally posted by savage4731Speaking as a supporter of the market economy and social democracy, I'd say that countries can and do stay in the middle and that that is a good thing. I don't think "socialist" policies are really easy to implement - indeed there have been plentiful examples of them being impossible to implement properly - nor that they are almost impossible to get rid of. I don't agree that eventually those countries will become completely socialist. I don't think something necessarily has to intervene like the government being overthrown or the economy collapsing. Elections bring about changes, for example. I don't agree that in the long run there is no middle ground. With an ugly dollop of obvious exceptions, the vast majority of the world's nations chart courses that are 'middle grounds' of various kinds.
what part of it could you possibly disagree with?