• Valmond@lemmy.mindoki.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    Capitalism for when there is scarcity (building hi-tech for example) state controlled “socialism” for things needed by everyone (schools, hospitals, roads, internet) seems like a smart start.

    Food could go under capitalism if heavy regulated, govt can sponsor art etc. Vote for what suits you.

    Yeah and no more lobbying or mega rich(like 10M€ max until at least everyone can eat, read and go to the hospital for free).

    • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Historically socialists have been better at utilizing scarce resources. Look at the 50 percent economic growth per decade achieved by soviet centralized economic planning before calculators and machine learning were a thing.

    • LoreleiSankTheShip@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      The thing is, when someone starts getting very wealthy, they inevitably errode the checks and balances put in place to curtail their power and to protect the poor. For example, electricity used to be nationalised in my country until a few years ago. The state company in charge of it would seek to stay near the floating line, not to make profits, and power was very affordable. Before the pandemic, it got privatised and prices went through the roof, we’re talking 1000% increases in some cases, because now they had to make money for the shareholders.

      This could only work if the people were very conscious and politically educated, so that they could prevent these things from happening. But just one bad generation can see those hard earned protections and rights erroded.