Why Socialism Doesn't Work

Find me socialist that equates income distribution with GPA distribution. You can't? Then this entire thread is a straw man. You are assaulting a political affiliation that does not exist.

In school if everyone completes the requirements for an A, everyone gets an A. In real life, if everyone completes the requirements, a sparse few actually receive the A, another small selection gets for themselves the Bs and Cs and the rest get left with Ds and Fs.

You're so afraid of socialism, meanwhile capitalism has destroyed the country.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/29/op...racy.html?_r=0

Ha ha, taking capitalism analysis from the New York Times. That's hilarious. Of course no socialists draw a parallel between academic and economic socialism. The parallel destroys their entire philosophy.

The difference you mentioned between economic and academic socialism is irrelevant to the analogy. Can you explain how you think it is relevant?

Now here's the million dollar question: How well would an academic system that involves redistribution of grade points work? Please explain your answer.

Grade point redistribution is an incredibly common, and incredibly asinine practice in school. But the difference is grade point redistribution in reality acts much more like capitalism. They call it grading on a curve. The top scorer gets the top grade, and every other position is filled in through comparison, with everyone's value compared to the other competitors. For it to work according to socialism, the real analogy would require primarily the understanding that in life, not everyone gets to manage the capital or no one would be left to produce the capital.

Therein lies the key problem with your analogy, it asserts that GPAs are competitive, and they're not. The competitive aspect comes after the GPA where it's used to get into college. If you want to make a sensible argument, you're best off starting there, stating that in socialism two students with differing GPAs would still be allowed into the same school.

But even then, to match the analogy with reality, we'd have to add a vocational school and accept that for every one person that gets into the university, 29 need to go to the vocational school and the other 70 need to work on the bottom of the pyramid.

And the rhetoric I hear in this country from pro-capitalist conservatives makes it sound like they're the ones fighting for unrealistic reform that evens out the pyramid. Then it's claimed socialists want to flip the pyramid. All socialists want is to collectively own what the workers produce in the first place.

Those are differences, but they are not relevant differences. Can you say what the parallels between the two systems are?

How well would an academic system that involves grade point redistribution work? Please explain your answer.

I will keep asking that question every time you dodge it.

Simply because you lack reading comprehension skills that doesn't mean I failed to address your question. See how my post basically only addresses that question? See how my entire post, every single sentence of it, directly relates to the analogy of GPA and economics, whether the analogy is relevant and how, if at all, it is relevant?

If you continue to assert that I haven't addressed your point I'll be forced to assume you're utilizing fallacy in order to dodge criticism against your argument. In which case, I win this thread. Your move.

(At first I thought, "fuck I should back out before this fool beats me with experience, then I thought, "No one's got more experience at being a fool than me!")

There was some talk about Denmark earlier in this thread, partly based on a blog post by some kid. However, same kid did not realise that socialism, as it is practised in Denmark, is also practised in a lot of other countries in Europe. When it comes to socialism, Denmark, the UK, and Germany are not far apart. And by most accounts, Sweden is more socialist than those three.

There is a widespread assumption in Denmark (and probably in many other places as well), that the US is an extremely capitalist country. However, clearly this view is inaccurate, since socialism thrives in the US; any country with a central bank that actively dictates interest rates, cannot be capitalist - if capitalism is seen as the "free market economy". And I believe zoning laws are in heavy use in the USA - these are also not compatible with a free economy.

As far as I know, there is not a single "free market economy" on this planet as this time; socialism in one form or another exists in each and every country.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Voldmer

There was some talk about Denmark earlier in this thread, partly based on a blog post by some kid. However, same kid did not realise that socialism, as it is practised in Denmark, is also practised in a lot of other countries in Europe. When it comes to socialism, Denmark, the UK, and Germany are not far apart. And by most accounts, Sweden is more socialist than those three.

There is a widespread assumption in Denmark (and probably in many other places as well), that the US is an extremely capitalist country. However, clearly this view is inaccurate, since socialism thrives in the US; any country with a central bank that actively dictates interest rates, cannot be capitalist - if capitalism is seen as the "free market economy". And I believe zoning laws are in heavy use in the USA - these are also not compatible with a free economy.

As far as I know, there is not a single "free market economy" on this planet as this time; socialism in one form or another exists in each and every country.

---

That is true. There is at least some degree of socialism in every economy. Do you think we should do that with grades?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Original Poster

Simply because you lack reading comprehension skills that doesn't mean I failed to address your question. See how my post basically only addresses that question? See how my entire post, every single sentence of it, directly relates to the analogy of GPA and economics, whether the analogy is relevant and how, if at all, it is relevant?

If you continue to assert that I haven't addressed your point I'll be forced to assume you're utilizing fallacy in order to dodge criticism against your argument. In which case, I win this thread. Your move.

(At first I thought, "fuck I should back out before this fool beats me with experience, then I thought, "No one's got more experience at being a fool than me!")

---

No, you did not answer the question. I asked you how well an academic system involving grade point redistribution would work and to explain your answer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

That is true. There is at least some degree of socialism in every economy. Do you think we should do that with grades?

---

I have not followed this thread in detail, so I may be missing the point here, but I'm in favour of a completely free market and totally opposed to socialism in any form. As far as grading students is concerned, that should be left to the body issuing the grades. Ideally, there would be private organisations - completely unconnected to the educational institutions - that did the grading of students (for payment). Society would then work out, what a grade from the various private grading organisations was worth.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Voldmer

I have not followed this thread in detail, so I may be missing the point here, but I'm in favour of a completely free market and totally opposed to socialism in any form. As far as grading students is concerned, that should be left to the body issuing the grades. Ideally, there would be private organisations - completely unconnected to the educational institutions - that did the grading of students (for payment). Society would then work out, what a grade from the various private grading organisations was worth.

---

Good deal. I'm with you on that.

The grade point analogy involves redistributing grade points so that the less fortunate students can pass. I am trying to get Original Poster to tell me what would go wrong in a system like that, but he is dodging the key question because he knows that his answer will involve saying exactly what is wrong with economic socialism. We've been arguing about socialism since about the time he became a member here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

The grade point analogy involves redistributing grade points so that the less fortunate students can pass. I am trying to get Original Poster to tell me what would go wrong in a system like that, but he is dodging the key question because he knows that his answer will involve saying exactly what is wrong with economic socialism. We've been arguing about socialism since about the time he became a member here.

---

Okay, thanks for the summary. :)

Funny, I thought OP had a rather anarchistic ideology (the Guy Fawkes mask etc.), but I must have read too few posts here in "extended discussion".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Voldmer

Okay, thanks for the summary. :)

Funny, I thought OP had a rather anarchistic ideology (the Guy Fawkes mask etc.), but I must have read too few posts here in "extended discussion".

---

He supports socialistic anarchy, which I don't think could ever happen even for two seconds on a large scale. He might want to tell you more about it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

No, you did not answer the question. I asked you how well an academic system involving grade point redistribution would work and to explain your answer.

---

And in my post, I explain how we already have a form of grade point redistribution, it's called grading on a curve, and if it were analogous to economics, it'd be more analogous to how capitalism works than socialism.

Voldmer - I associate the Guy Fawkes mask with revolution, not anarchy. Guy Fawkes himself was a Catholic pushing for theocracy, or something like that.... nothing I support. I'm a libertarian socialist, which in a nut shell means I believe that producers should own their product rather than contract out their labor in a system of wage slavery.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Original Poster

And in my post, I explain how we already have a form of grade point redistribution, it's called grading on a curve, and if it were analogous to economics, it'd be more analogous to how capitalism works than socialism.

---

That is not redistribution of grades. I have curved test grades myself. I know all about it. Curving grades doesn't involve taking any points away from anybody. I am asking about a system in which all of the grades for a test, class, course, or school are added up and then the sum is divided by the number of students and everybody gets that grade, or a less extreme version in which the best students lose a certain percentage of their points so that other students can get the extra points they need. What do you think of a system like that? How well would it work?

I think a system like that is not at all what socialism is. You're depicting the straw man version of socialism used to excuse the actual socialism that takes place in our government, used to malign social safety nets and ignore corporate welfare.

You should really read that New York Times article I posted. For Capitalism to function in society even capitalists warned us about the potential for those that control the capital to derail the system; the potential for capitalism and democracy to oppose each other (as we have seen come to fruition where it's now factually incorrect to call this country a democracy)

Let's try this yet again. How well would such an academic system work? What would be wrong with it?

You want me to say that if you receive the same score as everyone else whether you do the work or not, then there's no point in doing the work, right? That's why I keep going back to the fact that the method of redistributing grades--or wealth, is a STRAWMAN and does not actually represent socialism. You're being lied to.

Are you capable of answering the question? Do you need me to explain it to you?


By the way, whoever keeps giving my threads one star, grow some balls and identify yourself so we can discuss your views. Don't be a chicken.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Original Poster

Voldmer - I associate the Guy Fawkes mask with revolution, not anarchy. Guy Fawkes himself was a Catholic pushing for theocracy, or something like that.... nothing I support. I'm a libertarian socialist, which in a nut shell means I believe that producers should own their product rather than contract out their labor in a system of wage slavery.

---

Okay, got it! I'm essentially an anarcho-capitalist (for those who know, what that is), and I think that producers do own their products (but that they had better sell them, if they want any real benefit from them).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

By the way, whoever keeps giving my threads one star, grow some balls and identify yourself so we can discuss your views. Don't be a chicken.

---

Threads can be star-rated?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

They are both based on competition. Grades are based on accomplishment, and so are paychecks. Redistributing either discourages accomplishment and rewards lack of accomplishment and results in stagnation. Both are terrible ideas for that reason.

Do you think a system of grade point redistribution would work well? If not, why not?

---

Brilliant go getters will find it worth there time to get a doctorate if it means earning $85,000 (as opposed to $20,000 with out it), despite the fact that with out taxation it would be between $120K and $180K. Those types may bitch that it is not fair, but they will not choose to forgo using their talents and work fast food instead. Fast food may be harder work in many ways.

Then we have the lazy drunk, who will not change even if we take his food and shelter away. He will just beg and steal, if he is that type. However, giving him access to free mental health medications, is not ever going to make him less likely to seek work.



It sounds more like the video is describing communism, which is very different from socialism.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Voldmer

Threads can be star-rated?

---

Yeah. I don't really see what it's worth because the topic of the thread has a lot to do with its value and if the discussion on it sucks, I try to make it better. It seems like it's mostly a way for cowards to have their fits and run away.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sivason

Brilliant go getters will find it worth there time to get a doctorate if it means earning $85,000 (as opposed to $20,000 with out it), despite the fact that with out taxation it would be between $120K and $180K. Those types may bitch that it is not fair, but they will not choose to forgo using their talents and work fast food instead. Fast food may be harder work in many ways.

Then we have the lazy drunk, who will not change even if we take his food and shelter away. He will just beg and steal, if he is that type. However, giving him access to free mental health medications, is not ever going to make him less likely to seek work.



It sounds more like the video is describing communism, which is very different from socialism.

---

The brilliant go getters are much more likely to become doctors if they are not taxed too much. If we had equal distribution of wealth, almost nobody would want to be a doctor. Why do that when you can be a lifeguard or answer a phone and make the same amount of money? That is the extreme case. The less extreme cases reduce the tendency to be lazy as the taxation levels go down in the heirarchy, but somebody making $20,000 a year would be much more likely to become a doctor if he can take home $170,000 than if he can take home just $85,000.

Communism and socialism have different definitions, but in practice, the attempts to make communism and pure socialism happen result in the same reality. The government controls everything and gives people what it decides to give them. The governments will have different ways of describing and labeling what they are doing, but it's the same thing. That is why the Soviet Union is referred to as communist and also socialist. It was the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, but it was controlled by the Communist Party. Really, it was just a totalitarian Hell hole where people lacked incentive to work hard, business absolutely sucked, and the government collapsed because the economy was absolutely pitiful.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Voldmer

Okay, got it! I'm essentially an anarcho-capitalist (for those who know, what that is), and I think that producers do own their products (but that they had better sell them, if they want any real benefit from them).

---

Producers are the laborers that actually build the product, support the entire industry through their labor and reap nothing but their contracted wage. Essentially anarcho-capitalism exploits labor from an anarcho-syndicalist perspective. It's called wage-slavery because laborers have no choice but to be exploited if they want to make ends meet.

This discussion seems much more interesting than the OPs ridiculous game of redefining socialism and taking any attempt to clarify socialism as question dodging.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Original Poster

This discussion seems much more interesting than the OPs ridiculous game of redefining socialism and taking any attempt to clarify socialism as question dodging.

---

How well would a system of grade point redistribution (as described by me and the video) work? What might go wrong with it?

Is it even possible for an economic system not to carry an amount of disadvantages. Can anyone name an economic system that benefits everyone in the country?

As far as I'm concerned the most important factor in any country is education, no system will ever work fairly if the population is uneducated

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dutchraptor

Is it even possible for an economic system not to carry an amount of disadvantages. Can anyone name an economic system that benefits everyone in the country?

As far as I'm concerned the most important factor in any country is education, no system will ever work fairly if the population is uneducated

---

That is why all schools need to be private. Capitalism gets things moving.