«12. . .56575859606162. . .113114»
amogus hello!
New Alsunova and North sonovia
Would you consider classical liberals liberals or conservatives?
Conservatives. Why are you asking?
wHeN tHe iMpOsTeR iS sUs
btw, I'm also somewhat a Capitalist because I prefer mixed economies
Sonovia, third grader confirmed
Shoot, I clicked on the wrong policy again
Great
Well is it another robot-backed economy?
Heil Hydra (roleplay)
k
the only time i went socialist was because of those dam computers
It's actually possible for a socialist nation to have a good economy, but obviously since the markets are less free, it's less likely and less common.
yeah
Well, Y'know a good economy doesn't mean a great nation.
Take China for example, they have a good economy but a terrible GDP and commit human rights violations daily.
Listen.
If socialism works for your country, good for you.
But I'm in America.
The third most populated country in the world with almost 350 million freaking people, so it's harder to establish effective welfare policies here and impossible to give everyone the bare minimum of what they need.
A country with nearly $30 trillion dollars in debt, a country that has better things to do than wasting money on frivolous and just plain lazy people who are perfectly capable of finding a job and working for themselves.
The only people who deserve welfare are those who can't get a job, such as the disabled. Other than that, we need to stop spending so much on citizens who should be independent as America wasn't expected to be such a nanny state at all when our Founding Fathers established us.
Just my opinion on welfare policies. Don't get me started on free markets versus excessive and extraneous restrictions which aren't always the most helpful or useful.
its doesnt work LOL never has and I doubt it ever will
take away the slave labour and boom they go back like 30 years
I mean, you can't just bluntly accuse socialism of just being plain terrible. It's still possible for it to work under certain circumstances, although these circumstances have to be very special and elaborate, and in history it has failed many times, and not many countries have ever achieved the goal of successful socialism. It works in theory, but when you try it in real life, it normally doesn't pan out well. This is called de jure and de facto.
Sweden is an example of successful socialism (socialist mainly by welfare policies), but it has a low population, a clean environment with a good agriculture, and little national debt. Of course it worked for them. It can work for cute little pacifist countries with populations that even have the goddamn option to be politically apathetic.
Now compare cute little pacifist Sweden with India.
India is a socialist-leaning country, and although not all of India is poor, this country has high poverty rates and their government is just sitting back absolutely thriving. This most likely isn't a coincidence, if you ask me. It's the second most-populated country with 1.1B+ people, and it's impossible for welfare to work for them.
In some cases it will work. In most cases, it will fail. In some more cases, it fails horribly and the economy falls into recession.
But it will never, say it with me now, I repeat, never, ever work for America. Capitalism is the only successful ideology in opposition to socialism that has worked. The day America will become socialist never mind, Biden is in office, hold on...
The day America becomes socialist (and it works out for us) is going to be on the same day when hell freezes over, and that is final.
sweden is not socialist. The government doesnt own the businesses, the pentions are privaticed, same with healthcare and 1/3 of schools
yeah but china is kinda mixed when it comes to their economy
«12. . .56575859606162. . .113114»
Advertisement
