The best economic way ?

[Dexter]

I prefer Socialism, because I don't want the riches will stay riches because they utilized the poor people.
The eliete in Israel (18 families in Israel, that controlling everything, everything!!) are extream leftists, so called socialist, but they enjoy the free-market in Israel, the keep tham in control, allways.
Also the big corps have just too much power and influince on Israel politics, and it's very very dangerous .

Though Socialism is originaly universal, I prefer "National Socialism" (very bad connotation, huh  ), means that only the people that will mostly enjoy the goverment's benefits will be the Jews, and of course the ethnic groups that are loyel to tham .

I don't know what is better though, centrel planning or free market, that's somthing I should check .
I don't want tyranny, only democracy, and real one of course .

What economic way do you prefer, and why ?

[Sarah]

Anthing but extreme communism and capatalism. Minor concepts of all economic ways have their benefits, its when everything takes an extreme side does it lead to unfairness.

[newman]

Every time socialism has been tried in the world, it has FAILED. It NEVER works.

[Dexter]

Every time socialism has been tried in the world, it has FAILED. It NEVER works.

A. Not really (Sweaden, Norway etc'), and I'm not talking about liberal socialism and democrat socialism as I said above .
B. National Socialism made Nazi Germany to an economic empire .

[Dexter]

Anthing but extreme communism and capatalism. Minor concepts of all economic ways have their benefits, its when everything takes an extreme side does it lead to unfairness.

There are many sections in Capitalism .

[newman]

Every time socialism has been tried in the world, it has FAILED. It NEVER works.

A. Not really (Sweaden, Norway etc'), and I'm not talking about liberal socialism and democrat socialism as I said above .
B. National Socialism made Nazi Germany to an economic empire .

Germany had capitalism under (s)hitler, not socialism. They only called it that. Without free market capitalism there's no incentive to work hard. Socialism just taxes those who work to give to bums who don't.

[Dexter]

Every time socialism has been tried in the world, it has FAILED. It NEVER works.

A. Not really (Sweaden, Norway etc'), and I'm not talking about liberal socialism and democrat socialism as I said above .
B. National Socialism made Nazi Germany to an economic empire .

Germany had capitalism under (s)hitler, not socialism. They only called it that. Without free market capitalism there's no incentive to work hard. Socialism just taxes those who work to give to bums who don't.

You can't have free market under tyranny, because all the market is holded by the goverment ("Centrel planning"), therefor it was socialism, surly not cummonism or capitalism .
The rule that if you are poor you can't work is nonsense, if you can't work or some people (the eilite, for exm.) utilized tham, don't expect those people to secsses .

Besides, if you have damocracy and socialism than you have to ultimate democracy because the chance that corps. will control you become lower .

[newman]

Every time socialism has been tried in the world, it has FAILED. It NEVER works.

A. Not really (Sweaden, Norway etc'), and I'm not talking about liberal socialism and democrat socialism as I said above .
B. National Socialism made Nazi Germany to an economic empire .

Germany had capitalism under (s)hitler, not socialism. They only called it that. Without free market capitalism there's no incentive to work hard. Socialism just taxes those who work to give to bums who don't.

You can't have free market under tyranny, because all the market is holded by the goverment ("Centrel planning"), therefor it was socialism, surly not cummonism or capitalism .
The rule that if you are poor you can't work is nonsense, if you can't work or some people (the eilite, for exm.) utilized tham, don't expect those people to secsses .

Besides, if you have damocracy and socialism than you have to ultimate democracy because the chance that corps. will control you become lower .

In the democracies with the best living standards, people vote AGAINST socialism. How can you have socialism AND democracy when everbody will vote against it?

[Dexter]

Every time socialism has been tried in the world, it has FAILED. It NEVER works.

A. Not really (Sweaden, Norway etc'), and I'm not talking about liberal socialism and democrat socialism as I said above .
B. National Socialism made Nazi Germany to an economic empire .

Germany had capitalism under (s)hitler, not socialism. They only called it that. Without free market capitalism there's no incentive to work hard. Socialism just taxes those who work to give to bums who don't.

You can't have free market under tyranny, because all the market is holded by the goverment ("Centrel planning"), therefor it was socialism, surly not cummonism or capitalism .
The rule that if you are poor you can't work is nonsense, if you can't work or some people (the eilite, for exm.) utilized tham, don't expect those people to secsses .

Besides, if you have damocracy and socialism than you have to ultimate democracy because the chance that corps. will control you become lower .

In the democracies with the best living standards, people vote AGAINST socialism. How can you have socialism AND democracy when everbody will vote against it?

If you think people in Israel will vote against it than you are mistaking, we had enough of the schmuks that taking our money and utilizing us, but because the only socialists (actually, democrat socialists  ) are leftists, it is bad, because most people are workers and are right wings, they want better conditions AND right wing goverment .

[ape]

Dexter you're right that the elite should not monopolize the power, but we should have opportunity for all righteous people to start their own business with SAFFEGUARDS of course....so that one business cannot monopolize or cannot discriminate against righteous people. We should have affirmative action for righteous qualified people, instead of hiring all these ignorant creatures.

Bill Gates for example, stole the ideas for his operating system from Xerox and then choked all other operating systems because these stupid PC companies only buy HIS operating systems. I think that is wrong. We have to at least provide some incentives to prevent this..

[Dexter]

Dexter you're right that the elite should not monopolize the power, but we should have opportunity for all righteous people to start their own business with SAFFEGUARDS of course....so that one business cannot monopolize or cannot discriminate against righteous people. We should have affirmative action for righteous qualified people, instead of hiring all these ignorant creatures.

Bill Gates for example, stole the ideas for his operating system from Xerox and then choked all other operating systems because these stupid PC companies only buy HIS operating systems. I think that is wrong. We have to at least provide some incentives to prevent this..

I think you are suprised that in Sweaden most of the people have a lot of quality, why you ask ?
Because they are taking the education in their country as the main and the most importent thing ever, so the creat very smart people that can gain the country the money it lost in the citizens education .

[newman]

Socialism always involves high taxes. Taxes destroy incentive to work and make good.

[Dexter]

Socialism always involves high taxes. Taxes destroy incentive to work and make good.

Texas that goes on your education, your education will make you rich or at least pretty good economical status .

[newman]

Socialism always involves high taxes. Taxes destroy incentive to work and make good.

Texas that goes on your education, your education will make you rich or at least pretty good economical status .

That NEVER works. Nobody can get rich when the government is taking 40% or 50%+ of their income. Let people keep their taxes and pay for their own education.

[Dexter]

Socialism always involves high taxes. Taxes destroy incentive to work and make good.

Texas that goes on your education, your education will make you rich or at least pretty good economical status .

That NEVER works. Nobody can get rich when the government is taking 40% or 50%+ of their income. Let people keep their taxes and pay for their own education.

40%-50%
You just took it out proportion, no one will take you 40%-50%, that's nuts .
The education in Israel is the worst or one of the worst in the weastern world, the Israeli goverment always take money from the education to their puckets, Israel is in the last place at investment of the education, no wonder there are poor people, because they are ignorent, ignorent people just can't work, that is a fact and a logical conclusion .

If you are smart, you will work in a job that gives you money, and if you want your children to be money, you should give money, the goverment will make the PUBLIC SCHOOL as a great place that will make you ready for the real life, there is no need parents will give thousends of dollars for privet school because public school isn't so good .

[Dr. Dan]

I prefer Socialism, because I don't want the riches will stay riches because they utilized the poor people.
The eliete in Israel (18 families in Israel, that controlling everything, everything!!) are extream leftists, so called socialist, but they enjoy the free-market in Israel, the keep tham in control, allways.
Also the big corps have just too much power and influince on Israel politics, and it's very very dangerous .

Though Socialism is originaly universal, I prefer "National Socialism" (very bad connotation, huh  ), means that only the people that will mostly enjoy the goverment's benefits will be the Jews, and of course the ethnic groups that are loyel to tham .

I don't know what is better though, centrel planning or free market, that's somthing I should check .
I don't want tyranny, only democracy, and real one of course .

What economic way do you prefer, and why ?

Dexter, I prefer capitalism, but with people required to give to charity...The problem here socialism is that some people get educated....work really hard and DO make a lot of money. I think people like that he are hard workers should be the richest and shoud not be affected by lazy poor people in a socialist economy.

However, the duty of ALL people is Tzedaka..and the duty of the poor is that when they get jealous or envious of the rich, that they take it upon themselves to work harder...

A society with classes: rich people/poor people is necessary to get the economy going...I like the US's system because poor people can become rich if they work hard and get a good edumacation...and rich people can become poor if they do stupid things and are lazy...

[newman]

Socialism always involves high taxes. Taxes destroy incentive to work and make good.

Texas that goes on your education, your education will make you rich or at least pretty good economical status .

That NEVER works. Nobody can get rich when the government is taking 40% or 50%+ of their income. Let people keep their taxes and pay for their own education.

40%-50%
You just took it out proportion, no one will take you 40%-50%, that's nuts .
The education in Israel is the worst or one of the worst in the weastern world, the Israeli goverment always take money from the education to their puckets, Israel is in the last place at investment of the education, no wonder there are poor people, because they are ignorent, ignorent people just can't work, that is a fact and a logical conclusion .

If you are smart, you will work in a job that gives you money, and if you want your children to be money, you should give money, the goverment will make the PUBLIC SCHOOL as a great place that will make you ready for the real life, there is no need parents will give thousends of dollars for privet school because public school isn't so good .

Dexter, the Swedes pay OVER 50% in taxes in some income brackets. ALL socialist countries are high tax.

Look at everything governments control: Gov't schools, hospitals and transport. All dirty, dangerous and inefficient. Private is better.

[Dexter]

dannycookie57 :
Of course it is impossible to cancell the classes, but let's just reduce the gap between tham .

Besides, Pipi Netanyoyo, tried the wonderfull capitalism with his reforms, and now old people just get 81 shekels (One Shekel = quart of a US dollar) per month .
And, there are 1.5 milion poor people because of him .

Dexter, the Swedes pay OVER 50% in taxes in some income brackets. ALL socialist countries are high tax

Newman, did I said that the Sweadish Socialism is what I want ?
By the way, I would like refernces for your claims, it is very intresting .

[MassuhDGoodName]

Why, The Plantation System, of course!

[judeanoncapta]

Swedish Socialism bites.

[MassuhDGoodName]

Re:  "...Socialism always involves high taxes. Taxes destroy incentive to work and make good..."

It doesn't matter how much tax is levied...What matters is the purchasing power of your remaining disposable income.

The U.S.A. currently is practicing a form of Fascism, whereby already wealthy & prosperous Corporations are subsidized by the Federal Government, as well as subsidized by State Governments in the form of waiving all taxes for Corporations in exchange for locating to States.

Where does the $ come from to subsidize the wealthy Corporations?
Why, from the taxes levied on the citizenry.

Add to the burden on the citizens the brutal illegality of the IRS, which again, has its "code" re-written constantly to waive taxes owed by Corporations (which can then rent a small store-front in Cayman Islands and legally claim that they are no longer a U.S.-based Corporation; thereby escaping Federal taxes).

Insult to injury?--Current Federal "code" gives additional "tax breaks" to each and every Corporation which will relocate to China or elsewhere, and make all of its loyal work force join the ranks of the unemployed.

As the Red Chinese Communist Party so correctly tells its masses of slave laborers..."Capitalism is in Crisis!"

[judeanoncapta]

It isn't an accident that the poor in capitalists countries ae richer than most people in the non-capitalist countries.

Socialism didn't make Hong Kong prosper.

Capitalism did.

Socialism didn't make America prosper.

Capitalism did.

[Dexter]

It isn't an accident that the poor in capitalists countries ae richer than most people in the non-capitalist countries.

Socialism didn't make Hong Kong prosper.

Capitalism did.

Socialism didn't make America prosper.

Capitalism did.

The poor blacks in America are richer than the poors in Sweaden/Norway ?

 

[judeanoncapta]

It isn't an accident that the poor in capitalists countries ae richer than most people in the non-capitalist countries.

Socialism didn't make Hong Kong prosper.

Capitalism did.

Socialism didn't make America prosper.

Capitalism did.

The poor blacks in America are richer than the poors in Sweaden/Norway ?

 

Yes.

The poor in America are humungously fat.

[newman]

The poor blacks in America are richer than the poors in Sweaden/Norway ?

 

Poor blacks in the USA are poor because of their own stupidity or laziness.