Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (329514)	3/21/2007 12:04:12 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1578288

Owned by the government, is considered collectively owned and socialist. And yes government officials who control what the government owns have an incentive to make decisions in their own interests, and give themselves perks. As O have previously, you use the terms, communism and socialism, interchangeably. That is not right.......there are subtle differences between the two terms. Socialism: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done communism: a theory advocating elimination of private property b : a system in which goods are owned in common and are available to all as needed BS. On a large scale, socialism has operated within the framework of democracy and coexisted with capitalism. I'm not talking about welfare programs here but state ownership of the means of production. Yes that has existed in mostly capitalist democratic countries as well, but 1 - Its typically been negative, and 2 - Those countries where largely capitalist or "mixed economises", not purely or overwhelmingly socialist countries. Overwhelmingly socialist countries have problems that include problems inherit in socialism, not just problems related to their history or particular leaders and leadership structure. Tim, when I talk about the Soviet Union, I am not talking about communism or socialism. The SU gave the illusion of being a communistic state. It was not. It may have started out that way but it did not end that way. There was a class structure......that's a no no in communism. There was the pretense of central planning but the reality was an oligarch decided how much to produce. Under communism, the workers were supposed to have control over the factory. In fact, they did not. Bottomline: The SU was a run of the mill dictatorship with a new twist........it said it was communistic. A true test of communistic is the kibbutzum in Israel; a somewhat true test of socialism is Sweden or Denmark.