http://www.culture-war.info/Socialism.html
Capitalism, Socialism or Communism Class Warfare - Rich vs. Poor
Social Justice and Income Redistribution
Is Socialism or Communism better then American Free Enterprise, Capitalism?
On this page we will compare Socialism, Capitalism and Communism. First let us define the terms.
Socialism:
Socialism is a concept that individuals should not have ownership of land, capital (money), or industry, but rather the whole community collectively owns and controls property, goods, and production. Ideally, in this system all share equally in work and the fruits of their labor. Ideally this is a Christian version of help the poor and needy, sharing equally, but in the real world this can cause some problems as we will see later.
Communism:
Communism is a similar concept, in that ownership of land, capital and industry can not be owned or controlled by the individual. However, under Communism the control of these things is not by a local community but by the State Government. Under this system the government has total control of everything produced and control what is made, and who will receive the goods and services produced. Under this system you are not allowed to own your own home, your own car, your own furniture, or even the food you eat. The State decides what you can use and where you will work. You have few if any rights.
Capitalism:
Under Capitalism, individuals own and control land, capital, and production of industry. Individuals are free to purchase and own their own homes, cars, furniture, and other goods such as TV, radios, computers, boats, or any thing else you might want. You have total freedom to live where you want and what type of job field you want to pursue. If you have an idea for a new business or invention, you are free to pursue this without government interference. Under this system you have the maximum number of choices in life. This is the 'pursuit of happiness' from the Declaration of Independence.
America's first experiment with Socialism:
After the Pilgrims landed in 1620, they decided that they would plant a community garden and share the fruits and vegetables equally at the end of the season. The idea was that all would work together and share equally at the end of the season. However, no one wanted to work in the gardens. Most were reluctant to do the planting and weed a garden that was not theirs. That first year, the gardens were not well kept and they had poor crops, which led to hunger the next winter. Under this system, by 1623 the colony was facing starvation. It was decided that a new system be used the following year. Each family was given a plot of land to garden in proportion to its size. They would be allowed to keep the fruits and vegetables for them selves.
Governor William Bradford's account. . .
This had very good success, for it made all hands industrious, so as much more corn was planted than otherwise would have been by any means the Governor or any other could use, and saved him a great deal of trouble, and gave far better content. The women now went willingly into the field, and took their little ones with them to set corn; which before would allege weakness and inability; whom to have compelled would have been thought great tyranny and oppression.
The lesson here seems to be, when you own it you take care of it. If it belongs to someone else, you won't take interest in it or care for it. But if it is yours to own, you take interest in it and take care of it. The Pilgrims started out with socialism for the first two years but abandoned it in favor for capitalism after two years, which worked much better.
A modern day example: Apple Computers:
Steve Jobs, and Steve Wozniak, built the first Apple Computer out of their garage. They were just young men with an idea that people would like to own their own affordable computers. They didn't have enough money to start a company, so they sought out money from a capitalist. This could have been a bank or a rich individual. In their case it was multi-millionaire Mike Markkula, who provided essential business expertise and funding of $250,000. Jobs and Wozniak were right, people did want to own home computers and sales took off. Today Apple, employs over 48,000 employees world wide, and has annual sales over 65 billion dollars. As of September 2011, Apple is the largest publicly traded company in the world by market capitalization and the largest technology company in the world by revenue and profit.
Capitalism allowed these two men the freedom to buy parts for the first prototype computer. The freedom to seek out funds to set up a new company, develop production and distribution to customers, is the American Enterprise of Invention which we call Capitalism. Did Jobs and Wozniak steal from the poor to become rich? NO! They borrowed money from a Capitalist, who wanted a return on his investment. They all took a gamble and might have lost, but instead they won. They ended up creating great wealth for themselves, their employees, and their stock holders. They did not steal money from anybody!
Why Social Justice is wrong: Take from the rich and give to the poor. Income Redistribution.
Steve Jobs was not born rich. He became rich by following his dream and hard work. In doing so, he created new products, he created a new company and new jobs. This all worked to create more wealth for many people. He did not steal his money from the poor like some progressive liberals would have you believe. He created his money. So should he, and all other rich people, have to give their money away until everyone in America has an equal amount? This is the mentality of liberals; they sold the money from the poor, and they must give it back. This is the lie of the Communist Social Justice ideology.
The idea that all Capitalist steal money from the poor is utter non-sense. Most Capitalist create money through innovation of new ideas, hard work, good investments, good business decisions and properly managing their assets.
While it is true that there are dishonest crooks in business that can and do steal under Capitalism, there are also crooks and thieves under Socialism and Communism. Human nature being what it is, people tend to be lazy. What can I get without having to work for it. If I can steal it without having to work to get it, maybe I'll just take it. Maybe mom and dad will just give me my allowance even though I didn't clean the kitchen like I was suppose to do. (Something for nothing! We always want the easy way don't we.)
Why Socialism or Communism don't work.
If you don't own it, your not going to work or take care of it. Look at apartments that are turned into condos. When the apartments are rented, the renters don't own the apartments. They are not likely to care if something gets broken and mistreated thus lowering the value, because it is not theirs. It is the landlords. It is his problem. (Who cares, no skin off my nose?) However once the people buy the condos and it becomes their property, they now have a vested interest in keeping it in good shape. While they were renters they were living under Socialism (no ownership). Once they brought the condo, they became Capitalist. (ownership) and their thinking changed.
Under true Socialism or Communism, Steve Jobs could not have brought the parts for his prototype computer. If he knew that his hard work, would never allow him to make more money then his neighbor who spends his time watching mindless TV shows, why would he even bother to waste his time trying to invent something new and useful. Why not take it easy? Everybody else does. In Germany and France, union employees get months of paid vacation time. Take it easy, you'll get paid!
Socialism and Communism kill the 'will' to work, competition, innovation and creativity. Why compete to work? You won't make any more money. Why spend time innovating new ideas, or being creative, there won't be anything in it for me. As a result they fail to provide goods and services for their citizens. The Soviet Eastern Communist countries of the 20th century were noted for not having much goods and services for their citizens. Yet, the ruling class always had plenty of everything, and it was usually imported from capitalist countries. While we have rich people in America, we also have a large middle class, that live comfortable lives. Even many if not most poor people in America have refrigerators, TVs, and food on the table.
Socialism and Communism cost money:
Under Semi-Socialism in many Western European countries, the citizens are taxed at high rates of 50% to 75% of their incomes. In return the State provides cradle to grave coverage of health care, union jobs, subsidized corporations and subsidized transportation systems. While the citizens in these countries live comfortable lives they pay a high price for government services.
Under the Soviet Communist rule, the citizens are allowed to keep very little personal goods. Effectively the state takes all the business profits, and gives the workers ration cards to buy food, and clothing. Other personal items such as TVs, radios, AC units are hard to come by, and are rationed out by the state, if you can prove you need them. I met a couple that had lived in Communist Lithunian. They told me they wanted to move across town to another apartment to be closer to his mother. The move had to be approved by the State, and it took them 10 years and lots of red tape for simply moving to another apartment!
Communism: no freedom!
Since Communism controls all goods and services, the individual is at the total mercy of the State. You have no rights except those granted by the State. The old Soviet Union was a police state, with total control over its citizens. When I traveled into East Germany, I immediately noticed the lack of cars. West Germany was full of cars on the Autobahns. The streets in East Germany were mostly empty, with an occasional person on bicycle, even in the middle of winter. Freedom of travel is restricted in a Communist State because they control who gets what and for how long. If you were lucky enough to get a car in East Germany, it was usually a worthless piece of junk. I saw plenty of Soviet solders with rifles, so you dare not step out of line. You could feel the oppression and despair in the air.
Occupy Wall Street:
In the fall of 2011 many college students descended on Wall Street in New York City. They were not demanding a reform of Wall Street bankers who have cheated the American people, but rather they want to topple Capitalism, that they think is the problem. It is not Capitalism that is the problem, it is dishonest crooks. Lying cheating thieves are everywhere on the planet. They are people that think no matter what system they live in, they will find a way to get theirs without having to work for it. They are basically greedy people, and you will find them under Socialism, Communism or Capitalism. So let's not mistake the of blaming the system, when it is clearly the individuals that create the crime.
Under capitalism, the Wall Street banks would have had to declared bankruptcy, and be brought out by the successful banks for pennies on the dollar. The bank owners would have taken big losses along with the stockholders. Instead the government stepped in to bail out the banks who made poor business decisions. Those same bank owners who made the poor decisions, then gave themselves big bonuses from tax-payer dollars. The government rewarded failure. Our Occupy Wall Street crowd should go down to Washington and ask why the government gave tax payer bail-out money to the crooks who were cheating their clients. This is the real Income Redistribution, but not the way progressive liberals would have you believe. Under Socialism or Communism you will see more income redistribution, and the rich will get richer and the middle class will really disappear.
When the Communist took over Russia in 1917, they used many young College students to stage protest against the Czar. Vladimir Lenin called them mindless "useful idiots." The Communist are again using students to press their cause on Wall Street, and it is again to overthrow the government, and seize power. These young college students want justice, as we all do, but they won't get it from their Socialist, Communist or Islamic friends on Wall Street. They are being played as the sucker.
Government Conrol has an inverse relationship to Personal Freedom. The more control government has the less freedom individuals have. At the two extremes you have either a total dictatorship or you have total anarchy. The founding fathers thought about 40% government with about 60% personal freedoms was the best approach. This balance allows free enterprise to flurish, with enough control to prevent abuses. However, they realized this type of government would only succeed with a moral and honest population. As a society becomes more corrupt and dishonest, there are increasing needs for government control of the population. The Communist realize the Christian Church provides a moral framework for our society, and if they can destroy the Church and society's morality, it will be easier to impose Big Government controls on America. (For more on this see Agenda link at top of the page to the Naked Communist.) So ask yourself: Would you rather have a hand out from the government, or a pay check from a business? I think, most Americans would prefer a job which pays good money, over a government hand-out.
If the Government is BIG enough to give you everything, then they are also BIG enough to take it ALL away.
No comments:
Post a Comment