LogFAQs > #943052580

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, DB3, DB4, DB5, DB6, Database 7 ( 07.18.2020-02.18.2021 ), DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	agree/disagree: Are these fair summaries of various eco-political ideals?
Kyuubi4269 08/06/20 6:09:15 AM #5:	Lokarin posted... Capitalism: To maximize the wealth of the individual - personal goals should be to make as much money as possible since a powerful individual means a powerful nation I'd say it's to make as much wealth as possible throughout the system, whatever is most net profit is preferred, not what is most net profit for an individual. The goal is to give power to those who can generate the most profit, it's a system to maximise production. Lokarin posted... Socialism: To maximize the wealth of the society - A nation is only as strong as its weakest link; personal goals should be in maximizing the wellbeing of the weakest links. Socialism is the halfway point between Communism and Capitalism. It's still focused on individuals accruing personal wealth, however it doesn't consider letting unproductive people die off. Socialism tries to make sure everyone is capable of producing and having a place in society while minimising depriving productive people of their earnt power. Lokarin posted... Communism: To maximize the wealth of the community - A nation is only as strong as its communities; personal goals should be to maximize municipal wellbeing since it takes a village to raise a person. What happens in neighbouring towns doesn't really impact you so why care? This is where Individualism goes out of the window and everybody is intrinsically tied to eachother. Any member of the comminity failing is harm to the entire fabric and any success is bolstering the group. It's focused entirely on security attempting to level out fluctuations by trussing everything together. Only really effective in small or unstable groups. Lokarin posted... Statism: To maximize the wealth of a state/province - A nation is only as strong as its constituent voting power; personal goals should be to maximize the power of your state so it can veto the efforts of other states as needed This is, as far as you're explaining it, the same as communism, except defining a larger loose community. The first step from communism to socialism by gaining enough size to outgrow the need for tight stability and have the means to seize greater productivity. Lokarin posted... Dictator...ism: To maximize the wealth of the dictator - A nation is only as strong as its leader; the more power a leader has the better for everyone This isn't an -ism for a reason. A dictator can use any of the previous states, Dictators are the mirror to absolute majority vote with government in the middle. It has nothing to do with economics, it is an administration. --- Doctor Foxx posted... The demonizing of soy has a lot to do with xenophobic ideas. <cite>Kyuubi4269 posted [p:943052580] in agree/disa... [t:78894669]...</cite> <quote>Lokarin posted...</cite> <quote>Capitalism: To maximize the wealth of the individual - personal goals should be to make as much money as possible since a powerful individual means a powerful nation</quote> I'd say it's to make as much wealth as possible throughout the system, whatever is most net profit is preferred, not what is most net profit for an individual. The goal is to give power to those who can generate the most profit, it's a system to maximise production. Lokarin posted...</cite> <quote>Socialism: To maximize the wealth of the society - A nation is only as strong as its weakest link; personal goals should be in maximizing the wellbeing of the weakest links.</quote> Socialism is the halfway point between Communism and Capitalism. It's still focused on individuals accruing personal wealth, however it doesn't consider letting unproductive people die off. Socialism tries to make sure everyone is capable of producing and having a place in society while minimising depriving productive people of their earnt power. Lokarin posted...</cite> <quote>Communism: To maximize the wealth of the community - A nation is only as strong as its communities; personal goals should be to maximize municipal wellbeing since it takes a village to raise a person. What happens in neighbouring towns doesn't really impact you so why care?</quote> This is where Individualism goes out of the window and everybody is intrinsically tied to eachother. Any member of the comminity failing is harm to the entire fabric and any success is bolstering the group. It's focused entirely on security attempting to level out fluctuations by trussing everything together. Only really effective in small or unstable groups. Lokarin posted...</cite> <quote>Statism: To maximize the wealth of a state/province - A nation is only as strong as its constituent voting power; personal goals should be to maximize the power of your state so it can veto the efforts of other states as needed</quote> This is, as far as you're explaining it, the same as communism, except defining a larger loose community. The first step from communism to socialism by gaining enough size to outgrow the need for tight stability and have the means to seize greater productivity. Lokarin posted...</cite> <quote>Dictator...ism: To maximize the wealth of the dictator - A nation is only as strong as its leader; the more power a leader has the better for everyone</quote> This isn't an -ism for a reason. A dictator can use any of the previous states, Dictators are the mirror to absolute majority vote with government in the middle. It has nothing to do with economics, it is an administration. --- Doctor Foxx posted... The demonizing of soy has a lot to do with xenophobic ideas.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1