Quote:
Originally Posted by tw
You are asking the wrong person for citation. TheMercenary has made rediculous claims that require citation. Although I don't agree with some of Radar's conclusions, at least he is willing to put forth supporting facts.
A more accurate question for Radar would better define a boundary between socialism and communism. At what point does a socialist nation differ from a communist? For that matter, the US also could be called a socialist nation. All depends upon where boundary numbers get applied.
France is considered by many to be a socialist nation. The French (what - five years ago?) rose to the top of the list - the world's most productive nation. Others who have been there include Norway. Are they socialist? Some say so.
So where is this numeric definition that defines a difference between a socialist and a communist nation? And where is this citation from TheMercenary for any of his posts? Oh. TheMercenary can post something without citations? Well, Sundae Girl, why the double standard?
|
Socialism and Communism are just different spots on the same scale. The more a nation embraces socialism, the worse off they will be. European socialist nations like England, France & Germany support socialism in some form, and they suffer in those areas. Germany is still having a lot of trouble because of their socialism and some would claim they are successful. Some people actually claim Sweden is a successful nation. I don't call any nation where the government keeps over half of what you earn to be a successful one.
I consider America to be a partly socialist nation in that it has government programs that steal from those who work and create wealth, the government keeps a huge portion of it, and then gives what's left to those who are too lazy, inept, or incapable of earning their own way. It's false charity and it does more harm than good.
When a nation openly nationalizes the means of production you're talking about communism or full socialism.