What property laws need to be changed? I understand the tax thing.
But please expand on the property thing.
According to your definitions, private property can exist under all 3.
Remember, I'm here to gain knowledge that isn't "hurrr durrr I'm conservative and you're a commie and your system sucks".
I like the conversations here. My positions have changed since coming to PaRD.

Right now private ownership of companies through shares is enshrined in law. We'd need to change the laws around corporate ownership and probably other niche things I'm not aware of. Businesses as well are owned by individuals and those individuals are accountable to their lenders if they aren't incorporated.

This post was edited by NetflixAdaptationWidow on Jan 22 2022 11:26am

Ok so whats your solution?
Turn the shareholders into the lenders?
I don't see how the workers owning the means of production could work. I'm probably just too ignorant on this topic.
Everyone shares in the burden of paying for production and gets a profit equal to what they put in?

Instead of share holders being the owners, it is instead owned collectively by the workers with all decisions being made by the workers.

There wouldn't be an "owner" in the sense there is now, where you can just sell the business to another party and then they get to make all the decisions.


Personally I detest the entire idea of shareholders being a thing forever. Shareholders are people who get the money the business produces for no other reason than they paid money for that right. Ideally they are people who took on risk and took an active hand in the success of the business. I.e. the owner and initial investors, but then that gets warped way down the line to the point where shareholders are just people who paid for the rights to get the money a company makes while contributing no real value most of the time.

At a certain point, IMO, the idea of a business having share holders needs to end because when you can sell a company on the market in 3 clicks on your computer it incentivizes short-term decision making so share holders stay happy, rather than the long-term health of the community or business. I don't have a specific solution for that, but the eternal-shareholding we have now is a major source of inefficiency in capitalism.


Ideally at a certain threshold the government would buy out the inial investment and divest control of the company to the workers. That way even if the business is successful, the current owners get a massive payday. If we gave Jeff Bezos a billion dollars and did this do you really think that would disincentivize innovation? "Oh wow, I'm not gonna make the next Amazon cuz I'll only get a billion dollars".

This post was edited by NetflixAdaptationWidow on Jan 22 2022 12:37pm

Hello and thank God the work week is over!

Here are my answers:

capitalism- the economic system that rewards those who put in the effort and determination / has no limit to how high you can reach. Can it be cold in some cases? Absolutely -- but, it's also pretty compassionate as well in giving people opportunities to shine without needing government approval.

communism- no matter what you bring to the table, the government takes from the pockets of others to give to you. In return, your economic mobility is limited by the government and the government has total control over what you do and say. This is also done by force and you are not permitted to disagree. If anyone needs a great example of just how bad citizens have it under that system, President Xi and China are good examples.

socialism- the softer word invented to make communism seem more palatable.

On a final note, when I speak of capitalism, I do speak from experience. I have been broke and even homeless in life. My determination and capitalisms unlimited mobility allowed me to change my entire life on my own schedule / merits for both myself and my kids.

Could you really choose on your own terms in a Communist society that delivering pizza full time isn't good enough for you (not knocking the job -- I enjoyed the job, I just needed more money myself because I also have kids) and put in the effort to change that (including obtaining a college degree for $0 out of pocket through company reimbursement)? Under capitalism, I went from that to a Business Analyst / MS Office Application developer. This is a legit question -- I have never been able to get a straight answer on this one.

I welcome you thoughts!

This post was edited by CyrusTheGreat on Jan 22 2022 01:54pm

Looks like you don't have any understanding of what people mean when they refer to economic systems, and don't even have a functional understanding of what capitalism is.

I recommend you do some reading, because if you want to engage on a political forum your current level of knowledge isn't sufficient for even the most surface level conversations.

This post was edited by NetflixAdaptationWidow on Jan 22 2022 02:31pm

U probably wouldn't have been broke in the first place if it wasn't for capitalism.

Hello!

You may be right, as I did concede that Communism hands you money in exchange for complete control of your life.

However, if you were to ask yourself this question, I wonder what the answer would be.

What do you prefer:

- Government handouts that come with the cost of stripping you of all of your individual rights?
- Working towards success and overcoming the obstacles and challenges so that you can care for yourself without the aforementioned Government handouts that come with the cost of stripping you of all of your individual rights?

I welcome your thoughts

That's when you are in denial and refuse to admit there's a middle solution which is called social-democracy aka socialism which represent the real free world today.

Good luck explaining success to amazon workers in competition with robots and who have the freedom to piss in a bottle.

It really built it up first. Cult of Personality ruined Venezuela.