Does Socialism equal Destructionism?

Destructionism, refers to policies that consume capital but do not accumulate it. It is the title of Part V of the seminal work Socialism. Since accumulation of capital is the basis for economic progress (as the capital stock of society increases, the productivity of labor rises, as well as wages and standards of living), Von Mises warned that pursuing socialist and etatist policies will eventually lead to the consumption and reliance on old capital, borrowed capital, or printed "capital" as these policies cannot create any new capital, instead only consuming the old

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

BizSuitStacy · M

As the saying goes...socialism is great until you run out of other people's money.

Richard65 · M

@BizSuitStacy whose money was used to bail out the financial sector in 2008? 🤔

DogMan · 61-69, M

@Richard65 Other peoples money, was used to bail them out.

Richard65 · M

@DogMan that would be congressionally appropriated taxpayer funds. So capitalism is okay until you need other people's money to bail you out.

DogMan · 61-69, M

@Richard65 I was against the bailouts. No one bailed me out. I had accumulated enough
capital to keep everyone employed during the Recession, and during Covid.

Richard65 · M

@DogMan that's good and a credit to you. But that wasn't the question. Bizsuit's insinuation was that socialism is bad because it relies on other people's money. I was simply pointing out that in 2008 the entire Western economy relied on public handouts (other people's money) to save its collective ass. Privatize the profits, socialize the debt.

DogMan · 61-69, M

@Richard65 But he was right. Socialism DOES rely on others money and hard work.
It does not accumulate wealth, it gives it away, with no way to repay.

Look at what happened to Venezuela. This is what happens when you have
socialism. Eventually you run out of money. You have to pay people well enough
to pay for those that will not, or can not, work. Eventually people will say, "Why work"
I get all I need from the government, I'll just keep taking, and not contribute.

Richard65 · M

@DogMan again, that's not the point. I could argue that capitalism encourages unfettered exploitation of both the workforce and natural resources, lower wages and a reduction in quality of life. But the main issue was the idea that only socialism relies on other people's money, when 2008 showed the capitalist economy itself relied on a socialist bailout of trillions to save it from ruin and catastrophe. There's no debate about that, it's just a fact. In 2008 capitalism relied on a socialist ideal to survive intact.