Clown-Free Zone... sorry, no clowns allowed Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Clown-Free Zone... sorry, no clowns allowed

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: zonder who wrote (267675)	11/18/2003 12:58:01 PM
From: GraceZ	Read Replies (1) of 436258

Whether the system is not as efficient as the pure capitalism of the US is of course another issue. Just trying to say I don't feel your fears of an imminent descent into the communist hell are justified... I would never say we have pure Capitalism here, we have been moving towards Socialism steadily as well. It's taken over fifty years for the huge problems associated with the socialist measures undertaken by the Roosevelt administration to be clearly visible to all, although there were many people opposed to Social Security when it was proposed as a measure that would ruin the country. It took almost 100 years for Communism as practiced in the Soviet system to collapse. "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs". That's communism, not socialism How many arguments did I read right here on these boards about the tax cuts, that the tax cuts should never be directed to those who paid the highest taxes but to those who "need" the money? This is a variation of taking from those who are the most productive and giving to those who need. It's the worst kind of tyranny. You could say that, in the strictest sense, Socialism isn't Communism but it is positioned further along the continuum that runs between Capitalism and Communism. Capitalism being an economic system where the means of production is owned privately and Communism where the means of production is owned publicly. Socialism attempts to thread between those two extremes but it has to compete against systems which are more Capitalist. When a country turns capitalism "full on" it starts importing wealth from those countries which have it half on or some other measure. If the dollar loses it's position as THE reserve currency, it won't be some Socialist currency that takes it's place, it'll be some other place where capital is most likely already flowing even as we have this discussion. The choice of reserve currency doesn't arise from the effect of a currency being adjusted to account for a large trade deficit and traders actions. It arises from a history of trust, physical security, military might and the long rule of law protecting the principle of private property. Socialism is always at odds with the principle of private property. Say what you will about the Fed and their actions, but US Treasury bonds are still considered to have zero default risk against which all other debt obligations are measured. Aside from all this, those that hold the majority of our dollars in reserve have a vested interest in keeping the dollar as THE reserve currency. They receive dollars for their goods, they lend us back those same dollars in exchange for a promise of more dollars in the future. They aren't the ones demanding more dollars for their goods or even more dollars in the future for lending them back to us.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next