Which is better in the wake of dwindling natural resources - Capitalism or Socialism ?

circularsquare
circularsquare
@circularsquare-CAswn0 • Oct 19, 2024

I would like to use this thread to learn more about Capitalism and Socialism in general , as I am a bit hazy about these very important concepts.
We all know what capitalism and socialism is.Roughly, capitalism means private ownership of capital and profits whereas socialism means the properties are shared by the public.
Beyond this rough ideas I don't know which one is better. Getting into the details would need a thorough study of economic theory.
I am only aware of the major flaws in the very extreme cases of the two models.
In an extreme socialism , since everyone gets the same wages , the profit motive is completely lost leading to stagnation. In such a scenario , hard work is rarely awarded.
In an extreme form of capitalism , the laborers get to live in very poor conditions.

But I would like to discuss these issues from a perspective of the environment and natural resources.From what little I have read on these two topics I have rarely come across the terms 'global warming' , 'pollution' , 'renewable energy sources' .

Who do you think should be in ownership of resources which are highly precious - the government or private organisations? Left to themselves, hard-boiled capitalists would always give preference to 'growth' over saving fast depleting natural resources such as petroleum. And who should carry the burden of cleaning up the polluted environment -the government or factory owners ?

Like 0 Replies 6

Replies

Welcome, guest

Join CrazyEngineers to reply, ask questions, and participate in conversations.

Sign up Log in

CrazyEngineers powered by Jatra Community Platform

  • circularsquare
    circularsquare

    @circularsquare-CAswn0 • Feb 22, 2012

    Why no replies ? Why this Kolaveri di ?

    0
  • Kaustubh Katdare
    Kaustubh Katdare

    @thebigk • Feb 22, 2012

    How did this thread skip my radar? 😨

    I'd favor Government owning the natural resources any day over private organizations. But 'the problem' is that Democracy does not exist in this world and any government would run as a mighty business corporation with all the powers in their hands and they compete with the governments (read businesses) of other countries.

    In an ideal world, the Government would control all the resources and do the job of equally handing over the responsibilities of managing the resources to the corporations; while keeping a strict check on them.

    0
  • circularsquare
    circularsquare

    @circularsquare-CAswn0 • Feb 22, 2012

    From what I have read no existing economic theory satisfactorily takes into consideration the effects of industrialization on environment and the dwindling of scarce natural resources.

    Recently I read the views of Ayn Rand on capitalism (because I liked some of her views in her novels) . She advocates complete laissez-faire i.e zero intervention of government from affairs of people , except in case of law and order. I wonder how such a system would allocate natural resources , to take an extreme case.

    0
  • Kaustubh Katdare
    Kaustubh Katdare

    @thebigk • Feb 22, 2012

    I could never go beyond 150 pages of 'The Fountain Head' (but I'm going to go to the last page, I've promised myself). Let's say a an corporation finds large reservoirs of oil and decides to sell it at an astronomical price. What should the people do?

    It *has* to be the Government that should take control.

    0
  • circularsquare
    circularsquare

    @circularsquare-CAswn0 • Feb 22, 2012

    The_Big_KI could never go beyond 150 pages of 'The Fountain Head' (but I'm going to go to the last page, I've promised myself). Let's say a an corporation finds large reservoirs of oil and decides to sell it at an astronomical price. What should the people do?

    It *has* to be the Government that should take control.

    I agree , and the Government should be one which takes account of the people's wishes.
    Allocation of resources shouldn't be ad-hoc as is sometimes done in India.(sometimes means regularly in the last sentence)

    0
  • Kaustubh Katdare
    Kaustubh Katdare

    @thebigk • Feb 22, 2012

    circularsquareI agree , and the Government should be one which takes account of the people's wishes.
    Allocation of resources shouldn't be ad-hoc as is sometimes done in India.(sometimes means regularly in the last sentence)

    ... and that is because the #-Link-Snipped-#. You can't expect a large bunch of people to have a common understanding of good & bad and then select a representative to take them towards what's 'good' for them.

    While we've assumed that we live in free, independent countries; the reality is that our lives are controlled by few greedy corporations & banks. It applies to most of the countries. The countries that beg to differ are decimated. On a personal note; I don't think Saddam Hussain was as bad as the media told us.

    0