Why do you think Socialism is a bad thing?

It’s just the current bugaboo term the Right likes to throw around and the ignorant rally around.

I think the more fear of the left that the right imposes on the people off the back of the nonsense propaganda they came out with about Russia back in the day the more they hope to de-franchise the socialist model.

The right are free marketeers they think it went tits up this time because there was TOO MUCH control…this is the country that invented consumerism! They really want a totally free capitalism, thats why they want amongst other things a single low tax rate for all, its not democratic either!

Because many in the USA have been conditioned to worship “laissez-faire” capitalism.
That’s French for “Let it be”, as in “Let the corporations do whatever they want”.

This is great if you have loads of money, which is why this kind of view has been encouraged by the American establishment, esp finance & big business.

This isn’t very good for the majority of the population, but lots of them support it anyway, because they are stupid/ignorant and have been convinced that letting the corporate interests rip people off this way and that is somehow a victory for Freedom.

Why do you think Socialism is a bad thing? Why do you assume I think it’s a bad thing?

I don’t.

@RareDenver the asker isn’t a assuming its a bad thing once you read the detail, its just to grab your attention…

I do not.
I can not think of anyone I ever met who railed against socialism and knew what socialism actually means.
Like when creationists rail against evolution while having not the slightest idea how the ToE actually works.

@Tobotron I know, I was just being facetious

@RareDenver ahh written word, (didn’t read it right) well better than audio ‘rants’ lol…

I don’t.
But in general, the anti-socialism attitude spawns from the Cold War. We had presidents who said they would fight any foe who was attempting to spread Communism. We fought wars in countries to keep Communism away. That generation was brainwashed to believe that anything communist is instantly bad.
That generation was also brainwashed to believe “slippery slope” arguments are good. So to them, Socialism is just one small step away from Communism. And of course, we can’t have that, because Commies are our enemies.~

Sorry, no offense, but you have done nothing to change my mind about Socialism, in fact every time I am exposed to the concept or forced to think about it, the more I cringe over the notion of it.

@Cruiser Do you have an example that you cringe over? And why?

Also:
”Communism is a flawed system, as the people have no power.”
On the contrary. In actual Communism, as envisioned by Karl Marx, pbuh, the people have all the power, where every member of society participates in the decision making of all fields, from politics to business and where all decisions in the economy and politics are made democratically by the people.
Communism is the ultimate form of democracy. The regimes of the late Eastern Block called themselves “Communist”, but they were anything but.
East Germany had “democratic” in its very title, yet it was a dictatorship.

@Cruiser Socialism seems shit, until you break a leg at work, get laid off for being useless, have no money for healthcare and lose your home to “market forces”.

But, hey, if it oils the wheels of commerce, everybody wins! Right?

Laid off for being usless @The_Idler? There seems to be some misconception that if you’re fired for any reason whatsoever you get unemployment benefits. This is not true.

@Val123 Sorry- what are you talking about?

Because poor people can go screw themselves.

Ah, the American dream.

Well, @The_Idler…I couldn’t tell which side of the fence you were on on the issue. Most of the examples you gave sounded pro-social security “you break a leg at work, have no money for healthcare and lose your home to “market forces”. Those are forces outside of one’s control, and it’s nice to have a safety net in place. But I can’t figure out where “get(ting) laid off for being useless” fit in….

That was tied to the previous point.

In a anti-socialist, laissez-faire system, one could break a leg at work, and be laid off for being unable to work (what I meant by ‘useless’), and there would be no obligation of the company or government to protect your job, provide care and support your family & home. Thus, your life would be ruined.

btw, in the UK, all unemployed people are entitled to unemployment benefit, in addition to many other benefits and systems of support that ensure pretty much noone lives in poverty. Really. Nothing like the US, and even the US is pretty socialist.

But our system, coupled with unlimited immigration, is utterly unsustainable and will lead to the effective disintegration of our society. It’s flawed, not because it’s socialist, but it is flawed.

OK! Now I understand! Breaking your leg would be the factor that made you useless, not laziness! Good points, then.

@The_Idler
Well, you could always send your wife and 8 year old kids to work in the coal mines 18 hourse a day for a pathetic wage and no guarantee of being paid at all!

@ragingloli until Thatcher closes them.

@ragingloli His point was that socialism, to a certain extent (and to the extent it is now present in our government) is a good thing.

@stranger….DON’T TELL THEM ABOUT MY DRESSER! I’LL HAVE TO GIVE IT TO THE GOVERNMENT SO THEY CAN PART IT OUT TO THE POOR!!!

@Val123 he seems to be listing your wardrobe

The corporations have huge power and the people have no say about who runs them. My biggest objection to socialism is in attitude towards private property.

The only objections I have to the Canadian system is that constitutional rights can be altered by a simple majority and that the will of urban populations dictate the rules rural people must live by (gun control, for example). The US system over-represents rural interests, but there has to be some happy medium.

I have no problem with heavily progressive income taxation or treating the basics of life as rights; even to the point of nationalizing industries that would otherwise not work in the best interests of society. Individual (not corporate) property, speech, self-defense and self-determination rights are sacred to me.

The free market and Smiths “invisible hand” have become a religious icon to some. When allowed to run unchecked, the 99% who don’t function optimally in a capitalist system are cast aside or forced to superficially conform.

I’m no economist, but the system in northern Europe and Canada seem to function better and more fairly for the greatest number of people. It’s a matter of balancing the right to a minimum standard of living in a wealthy nation and the responsiblity of individuals to contribute their fair share to necessary work.

@Val123 ROFL…private property is sacred to me.

Nice @stranger_in_a_strange_land.

@Val123 @The_Idler it was posited….“Well, I hope this convinces some of you to stop Socialist-bashing.” I fail to see anything in the question nor in this thread that is anything close to convincing nor definitive of what is so great about socialism. Breaking a leg is hardly a reason to abandon capitalism! Laziness is the one and only reason I see to do so.

@The_Idler I don’t know you and I don’t know your situation and I am sorry that happened to you. I don’t know if you have or haven’t saved money for rainy days or if you work hard to pay for insurance and cover contingencies for times like you face. I do and I am prepared to continue to work hard just so my family and I are taken care of if or when shit hits the fan. Finally after 30 years of hard work I am getting ahead and if this were a socialist country I would be at the same place I was 30 years ago. Based on what I see here….thanks but no thanks.

True socialism has never worked to raise the standard of living of those living under it. for example, China wallowed in poverty until it decided to learn from the economic success of Hong King and began introducing free enterprise. Look at its success now.

Socialism is a failed system of economic redristribution of wealth. “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need” sounds great, until people realize they no longer are going to be rewarded for productivity. Then it comes apart at the seams from lack of motivation.

BTW… I don’t see Canada as a socialist country. It’s more of what is called a “mixed economy.”

@ItsAHabit
True Socialism has never existed as a practiced system. Like Communism, Socialism has democratic rule at its heart. All the countries that called themselves and were called ‘socialist’ or ‘communist’ were dictatorial regimes and thus neither.
So do not call what was practiced in China “true Socialism”. Because it was not even close.

@CaptainHarley “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need” is not from Socialism, but from Communism.

Democratic Socialism would be entirely fine by me.

Socialism quashes ambition.

Perhaps worse than that, it fosters a mentality that makes it easier for the State to run everything. I like my government small, see.

@augustlan

It’s from Das Capital, from which both socialism and communism draw.

@Nullo As do I, Nullo. As do I.

I would say that, of the systems employed so far, capitalism is the most compatible with human nature. The best? Perhaps not, but then neither are people.

Capitalism rewards greed, war, want, and needless consumerism…its easier to nurture the most selfish emotions in people and squash those with the least…

Success under socialism may to you seem like a non motivational economy but if you were to live and to be brought up under socialism you may have more honest morals. If you want to be a Dr you shouldn’t be doing it for the money but because want to save lives.

But one things for sure I don’t think people need to think things will change anytime soon, Capitalism roots itself in society via debt and one thing we ALL know right now is that its rooted pretty strongly and from what I asked to change things would wipe a lot of the debt which would cause its own pretty formidable problems.

If America were pure Socialist I wonder what it would be like, you have all the resources you need I imagine it could be a pretty nice place…

Capitalism and Communism have both failed at producing ideal societies for the same reason: human greed.

The reason Capitalism is more powerful (and has “won”) is because it harnesses the power of human greed, which is one of the greatest powers this Earth has known.

———

@Cruiser, my situation was hypothetical. What would happen if someone broke his leg in a completely anti-Socialist society. It is absurd to suppose that insurance, savings, healthcare, etc. would be affordable or reasonable for everybody, or even most of the working class. In fact, nowhere has this ever been so, hence the need for social security “net”, which exists in all developed countries. Yes, even the USA.

All work safety regulations, minimum wage, max work hours, protection from unreasonable ultimatums on employment, etc, ALL these “labour” laws that make (ok made) the UK great and still make the USA the Worker’s Paradise of the world, they are “Socialist”. They are hated by the corporations, who espouse “laissez-faire” capitalism, which means “lets us treat our workers like the shit we know they’re worth”.

If you want to know what laissez-faire capitalism is like, go work in China, or Mexico.
Ironic, I know, but you’ll sure see how the factory owner really wants to treat you.
Wonder why they all want to come work in the USA?

I understand your criticisms of the “socialist” systems you have observed, but Socialism can and does exist WITH free enterprise, for example Great Britain – it made us the greatest nation on Earth – and now all of Europe and the USA, and it’s made you the greatest nation on Earth.

So we can have relatively free markets, free enterprise, democracy, freedom AND effective social security.

If you look at which countries have the highest standard of living and most developed societies, you will see this system as the common denominator.

I know this isn’t the definition of pure Socialism, but in the context of this question “deriding Canadian Socialism”, discussing pure Socialism is kinda pointless anyway.

@Tobotron

You need to take a really, really close look at human nature. Socialism has never worked, is not working now, and never WILL work until you can change human nature.

The US was in an ongoing conflict with a system which called itself “socialist,” but which in reality was just a dictatorship in socalist clothing. It was based on fear, while American capitalism was based on greed. Greed won. Given the perversity of human nature, greed will always win.

@The_Idler Hence the crux of the problem in discussing Capitalism or Socialism is the working definition of either. I am new to this argument and am basing my statements on the pure definition of either so I can start to see why we are so far apart on achieving a sense of appreciation for either’s comments. I have lived my whole life under the perception of what I see free market democratic captialism has provided for me and what appears to me to be a great but far from perfect nation. The US is constantly in flux moving from one extreme to another because of a free market economy. Fortunes are made and lost. Legs are broken and mended. People work and get paid. All of this happens because it is allowed to but hardly unfettered. The important thing ot remember and not lose sight of is it happens because we a free to chose. Nobody is forced or coerced to do anything in this country. Free will is what makes your life what it is over here…sure there is disparity here but look around and some of the greatest disparity that exists is in the corrupt communist and socialist countries. You can’t take what our fore fathers fought so hard to build here and trash it by limiting freedoms through the doctrines of Socialism. Just ain’t gonna happen. I wish I had time to pick apart this question as my choice to work where I am at just dumped a steamer in my lap I have to go deal with! Catch you later.

@Cruiser Well, now, I have come to understand your perspective, as you have mine.

I understand the intent of your message and I admire that very American insistence that hard-won freedoms shall not be tempered (The Price of Freedom, and all that), but it is important to realise that this admirable reverence for your forefathers’ achievements is regularly hijacked by corporate/big-business interests, to garner public support for their agenda, which involves appropriating those freedoms, guaranteed to each and every American, for their own, exploitative, conspiratorial, amoral ends.

The original idea of American Freedom was that any man, of any birth, could come and make an honest living, have himself a little house and grow alfalfa and live off the fat o’ the land… etc. freedom from societal “pressures”, from being “forced or coerced” to participate in a particular way, as you say…

is this Dream not dead? What now separates the USA from the Old World, besides the Atlantic?

You say nobody is forced or coerced to anything… but the entire reason, as you can see, that Socialism fails is because nobody is coerced, and the entire reason Capitalism succeeds is because people are coerced… by money.

Capitalism could not work without a society fundamentally structured around money. In all societies, the masses must be coerced into working for the Establishment. Nobody does it out of good-will, that is the entire reason, as you say, that Socialism fails. Other times and places have used strict controls such as authoritarianism and feudalism, or subtle indoctrination such as religion and nationalism, but in America they use money. This is so successful because of it’s flexibility. It is a direct representation of self-interest, and that is what drives all of us. This flexibility is all your freedom.

But in the end, it is ABSOLUTELY necessary to structure the society in such a way that the masses NEED money to SURVIVE, and the most feasible way for them to acquire money, and so survive, is to serve the Establishment. Thus, practically all Americans are effectively forced/coerced into serving the Establishment. Hence, the American Dream is dead, etc. etc.

In essence, the USA is just the same as Europe, but with less social security.

So, following on from my previous post, and back on topic.

As demonstrated above, the freedoms of normal individuals have in fact been limited by the freedom of the capitalists to structure the society in such a way as to necessitate the use of money, and so “coerce” the masses into serving them.

Socialist ideas are intended to limit the freedom of the capitalists to do thus, in order to protect the freedoms of normal individuals. This is why they are portrayed so negatively by the Establishment in the US, which consists of capitalists, who naturally desire more freedom to control the structure of US society (Read: Power).

Socialist ideas do succeed in this respect, but there are other difficulties in implementing them effectively.
Nobody said structuring society in a fair and effective way would be easy, though…

An effective understanding of human nature would be very helpful in this discussion.

* People are almost always dissatisfied, wanting more. Once, when the labor leader Samuel Gompers, was asked what it was labor wanted, he replied simply, “More.”

* There have always been those with a burning desire for power.

* There have always been those with greater intellect than others, or with greater cleaverness than others. These people tend to rise to the top of the social order, especially if they also have a burning desire for power.

* Altruism is not universal.

* Most humans are unwilling to live simply.

* Jealousy is a fact of life.

* Envy is a fact of life.

Those are basic elements of human nature ( although certainly not all ). The only economic system of which I am aware which harnesses all of them effectively is capitalism. Find me a more humane system which can harness them and i will advocate it.

@The_Idler No offense, but your last 2 comments are the reason I get so frustrated with these discussions in the size and number of gross assumptions on your part. You paint the entire US corporate world as self-serving greed mongering monsters. Where in fact I know that to be completely the opposite. I work for a company and our company in turn interacts with over a thousand other companies and the vast majority (99%) are honest hard working companies.

I am beginning to think you may be confusing US corporate workers with US government workers as if you want to see a breakdown in the system, walk through the front door of any government agency and you will see bloated excesses and inefficiencies that would put any private company out of business in months. Socialism even in a mild form would castrate our countries ability to be innovative, competitive and aggressive on the world stage and that is what every American should be very concerned with if we are to remain the most powerful country in the world.

There seems to be an “either/or” mentality here. As though we can’t have capitalism AND an infusion of Socialism, although we’ve had exactly that since the 30’s, and nobody’s complaining about THAT. Nobody’s complaining about the “socialistic” concepts of workers comp, unemployment, social security, disability, public education, roads, city workers, etc.

Nobody wants or is expecting to see a 100% socialist state. I think everything is pretty good the way it is now for the individual, although so much of what we benefit from is evil “socialism” at work, isn’t it?

So what exactly is it that people seem to be so afraid that Obama’s gonna do differently that’s going to throw us into abject lethargy? I really don’t think he IS going to do anything differently as far as individual benefits under certain circumstances than we have right now.

However, I hope the government DOES step up to the humongous corporations upon which our total economy hinges, and demand more accountability from them. Yes, I would like to see Big Brother keeping an eye on those greedy, ruthless, careless, power hungry mongrels who could care less about the rest of us. THAT’S whose really running our economy right now, not the government, and it sucks. And it’s dangerous.

I’ll bet that BP fiasco wouldn’t have happened if the government had been overseeing the process.

So what am I missing? What threat do some of you see Obama as posing?

@Cruiser This thread was getting kind of long, and I read your post, just above mine AFTER I posted it. So, to respond to your thoughts…I don’t think the government has any intention of “taking over” any corporation. I hope they DO have intentions of overseeing those big corporations, with the idea that the better they are run, the less Big Brother will be nosing around. But if BB catches you screwing up, cutting corners, they they’ll be on you like S on S until you get your act together.

Again, I don’t see the government actually running those corporations. Just overseeing. Again, if there had been any kind of government influence over BP, I’ll bet the spill wouldn’t have happened. BP would have been bitching the because the government was making them take the precautions and costing them money…so what? Let them bitch.

@Val123 As far as BP is concerned the Governmental agency Minerals Management Service was supposed to oversee off shore oil drilling and failed miserably at it as they were too busy having parties and accepting gifts from oil companies. Plus no agency could have stopped this non American company from cutting the corners it deliberately cut that led to this disaster. Pure non-American Socialist flavored greed caused this FUBAR.

@Cruiser Do you have some cites for me to look at on that?

“You paint the entire US corporate world as self-serving greed mongering monsters. Where in fact I know that to be completely the opposite. I work for a company and our company in turn interacts with over a thousand other companies and the vast majority (99%) are honest hard working companies.” @Cruiser

Corporations exist solely to make money. This is incentivized via the market, and so it happens. That is why they are so much more efficient than Government. Society has been structured in such a way that money is power. Hence, corporations exist solely to accumulate and augment their power. Share prices and free trading ensure that profits are the No.1 priority. This dehumanizes the entire process of the empowerment of the rich.

Hence, self-serving greed mongering monsters.

The only reason any corporation is honest and hardworking, is because it is profitable to be so. It is incentivized by the government. This is a “socialist” idea. Yes, socialist ideas exist in the USA system. Many. The laissez-faire capitalists don’t like to see any “socialist” incentives for corporations to have moral responsibility, as these detract from efficiency and so profits.

I agree that you are the most powerful nation on Earth, because you let the big corporations exploit the wealth and labours of the nation with fewer “socialist” checks and controls, but Norway has the highest standard of living.

I don’t like Socialism because the individual is reduced to the least common denominator.
The individual becomes sacrified to the State.
No,thanks;)

@The_Idler You can’t win that laissez-faire capitalists argument here anymore…just doesn’t exist in the form you purport. Unions and Governmental regulations exist to offset this Draconian capitalist world you insist exists here. We could not possibly compete with China, North Korea, Vietnam, etc etc. due to our regulations, min. wage and benefits employees demand and get if it were not for import tarrifs. WHy do you think so many Socialist countries have their greedy corporations here to siphon off profits and send the money home? The system works and everybody is happy!

“Unions and Governmental regulations exist to offset this Draconian capitalist world you insist exists here.”

No, that I insist would exist, if it were not for the Socialist ideas of labour unions and governmental regulation, which protect the American working man from being too harshly exploited by the corporations…

You have Socialism in the USA…

As we have explained, those countries are ‘communist’, not socialist. And they aren’t even really communist. It’s just a sham. Like the “Democratic Republic” of the Congo.

Talking about Socialism in the context of this thread, i.e. “Canadian Socialism”, that doesn’t mean the government owns and controls everything like in USSR or China… does it? Have you ever been to Canada, and seen their “Socialism”? ...it’s a lot like American Socialism. Not much like USSR.

I hate having to google stuff for you guys…. @Val123….here you go….

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/05/27/mms.salazar/ Funny how it takes an epic disaster to clean up a messed up Government agency.

Read this and weep…

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/05/16/60minutes/main6490197.shtml?tag=contentMain;contentBody

Anderson Cooper popped the cork on this one here…
http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2010/06/07/video-exclusive-oil-rig-explosion-survivors-speak-out/

@The_Idler I have good friends in Canada and would only be able to offer up the standard fare of them admiring the quality of our health care and griping about the amount of taxes they pay. Other than that I do not know much other than Canada has awesome fishing and Molsen beer!

@Cruiser Well, that’s hearsay, though I can personally testify with regards to how much better their taste in beer is ㋡

This was always going to happen. Socialism has a very, very warped image in the USA.

All I’m trying to show you is that you shouldn’t deride Canada as Socialist, or Socialism as worthless, precisely because the strength of your unions and effectiveness of your government regulatory authorities and labour legislation ARE benefits of Socialist ideas in the USA.

My painted picture of “draconian capitalism” is what the USA would be like if it really were completely anti-Socialist, or laissez-faire.

Corporate interests campaign against government regulation and labour legislation, because they’re Socialist ideas: they are intended to protect the normal individual’s freedoms from the process of wealth accumulation by the Establishment. You just said that this is what is good about the USA, well this is what is Socialist about the USA.

Look at Mexico, would you say ordinary people live a “freer” life there?
No! Because government is weak and ineffective at controlling the corporations. That’s why everyone gets exploited. And the capitalists love it.

@Cruiser Thank you for the links. And I WAS googling, just couldn’t find anything other than the home website.

That was disheartening…..but the fact that MMS was corrupt meant that it’s very possible that they looked the other way, but MMS didn’t cause it. However, they allowed it to happen which makes them almost as culpable. But I don’t see how NO over site would be better…...thoughts? (Can I have some beer?)

@lucillelucillelucille In a 100% socialistic state, yes. You lose your individuality to the state. Nobody is suggesting that we go 100% socialist.

@Val123 did you watch or read the interview with the rig survivors? What they say implicates BP beyond the pale of gross negligence and paints them as willfully breaking many rules in place. How on earth can you police or prevent every aspect of what companies do in their operations. It is impossible and IMO a Government agency is no guarantee that things will always go smoothly.

“Nobody said structuring society in a fair and effective way would be easy, though…”

If the US had a more socialist policy towards oil extraction, like, say, Norway, which, incidentally, has the highest standard of living in the world, disastrous negligence such as this could perhaps be more easily prevented.

Why was the government agency too weak, corrupt and ineffective to prevent this?
Because the corporations have too much power.

What exactly is wrong with 65% public-owned State oil extraction?
Is it ‘anti-freedom’, just because it’s socialist?
How could it possibly affect relative competitiveness of US oil industry?
It’s pretty simple, you drill a hole and it comes out.

So why doesn’t the US do this?
Because the oil companies have too much power over the structure of your society.

@Cruiser So what possible solutions to that do you see? I mean, I’m looking at @The_Idler‘s post up there, and I think that’s interesting….very interesting.

@Val123 IMO keep things the way they are or deregulate a little more and make the oil companies 100% liable for their activities. The liability caps is what caused this. BP know they are only liable for so much and got away with bloody murder so far. Had they known that any spill would be on their dime they would not have pushed that rig that day.

@The_Idler You and I see the same problem through different lenses. Yes corporations only have too much power only because the Government allows them to and even encourages and goes out of their way to protect their power. It’s known as “K” street here and K street is home to some of the most powerful and influential lobbying firms in the world including those from Socialist countries! BP lobbyists ensure they have first dibs on prime drilling sites, Sweden, Belgium and Germany to name a few get juicy defense contract thanks to their lobbyists. I could go on for the rest of the day on how lobbyists work their magic for China, Korea and a host of other foreign countries. I say bulldoze the whole G-damn K street and bring the power back to the voters like it once was.

Your form of Socialism you propose wouldn’t make a dent in how we do business it would only make matters worse with the net result of a lazy un-motivated work force to boot….thank you very little. I prefer the free market pay-to-play lifestyle we all can enjoy if you really want to.

@Cruiser But…keeping things they way they are obviously isn’t working! I agree about the liability cap thing….why would they even have such a thing in place?

@Val123 Because of a couple reasons. One is because of what just happened. This cleanup cost will be ginormous and currently there is caps in place over the liability over such possibilities. Deep water drilling is obviously fraught with dangers of mishaps and no oil company would take on the task if they knew they would have to pay the entire cost for the cleanup and other financial repercussions of the spill. The worlds thirst for cheap oil up till now has help design a system that limits liabilities to help keep costs to the oil companies down which keeps the price of oil and gas down.

Vaccine companies are afforded similar safe guards against lawsuits in the event of a pandemic or other outbreak that they can quickly develop new vaccines and not be held liable if there are complications from people who take the vaccine otherwise they wouldn’t take on the very risky task and risk of such an endeavor.

So…the cap can be a good thing, almost a necessary thing, so we CAN’T get rid of it. But…couldn’t we change the parameters of it? Well, I don’t know what the parameters are. Is it a money amount, or a percentage of the profit amount?

@Val123 -Socialism is an economic system.To apply it in a small amount towards a Capitalistic system is like throwing sand into a well-oiled engine.Soon,it grinds to a halt,just like you see happening now in the US.
Time to drain the oil,change the filter and get back on the road.

@lucillelucillelucille So you would do away with Social Security and Medicare?

Capitalism is not a well oiled system. It is inherently self destructive because of its tendency to produce monopolies and its inherent rewards for worker exploitation.

Capitalism on its own is rather like a nuclear bomb. A runaway chain reaction that releases large amounts of energy in a small time frame and then causes massive destruction.
Government intervention and regulation is the nuclear reactor that tames that chain reaction and makes it useable.

@lucillelucillelucille And schools, post offices, fire departments and police departments?

this short video sums up Capitalism pretty well, certainly points out a few problems with it…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sqwd_u6HkMo