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 »

ChipmunkErnie · 70-79, M

A better question might be: Does Socialism actually exist anywhere other than in small, isolated communities?

This comment is hidden. Show Comment

NativePortlander1970

@ChipmunkErnie The founding Fathers intended the United States to be Socialist in practice, just read the Preamble of the US Constitution as well as the Bill of Rights closer, but then the robber barons of the mid 1800's came along and destroyed it all.

ChipmunkErnie · 70-79, M

@NativePortlander1970 Just re-rewad The Preamble -- not a darned thing about socialism there. Justice and equality, maybe.

NativePortlander1970

@ChipmunkErnie
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

BohemianBabe · M

@ChipmunkErnie

A better question might be: Does Socialism actually exist anywhere other than in small, isolated communities?

No, but the countries that came closest to Socialism are the Nordic countries and the German Sprachraum. These countries also have the highest living standards in the world.

DogMan · 61-69, M

@NativePortlander1970 Socialism would work, if you could get the majority of people to
contribute, and be productive. But that will never happen. As of now only about half of
the people contribute, the others just take, and consume. Socialism would just bring down
the productive people, and eventually they would also say, FUCK IT! And stop producing
for the un-productive.

This comment is hidden. Show Comment

DogMan · 61-69, M

@NativePortlander1970 No it would not, we would be ruined by now, because half the people
would produce, and the other half would just consume. Human nature.

This comment is hidden. Show Comment

DogMan · 61-69, M

@NativePortlander1970 You have no grasp of human nature, do you?

Are you still in high school?

NativePortlander1970

@DogMan If it's part of their culture and learned while growing up, it will be a part of their nature. There was a study done in the 70's into the 90's involving kids that were raised in communes, it showed them compared to kids not raised in them, the commune kids were nearly 100% involved with volunteering and community involvement, whereas the non commune kids were more of a hit or miss when asked to volunteer or get involved with their community. Another factor discovered with the non commune kids were the size of their communities and family involvement. However since Occupy Wall Street we are seeing more community involvement with youth, albeit the leaders are steering them down more malicious militant paths.