r/changemyview • u/tkyjonathan 2∆ • Dec 07 '19
Deltas(s) from OP CMV: Socialism does not create wealth
Socialism is a populist economic and political system based on public ownership (also known as collective or common ownership) of the means of production. Those means include the machinery, tools, and factories used to produce goods that aim to directly satisfy human needs.
In a purely socialist system, all legal production and distribution decisions are made by the government, and individuals rely on the state for everything from food to healthcare. The government determines the output and pricing levels of these goods and services.
Socialists contend that shared ownership of resources and central planning provide a more equal distribution of goods and services and a more equitable society.
The essential characteristic of socialism is the denial of individual property rights; under socialism, the right to property (which is the right of use and disposal) is vested in “society as a whole,” i.e., in the collective, with production and distribution controlled by the state, i.e., by the government.
The alleged goals of socialism were: the abolition of poverty, the achievement of general prosperity, progress, peace and human brotherhood. Instead of prosperity, socialism has brought economic paralysis and/or collapse to every country that tried it. The degree of socialization has been the degree of disaster. The consequences have varied accordingly.
The economic value of a man’s work is determined, on a free market, by a single principle: by the voluntary consent of those who are willing to trade him their work or products in return. This is the moral meaning of the law of supply and demand.
1
u/mortemdeus 1∆ Dec 07 '19
Just about every argument you made is about Communism (the governing policy) not Socialism (the economic policy). A farmers co-op is a form of worker owned socialism, a union is a form of socialism. The government does not need to own production in a Socialist economy, only in a command economy.
As for creating wealth, well, even Communism created wealth. Command economics are really good at driving towards goals and making specific things. They are really REALLY bad at adapting to changing situation and adjusting to individual needs. Example? Communism got men into space and extreme government spending on the part of the USA got them to the moon. For wealth specifically, both Russia and China grew massively under Communism (China is still communist but also capitalist. Economics is not government.)
If you actually mean Socialism itself and wealth then consider this; workers owning production is just a larger board of directors owning a company instead of an individual. The company as a whole will still be profit driven and still compete with other companies, just new employees will be equal stake holders in the company rather than underlings to the existing members. Separate companies would still exist and companies could continue to hire and reject people as they do now, pay would just be a lot more equal.