International Socialism is worse for the economy than a world war

Rod1

Plutonium Belt
@plutonium
Joined
Jul 19, 2010
Messages
54,253
Reaction score
11,333
So when are we going to put this twisted ideology in the same group as fascism or radical islam?

Venezuelan GDP set to shrink by 83% of its 2011 levels by 2021

cun5udi4iic41.png


Comparison to civil war

Syria shrunk by around 62% in the worst part of the war and has been recovering slowly in the past 2 years.

C_NWYT7XoAAqhtz.jpg


Germany which was bombed to dust during WW2, lost thousands of working age men, then deindustrialized under Morgantheau plan plunged by 70% before recovering.

qa2cjvsual331.jpg


Its quite insane, i dont think there has been anything like that in history a nation without war, without conflict, with massive natural resources having an economic meltdown that could only be compared to the mongolian genocides.
 
Well I'm convinced. Not like there are any externalities involved. Cut and dry.
 
War is bad. Helping others is good. There is no refuting that socialism helps others and in doing so is good.

we as a society need to stop doing more bad things and start doing more good things and if socialism helps then maybe we should start there.
 
So when are we going to put this twisted ideology in the same group as fascism or radical islam?

Lol. I've been saying the moon & crescent, hammer & sickle and the swastika are the representations of the worst ideas people have ever conceived for years.

Worse than a WW? Now that's debatable.
 
War is always great for some economy. So is slavery. But they shouldn’t be our preferred means of economic stimulation because they exploit human misery.
 
Nice to see the commies outing themselves in this thread.
 
Command economies are shit, more news at 11.
 
I'm guessing this has nothing to do with socialism.

Socialism in VZ was doing very well at the start of 2002 and now it's not. I wonder what changed? I think VZ is more about poor leadership as they should had invested the oil money better.
 
Command economies are shit, more news at 11.

Yeah, I just don't get Rod1's prerogative to be honest. That command economy is inefficient, unstable, and, at least past a certain point, unproductive isn't really a controversial point. But he's also trying to make this uncontroversial point in the worst possible way, by using an anecdote about the economic contraction of Venezuela without tying it to socialist (or even command-economic) policy. There's nothing in the socialist playbook that transfers productive firms to military cronies and gives said cronies complete control over the economy, allowing them to basically short exchanges on their own currency. There are socialistic Venezuelan policies that you can rightfully call out as counterproductive and disincentivizing, like price controls and profit caps, but you'd be hard-pressed to build a catalog of such policies and reasonably blame them for the contraction.
 
War is better for the economy than capitalism or any other ism based on these retarted fucking graphs.

World war will always stoke the economy. Why the fuck do you think we had them in the first place.
 
You forgot China

Oh wait they’ve had record shattering GDP growth over the past 40 years
 
Well I'm convinced. Not like there are any externalities involved. Cut and dry.

Feel free to elaborate on the externalities? or are you going to keep them ambiguous enough to claim "Stop putting words in my mouth".

Got to love that the first 2 posts where drive-by shitposts, did i triggered people?
 
War is bad. Helping others is good. There is no refuting that socialism helps others and in doing so is good.

It helps people lose weight and go vegan, thats good mrite?
 

Well I'm convinced. Not like there are any externalities involved. Cut and dry.



3MrSOy57OWTTLgGQRD2bBoPcuf5B22L8qcn4BZ3D6Tg.jpg


The worst is that, externalities aside, Rod1 is extremely intelligent and able to articulate his critiques in terms of command economy instead of using the term "socialism" as an incoherent boogeyman. But, alas, he does not.

Yo @Rod1 looks like the troop is assembled and ready
 
You forgot China

Oh wait they’ve had record shattering GDP growth over the past 40 years

You mean the SEZ in China, which are capitalist, the rest of China? not so much.
 
Feel free to elaborate on the externalities? or are you going to keep them ambiguous enough to claim "Stop putting words in my mouth".

Got to love that the first 2 posts where drive-by shitposts, did i triggered people?

You follow Latin american politics, you can't think of any problems venezuela has had other than "socialism"? The socialism that gave them their wealth to begin with?

<puh-lease75>

"Externalities, what externalities?"
 
You follow Latin american politics, you can't think of any problems venezuela has had other than "socialism"? The socialism that gave them their wealth to begin with?

<puh-lease75>

"Externalities, what externalities?"

Wait, wait. I know the troop is pretty much just insane children on the spectrum but do you actually believe that Venezuela was “given its wealth through socialism?”
 
Yeah, I just don't get Rod1's prerogative to be honest. That command economy is inefficient, unstable, and, at least past a certain point, unproductive isn't really a controversial point. But he's also trying to make this uncontroversial point in the worst possible way,

Thank you for a thoughtful answer.

There's nothing in the socialist playbook that transfers productive firms to military cronies and gives said cronies complete control over the economy, allowing them to basically short exchanges on their own currency.

True, but this is the result of the direct implementation of socialist ideology for several reasons.

1.- The notion that "profit is theft" leads to believe people in the immutable value of things, if we go by the promise that all private investment is theft of the surplus value, then we establish an idea that "killing or driving off capitalists" will not result in a plunge in the productive capacity of the country. The reality is that most if not all of the expropiated companies in Venezuela saw a plunge in output.

2.- The idea that the means justify the end and the notion, and the whole "Institutions are a tool of the burgeois" lead to the destruction of institutional checks and balance of any government not only concentrating power in those with the tools of violence but making it the only thing that matters.

The military becoming ideological and corrupt wasnt a coincidence, it was almost inevitable once Chavez set up the country in a way that they were the only power that matters.

There are socialistic Venezuelan policies that you can rightfully call out as counterproductive and disincentivizing, like price controls and profit caps, but you'd be hard-pressed to build a catalog of such policies and reasonably blame them for the contraction.

The problems with socialism are more political than economic.
 
Back
Top