Jonathan Waite ([identity profile] smallship1.livejournal.com) wrote in [personal profile] lexin 2009-12-03 06:38 pm (UTC)

Off the top of my head: It is the nature of any money-based system that everyone pays in some measure for everyone1 else. The first "everyone" always means everyone; the value of the second "everyone1" varies according to the particular system involved, but it's always the goal of those in that group to keep it as small as possible, because that means they get more each. The ideal of socialism is that the second "everyone1" equals the first "everyone", but nobody's made that work yet as far as I know.

In other words, it's never a case of whether you have socialism, just of how much and who benefits; the people who need it, or the ones at the top who don't.

Post a comment in response:

(will be screened)
(will be screened if not validated)
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting

If you are unable to use this captcha for any reason, please contact us by email at support@dreamwidth.org