History Greatest debate in modern history? Socialism(not Stalinism) vs Capitalism

[Dale]

-How does capitalism improves the health of population?

By encouraging the development, production, and distribution of new and innovative medical devices, procedures, and drugs through rewarding those doing the hard work required. When is the last time that you have heard of a new drug being developed outside of capitalism?

 

[AlexES16]

By encouraging the development, production, and distribution of new and innovative medical devices, procedures, and drugs through rewarding those doing the hard work required. When is the last time that you have heard of a new drug being developed outside of capitalism?

What about the enviroment?

 

[Max Faust]

When is the last time that you have heard of a new drug being developed outside of capitalism?

When is the last time you have heard about a new disease being developed outside of capitalism?

 

[BoomBoom]

When is the last time that you have heard of a new drug being developed outside of capitalism?

NIH (and similar) funding has developed many new drugs.

 

[calculusrocks]

What about the enviroment?

People have property rights, and when you own a piece of property you badly want to preserve it. If someone intentionally pollutes your land, then they are guilty of a serious crime as it is the equivalent to theft.

 

[mheslep]

Well, I would challenge anyone to point at an existing PURE "capitalist" system anywhere. It simply doesn't exist. It couldn't. It's just a word that has been invented by propaganda specialists. Claiming that the USA is capitalistic is just ridiculous. The people gets taxed out of their ears all the time. The only real difference between the USA and, say, France; is that in the USA the people gets taxed by private interests (through the boom-bust cycles of inflation-driven economy) whereas in France they get taxed by the state. Whereas it's possible for an individual to get "rich" in both places, it's a lot easier to get "poor" in the USA.

This contains several fairly specific claims about life in France and the USA. How do you come to these views? E.g. there are equivalent opportunities to 'get rich' in France and the USA, the commercial 'boom-bust' cycles approximate surplus taxation in France, etc.

 

[mgb_phys]

Well, I would challenge anyone to point at an existing PURE "capitalist" system anywhere.

Chicago in the 30s, big bits of Columbia and some US inner cities now.

There's no police so you have private armies, they extract as much extortion(tax) as possible from dealers/customers/stores in their area. The amount is naturally set by economics, if somebody can't pay they are replaced by somebody who can.

Organized crime is very efficient from an economics point of view.

 

[Dale]

NIH (and similar) funding has developed many new drugs.

Are you seriously citing the NIH as an example of something "outside of capitalism"? It is part of the US system, after all.

In any case, the NIH funding tends to focus on basic science research, which is indispensable, but is not itself the development, production, or distribution of a new therapy technology. Usually the NIH-funded research will identify a target and then private industry will develop the therapies to hit that target. Of course, that is grossly simplified and generalized, but it is a good rule-of-thumb.

 

[Evo]

NIH (and similar) funding has developed many new drugs.

NIH? Please post a link to drugs they have brought to market. Also, who do you think funds the NIH? Us capitalists do.

 

[mheslep]

Chicago in the 30s, big bits of Columbia and some US inner cities now.

There's no police so you have private armies, they extract as much extortion(tax) as possible from dealers/customers/stores in their area. The amount is naturally set by economics, if somebody can't pay they are replaced by somebody who can.

Organized crime is very efficient from an economics point of view.

Well Adam Smith might have baulked at that definition of free market capitalism, the basis for which is un-coerced agreement among parties to transact, including some kind of legal basis to uphold agreed-upon contracts in those transactions. So while I'd agree it is theoretically possible to have some kind of 'godfather' run capitalism - perhaps China qualifies - as soon as someone puts a gun to your head capitalism is out the window.

 

[Max Faust]

How do you come to these views?

A relatively long life of observation.

An economics degree. A lifetime in business. A network of VERY crafty people.

How does anyone arrive at an opinion?

 

[BoomBoom]

NIH? Please post a link to drugs they have brought to market. Also, who do you think funds the NIH? Us capitalists do.

Seriously?? That is the main mission of the NIH is to invest in research for new treatments, therapies, and medicine in the treatment of disease. I had assumed this was common knowledge, but if you still require a link, I will provide it.

(http://www.ott.nih.gov/policy/policy_protect_text.html" study is about 10 years old, but it determined that about 8.5% of the drugs on the market were from direct NIH funding.)

"Us" capitalists fund the NIH through our tax dollars which is a socialist program.

 

[BoomBoom]

Are you seriously citing the NIH as an example of something "outside of capitalism"? It is part of the US system, after all.

Are you implying that the U.S. is completely void of 'socialist' programs?

 

[mheslep]

NIH (and similar) funding has developed many new drugs.

Seriously?? That is the main mission of the NIH is to invest in research for new treatments, therapies, and medicine in the treatment of disease. I had assumed this was common knowledge, but if you still require a link, I will provide it.

(http://www.ott.nih.gov/policy/policy_protect_text.html" study is about 10 years old, but it determined that about 8.5% of the drugs on the market were from direct NIH funding.)

"Us" capitalists fund the NIH through our tax dollars which is a socialist program.

That is not what Evo asked you. The question was about drugs they [NIH] have brought to market. We are all aware that NIH does great research which inevitably impacts the development of drugs and treatments. Which drugs has NIH run through a lengthy and expensive FDA approval process? Which does it manufacturer by the billion? For which does it visit and educate physicians? In other words, which drugs does it actually ship to drug stores which can help anyone?

 

[BoomBoom]

The question was about drugs they [NIH] have brought to market.

OK, well I concede that that is really not in the spectrum of what they do. They invest in the development, but not the manufacturing, sale, and distribution of drugs.

But that is somewhat besides the point though since I was responding to this claim:

When is the last time that you have heard of a new drug being developed outside of capitalism?

The point being that the NIH does have a hand in the development of drugs and it is a socialist program.

 

[mheslep]

A relatively long life of observation.

An economics degree. A lifetime in business. A network of VERY crafty people.

And this has shown you how easy it is to become successful in both France and the USA, enough so that you could make a blanket statement on the subject? Me, I would have looked at how difficult it is to start a business in each country, or how many are perennially unemployed in each. The state might take care of the forever unemployed, but I doubt they'll ever become well off.

 

[mheslep]

OK, well I concede that that is really not in the spectrum of what they do. They invest in the development, but not the manufacturing, sale, and distribution of drugs.

But that is somewhat besides the point though since I was responding to this claim:


The point being that the NIH does have a hand in the development of drugs and it is a socialist program.

Ok, we're on the same page. It's been suggested not to uncommonly by some pundits and academics that we don't need any drug companies, that the NIH does everything we need already, literally. That's a view I find absurd for the reasons I listed above.

 

[AlexES16]

I was watching "Capitalism a love story" by Michael Moore. Dude capitalism fail hards. It doesent protect the enviroment, or health of it citizens, promotes canibalism, selfishness, gangsterisim. USA is defintly a bad Empire just as USSR was. The chairmans are like little dictators, just like Mao and Stalin. Technology in capitalism is used for profit not for the good of society.Yeah state capitalism failed hard to just as the free market capitalism. The Libertarianism Socialism is good and communism is an ideal. Striving for a better tomorrow is not a bad thing sounds like "eyes on prize". At the end i think the healthy thing do in life is find happiness and money helps to ensure the basic need and not being poor, after that money doesent have impact on happiness.

 

[calculusrocks]

Michael Moore also believes Cuba's Health Care system is pretty good.

 

[CRGreathouse]

I was watching "Capitalism a love story" by Michael Moore. Dude capitalism fail hards.

It's just possible that you need to broaden your horizons.

 

[Evo]

Seriously?? That is the main mission of the NIH is to invest in research for new treatments, therapies, and medicine in the treatment of disease. I had assumed this was common knowledge, but if you still require a link, I will provide it.

(http://www.ott.nih.gov/policy/policy_protect_text.html" study is about 10 years old, but it determined that about 8.5% of the drugs on the market were from direct NIH funding.)

"Us" capitalists fund the NIH through our tax dollars which is a socialist program.

What specific drugs were researched and brought to market by NIH? Oh, none. That's not their function. Or do you have something no one else knows about? Please post the links to the drugs the NIH have brought to market.

 

[BoomBoom]

What specific drugs were researched and brought to market by NIH? Oh, none. That's not their function. Or do you have something no one else knows about? Please post the links to the drugs the NIH have brought to market.

No, that is not their function... (see post #105.) Again, that is completely besides the point since the statement I was responding to specifically stated "new drug being developed".

 

[mgb_phys]

Well Adam Smith might have baulked at that definition of free market capitalism, the basis for which is un-coerced agreement among parties to transact, including some kind of legal basis to uphold agreed-upon contracts in those transactions.

Smith only needed for you to agree to trade or not, his objection was being forced to trade at a non-market rate (in his day the corn laws).

The choice is pay protection to the mob or leave, if the mob extracts too much everyone leaves - or pays for their own army.
An inner city drug gang's monopoly is no different from a company lobbying for rules making it hard for a competitor to get into the market. The gang is just rather more democratic ;-)

 

[mheslep]

Smith only needed for you to agree to trade or not, his objection was being forced to trade at a non-market rate (in his day the corn laws).

The choice is pay protection to the mob or leave, if the mob extracts too much everyone leaves - or pays for their own army.
An inner city drug gang's monopoly is no different from a company lobbying for rules making it hard for a competitor to get into the market. The gang is just rather more democratic ;-)

Too many Too Cool Drug Gang movies in there somewhere.

 

[AlexES16]

It's just possible that you need to broaden your horizons.

Maybe you are right, but watching all those USA problems, and that's USA the richest nation in the world and one of the most advanced and educated, now how the hell will capitalism work in countries like mine in which the capitalist buy every politician, military, death squads, gangs so they can be richer plus people is very ignorant. Plus climatic change, and maybe the beginning of a new ice age. So yea for you guys in the 1st world, is fine if you go capitalism, socialism or wathever, you have the tech, money, scientist and everything, but for us, maybe we or are just gona pass to history as millions of deads or fight to change things.

 

[calculusrocks]

Maybe you are right, but watching all those USA problems, and that's USA the richest nation in the world and one of the most advanced and educated, now how the hell will capitalism work in countries like mine in which the capitalist buy every politician, military, death squads, gangs so they can be richer plus people is very ignorant. Plus climatic change, and maybe the beginning of a new ice age. So yea for you guys in the 1st world, is fine if you go capitalism, socialism or wathever, you have the tech, money, scientist and everything, but for us, maybe we or are just gona pass to history as millions of deads or fight to change things.

I don't think we're first in the world. In fact, I think the $ is going to fall considerably. This isn't about some ego-trip on American exceptionalism. This is about reality, and the reality is that we're in debt to the rest of the world for gobs, and gobs of money, and in my opinion we're not going to be able to pay it back. The rest of the world, they're not going to keep lending us the money forever, so we're going to print it. We have a phony economy being floated by the rest of the world in my opinion.

 

[calculusrocks]

Plus climatic change, and maybe the beginning of a new ice age.

The climate change arguments (the global temperature isn't right, so therefore gov't must manage the economy in new and interesting ways) lacks credibility in my mind. First it was global warming and the ozone, then it became climate change, and now experts are raising the alarm about global cooling. I mean, who are these experts? Why doesn't the gov't give me $100,000 a year, and I can give them the same official results, and then they can save billions of dollars for themselves by avoiding this crusade on the industrialized nations being the global thermometer?

 

[vici10]

Regarding drug companies, there is an interesting book
"The Truth About the Drug Companies" by Marcia Angel, former editor in chief of New England Journal of Medicine http://books.google.ca/books?id=sF3...+the+Drug+Companies&cd=1#v=onepage&q=&f=false

According to the book manufacturing and distribution does not cost that much money. Manufacturing is especially negligible amount. The basic research is most difficult because it is not predictable and take long time and it is done in universities for public money. The most money is spent in clinical trials that partly is done by universities and public research institutes and partly by the private companies. From all this the huge amount of profit is just given to private companies. I say given because it is mostly institutionalized, since it is all based on patents and intellectual property rights that are given to private companies.

 

[calculusrocks]

I think part of the problem, and I'm as guilty of this as anyone, is that Capitalism and Socialism can really only be contrasted in the philosophical, or the historical. In nature, that's not how it turns out. It's not Ivan versus Rocky in Rocky IV either.

Socialism needs to feed off of producers; it needs producers so it can redistribute wealth. Inevitably, people wake up and realize, "Why work? I'm already getting paid not to work." Capitalism the mechanism to create that wealth in the first place. Socialism must feed off of Capitalism. Even in your most oppressed countries where the government had almost total control of the economy, there was still plenty of black markets. Free exchange is totally natural.

 

[Max Faust]

USA the richest nation in the world and one of the most advanced and educated

Dude, the USA is neither rich nor educated - and certainly not advanced. Yeah they have some gadgets here and there to scare the peasants, but all in all it's nothing but a 3rd world banana republic. They haven't got ****. Just debt.