Socialism

Capitalism





unitedkurdistan wrote:Nothing in the middle?



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.

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.


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.

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.

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



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 .

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.

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.

Registered users: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot]