It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by The Vagabond
Originally posted by Nygdan
Originally posted by The Vagabond
This is intended to create similiar ambitions in the aristocracy of neighboring nations bringing about a capitalist domino effect.
This domino effect is proably less intentional (setting aside any concerns as to the validity of the scenario) and more the result of what Adam Smith called 'The Invisible Hand' of the free market. The free market results in organization of the system as a sort of secondary effect of people investing capital to get profit returned to them.
Capitalism isn't just selling and buying products or bring gold or money into a country, thats more properly 'mercantalism'. The british operated under that economic system wrt to their overseas colonies, as did the spanish, whereas the revolutionaries were calling for the 'unhindered' action of capitalism, the investment of capital.
Socialism operates, distinct from capitalism, with closed markets and with the government merely creating stuff, but not for a return on profits. So a 'capitalist' will look to the market to decide what product is needed and make the 'capital' expendatures to purchase the equipment to produce that product and then sell it in the market, with that ultimate sale and profit being the goal. A 'socialist' on the other hand, will not look to the market, even if one some how operated, and instead will decide what the people need and then gather the resources in anyway and produce that need in anyway and then distribute it to the people.
So the 'context' of each is different along with the method. The capitalist is thinking about markets and sale, the socialist doesn't care about the market, doesn't recognize it as meaningful, and thinks about what populations of people need and distribution.
So its kind of a fuzzy thing, and, since the international system is market oriented, socialist countries probably tend to act at that level as 'market oriented'.
Thats why socialism is an internationalist movement that has to wipe out capitalist markets and replace the global 'market' with a socialist system. Because the government in venezuala isn't going to give cuba oil, or even expect that cuba will give it some resource later. Under socialism there has to be 'one government' to simply distribute the resources and any 'products'.
Also, in your scenario, when the countries exchange, if they exchange.... not according to some rate based on an items 'value' (ie diamond has more 'value' than coal, or whatever), then they are behaving in something like a socialist manner... if they try to make it like a market transaction, then its different.
So, of course, in this way of thinking, market thinking is, well, heck its exploitative and 'evil' or something I guess, and the 'socialist system' is 'nice' because everyone is on the same team practically.
Problem is that capitalism and the market based economy seems to result in more people haveing their needs and wants met over all and better organization to teh entire system and more products and uses and all that, because of the 'Invisible Hand'.
Eww, that was like a lecture or something.
Originally posted by The VagabondWhen providing for or buying from a nation directly is not sufficently lucrative that nation stagnates and the people therein can not always follow the market to other nations.
believe that a mingling of socialism and capitalism, perhaps best termed "centrally planned capitalism" can be highly effective for expanding economies as well as ensuring that citizens of the international community are appropriately provided for
middleground where creativity can satisfy issues that would be the primary concern of socialists (providing for the people) while also generating new market opportunities
What I'm looking for is the prospect to provide for the people through a coordinated economy while respecting local markets as the driving force of economics
They should have respected the market and worked within it in a way suitable to socialist values.
This is made possible by the profit motive of a small number of primary transactions
I believe that operating to socialist ends by capitalist means might hypothetically
Originally posted by Nygdan
middleground where creativity can satisfy issues that would be the primary concern of socialists (providing for the people) while also generating new market opportunities
Thats the thing tho, capitalism and the competition of the market is supposed to result in greater creativity, whereas central planning has a serious potential for polticizing and stagnation.
Even non-centrally planned and still non 'market' 'economies' have stagnation built into them. 'Ancient' economies, which aren't market economies or socialist/communist ones, don't seek to maximize efficiency or work at large scales or promote inovation.
What I'm looking for is the prospect to provide for the people through a coordinated economy while respecting local markets as the driving force of economics
I seriously doubt that a globalist centrally planned economy can work out tho, especially with various market economies operating beneath them, becuase in a sense they'd be at odds.
They should have respected the market and worked within it in a way suitable to socialist values.
Well, strictly speaking, market thinking and socialist values are anti-thetical to one another. Fortunately the world and reality isn't so strict tho.
This is made possible by the profit motive of a small number of primary transactions
Can't allow the market to act with free reign, can't plan the entire thing central, so you use a regulated market to sort of 'force' profits in some things. This allows the inovations of capitalism and its efficiency in some areas to work for 'humanitarian' benefits. Seems reasonable enough.
I think you might be interested in that 'third wayism' that i referenced above. I am not particularly familiar with it tho.