Prometheus Posted April 11, 2004 Report Share Posted April 11, 2004 I wanted to know your opinions on the shortcomings of a mixed economy (socialist and capitalist) thank you for your time, dinesh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard_Halley Posted April 11, 2004 Report Share Posted April 11, 2004 The shortcomings are that there is socialism involved. Oh, and also that it is not completely capitalist (but that was implied in the first sentence, wasn't it). Perhaps what you should ask is: what are the shortcomings of socialism? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
y_feldblum Posted April 11, 2004 Report Share Posted April 11, 2004 It's not as long as an unmixed economy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prometheus Posted April 11, 2004 Author Report Share Posted April 11, 2004 then perhaps you'd be kind enough to point them out to me considering i do enquire as to the shortcomings of socialism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
y_feldblum Posted April 11, 2004 Report Share Posted April 11, 2004 The two are utterly incompatible, and any mixture of them is a contradiction which is bound to collapse and the default position must be socialism. Capitalism is based on protecting individual rights. Socialism is based on damning individuals for their rights. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearster Posted April 11, 2004 Report Share Posted April 11, 2004 It's been observed that socialism destroys man's motivation to work. This is true, but not the principal arguement against it. It's been noted that socialism does not provide the most efficient means to determine who should work on what. This is also true, and also is not the principal argument against it. It's been said that socialism can't guarantee that the sum total of everyone's ability adds up to be at least as much as the sum total of everyone's need. True, not the main point. A corollary of this is that "ability" and "need" can't be defined. True, not the point. An obvious objection is that socialism enables the lazy and the irrational to just mooch off others' work. True, not the point. A more subtle objection to socialism is that it consumes the seed grain (capital) to feed people today, and ignores that they will all starve next year when there is no crop. True, not the main point. The principal objection to socialism, which should be screamed from the windows and rooftops by everyone who loves his life and who is willing to work to support it is that socialism attacks the very thing required to live and support one's life. One's mind. If man is to live and prosper, he must do so by thinking (or mooch/loot someone who does). His thoughts tell him how to act; he has not got instincts to automatically guide his actions. His actions lead to production of tangible and intangible property, and complex relationships of trading such property for other property. Socialism attacks this, the root of man's ability to live. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackSabbath Posted April 11, 2004 Report Share Posted April 11, 2004 The best place to start is Ludwig Von Mises's book 'Socialism' written in 1922 and updated with 'Planned Chaos' added. It proves that Socialism must fail economically because it is totalitarian and it makes economic calculation impossible. It does so by eliminating the market and ,therefore, market prices. With no prices, economic calculation becomes arbitrary and chaotic. Socialism is totalitarian because it places the entire economy under state control and Mises demonstrates that economic freedom and political freedom are indivisible. Socialism must fail philosophically because the means of production, at root, is not capital or machines but the human mind and that cannot be nationalized or stolen by the state to give it it's proper name. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AutoJC Posted April 11, 2004 Report Share Posted April 11, 2004 Besides, the mixed economy costs you money. You pay taxes to subsidize the welfare of others. That's just immoral for the government to impose that on you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadCap Posted April 12, 2004 Report Share Posted April 12, 2004 What is the shortcoming of socialism? The same as the 'shortcoming' of slavery. It is completely immoral in that it treats men as property, instead of sovereign beings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Invictus Posted April 12, 2004 Report Share Posted April 12, 2004 Read The Failure of the New Economics: An Analysis of the Keynesian Fallacies, by Henry Hazlitt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.