Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What a great way to explain socialism.

Collapse

300x250 Mobile

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • What a great way to explain socialism.

    (A Friend sent this to me, I thought it was great)

    An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never failed a single student before but had once failed an entire class. That class had insisted that socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer.

    The professor then said, "OK, we will have an experiment in this class on socialism. All grades would be averaged and everyone would receive the same grade so no one would fail and no one would receive an A. The Class agreed!
    After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy.

    As the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too so they studied little. The second test average was a D! No one was happy.

    When the 3rd test rolled around, the average was an F. The scores never increased as bickering, blame and name-calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else.

    All failed, to their great surprise, and the professor told them that socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great, but when government takes all the reward and shares it with those not earning it, no one will try or want to succeed.

    It just doesn't get any simpler than this.
    MDRDEP:

    There are no stupid questions, but there sure are a lot of inquisitive idiots.

  • #2
    Although simple, it is not accurate. Socialism does not necessarily mean that everyone is compensated equally. Even in the USSR, compensation was quite disparate.

    There are many problems with socialism, the most severe being that it lacks a mechanism to allocate resources efficiently and does not provide incentives to innovate. Making economic decisions based on popular will results in very poor decisions that lower total economic output in the long run.
    Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. -- Aldous Huxley
    Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity. -- Albert Einstein

    Comment


    • #3
      Although simple, it is not accurate. Socialism does not necessarily mean that everyone is compensated equally. Even in the USSR, compensation was quite disparate.

      There are many problems with socialism, the most severe being that it lacks a mechanism to allocate resources efficiently and does not provide incentives to innovate. Making economic decisions based on popular will results in very poor decisions that lower total economic output in the long run.
      Dal,

      I am going to plagiarize you, and send this response to my friend. LOL
      I am kidding. That was a Great Response.
      MDRDEP:

      There are no stupid questions, but there sure are a lot of inquisitive idiots.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by DAL View Post
        There are many problems with socialism, the most severe being that it lacks a mechanism to allocate resources efficiently and does not provide incentives to innovate.
        Read the OP's analogy again. This is exactly what it says.
        sigpic
        Our houses are protected by the good Lord and a gun.
        And you might meet 'em both if you show up here not welcome son.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by jcioccke View Post
          An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never failed a single student before but had once failed an entire class. That class had insisted that socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer.
          The professor was incompetent because he doesn't even know what socialism is. There was no collective ownership of the means of production in his experiment.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by FredFlash View Post
            The professor was incompetent because he doesn't even know what socialism is. There was no collective ownership of the means of production in his experiment.
            The "product" of the class was grades. The class was given collective ownership of production of those grades. Just as DAL pointed out, there was no mechanism of incentive to bring the grades up. Therefore the class, as a collective whole, failed.
            \

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by KapsFB View Post
              Read the OP's analogy again. This is exactly what it says.
              No, it is not exactly what he says, and it certainly is not a complete explanation of socialism, nor does it explain why socialism is doomed to failure.

              Work is not the same as innovation. You could have a socialist system that rewarded innovation. For example, the government could award prizes for new inventions. However, the government cannot measure the value of the invention well.

              Your people could all work very hard at sewing clothing by hand, but your country would never progress, because there would be no reward for inventing the sewing machine.

              Everyone could work very hard at being farmers, but absent the invention of technology, people would starve as the population increase.

              Innovation is essential in order to raise the standard of living. Semi-socialist economies in Europe stagnate in part because the government subsidizes inefficiency to preserve jobs. Competition from abroad forced them to change.
              Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. -- Aldous Huxley
              Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity. -- Albert Einstein

              Comment


              • #8
                Defintion of Socialism (M-W Third New International)

                1 : any of various theories or social and political movements advocating or aiming at collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and control of the distribution of goods: as a : FOURIERISM b : GUILD SOCIALISM c : MARXISM d : OWENISM

                2 a : a system or condition of society or group living in which there is no private property <trace the remains of pure socialism that marked the first phase of the Christian community -- W.E.H.Lecky> -- compare INDIVIDUALISM b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state -- compare CAPITALISM, LIBERALISM c : a stage of society that in Marxist theory is transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and payments to individuals according to their work
                Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. -- Aldous Huxley
                Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity. -- Albert Einstein

                Comment

                MR300x250 Tablet

                Collapse

                What's Going On

                Collapse

                There are currently 2379 users online. 171 members and 2208 guests.

                Most users ever online was 158,966 at 04:57 AM on 01-16-2021.

                Welcome Ad

                Collapse
                Working...
                X