US Most Competitive Economy...BUT

[Czar]

Alot of people claim socialism has failed, now I would like to ask you Vic, ntdz and erwos, has socialism failed?

 

[erwos]

Originally posted by: Vic
That I have learned to avoid wasting my time arguing with the faithful, especially those that, for the sake of their argument, pretend ignorance and demand that I educate them when education itself is so free and plentiful. In other words, there is no burden on me to prove anything simply because you are ignorant, so quit pretending there is.

Got proof that you're so educated about these topics? I'm getting a littled tired of your claims of impartiality and brilliance.

-Erwos

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Czar
so your claim is that because Ikea is swedish that shows that scandinavia is capitalistic?

Duh. How about I throw in Nokia too? :roll:

Originally posted by: Czar
Alot of people claim socialism has failed, now I would like to ask you Vic, ntdz and erwos, has socialism failed?

And I saw this coming. It was only obvious after pretending to be ignorant for post after post that you were going to pop your final strawman.
Socialism failed when the USSR failed. Socialism failed when China turned to capitalism. Socialism continues to fail everyday in North Korea.

 

[Czar]

Vic,
Now tell me, what is socialism?

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: erwos
Got proof that you're so educated about these topics? I'm getting a littled tired of your claims of impartiality and brilliance.

-Erwos

You need to learn how this forum works. Czar is not interested in facts, he's simply setting up a string of posts to recover this thread to its original anti-capitalist agenda from the damage that you did to that agenda with your first post.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Czar
Vic,
Now tell me, what is socialism?

I already did.

 

[Czar]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: erwos
Got proof that you're so educated about these topics? I'm getting a littled tired of your claims of impartiality and brilliance.

-Erwos

You need to learn how this forum works. Czar is not interested in facts, he's simply setting up a string of posts to recover this thread to its original anti-capitalist agenda from the damage that you did to that agenda with your first post.

heheh, good one

 

[Czar]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Czar
Vic,
Now tell me, what is socialism?

I already did.

by providing me with a link to google?

again, what is socialism? or better yet, what do you think socialism is?

 

[Czar]

have to go now and plan my trip to london next month, will be back later, hope to hear some more from you Vic

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Czar
heheh, good one

I agree. I admit that I have always admired your abilities of obfuscation and manipulation. After all, you even got erwos to attack me for not meeting your demands for information when you yourself here have not provided on single, tiny shred of information. Me hats off.

Oh btw, thanks for not reading my posts too. I provided more than just a link to google.

 

[Starbuck1975]

It might also be worth mentioning that many of the nations that top this list are suffering from a continually declining talent pool of skills critical for future economic growth and development. Germany in particular is suffering a huge shortage of engineers to the extent that they are essentially importing them from nations like China, India and other Southeast Asian nations...a different slant on outsourcing.

 

[zendari]

2nd place is first loser.

 

[Perknose]

Originally posted by: Vic

You are correct, the Scandanavian countries are not socialist. They are more properly referred to as "welfare states." Private ownership of property and production still exists and is encouraged. The proletariat is not dictating in those countries, far fsckin' from it.[/quote](The so far in human experience mythical) Dictatorship of the proletariat is a feature of communism, not socialism.

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: zendari
2nd place is first loser.

Ahh, so now economies are a zero-sum game with all benefits accruing to the 'winner'. Possibly your most insightful post yet.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Perknose

Originally posted by: Vic

You are correct, the Scandanavian countries are not socialist. They are more properly referred to as "welfare states." Private ownership of property and production still exists and is encouraged. The proletariat is not dictating in those countries, far fsckin' from it.

(The so far in human experience mythical) Dictatorship of the proletariat is a feature of communism, not socialism.[/quote]
The only true difference between ideal marxist communism and ideal socialism is that communism is to come about by violent revolution whereas true socialism is to be implemented peacefully over a period of time. Because of this, socialism is better suited to so-called mixed economies.
In fact, ALL of those countries in that list are mixed economies, with roughly similar levels of mix at about 50% taxation. The only differences are in the manner of the mixing, with the Scandanavian countries on one end representing a high level of government involvement in social and human services and the US on the other end representing a high level of government involvement in military production and law enforcement/legal/courts.

 

[Stunt]

Sure business competitiveness has no correlation to socialist policies, but it has a massive impact on the people. I could really care less with how easily businesses are able to operate within a country when I am getting taxed up the a$$ and unemployment is out of control.

I have a friend from Norway, his mom is a homemaker and his dad is unemployed; what kind of society is it when all the hard workers are getting taxed to hell and people like this sit at home all day. And this is an accepted practice!

I will agree with your list of business economic freedom; but the impacts of socialism are not shown here...highly misleading.

 

[piasabird]

The US has some socialist aspects to its Economy. In a way this can soften the blow when you lose your job or are between jobs. Many industries are seasonal and depend on annual unemployment benefits to make it through the winter. Lots of companies like to lay workers off for Christmas. I use to hate that.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: piasabird
The US has some socialist aspects to its Economy. In a way this can soften the blow when you lose your job or are between jobs. Many industries are seasonal and depend on annual unemployment benefits to make it through the winter. Lots of companies like to lay workers off for Christmas. I use to hate that.

True however once has to wonder if our lack of over the top social programs to capture people like this has done more good than harm. Without the social programs to catch these people it forces them to pick themselves up and get moving quicker than it does when you have the state to take care of you.

High unemployment in these EU countries may be a combination of poor markets or people not needing to work and living off the state for extended periods of time. Both of which are not good.

 

[computeerrgghh]

Text
Interesting link that explains how some of this is found and its implications. Note that the survey is of 11000 business leaders.
edit: I don't think that the competitiveness can be attributed to the fact that a country is socialist but rather the efficiency and effectiveness of the laws that effect business.

 

[zendari]

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Originally posted by: zendari
2nd place is first loser.

Ahh, so now economies are a zero-sum game with all benefits accruing to the 'winner'. Possibly your most insightful post yet.

I never said that. But I'm glad you liberals think the worlds best economy should try to mimic inferior ones.

Maybe the Colts should take some lessons from the Ravens.

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: zendari

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Originally posted by: zendari
2nd place is first loser.

Ahh, so now economies are a zero-sum game with all benefits accruing to the 'winner'. Possibly your most insightful post yet.

I never said that. But I'm glad you liberals think the worlds best economy should try to mimic inferior ones.

Maybe the Colts should take some lessons from the Ravens.

Um, by most measures, the US is one of the most competitve economies, but rarely is it ranked #1.

And if the so-called 'inferior' economies do certain things better, you would still do well to mimic those things.

 

[ntdz]

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Originally posted by: zendari

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Originally posted by: zendari
2nd place is first loser.

Ahh, so now economies are a zero-sum game with all benefits accruing to the 'winner'. Possibly your most insightful post yet.

I never said that. But I'm glad you liberals think the worlds best economy should try to mimic inferior ones.

Maybe the Colts should take some lessons from the Ravens.

Um, by most measures, the US is one of the most competitve economies, but rarely is it ranked #1.

And if the so-called 'inferior' economies do certain things better, you would still do well to mimic those things.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

 

[sandorski]

Interesting thread, in that instead of admitting that "Socialism" hasn't failed, some will simply relabel the functioning (previously labeled) Socialist Nations as "not Socialist". Behold the power of Strawman!

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Originally posted by: zendari

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Originally posted by: zendari
2nd place is first loser.

Ahh, so now economies are a zero-sum game with all benefits accruing to the 'winner'. Possibly your most insightful post yet.

I never said that. But I'm glad you liberals think the worlds best economy should try to mimic inferior ones.

Maybe the Colts should take some lessons from the Ravens.

Um, by most measures, the US is one of the most competitve economies, but rarely is it ranked #1.

And if the so-called 'inferior' economies do certain things better, you would still do well to mimic those things.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

A different sentiment altogether, and not what zendari said😉

Did you know that 60 years ago Canada had a higher per capita GDP than the US? Bad policy can make all the difference in the long run. (Of course, the median person is actually richer in Canada than the US, still, but that's another story).

edit - not sure of the exact date 60 years is a guess - I'm looking, but IIRC it wasn't all that recent, but sometime in the last century. The point is that some policies may have a deletirious effect on growth, and in the long run that means the economy that starts off wealthier may not end up that way.

 

[zendari]

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Um, by most measures, the US is one of the most competitve economies, but rarely is it ranked #1.

And if the so-called 'inferior' economies do certain things better, you would still do well to mimic those things.

In business competitiveness the US is #1, and that is the topic of this thread.