Not sure. I know a lot of people who believe in capitalism and maintaining it through socialistic injections, but they aren’t wanting to give the means of production over to the government/people, which is l what leftist is to me.
It has troubles to get that to work, and often times higher expenses, but that’s what they seem comfortable with
I think “socialistic injections” is a misnomer. Capitalism and Socialism are descriptors for entire economies, not parts of them. Generally, reading theory tends to help people support moving towards Socialism.
I get what you mean, but how would you describe Canada’s healthcare system or veteran affairs in the U.S.?
Really the same with public schools, roads, libraries, medical coverage for the elderly, SNAP benefits… they are all socially shared costs by the people, while existing in a capitalistic country
Kay this is just semantics at this point, so ultimately it’s unimportant because delving this deep into it distracts from the overall conversation.
With that said, wouldn’t the existence of a post office and other socialized services make the US (and basically every nation state in existence) by strict definitions, a mixed economy? Like if we had to keep to first year undergrad levels.
To be clear for the back row, being this pedantic about semantics not only distracts from the overall conversation but when made as a serious point is at best a sign of ignorance, and at worst it’s an argument made in bad faith in order to move the goal post. This comment is meant as an aside. Ultimately like everything else an economy is a spectrum, and strict categories are more often than not caused by our desire to make things simple.
No economy is “pure,” what determines if an economy is Capitalist or Socialist is what is primary. Trying to say that Capitalism or Socialism describes a specific section of an economy results in issues like drawing hard lines where they shouldn’t and can’t be drawn.
Alright so the term programs is the word you prefer to injections. I wasn’t saying such programs make the country not capitalistic, I was just saying many people who vote democrat want capitalism with more social programs.
You may be right that if they read more theory they would be more apt to ditch capitalism, but many of them are programmed to reject any talk of other systems.
Sometimes it’s not worth the fight.
I feel like most self described liberals would be leftists if they actually looked into it anyway
That’s my experience, generally. The ones I can get to read a bit of theory tend to be more sympathetic towards Socialism.
Not sure. I know a lot of people who believe in capitalism and maintaining it through socialistic injections, but they aren’t wanting to give the means of production over to the government/people, which is l what leftist is to me.
It has troubles to get that to work, and often times higher expenses, but that’s what they seem comfortable with
I think “socialistic injections” is a misnomer. Capitalism and Socialism are descriptors for entire economies, not parts of them. Generally, reading theory tends to help people support moving towards Socialism.
I get what you mean, but how would you describe Canada’s healthcare system or veteran affairs in the U.S.?
Really the same with public schools, roads, libraries, medical coverage for the elderly, SNAP benefits… they are all socially shared costs by the people, while existing in a capitalistic country
Those are social programs. Socialism and Capitalism are systems overall, the presence of the post office in the US does not alter that character.
Kay this is just semantics at this point, so ultimately it’s unimportant because delving this deep into it distracts from the overall conversation.
With that said, wouldn’t the existence of a post office and other socialized services make the US (and basically every nation state in existence) by strict definitions, a mixed economy? Like if we had to keep to first year undergrad levels.
To be clear for the back row, being this pedantic about semantics not only distracts from the overall conversation but when made as a serious point is at best a sign of ignorance, and at worst it’s an argument made in bad faith in order to move the goal post. This comment is meant as an aside. Ultimately like everything else an economy is a spectrum, and strict categories are more often than not caused by our desire to make things simple.
No economy is “pure,” what determines if an economy is Capitalist or Socialist is what is primary. Trying to say that Capitalism or Socialism describes a specific section of an economy results in issues like drawing hard lines where they shouldn’t and can’t be drawn.
Alright so the term programs is the word you prefer to injections. I wasn’t saying such programs make the country not capitalistic, I was just saying many people who vote democrat want capitalism with more social programs.
You may be right that if they read more theory they would be more apt to ditch capitalism, but many of them are programmed to reject any talk of other systems.