green Loc: 22.1749611,-159.646704,20

name one purely capitalist country.

the countries you mentioned are all dictatorships

Twardlow Loc: Arkansas

Well, we have a bunch of people writing about something they know nothing about, being led by someone ignorant or deceiving.

Let's deal with some cold, hard, verifiable Facts.

First of all, let's learn what socialism is: Socialism is an economic theory in which the Government owns or controls the means of production. . No one in this country advocates Socialism by this definition.

Communism (which no one is talking about here) is an economic theory of revolution which leads to a classless society in which the government (or everyone) owns everything in common, and the government controls both politics and the economy. Obviously, no one in this country advocates this either, following the serial failures of that system all over the world.

However, there is a body of scholars who attempt to measure happiness in the world, and you can read about it here:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/20/world/worlds-happiest-countries.html?mabReward=CTM1&recp=3&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&region=CColumn&module=Recommendation&src=rechp&WT.nav=RecEngine

They have a 'top hits' list of countries they deem the happiest, and the top five countries are
1 Norway
2 Denmark
3 Iceland
4 Switzerland
5 Finland

These countries (mostly, not certain about Switzerland) feature the so-called Nordic model, or Nordic Capitalism, or Nordic Social Democracy, advocated by Bernie Sanders in the last election. It is not Socialism at all by the definition given above.

This is (according to Wikipedia) "a combination of free market capitalism with comprehensive welfare state and collective bargaining at the national level."

Common traits are "a 'universalist welfare state aimed specifically at enhancing individual autonomy and promoting social mobility; a corporatist system involving a tripartite arrangement were representatives of labor and employers negotiate wages and labor market policy mediated by the government, and a commitment to widespread private ownership, free markets and free trade."

I point out that tha four of the five 'happiest' nations practice this form of government.

On that same list, the U.S.A. is listed at number fourteen.

Twardlow Loc: Arkansas

Please see my post. Perhaps you deceive your students. I refer to the so-called Nordic Model of Nordic Social Democracy, similar to what Bernie Saunders advocated last election. My post below explains it farther, including a 'top hits' list of the happiest countries. Four of the top five follow this model, and the USA is listed down the list at 14.

Twardlow Loc: Arkansas

I don't agree at all. Socialism is a economic theory in which the government owns the means of production--look it up.

Of course, no one advocates that in this country.

The Social Democracy that Bernie advocated is much closer to the USA--government support of citizens, but a free enterprise economy.

Look that up, too.

Twardlow Loc: Arkansas

Rockefeller was so hated because of his business practices that mothers used to threaten their children, you better behave or Rockefeller's going to get you.

Twardlow Loc: Arkansas

You confuse communism with an erroneous concept of socialism; you should study more and speak less.

Socialism is an economic theory in which the government owns the means of production; communism is something entirely different.

Look up Nordic Social Democracy....

steve03 Loc: long Lsland

a good definition of Anarchism.

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

Nope, not confused, communism is the ultimate end product of developing socialism and no country has really made it all the way to communism, not matter what they call themselves. The Soviets called themselves state socialists. According to Marx, Engels and the other intellectual gods of the movement true communism will see government itself fade away.

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

The US is mainly Pragmatist mixing things from various "isms". The more extreme we get to any one ism the more problems we have had. The last 80 years or so the socialist ideas are gaining ground, and so is the debt problem. To paraphrase Thatcher, The problem with Socialism is sooner or later you run out of other people's money.
And the bigger the population the faster that happens because of the larger numbers of those who decide for one reason or another to do the minimum and live off those other people's money.
All those Scandinavian countries together don't have the population of California. And because they have friends who will do the heavy lifting they don't really need to maintain large defense forces among other things. So it takes the pressure off the running out of money and allows them to keep going. But at some time those chickens will come home to roost.

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

Ask any accountant who knows those programs. You don't pay in nearly enough to fund the benefits if you live to the average age. You are paid out of money collected from those younger than you. It is a variation of a big Ponzi scheme and in a nation where the average age keeps going up those young wage earners become so outnumbered they cannot meet the amount of money needed.

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

Read more about the socialist/communist ideas of Marx and Engels and how it should evolve from capitalism to socialism to communism. But it hasn't worked yet. And probably never will.

Those Nordic model countries are small population and historically have had a united culture where almost everyone worked and contributed. With the changes in their populations, cultures and the way people think that is breaking down and they were going into debt, started to try to come out of it and then the waves of refugees hit with a large portion who either could not find work or such low paying work that they become dependent on all those social programs and the debt is going back up.
They do save money to funnel into those programs because they have a relatively tiny defense budget. But they can only have that because they have friends/allies, big brothers and one really big uncle that back them up.

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

Someone mentioned the spread of wealth and poverty and claimed the US has the biggest.
Wrong, try going to many third world nations and go see the slums and poor areas, not the tourist spots.
What the US classifies as "poverty" or "poor" is middle class or upper middle class in those nations.
The difference between Bill Gates and other billionaires is great on a % basis. But the difference between those we consider poor and the poor of many nations is even greater, esp when you look at "stuff" and life style instead of money. Out poor have cars, AC, TVs, microwaves, phones, often cable etc etc etc. While in those third world countries many of the poor can actually pick up everything they own (except furniture and housing) and carry it.

Do we have people like that, yes. But very few compared as a % of our huge population. And many of them have personal problems that contribute to their status. If we concentrated just on those people and not larger masses that can then "vote" for their patrons in politics the problems could in large part be solved for much less money than the "solutions" being tried and not working.

Our government, esp the liberals, try to solve the problems of the few by changing the whole system.
Health care is a great example. The nation could have provided health insurance for everyone who didn't have it for a small % of the cost of ACA.

Well I have to get ready for photo club, then do family business and income taxes so I need to quickly go over other posts and then leave.

Keenan Loc: Central Coast California

What you fail to understand is that Marx and Engels are not the sole authors on socialism, nor do they represent the sole model. The various models and types and degrees of socialism are as varied as the Earth's human cultures and languages.

Your arguments are hopelessly circular and use many straw men, and you continuously contradict yourself. Taking one example, you claim that "it is supposed to evolve from capitalism to socialism to communism" and that the fact the no country has "made it all the way" is "proof that it doesn't work". But the Nordic countries are not trying to "go all the way." They have always been content with the model of social democracy along with a mixed economy. Therefore, your premise is false.

phcaan Loc: Willow Springs, MO

Knda like the infinite shades of grey.

Bazbo Loc: Lisboa, Portugal