This conversation is closed.

Is socialism the best option for Latin American countries?

Socialism is good for lowering poverty rates? I think economic models do not give the expected results when carried to an extreme.

  • thumb
    Sep 13 2013: We must evolve past our inherent nature, then we will stop gravitating towards a central system that at first may seem fair but in the end it gets taken advantage of by individuals.

    Uruguay seems to have a good system.
  • Sep 13 2013: No, I don't think so. The only way to reduce poverty is trough education, poor countries are poor not because the economic model the have, they are poor because they have very few or no scientist, they are poor because there is a scarcity of engineers, they are poor because there are not enough technicians. Give every adult a college education and you will have a rich country almost instantly. So if you want to fight poverty, then fight the educational model, not the economic model otherwise you will do more harm than good.
    • Sep 13 2013: I agree with you Amadeus, education is the only way out. But in a country where leaders have no governing priorities within education, that can be done? Change them?
      • Sep 13 2013: I admire your comments and thoughts and earnestness. The best advice I've received thus far in life is 'stop feeling sorry for yourself.'

        Do not look to government to save you. They have little interest in saving you. Only in keeping you Uneducated. Do not look to Business to save you. They have little interest in saving you. Only in keeping you Dependent.

        Accepting what 'IS THE REALITY" does NOT mean there is NO action taken. Acceptance of what IS allows for different directions,,,,,,different actions......different paths of evolution.

        It is the MEEK that inherit the Earth. But they must be Awake to inherit it.

        Get rid of SHOULDS AND SHOULD-NOTS. Then change occurs. Get rid of old beliefs. Old models. They drag you down.
  • Sep 13 2013: Very Friendly Lejan, we will be in touch.
  • Sep 13 2013: Socialism has not and will not work because of one underlying trait in the human spirit, survival. Socialists seem to have had this trait bread out of their DNA and will accept anyone that would help them without any effort on their part. They learn to late that working for a common cause simply means toiling for one master or another and receiving a fraction of the reward for your efforts. For the most part socialists are life's losers, blaming all their deficiencies on someone else and for the most part those that do acquire wealth usually do so through inheritance not hard work and common sense. Have you ever wondered why so many of them work for the government? From one teat to another for an existence, certainly not a life.
  • thumb
    Sep 13 2013: Socialism has never worked, and economic freedom, liberty, and education have always worked.

    Corruption is the main problem in Latin American countries, and all political systems are prone to that. But with Socialism there is no check and balance to keep it under control.
    Economic freedom, liberty, and education are the best weapons against corruption and crime.

    To give equal opportunity for all in the world, an international online education system need to be done. So a kid in Latin American can take the same classes as a kid in North America, Middle East, or Europe.
    • Sep 13 2013: Don Anderson, I agree with you, la education and the liberty are the principal option. In our countries is so difficult because the politics dont want help to all poors, but you hace the reason, 100% for you.
  • Sep 13 2013: Hello Krisztian, many people today think that the socilismo is the solution to poverty, mainly in Latin America, I think that the lack of fair capitalist leaders?
  • Sep 13 2013: Hello Pat, you think Socialism is the best opcion por the present?
    • thumb
      Sep 13 2013: Hector, if you use the red 'Reply' function on someones comment, it will trigger an e-mail notification to them, so that they know you answered. Otherwise they will find your answer only if they return to this conversation by choice, which may not always be the case.
      • Sep 13 2013: Thanks you, I will take it, I'm new here and I'm learning diferents forms of work and transmit a lot stuff and ideas. Thanks you again.
        • thumb
          Sep 13 2013: You are welcome and I am looking forward to your ideas you are willing to share here.
  • Sep 13 2013: Socialism is not for masses that Perceive themselves as sole-and-separate INDIVIDUALS. It requires selfLESSness. We do not have that. We are not ants. Ants do it quite nicely. A different intelligence arises from does not need governing.
    • thumb
      Sep 13 2013: If that was true, why do some countries still have 'medicare' programs, in which the strong are willing to support the 'weak'?
      • Sep 13 2013: Those are programs. Not countries.
        • thumb
          Sep 13 2013: You stated 'We do not have that.' Aren't countries a collective of 'we'?
  • thumb
    Sep 13 2013: marx died over a hundred years ago. the virus he created is still at large, and stronger than ever.
    • thumb
      Sep 13 2013: Marx was a critic of capitalism and I leave it to your imagination why this criticism has become stronger than ever in 2013...

      To give you a hint, recent 'proof of concept' of a given system may be part of it ...

      And just for once, try not to blame 'governments' while reflecting about it ... use 'Canada' instead to satisfy this Pavlov's reflex instead ... :o)
      • thumb
        Sep 13 2013: so the rationale would be something like: since X does not work, we better choose Y, which failed already, but tortured half the world for half a century before it did. i would suggest a little more insight.
        • thumb
          Sep 13 2013: By simple minds this could probably be seen that way, as well as the rationale: Since Y failed already for half of the world, we stick to the remaining X, which doesn't work either, and get the whole world tortured ...

          What's the insight you were suggesting?
      • thumb
        Sep 13 2013: insight is something you don't get out of a forum post. but for start, it worth having a look at the criticism of any theory without we are choosing it. the second advice would be to actually understand the criticism in addition to having a look. how about that?
        • thumb
          Sep 13 2013: I wasn't expecting to find insight here nor asking for advice. I was simply asking for your 'insight' on the given subject, which seems to have deepened a 'little more' than a not closer specified 'average'. May not have become clear enough, I would agree.
      • thumb
        Sep 13 2013: so you did not expect to find insight here, but you wanted me to write my insight here? or you want the serial number or name of the insight? i'm seriously out of ideas. but one way to start is to follow up on what ludwig von mises had to say about socialism, and i recommend not reading his work, but some modern commentary/explanation of it.
        • thumb
          Sep 13 2013: Honestly, I did not expect a meaningful reply from you, Krisztián, I just gave it another try...
  • Sep 13 2013: Socialism is just a word. Exporting American corporate socialism might not work anyplace else as well as it's not working here.
  • thumb
    Sep 13 2013: Socialism is NOT the best choice for ANY country.

    Willy nilly socialism borrows from the future to pay for a better standard of living now.

    Take a look at this index that shows what works.

    Notice that the U S will not be in the top 10 soon, indicating howw greater and greater socialism is working for the U S
    • thumb
      Sep 13 2013: That probably explains, why the biggest creditor of the USA is the 'willy nilly' Peoples republic of China, as dept got nothing to do with 'borrowing from the future to pay for a better standard of living now.' ...

      Oh, I forgot, it was the US government, not the system it is influenced by ...
    • thumb
      Sep 13 2013: The Heritage Foundation

      'Our mission is to formulate and promote conservative public policies based on the principles of free enterprise, limited government, individual freedom, traditional American values, and a strong national defense.'

      Reading this, they must have been at the forefront of the Occupy Wallstreet Movement. If they weren't, no further questions ... :o)

      How are those organizations called again... think tanks, spindoctors ...?
  • Sep 13 2013: Can we do something from outside?
  • Sep 12 2013: The union of two economic models might work?