Would you work as hard if socialism

[CRGreathouse]

just because people with capital might give the money for research and "take the risk", they are not the ones doing the research. workers take the risk all the time when their bosses do - when a company goes bankrupt you get sacked.

My brother worked for a guy who opened his own business. The business failed. My brother got another job. The guy who started it did, too... but he also lost his house which he had used as collateral for the business loans he got. (I think he sold it to pay off the loans, it didn't get foreclosed. But he lost almost all of its value.)

the whole thread smells of stockholm syndrome. the funny thing is that this thread is probably full of grad students and miserable post docs that get exploited till their bones are dry as garbagety cheap research monkeys and yet they all get all squiggly in their pants when someone dares to question the present situation.

Ad hominem much?

 

[CRGreathouse]

The educational system in Russia today is still way better than in the US, thanks to their communist past.

My two Russian* coworkers disagree with that. At least, they say that 20 years ago it was much worse.

* Both describe themselves as Russian and lived in the USSR, but one's actually from the Ukraine. I don't know if that makes a difference to anyone in terms of educational experience.

 

[fleem]

^ Also we need to remember that the west is already very socialized in many ways, so comparing west and east isn't always comparing democracy with socialism/communism. It upsets me when I hear people blaming free market for the lion's share of economic problems the west currently has, in spite of the fact that the western market has not been very free since about 1971--when the fed (& fannie & freddie) started artificially pushing down interest rates in earnest (and also making it spring too high by suddenly stopping loans from the fed after a time of artificial low rates). Secondly the govt created big incentives for banks to make bad loans (i.e penalties if they didn't). Finally, in the west the state pays for a large amount of education, which will tend to reduce competition among schools.

 

[Count Iblis]

My two Russian* coworkers disagree with that. At least, they say that 20 years ago it was much worse.

* Both describe themselves as Russian and lived in the USSR, but one's actually from the Ukraine. I don't know if that makes a difference to anyone in terms of educational experience.

Well, then the difference between the West and Russia is even larger now. The Chinese educational system is also more advanced. There was a discussion about this some time ago in Britain. A Chinese university entrance exam problem was compared to a similar British equivalent. I think the British problem could be solved if you knew the definition of sin and cos using the right triangle (which is primary school level stuff), the Chinese problem was a compicated geometry problem most British university students would at least struggle with a bit.

 

[fleem]

Count, i actually agree with you to some extent, but my point is that I believe the reason for it isn't free-marketism vs. communism, its that the west is quite socialistic as well, as far as education goes, and also the affluence makes people less interested in being productive and bettering themselves, so consumers of education don't promote competition as much, either. Likewise affluent and govt-sponsored industry (like defense and aerospace) cares less about testing prospective employees because there's less accountability, and the west suffers from this even more than the east because there's more defense/aerospace money. But I won't go so far to say that one bad thing about the free market is that it ends in affluence and affluence is bad for humans! We know it generally is bad for humans (making them apathetic), but that's a different sin.

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

Well, then the difference between the West and Russia is even larger now. The Chinese educational system is also more advanced. There was a discussion about this some time ago in Britain. A Chinese university entrance exam problem was compared to a similar British equivalent. I think the British problem could be solved if you knew the definition of sin and cos using the right triangle (which is primary school level stuff), the Chinese problem was a compicated geometry problem most British university students would at least struggle with a bit.

Note that 50% of china are still rural farmers and I doubt even 1% of that half ever make it to college.
http://www.upiasia.com/Society_Culture/2009/07/14/chinas_college_grad_employment_statistics/3617/
Apparently this year saw 6.1 million college grads in China. Out of a population of about 1.3 billion people.

 

[LBloom]

The problem with this thread is the word "socialist" and "socialistic". Anyone who has basic knowledge of economics should know we abandoned the free market to the dustbin of history in 1901 with Teddy Roosevelt! Pure capitalism is a failed experiment that produced misery, just like communism.
As for socialism, the word is practically meaningless. It could refer to the socialist states of East Germany and USSR, or the scandinavian and European nations run by Social Democrats, who are a bit to the left of democrats. The fact is, we need a bigger government to not only protect people (as its a moral imperative), but also to promote pure or basic science that might get shortchanged by industries focusing on the bottom line.
Government should always be kept in check, but it shouldn't be needlessly bashed if in certain areas it is more efficient (health care comes to mind)

 

[rabbitweed]

The problem with this thread is the word "socialist" and "socialistic". Anyone who has basic knowledge of economics should know we abandoned the free market to the dustbin of history in 1901 with Teddy Roosevelt! Pure capitalism is a failed experiment that produced misery, just like communism.
As for socialism, the word is practically meaningless. It could refer to the socialist states of East Germany and USSR, or the scandinavian and European nations run by Social Democrats, who are a bit to the left of democrats.

THIS.

Though I would argue that 'communism' requires similar attention:P