Roj Bash Kurdistan

Well I decided to create this forum. Pick what option you would go down for Kurdistan if you were President, and why if possible.

Socialism

Capitalism

Nothing in the middle?

unitedkurdistan wrote:Nothing in the middle?

I made a new poll, put Mixed economy. Can I ask what you find so appealing about Capitalism?

Everyone re-vote or vote please.

In Iraqi Kurdistan will never be socialism

if I were elected, then:

democracy
capitalism
a strong army
well-developed social program for people

Actully I stand for mixed.

The reason is because if your economy is to much dependent on trade(globalization) you are much more vulnerable, like Kurdistan is now. But if you stand for Socialism you will end up behind the rest of the world in many fields which also makes you vulnerable.

unitedkurdistan wrote:Actully I stand for mixed.

The reason is because if your economy is to much dependent on trade(globalization) you are much more vulnerable, like Kurdistan is now. But if you stand for Socialism you will end up behind the rest of the world in many fields which also makes you vulnerable.

Capitalism doesn't neccasarily mean globalisation. That is the balance of payments problem, but that can occurr with anything really. If like India or Chine you are willing to have masses of foriegn companies that will develop your country at a low cost in sacrifice of your workers getting a low pay, then that can be seen as a weakness. Although some capitalists will argue that "it's the natural course of capitalism". I don't see anything wrong with Socialism, its the perfect system. The last time I checked socialism is the champion of technology. Why would the country be behind a Socialist country? It would actually be even more technologically advanced since all the resources are allocated and controlled by the government, which in a ideal world be un-corrupt. My main problem with the free market is that it encourages inequality, and it also encourages indivualism.

jjmuneer wrote:

unitedkurdistan wrote:Actully I stand for mixed.

The reason is because if your economy is to much dependent on trade(globalization) you are much more vulnerable, like Kurdistan is now. But if you stand for Socialism you will end up behind the rest of the world in many fields which also makes you vulnerable.

Capitalism doesn't neccasarily mean globalisation. That is the balance of payments problem, but that can occurr with anything really. If like India or Chine you are willing to have masses of foriegn companies that will develop your country at a low cost in sacrifice of your workers getting a low pay, then that can be seen as a weakness. Although some capitalists will argue that "it's the natural course of capitalism". I don't see anything wrong with Socialism, its the perfect system. The last time I checked socialism is the champion of technology. Why would the country be behind a Socialist country? It would actually be even more technologically advanced since all the resources are allocated and controlled by the government, which in a ideal world be un-corrupt. My main problem with the free market is that it encourages inequality, and it also encourages indivualism.

What I mean is that when you are more isolated then others will go forward in technology while you are behind, like USSR. In simple daily life stuff. Like the cars in USSR couldn't compete to american or european cars since they didn't have anyone to compete with. People could only buy one type of clothes both for women and men, one type of car etc that's what I mean.

there are nothing such as mixed economy. there are capitalist countries with big public sector (like russia and other former red block countries, danmark, normay, sweden and so on...) and there are capitalist countries with little public sector (like USA, mexico, japan and so on)

i am for socialism. like albert einstein sad: “We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.” (he was socialist)

unitedkurdistan wrote:
What I mean is that when you are more isolated then others will go forward in technology while you are behind, like USSR. In simple daily life stuff. Like the cars in USSR couldn't compete to american or european cars since they didn't have anyone to compete with. People could only buy one type of clothes both for women and men, one type of car etc that's what I mean.

isolated? the west isolates allmost all the world for its own business. example it isolates africa. F*ck technology if it is buy every month a new phone, spending all resources on unusable things, and the worst of all spending resources that doesnt belong you but you suck other countries resources.

USSR where behind because USA had much more resources and money from those countries it did steal resouces from. The west is democratic in the west, but outside the west they are double faced and supports dictators. USA is the country wich supports most dictators with weapon.

1% of the world population owns 40% of all world resources, and there die 30 000 children every day because of hunger.

i'm not leninist, but he saw the future very good. he sad the highest stage of capitalism would be imperialism. just like today.

kurd-sthanam wrote:

unitedkurdistan wrote:
What I mean is that when you are more isolated then others will go forward in technology while you are behind, like USSR. In simple daily life stuff. Like the cars in USSR couldn't compete to american or european cars since they didn't have anyone to compete with. People could only buy one type of clothes both for women and men, one type of car etc that's what I mean.

isolated? the west isolates allmost all the world for its own business. example it isolates africa. F*ck technology if it is buy every month a new phone, spending all resources on unusable things, and the worst of all spending resources that doesnt belong you but you suck other countries resources.

USSR where behind because USA had much more resources and money from those countries it did steal resouces from. The west is democratic in the west, but outside the west they are double faced and supports dictators. USA is the country wich supports most dictators with weapon.

1% of the world population owns 40% of all world resources, and there die 30 000 children every day because of hunger.

and 80% (or 70%,i don`t remeber) of the food that is planted/made every year goes to 20% of the world population

kurd28 wrote:In Iraqi Kurdistan will never be socialism

if I were elected, then:

democracy
capitalism
a strong army
well-developed social program for people

democracy - this is fake.

capitalism - ok than what? will you be richer just because of this? most poor countries have free marked. (yes they are mostly isolated. but mostly african countries)

a strong army - if you dont have economical support from the west, or if you are not imperialistic, it will suck all the countries ressources. (and then you cant have "well-developed social program for people")

again well-developed social program for people - if the country is capitalist, this is impossible. dont think you will be a new germany, japan or france in just 10 years.

Any thing is fine as long as it serves people . Show me one successful country and I will choose their system no matter what it is .

talsor wrote:Any thing is fine as long as it serves people . Show me one successful country and I will choose their system no matter what it is .

I think Sweden have a pretty good system, no one is starving everybody have food for the day and its the social program is very good mean while the have a normal strong army/the technology is advance to.
And the corruption is pretty low/invincible, until now the media reviled that sweden have made weapon fabrics in Saudi Arabia and worked together for 25 years.

kurd-sthanam wrote:

unitedkurdistan wrote:
What I mean is that when you are more isolated then others will go forward in technology while you are behind, like USSR. In simple daily life stuff. Like the cars in USSR couldn't compete to american or european cars since they didn't have anyone to compete with. People could only buy one type of clothes both for women and men, one type of car etc that's what I mean.

isolated? the west isolates allmost all the world for its own business. example it isolates africa. F*ck technology if it is buy every month a new phone, spending all resources on unusable things, and the worst of all spending resources that doesnt belong you but you suck other countries resources.

USSR where behind because USA had much more resources and money from those countries it did steal resouces from. The west is democratic in the west, but outside the west they are double faced and supports dictators. USA is the country wich supports most dictators with weapon.

1% of the world population owns 40% of all world resources, and there die 30 000 children every day because of hunger.

i'm not leninist, but he saw the future very good. he sad the highest stage of capitalism would be imperialism. just like today.

Well USSR did isolate themself from the world, look at the depression, USSR wasn't affected at all while the rest of the world was! That's a positive thing but look after 2nd world war, what happened to USSR then?
Compare South Korea to North Korea. S Korea with US influence look how rich it has become and look at North Korea, where it's people are starving daily.
I am against Imperialsm but compare the US imperialsm to the USSR. Compare Poland, Baltikum, Kazakhistan etc to how it is now. USSR isloated their people from their rest of the world, how the people of USSR were suffering while the rest of the world were progressing. Look at West Germany to East Germany. USSR, less resources?! They are the worlds biggest country, with all kind of resource. Oil, gas, iron, limber, uranium etc Much more than US. That's how the world works today if you don't have money you don't have ANYTHING.

Kure Kurda! wrote:

talsor wrote:Any thing is fine as long as it serves people . Show me one successful country and I will choose their system no matter what it is .

I think Sweden have a pretty good system, no one is starving everybody have food for the day and its the social program is very good mean while the have a normal strong army/the technology is advance to.
And the corruption is pretty low/invincible, until now the media reviled that sweden have made weapon fabrics in Saudi Arabia and worked together for 25 years.

The swedish system is alright, though it really pisses me off how people abuse the system in Sweden , making kids everyday and live on social welfare, particularly the somalis. The more kids, the more money. I know that there are also Kurds who abuse it. And that's some of the things I find wrong in Socialism. Everybody has to contribute to the economy and not just taking from it.