whats the difference between socialism and capitalism? is one bad and good?
547331
socialism deals with collective ownership  for example every worker in a restaurant owns the restaurant and split the profit\n\ncapitalism deals with private ownership for example only one person owns a restaurant
684232
# Strictly speaking, any real or hypothetical state organized along the principles of socialism may be called a socialist state.\n# According to Marxism, socialism is a stage of social and economic development that will replace capitalism, and will in turn be replaced by communism. Thus, in Marxist terms, a socialist state is a state that has abolished capitalism and is moving towards communism.
435734
This is a pretty broad question.\n\nFirst, a basic review of the political spectrum:\n\nIn theory, you have communism on the far left and fascism on the far right. The distribution from left to right goes something like this:\n\ncommunism, socialism, liberalism, conservatism, fascism\n\nwith other steps in between of course.\n\nSince socialism is associated with the left side of the political spectrum, many people confuse it with communism. Opponents of socialism tend to use both words interchangeably in order to imply that the failures of communism are present with socialism as well; in other words, to confuse people and make socialism sound bad.\n\nIn general, the farther you move to either extreme (either communism or fascism), the more centralized the government tends to become.\n\nDemocracy is represented by the central portion: liberalism and conservatism.\n\nMost European nations practice socialism to some degree or another. Some are very successful at it (e.g. Sweden), others are having more problems with it (e.g. France). In general, however, in socialist nations like France where there are social problems, the problems stem not from socialism itself but from other factors (e.g. very high numbers of immigrants, etc...).\n\nSince socialism tends to back a system where there is a back-up plan to assist those who are not flourishing in society due to lack of employment, low pay rates, etc..., then any government program that attempts to help those who are not flourishing could theoretically be called socialist. In this sense, socialism is being constrasted with a laissez-faire system in which the market is allowed to operate with complete independence. However, even those who vehemently oppose socialism have to agree that a completely free market would result in juvenile sweat shops, endentured servitude, and a lot of other activities that are not good for one segment of society or another unless there were laws in place to prevent these things.\n\nIn other words, a completely free market with no legal intervention would be a pretty ugly place. Certain laws and social programs have to be developed to keep society equitable for all. Where to draw the line is the major question. \n\nFor example: Is public education, child care, etc... something each parent should be responsible for, or should society pitch in as well? Personally, I think it's obvious that society as a whole benefits from educated children, so society as a whole should help pay for education. Think of it this way: if education was only available to the wealthy, then those who grew up uneducated would become a drain on society and crime rates would sky rocket. So you can either pay for education or pay for increased police forces; take your pick. Likewise, society benefits from assisting families with child care so parents can work. If people can't find affordable health care, they'll just stay home with their kid(s) and collect unemployment. Which is worse?
906267
Communism is an economic system and Socialism is a political system (a form of government)  that can be adopted under a capitalist system (Examples: Spain, France).\n\nCommunism is opposed to Capitalism.\nIn Capitalism businesses are owned by private businessmen. This is a system of free enterprise, where anyone can start their own business and sell what they want to whom ever they want. \n\nCommunism is a "command economy." This economic system has only public ownership of businesses, where the national government has complete control of all industries. People are told what to produce, how much is needed and the price to sell it at. \n\nWhile there is wide variation between socialist groups, nearly all would agree that they opperate according to principles of solidarity and advocating an egalitarian society, that would serve the broad populace rather than a favored few.
178148
A social "safety net" , such as welfare, is not socialism. Socialism is the ownership of all assets and wealth by the state.  welfare is more appropriatly described as a redistribution of wealth. The source of the wealth is taxation of other individuals, the state is only a middle man, not the source of the wealth.
906881
The problem here is what is meant by the word 'communism'. What used to obtain in the Soviet Union had little resemblance to anything that was reflected on or seen as desirable by Marx or Engels.\n\nThis business about 'good in theory but bad in practice' is hog-wash inasmuch as the practice in Eastern Europe had little to do with the theory, if by the latter is meant the writings of Marx and Engels. Marx himself- by far the more interesting writer of the two- did not produce blue-prints of post-revolutionary society, but was indeed very clear about the evils of capitalism. These are present still, and are clearly in evidence. We live in a grossly exploitative and unequal world economy.\n\nHere it would be better to question capitalism, rather than communism!
585303
Capitalism is the private ownership of the means of production.\n\nOther economic systems, such as socialism (government control of the means of production), communism (government or collective ownership of the means of production).\n\nIt is an interesting question to consider whether capitalism would survive without government.  Certainly, one of the weaknesses of capitalism is that it leads to a highly inequal distribution of wealth, as the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.  At some time, if the poor were poor enough, they would band together and take away the assets of the rich.\n\nWe've seen revolution after revolution throughout human history, many of which, at their core, arose from inequal distribution of resources (the poor will only tolerate so much before they will commit their lives to fighting the status quo).  At some level, whether from the wealthy in a cpaitalist system, or from a government, there needs to be a mechanism in society to maintain social order.  While this is not part of the core fundamentals of capitalism, this social order is necessary for the capitalist economy to operate.
568559
The Socialist system, like what the UK has, is one of the best.  It mixes with democracy providing freedoms, yet, the government cares for you.  \nI like Socialism as i think that the Government is more responsive to you.
350231
Socialism is an economic system whereby the wealth created by the whole of society is redistributed evenly amongst the populace, ensuring that all are equally rewarded for the work everyone does.\n\nCommunism is a political contruct by which socialism is the main economic form.  In a communist society, a single political party controls the government, there are no real elections, and the populace is kept complacent by a bloated government machine that provides for all of the people.  Socialism is the dominant economic form to ensure the people are deluded into theinking they are taken care of.  \n\nExamples of socialist societies - France, Sweden, England\n\nExamples of Communist societies - Former USSR, China, Cuba
95780
Well, this country is neither pure communist nor capitalist. Neither works. We have a capitalist, democratic republic that uses socialist programs (sometimes too much) to help citizens and the economy.\n\nAs for me, I generally vote against things that drive us more towards socialist or communist ideals. The great thing about a free country should be/is that you have the right to succeed or fail. It is up to you as an individual to make something of yourself. The government should do its job of protecting the country as a whole, protecting our rights, and protecting the constitution, but it should not bring us to a "share the wealth" or "redistribution of wealth" system.
351790
Communism is a society where the Government controls and distributes everything, usually by inspiring fear in the populice.  \n\nThe above answer better describes socialism then communism, though both are remarkably similar.
1154911
Theoretically, in Socialism ,all the means of production are owned by the State while the State withers away in Communism.The principle of compensation by the emploer State to Labour in  Socialism is :_"From each according to his ability; To each according to his work " while in Communism  it is "From each according to his ability, To each according to his need"\nPractically  ,in China or in Soviet Union the State did not show any sign of withering  away,\nBoth Socialism and Communism are converging into a modified variety of Welfare oriented State Capitalism\nConfusion-Master
333769
History has proven pure communism or socialism doesn’t work.  Humans are free thinkers and eventually demand access to individual freedoms and rights.  History has also proven pure democracy and capitalism doesn’t work either.  Louis, Tocqueville warned of a “tyranny of the majority” which some say may be occurring in America today.\n\nThe answer is a balance between the two.   In a perfect society there would be enough social programs to support the poor, sick, and needy while providing opportunity for those “go getters” who wish to pursues wealth and success.
1103725
Capitalism government: a goverment that's run on "an economic system based on the production of commodities for sale, exchange, and profit" (wikipedia)\nBiggest capitalistic government: Britain (from mid to late nineteenth century)\n\nCommunism: "a political ideology that seeks to establish a future classless, stateless social organization based upon common ownership of the means of production" (wikipedia)\nBiggest communistic government: People's Republic of China\n\nSocialism: "refers to a broad array of doctrines or political movements that envisage a socio-economic system in which property and the distribution of wealth are subject to social control" (wikepedia)\nBiggest socialistic government: Soviet Union (in terms of economic system)
586496
you sure do enjoy rambling, don't you?\n\nyou are pro-capitalism and anti-communism?\n\nlet's see...oh, i don't remember the question now...and i can't see it because of your slightly illogical dissertation on the benefits and perfectionistic nature of capitalism...oh well, guess i'll just give up now, as i'm not a perfect capitalist genius...\n\nanswer me this, preferably in less than 5 sentences, but in coherent, complete, grammatically correct sentences:  why is capitalism so inherently superior to communism?\nAnd I don't hate you, so please don't get mad and begin spewing comments that make you sound like an idiot.
625937
Capitalism is basically Democracy (in my opinion), it's the complete opposite of Communism, where everyone is equal and have equal rights.\n\nCapitalism is to a simple extent; anyone can earn as much money as they can or like, live in a house as big as they like and have as many cars as they like providing they have the money obviously ;), it's basically freedom. \n\nSome groups dislike Capitalism as you know, as the lower end of the class (i.e working people or mainly unemployed), can live in seriously filthy and crime ridden areas, and have no chance of making something in life, where as Communism gives everyone a chance as some people believe.\n\nSo basically\n\nCapitalism = Anyone can make something of them selfs, and succeed in being wealthy.\n\nCommunism = Anyone should have no advantage over anyone else.
54704
"Capitalism is the unequal sharing of fortunes; Socialism is the equal sharing of miseries."\n\n-- Winston Churchill