This current week in my economics' classes we will be discussing different types of “economic systems” or the ways that economies tend to organize themselves. We describe the three types of economic systems in terms of a continuum with a purely free market economy (pure capitalism) at the one extreme and a command economy (communism) at the other extreme, with anything in between the two extremes being called a mixed system.
Often in the media, we use a word called “socialism”, which is economically close to “communism” in terms of households all earning closer to the same incomes even though workers provide varying skills and value to society. Usually, the word "socialism", when used in the United States regarding our current situation, is characterized by the wealthy paying increasingly higher taxes, relative to the poor, which are, in turn, spent by the government for common goods (national defense, health care, roads, airports, etc.) or directly transferred to the poor (more welfare, higher unemployment benefits, etc.)
Relatively more economists than non-economists would be in support of a more capitalistic system than a socialistic system as the study of economics (how do we satisfy our unlimited wants with scarce resources) is mostly about having the proper incentives.
Let’s consider a hypothetical experiment in socialism (communism) using an AP classroom full of high achieving economic students:
Effective immediately, all grades in AP Macro will be averaged together and everyone will receive the same grade. My guess is that after the first test the grades might average to a B. The students who studied hard would become upset and the students who studied little would be happy. But, as the second test rolls around, the students who studied little would probably study even less and the ones who studied hard would decide not to study as hard as they did on the first test. My guess is that the second test would average to a D or C-! After the second test, no one would be happy, especially with me, as they would see their college transcripts deteriorating rapidly. When the 3rd test rolled around the average would probably fall to an F. Attempts by certain classmates to rally the class to a higher average would probably not be effective, even though their grade or standard of living would be at risk. I would predict that the scores would never increase and bickering, blame, and name calling would result in hard feelings as no one would study any longer for the benefit of anyone else. All of you may end up failing, and I would quickly be fired and have my tires slashed!
Socialism is ultimately economically inferior to capitalism because under capitalism (free market economy) when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great; but when the government levels the playing field and takes more of the reward system for the achiever away; few will try or want to succeed as much as before and things tend to worsen with less productivity.
And that, economic students, is why virtually all economies tend to move in the direction of capitalism or free markets, as opposed to moving more towards communism or socialism.
Discussion Questions:
1. Is the classroom grading experiment discussed above a valid analogy, in your opinion, as to why most economists say that a capitalistic society will increase standards of living much faster than a more socialistic system (more leveling as the government transfers wealth from the rich to the poor)?
2. What positives can be achieved through a socialistic system, either economically or otherwise? Are their aspects of socialism in the US currently that you strongly support?
3. In the United States
1. The classroom analogy is a fairly accurate one. The capitalistic economy in which those who work harder see more rewards or benefits is accurately represented by the usual grading policy in which you get the grade you earn. Socialism can clearly be seen in the grading system of averaging all students' grades.
ReplyDelete2. One positive of a socialistic system is the idea of universal health care. In the United States we only recently passed a law to give most Americans healthcare. While I think the current system stands in need of revision the idea that all people get healthcare is a fair one. Medical costs are extremely high and those who cannot afford healthcare definitely cannot afford the costly medical bills that come from living without it.
3. Most if not all the allegations that President Obama is intentionally leading the nation towards socialism definitely come from Republicans. I don't know enough about the political system to say whether their allegations are totally false but I do think part of it is angry Republicans who want to regain control of the White House. In the years President Obama has been in office, the economy seems to be doing fairly well. The nation has bounced back from the recession in 2007/2008. While some policies Obama has put into effect, such as Obamacare, are more socialistic, overall I think he has done a good job of balancing the mixed economy system.
1. Yes, I think the classroom grading experiment discussed above is a valid analogy. The classroom analogy gave a perfect example of what a capitalistic and a socialistic economy would be like. In a capitalistic economy, people earn their own wealth and do not have to receive less of what they earned to somewhat evenly distribute the wealth among the poor; as of the example given in the classroom, everyone earns the grade they get which could potentially make everyone work harder. However, in a socialistic society everyone receives the "average" of what was made; like in the classroom setting, those who worked hard and studied got the same grade as those who did not. This would lead to people in society not trying as hard and will take longer to reach a higher standard of living.
ReplyDelete2. One benefit of socialism is it could potentially end poverty. With everyone making the same amount, the standard of living for everyone will rise and will result in no one considered to be "poor". However, I do not strongly agree with this because those that earn the bulk of the money work hard for it; rather than those living in poverty who will have wealth just "handed" to them.
3. I agree and disagree with this statement. Even though I think this is a biased view made by the Republicans, I can understand where their accusations are coming from. Obamacare is one of the most notable policies that Obama has done in his almost 8 years in office. Republicans may accuse Obama of leading this country into socialism because Obamacare has a more socialistic approach. However, he has helped our economy throughout the years and I do not think that he has lead this country into socialism.
1. It is a valid analogy in my opinion because it shows how important it is to be rewarded for hard work or else nobody would be motivated to do anything. Capitalistic societies will result in people working harder, which will increase standards of living. A socialistic system does not motivate people and keeps an economy from economic growth. Students don’t want to study really hard and end up getting pulled down by the people who don’t study, so they don’t study as hard.
ReplyDelete2. Advantages of socialism are the reduction of wealth disparities and unemployment. Jobs are distributed out to the public, giving everyone jobs. Reducing disparity in wealth is the equal distribution of assets in a population. Meaning everyone makes about the same amount of money so this will reduce the amount of poor people. I support social security, public schools, and the military in the U.S. These things I think are very important and socialism in this aspect makes them possible.
3. I wouldn’t say that President Obama is intentionally leading the nation towards socialism, but I do think he has too many socialistic policies. It might be a bias view from the Republicans wanting to gain reelection, but at the same time there is a lot of evidence of socialism such as Obamacare.
1. Yes, I do think that the classroom grading experiment is a valid analogy as to why most economists say that a capitalistic society will increase standards of living much faster than a socialistic system. In a capitalistic system, people would be more motivated to work hard than in a socialistic system because the more efficient they are, the more they will get paid. In a socialistic system, people would be less motivated to work hard as everyone gets paid the same amount of money regardless of whether some people work harder than others.
ReplyDelete2. One positive thing that can be achieved through a socialistic system is that poverty would not occur as everyone gets paid the same amount of money. However, I do not agree with aspects of socialism as it lowers the standard of living as people are more likely to not be very motivated to work hard and it would be unfair for those who work efficiently to get paid the same amount of money as those who do not work hard.
3. Yes, I do think that that statement may be a bias view coming from angry Republicans who lost to Obama's reelection, but at the same time I do think that Obama is starting to lead us towards socialism. His health care programs, such as Obamacare, have been a step towards socialism and I think that he would want to see more of these types of programs passed. The statement is not purely biased and there is factual evidence of health care programs being passed under the Obama administration. However, I do not think that he wants to lead us to total socialism.
1. I believe that the classroom grading experiment discussed above is a valid analogy as to why economists say that a capitalistic society will increase standards of living faster than a socialistic system. A socialistic society is shown as the average of these students grads but in a capitalistic one, the students work harder and earn their grades.
ReplyDelete2. The positives that can be achieved through a socialistic system are that everyone will have the same wealth and the division of classes would shrink. This would mostly be shown by ending poverty and the standard of living among all the people would increase. Even though this concept can solve some problems, I do not agree with it. It eliminates the concept of a free market and it would make people less motivated and not work as hard.
3. I believe that Republicans may be exaggerating a little bit when talking about President Obama’s socialistic attitude, but I do believe that this view is somewhat accurate. For example, Obamacare seems like a very socialistic policy introduced by him but I do not think he is overall leading our country to Socialism.
1. Is the classroom grading experiment discussed above a valid analogy, in your opinion, as to why most economists say that a capitalistic society will increase standards of living much faster than a more socialistic system (more leveling as the government transfers wealth from the rich to the poor)?
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion the classroom grading experiment is a valid analogy due to the fact that a capitalistic society will increase productivity much faster than a socialistic system. In a capitalistic society, people would be more driven to work hard than in a socialist society because the more efficient they are, the more they will get paid and in a socialistic economy, people would do the minimum work possible and get the same amount of compensation as the people who work the hardest.
2. What positives can be achieved through a socialistic system, either economically or otherwise? Are their aspects of socialism in the US currently that you strongly support?
Some positives of socialism are the equality of classes and the needs of the poor are not allowed to fade into obscurity. I support some aspects of welfare as not all people are able to find jobs in their field at a specific time, but against the fact that people can not search for jobs but still receive welfare checks.
3. In the United States, many Republicans say that President Obama is intentionally leading the nation towards socialism. What do you think? Is this view simply an unsupported bias asserted by mostly Republicans since they currently don’t control the White House and want to gain reelection, or, is this view accurate and factual?
I don't believe President Obama is leading the country towards socialism, but is, however introducing some new legislations to even the playing field for minority groups. I think that the Republicans are just overstating and exaggerating some of Obama's policies as socialism and they are playing to their supporter base who believe that the Democrats are pushing the country towards socialism
1. The classroom experiment is a valid analogy. A capatalist economy encourages people to work harder and allows those who work the hardest to have an increased standard of living over those who don't work as hard. A socialist economy would promote laziness and things wouldn't be as efficient because everyone would be receiving the same pay.
ReplyDelete2. Although socialism might have a roll in inefficiency, there would be a much more equal standard of living across the board. There would be a decrease in unemployment and there would be less divisions of classes. Everyone would get healthcare and things would be much more equal.
3. I think that although some Republicans might be true, the allegations might be hyped up or intensified. The views are biased because they may dislike him because he is a Democrat, but it is true that his views might be socialistic. One example of this is ObamaCare. This is a way of making sure everyone receives medical care and is equal.
1. I do believe the classroom experiment is a valid analogy. In a socialist economy (like the classroom in the experiment), the rewards are taken away, thus removing any motivation to succeed. The students in the experiment who studied and did well lose motivation to do so because the lazy students would drag down their grade anyway, so why try? This is very applicable to real life. Socialist economies take the rewards away and spread the wealth around. Therefore there isn’t a real reason for people to work hard and innovate.
ReplyDelete2. The main advantage of socialism is the fact that it prevents wealth gaps and most poverty. Socialist economies spread around the nations’ wealth, so everyone is basically making the same amount of money. This is a good thing in theory, but the overall economy would be bogged down. I like welfare and unemployment benefits to an extent. People need help and the government should look out for the overall welfare of the people. I don’t like when welfare gets abused or people just live off of welfare and unemployment checks. People should use the government as a temporary help, not as a permanent solution.
3. I am not familiar enough with President Obama’s policies to make a definite claim, but I think the Republicans have somewhat of a basis for their claims. I still think they’re just trying to slander Obama. I know ObamaCare is a fairly socialist policy. I also know he is a supporter of welfare. I don’t think he is purposely leading the United States in a socialist direction, but he has a more socialist mindset than the Republicans.
1. Yes, the classroom grading experiment is a valid analogy. I think this because if this was me in the analogy I would probably study for the first couple of tests then slowly stop studying. My thought process would be: If I'm studying and my grades are slowly deteriorating, it would not be worth to study. It is similar to marginal costs over marginal benefits, you should get the grade you tried for. If the marginal costs do not equal marginal benefits, something is wrong.
ReplyDelete2. A positive that can be achieved in a socialistic system is poor people can benefit more. The rich would be taxed and that money would go to helping out people that aren't so economically stable. Another positive is that people will always be looked as equals. I do not believe there are any aspects of a socialistic society that I support because it ruins the incentive to try harder and get products out faster. In my opinion, the economy would be worse off.
3. I do not think President Obama is intentionally leading the nation towards socialism. I have not noticed anything too socialist. I do not think this is 100% unsupported bias, however. It would be downright silly to make a claim with no solid evidence. However, I think some republicans are exaggerated saying he's trying to make the USA communist and things like that.
1. Yes, I think the experiment is valid because shows a great example of what a capitalistic and a socialistic economy is. In a capitalistic economy, people earn their own wealth and don’t need help from others, and in the classroom, the students receive a grade that will make them work harder. When people who studied got the same grade as someone who didn’t, those who study won’t work as hard.
ReplyDelete2. A socialistic economy might mean inefficiency but the standard of living would be much greater throughout the country. I think that unemployment would skyrocket because people wouldn’t see the need to work and the divisions in between social classes would shrink.
3. I do not think that President Obama is leading the country towards socialism but he is trying to increase the minorities’ impact in our country’s growth. The Republican’s views are biased and exaggerated. One example of Obama turning the country into a socialistic economy is his policy of health care wanting to make sure that everyone has equal insurance.
1. The classroom grading experiment is a valid analogy as to why most economists say that a capitalistic society will increase standards of living much faster than a more socialistic system because it displays how without incentives people don't work hard and the standard of living becomes worse. The analogy portrays the missing incentive as good grades.
ReplyDelete2. Some positives can be achieved through the socialistic system including the spread of wealth so that no one is impoverished. Aspects of socialism in the US currently that I strongly support are the wealthy paying higher taxes relative to the poor which are spent on government for goods like national defense and healthcare.
3. I think Obama is leading the nation towards socialism in some ways but not intentionally. He is leading towards some socialistic policies like free health care but he is doing this because he thinks this will help the low income people not to make the country more socialistic. I think the view is somewhat true but as usual the republicans exaggerate because they want to make the democratic party look bad.
1.The classroom grading experiment is a valid analogy as to why most economists say that a capitalistic society will increase standards of living much faster than a more socialistic system because without any benefits or reasons, people are not going to work hard to achieve anything. If everyone is going to end up with the same pay and benefits, people are not going to put an effort into their work.
ReplyDelete2. A socialistic economy is one that describes an economy where households earn essentially an equal income, even if their work ethics differ. One positive aspect that can come from a socialistic economy is that the poor will rise in social class and live a better life. The aspect of socialism in the US that I agree with is our taxes being used for national defense and health care, due to the fact that they are important and need to be funded.
3.I don’t think Obama is intentionally leading the nation towards socialism, however, many of his decisions reflect a socialist economy. Obamacare is a socialist idea that Obama established, but at the same time the Republicans are over-exaggerating to some of his decisions, for the U.S. is not near a socialist economy.
1. Yes, I would say that the Classroom analogy is a fair way of representing the two systems. The analogy clearly shows how motivation to succeed would be destroyed due to the fact that if you try really hard then you wouldn’t get a fair grade. This example doesn’t perfectly represent socialism as it would be that everyone would get the same, in theory, and not that everyone would keep on deteriorating until they have all failed. This makes it seem that the failure of others directly affects you when in socialism other people’s failure doesn’t affect your life but the government system does. It would be a better example if no matter how hard the students tried they would get the same grade thus leading everyone to not trying at all as they will still get the same result. The example does clearly show how Capitalism is superior compared to Socialism.
ReplyDelete2. A socialist system always seems a lot better on paper and in theory there should be a lot of economic and social advantages. I would think that socialism would make the working class and the low income families a lot happier than it would the rich of society. Those who gain from socialism will obviously support it but those who lose from it will not. There should be a stronger sense of community and less poverty as everyone is sharing the same stuff and is in the same situation but overtime people would slowly begin to want a change as they would want more things and won’t want to be limited to what a government gives them. I think the best advantage of socialism is Free Healthcare as it should be a human right that every person can live a healthy life and shouldn’t be denied care. This has been implemented in the United States but has not caught on and has heavy opposition. I think if you want to have a socialist state that you have to start from scratch and not try to change an existing country.
3. I think a lot of republicans say is to try and discredit the Democratic party and we all know that politicians honesty streaks are not that long. Politicians often manipulate data and try to make out their opponents to be bad people. So although there could be truth in the Republicans statement, it could also just be political competition. I think socialism always looks like a good idea if you are the one that is leading it. The President knows that if the United States becomes socialist that he will still have all the luxuries he wants as he won’t have to conform to the socialist system. This is why a lot of socialist leaders become aggressive as they want to keep their power over others. I think President Obama is socialist in his view on Healthcare; he wants a similar system to England who has the NHS where every citizen has equal access to aid. I don’t think Obama is leading the US towards socialism but I do think that some of is policies are more socialist than capitalist.
1. The classroom is a valid analogy expressing the thought that with a socialistic economy more people are tend to slack off yet still gain the average income while others who do work hard will get same income. Economies that have a capitalistic society will see faster increases in standards of living because people will want to work harder to gain that greater income than working not as hard and gaining little income, it institutes a bit of competition within us.
ReplyDelete2. An advantage with a socialistic economy is the benefit of not having the chance of monopolies growing in firms that causes other smaller businesses to disappear and no social division with everyone having the same amount of income but Socialism does tend to have a negative effect in an economy.
3. Not to get into politics but the Republicans will bash on anything that Obama said but I do disagree with the statement that Obama is leading our economy into socialism because we have not seen anything socialistic, rather than free healthcare, that affects our economy otherwise if we did, we can sure count on the government going into gridlock and probably not involving themselves in the economy or anything.
1. I think it is a valid analogy because it reflects how people would act if they all made the same amount but did different amounts of work. No one would work harder than they had to if everyone got the same amount of pay. This would create less incentive for people to work harder, and the economy would go down because everyone wouldn't be fighting to get a higher pay.
ReplyDelete2. One of the benefits of socialism is that there would be no poverty. While this would be helpful to a lot of people who could not be able to earn as much on their own, I do not agree with it because it provides everyone with less incentive and it would hold the country back.
3. The statements by the Republicans isn't entirely true but there is a small amount of truth in it. Obamacare is an example of one of the socialistic policies that Obama has enacted. It is socialist in the sense that it enables everyone in the country to have equal healthcare. I don't think he is leading us towards socialism because a lot of times politicians try to exaggerate to make the other party look worse than they actually are.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete1. Yes I do believe that the classroom grading experiment is a valid analogy to prove that a capitalistic society will increase standards of living more than a socialistic one. Competition results in better products, which results in a higher standard of living. Everybody makes decisions based on self interest meaning that when deciding what decision to make they focus on what they will get out of it. If an individual knows that no matter how much effort they put in they will get the same result as someone who puts in little or no effort, they will stop making an effort. In the analogy after seeing the grades they received for the first test, the students who had studied a lot stopped studying because they knew no matter what they would get the same result. The teacher was taking the "wealth" (i.e grade) of those who studied and distributing it to those who did not study (i.e the poor).
ReplyDelete2. One positive of a socialistic system is that the standard of living for the poor increases to a point that it would not be at without the distribution of the wealth earned by the rich. There are currently no aspects of socialism in the U.S that I support because in my opinion all socialism does is take away the incentive for the poor to work and earn money.
3. Yes I do think that Obama is leading our nation to socialism, whether he is doing it intentionally or not I do not know. Of course Republicans are going to say whatever they think will win votes, but at the same time you cannot really argue with the fact that some of Obama's policies such as Obamacare are very socialistic in nature.
1. The analogy regarding the classroom is a valid one. It shows that in the world of socialism some people work harder than others, but it does not matter due to everyone sharing the same outcome. Those who do not work hard will stay lazy, and those who do work hard will become lazy. The analogy shows that you are just a small piece of a very big puzzle, and every single person must work together to solve it.
ReplyDelete2. In a socialistic society, poverty and the class system is eliminated for everyone (mostly). This is a good thing, because everyone is equal. But overall socialism is not so good, as it tends to hurt the economy more than it helps. This system is not an efficient one in my opinion, as the amount of hard work you do does not matter in the end.
3. I believe the view that Obama is a socialist is not accurate and it is held by republicans who want control of the White House. Obama's policies might resemble a few aspects of socialism, but his plans are far from the actual structure of the form of government.
1. The Analogy in my opinion was a great one! It helped me understand perfectly the difference between Capitalism and Socialism. It shows that people through Capitalism earn there reward. The hard workers deserve to get the good grade. Socialism would mean that no matter how hard you work, in the end you will be the same as the person who didn't work at all.
ReplyDelete2.Through a socialistic system the biggest benefit that I can see would the end to poverty. Since everybody would get the same amount of things it would be a more level society. I do not strongly support any aspects of socialism in today's society.
3. It is ridiculous that the republicans are saying that President Obama is leading this country towards socialism. Yes he does lean toward the middle class and the rich do pay high taxes but I see no problem with that. It is not like he is making the Rich pay all of there money there is still a huge division of wealth. The republicans are just trying to get majority back. President Obama makes decisions that everybody may not agree with sometimes but the is not a socialist.
1. The analogy that is drawn by the classroom experiment is accurate. A socialist system attempts to bring economic equality among all people. However, in doing so, it takes away any incentives to be creative, innovative, and entrepreneurial and thus can limit economic progress. People need incentives to motivate them to achieve rewards. This is what drives a capitalistic system.
ReplyDelete2. There are aspects of socialism that do benefit societies. for example, in some countries such as Brazil and Canada, there are public health systems. Citizens do not have to pay for health services. This especially helps the poor people and prevents public health costs from skyrocketing should disease and illness spread because of lack of access to health care. In the US, the federal welfare program serves the poor and needy. As long as it is well managed it can be effective. However, it can be abused and counterproductive. Additionally, public housing for the poor has the same benefits. But again, it must be well managed to prevent abuse. Both of these programs serve a purpose to support the poor until they are able to support themselves.
3. President Obama's health care program called "Obama Care" is considered a socialist program. It requires that all citizens sign up for health care. This takes away the individual choice that many citizens like and that Republicans say is part of our constitution. "Obama Care" provides everyone an opportunity for health care regardless of economic status - whether rich or poor. However, it is more a perception or misperception among Republicans that he is a socialist.
1. I think that the analogy was a perfect analogy. In fact, my father used the same analogy to explain the differences to me. I believe that the analogy does show that a capitalistic society will improve the standard of living much faster then a socialistic society because the capitalistic society provides a better reward for hard work.
ReplyDelete2. A positive that can be achieved through true socialism would be that everyone would be the same. There would be no income inequality, thus problems between rich and poor would essentially be wiped out. Nevertheless, a true socialistic society is impossible
3. While Obama's father was a self professed "African Socialist", I do not believe that Obama is a true socialist. Some of his policies have certainly leaned more command economy based, but I believe that the Republican party has been exaggerating in order to take back control of the White House.
1. I agree with the classroom analogy because it follows the thought process of the initial effort discrepancy and the gradually increasing effect of the lack of incentives, as well as how some would work harder for the greater good of everyone but the majority would have lost motivation causing a societal-wide decline in the standard of living. The motivation and personal responsibility that are essential to a capitalistic society force everyone to work hard out of self-interest, which in turn benefits society as a whole.
ReplyDelete2. A socialistic system could result in full employment as well as equality in benefits and services people receive. However, I would not support those as reasons for a country to move towards socialism due to potential unhappiness for citizens and a lowered standard of living just to make everyone equal. In regard to socialism in the U.S. I do not know loads about the inner workings and particulars or programs but I do support unemployment benefits to hold people over in rough times as well as social security for the retired as most could not work, find jobs, or otherwise have a reliable source of income.
3. I disagree with the statement that President Obama is intentionally leading the nation towards socialism. While Republicans most likely have a bias, I am sure that some who assert this do have factual evidence to support the claim while others simply are upset with some of the president’s policies. Such support would mostly be found in the Affordable Care Act and President Obama’s plan for free community college because the idea is everyone pays into the system for what should be (but at the time being is failing at) a benefit for all.
1. Yes I do believe this classroom experiment is a good analogy. In a Communist society, people have job security so everyone i guaranteed an income. If a person is guaranteed an income, why would they work? Therefore people start to slack off in their work because it doesn't matter if they show up to work because they are still getting paid. In a Capitalist society people would be more inclined to work hard because they do not have a guaranteed income and they could get fired and have no money. So people will work hard at their job to provide efficiently made goods and services to the consumers. As demonstrated in the experiment, the students who had their grades averaged started to slowly stop working hard because they know in the end, no matter how hard they studied, they are not going to get the best score because someone else didn’t study well and it brings everyone else’s grade down (just like people’s drive for their job would go down when there is nothing to gain). When the students weren’t guaranteed a good grade, they studied much harder and they did a lot better performance wise (just like in a Capitalist economy its every man for themselves).
ReplyDelete2. The only strong aspects of a socialist economy are that there is always food, shelter, and money for people. The whole point of a communist country is that everyone is equal and nobody will be left out in the dust and starved. Socialism does not have an income inequality problem that Capitalist countries have because in a socialist country, everyone is paid the same and treated the same. Some aspects of socialism in the US are some social programs the US has available like; unemployment, welfare, and social security, to name a few. These programs help people who are in need of money and support because of global inequality.
3. I don’t believe that Obama is leading the US to socialism (and this is coming from a Republican). Obama has put in some social reforms to help women with maternity leave and some programs to help transgendered individuals in the military go through a transition funded by US taxes. President Obama, however, has been willing to compromise on a lot of issues, for one; not raising the minimum wage and he has cut taxes a bit. Obama is Liberal President, not a socialist (yes there is a fine line).
1. I believe this is an extremely simplistic analogy. This is an excellent analogy, but there are many exceptions. There are so many more factors that go into economy, motivation, etc. This is only one possibility. Some people may see it as something to take pride in; I've known students who won't work hard on an assignment, because they do not care if they get a bad grade. However, when placed in a group, sometimes the same student will work hard, since they do not want to be the one to bring the team down. Although this is a great analogy, we have to keep in mind that there are many more factors that would play into an actual economy, and this is oversimplified.
ReplyDelete2. Socialism could hypothetically be an amazing thing. If it was human nature to maintain motivation without incentive, and people were all amazing, charitable human beings, it would be the best form of economy without a doubt. Socialism prevents hierarchy or social/economic classes, helping prevent prejudices. This also keeps everyone equal, and assists from letting certain people (the rich elite) from gaining too much power. Socialism is a great way of keeping everyone on the same level, and helps to prevent people from struggling with poverty or something. It also gives the government more control over what the country is doing, allowing for a simpler way of life. In the U.S., despite being a capitalist economy, has several socialistic aspects. One of the most prevalent is healthcare. This is a great concept our country has grasped, and I fully support it. It's a great way to say that we will not just let our people get sick or hurt without help.
3. Most of the people claiming Obama is leading America toward socialism is mostly not completely aware of what socialism really is. President Obama is employing certain socialist principles, but this does not mean he wants socialism in America. There are many many factors that go into the type of economy we have, and adding a few programs will not tip the scale toward socialism. We still have lots of freedoms in our economy, and I do not feel that he is trying to change that.
1. The classroom grading experiment discussed above is a valid analogy. I think it is a valid analogy because it introduces a communistic society and shows how it functions. In the analogy, the students’ grades are averaged together, thus reflecting how the wealth in society is shared under communism. After the second and third test, the students who were striving to receive an A in the class lose motivation because they see that their hard-work and effort are not giving them the results they want. Because of this, the students who were striving to receive A’s lose motivation and the whole class average drops to an F. This analogy shows that in a communistic society, the people who strive to earn wealth and work hard will often lose their results and hard-earned money to people who do not work as hard. Productivity decreases because people know they don’t have to work too hard to receive rewards. The analogy shows that a capitalistic society will function better, because hard-workers and achievers have the initiative to earn great rewards.
ReplyDelete2. One positive that can be achieved through a socialistic system is that the wealth is spread-out through the society. This helps balance the quality of living so no one has too much more than anyone else. In a socialistic system, the people are literally “all in it together” because whatever one person earns and how hard they work, they have to share it with the society. One aspect of socialism in the U.S. that I strongly support is that taxpayers’ dollars are used to fund fire departments and police departments. Through these two departments, we have a sense of safety.
3. I am not fully familiar with all of Obama’s policies, but from what I do know, I do not think that Obama is leading us towards socialism. I think this assertion is consistently from biased Republicans, but I could understand why they think that Obamacare is a socialistic policy. Obamacare gives everyone equal health care so in the communistic sense, giving everyone health care seems like an idea that would fit into that category, but I still believe that he is not intentionally trying to make the U.S. a communistic country. I think it is too much of a stretch to compare Obamacare and socialism.
1. The analogy provided was ideal. I immediately saw the similarities between your scenario and how socialism would actually affect a nation. There is no motivation to succeed when success yields no reward, and this key caveat of socialism is described perfectly in the analogy provided.
ReplyDelete2. Socialism would almost eliminate any remnants of the lower class, and this is (on the surface) a positive of the system. However, the idea of the less wealthy of our society losing any motivation to succeed and up their standing in society is not one that I support. I am a strong believer that one should work for every bit of what he has, and income should be directly related to services provided.
3. I am not going to claim a political affiliation when critiquing reforms imposed by president Barack Obama, as this will simply make me partial on the issue and unable to give a fair assessment. Additionally, the idea that President Obama is attempting to lead the nation into socialism is an over exaggeration. However, I can see why someone would be led to this belief, as the affordable care act does make the government the primary regulator of health insurance and thus limit competition in the healthcare industry (increasing government control of the economy is a well-known socialistic practice). In conclusion, I do not believe that President Obama is leading the country to socialism, although it is undeniable that the democratic party's economic policy has some beliefs in common with socialism.
1. It is a valid analogy. What it does is outline human need for incentive and motivation to do well. If there is no reward, then people have no need to be ambitious. Just like where students won’t try if they knew they were just going to do the same as everyone else, businessmen and the entrepreneur are less likely to actually try if they know that they will ultimately get nothing in return. Thus, standards of living go down like grades go down as everyone ceases to care.
ReplyDelete2. Some positives of socialism are that the poor get help they need. They are not left to merely fend for themselves, and instead poor families have a better opportunity to stop being poor if they try hard enough. What socialistic tendencies in the United States also do is make impossible for the children of impoverished families not to remain that way if they do not want to. They are given the opportunity through public resources and government spending to do well in school and create a life for themselves outside of squalor. On the same note, socialism also helps the elderly who can no longer work from living in poverty in the last years of their lives. People who work for their entire lives are able to live comfortably after retirement without having to fear a complete depletion of funds. For these reasons, I support some socialist tendencies in the U.S. I support initiatives that try and help individuals out of poverty through funding education and that take care of the sick and elderly who cannot work for wages anymore.
3. It is mostly, if not all, Republicans who are the ones making this claim that Obama is a socialist. You would be hard-pressed to find an independent that has made this claim in any major media outlet. However, programs like Obamacare do come across socialist when they are interpreted as making a previously private business into a government one. I do not think it is merely an unsupported bias Republicans have since they just want to gain control of the White House, but I do think it is just a case of the out-of-power party just being overly critical. Obama and many of his policies go against conservative principles, so it is unsurprising how readily members of the GOP demonize Obama. In politics, more often than not, people believe that their ideas are the one and true absolutely correct answer. They defend these ideas viciously and completely ignore the opinions or voices of others, which is what we see when Republicans criticize Obama’s every move.
1. I think that yes, it is a valid analogy. Most economists believe that a capitalistic is superior for one main reason: motivation. In the classroom setting, students are motivated to study hard so they can get good grades which benefit them in the long run. The system of rewards and punishments drive individuals to push themselves to be the best they can be and this, in turn, raises the standard of living. If the playing field is leveled, individuals will only do the bare minimum.
ReplyDelete2. In a perfect world, socialism would be a good system. The gap in wages would completely disappear. The socialist system takes from the rich to give to the poor, making all things equal. The problem with this system is that human beings are very self-interested. Someone who goes to school and works really hard should be paid more than someone who slacks off their whole life. Income inequality seems like a fantastic idea from the perspective of the lower class, but not the upper class. I don’t support a socialist system in America because it takes away the incentive to work hard.
3. Obama has implements many socialist programs such as the affordable care act but I don’t believe his intention is socialism. He is widening the government’s control (the definition of socialism) over sectors of the economy such as Sarbarnes-Oxley Act which tightens controls on the bank and trying to make religious organizations pay for objectionable services from the HHS mandate. The way he runs the country is more socialist that past presidents but I don’t think a socialist system is the end game he has in mind.
1. The classroom grading experiment above is a valid analogy as to why most economists say that a capitalistic society will increase standards of living much faster than a more socialistic system. The main issue in a socialistic system is the motivation of the work force to become better educated and work harder to make money. The same idea is true when talking about the averaging of students' test grades. The initially motivated kids will try less if they know that the initially unmotivated kids will also try less as the year progresses.
ReplyDelete2. Socialism is an idea that sounds good to two people: socialists and some political theorists. Socialism appeals to many people because it could theoretically close the "ever-widening gap" between the rich and the poor, the infamous "top 1%" and the rest of the country. I do not support aspects of socialism in the US because it has the potential to lower the standard of living for everyone in the country.
3. President Obama has proved time and time again that he is leading the country towards socialism. For example, Obama constantly talks about redistributing the wealth, and usually attempts to do so by heavily taxing wealthier people. He sometimes disguises his socialistic policies such as the Affordable Care Act. True socialism would take and redistribute everyone's wealth and in return, the government would provide healthcare. In the United States, instead, the government forces many to buy healthcare. There is no possible way for Obama to be leading this country towards socialism unintentionally. The Republicans, like most political parties, don't always have a great track record when it comes to telling the truth, but anyone who looks at the comparison between a socialistic system and the policies Obama has proposed and implemented cannot deny the resemblance. Unfortunately, it has been proven that socialism does not work when put in to practice (Maoist China and the Soviet Union).
1. The classroom example discussed above is a valid analogy to why economists say that a capitalistic society will increase standards of living over a socialistic system. Competition is what capitalism thrives on and that is what motivates people to do the best job. If you work hard and get the same amount of money as someone who is lazy that does not motivate you to do your best job.
ReplyDelete2. One positive idea that can be achieved through a socialistic system is that the gap between the rich and the poor is almost non-existent. In a socialistic system no one has more and everyone is equal. The poor would have just as many opportunities as the rich and nobody would have an economic advantage in society. One aspect of socialism that the US currently has that I support is our social security. We all pay the same percentage and we all get close to the same amount back when we retire. This is a great way for our country to make sure that everyone has the chance to live a decent life after they are done working.
3. I think that Obama is trying to implement certain things from socialism that have worked in other countries, like healthcare. I think that is easy for the Republicans to say he is trying to make the US a socialistic nation because he is taking ideas from socialism. It’s politics and the opposing party is always trying to find faults with the other party. This is just one of many attempts the Republicans have made to try and make Obama look bad.
1. I believe that the analogy was an excellent instructional device that explains the failures of a socialistic system compared to a capitalistic one. It provides a good example of how hard work is directly rewarded and therefore encouraged in a capitalistic society, but not a socialistic one. However, strictly as an analogy, it has some flaws. The analogy works only if you assume that the class was motivated primarily by getting good grades. If the students in the class cared primarily about learning the material for the joy of learning, then they would study hard regardless of the grade they got, and because everybody would be studying hard, the grades would remain good. This condition may be satisfied in some elite classes which people would only take if they were already passionate about the subject. However, these conditions are rare, if they exist at all, in real world economies, which have people and have people motivated primarily by profit (or, in the analogy, grades). Otherwise, the analogy excellently explains why most economists prefer capitalistic systems.
ReplyDelete2. The primary benefit of socialism is that it promotes equality between people. While equality may not always be the primary goal of societies, it is certainly something to strive for. I support the existence of welfare systems as a means to allow people to support themselves when they cannot find work. However, I do not support welfare states so large that they remove the motivation of the unemployed to find work.
3. Obama has certainly intentionally introduced policies that are generally associated with socialism, or that have socialistic aspects. His policies like the GM bailout and the Affordable Care Act have interfered with capitalism in America. However, I think the Republicans' statements that Obama is leading the U.S. towards socialism are hyperbole. The Republicans calling his policies socialism is likely an attempt to try to frame Obama in a negative light so they can gain political power.
1. I would venture to say that the description given in relation to a
ReplyDeletecommunist economy is fairly accurate, and gives reason as to why a
capitalist economy would be more beneficial. When some people
begin to succeed, more wish to succeed, which leads to a competitive
environment. This environment, sparked by competition, is what
keeps a free market economy as the best approach.
2. A positive that can be achieved through a bit of socialism is
education. The public school system, for example, is an example of
socialism, because everyone chips in for the greater good of society,
even if the public schooling system has no direct impact on them.
Programs like this require everyone to contribute, and also allow for
the betterment of society.
3. In my opinion most, if not all, of the accusations of President
Obama being a socialist are direct results of the Republicans. This is
not a wrong thing to do, per say, as the party most likely wants the
largest influence they can achieve, which is understandable. Also, the
President has suggested programs, such as Obamacare, which lean
more towards socialist ideals. However, just because they are more
socialist does not mean that they are bad or harmful, and I believe that
the Republicans' denunciations should be taken lightly.
1. I believe the classroom situation is a valid analogy. The reason why most economics say capitalism is superior to socialistic systems is because people's hard work is rewarded in a capitalistic system. If someone works and earns a lot of money, they are able to keep the rewards, as they earned it themselves. In a socialistic economy, that person's hard work would be taken and distributed among everyone else, sharing the reward "equally". The standards of living would develop much faster in a capitalistic economy because everyone is working for themselves and they alone are responsible for their own success. If they work hard, they will receive what they want and be successful. With socialism, the hard workers pick up the slack of the lazy workers and everyone is given an "equal" award. The hard workers wouldn't see a point in working hard because everyone gets the same thing anyways. This would halt economic growth.
ReplyDelete2. Socialism generally sounds good on paper. It states that everyone is equal and thus will receive an equal amount of rewards. To those in the lower spectrum of society, that may sound good, but realistically it's not sustainable in the real world. Everyone receiving the same amount of rewards wouldn't be fair to the people who worked hard for what they have, and encourage lazy people to take advantage of that. I don't support the socialistic economic system as I think it would interfere with the advancement of society as a whole.
3. Democrats are known for wanting a bigger government, where everything is regulated and controlled. Republicans want the exact opposite, a free market with little government regulation and interference. President Obama, during his presidency, has expanded the role of the Federal Government in the average citizen's lives. Obamacare is a government regulated health-care system that many people weren't quick to support. Taxation is known to increase when Democrats are in office, where the rich are taxed more than the poor. The more you earn, the more you are taxed usually. Those taxes are used to fund other government projects. I think the view is somewhat accurate as some aspects of Democrat beliefs involve socialism.
1. The classroom analogy is a nearly perfect. The economists are right. Humans want to win, to fulfill the most. They are less motivated to work for other people’s stuff. They will create things and drive the economy if they benefit directly from them.
ReplyDelete2. Socialism is a fantastic system in theory. Eliminating poor people and people who are failing classes is great. Those people deserve extra support (unemployment benefits, welfare, the minimum wage), but it should still be in there extreme best interest to get a job and develop skills. It’s like getting extra help from a teacher. However getting an A still requires work by the student. The teacher cannot just give the A for free.
3. President Obama is a liberal, he is therefore leading the country in the generally toward socialism. He is implementing things like universal health care. That is a socialistic policy. Is it a good idea? Who knows? The Republicans think it is not and Obama thinks it is. However the Republicans, as politicians tend to over blow things in order to win elections.
1. I do think that the classroom analogy is accurate. The capitalistic economy is represented in a perfect way with the grading policy where you have to earn your grade; it is not just given to you. Socialism can be seen in the grading system by averaging all of the student’s grades.
ReplyDelete2. One benefit of socialism is that is could end poverty. If everyone made around the same amount of money, then there would be no outliving someone therefore anybody could be poor. I do not agree with socialism because it would lower the standard of living and most people would not be motivated to do much of anything. Or they would do very minimal because they know that they are getting made the same as everyone else.
3. I do not believe that this view is 100% accurate. I think that Republicans are over doing it and making things sound worse then what they are but there are things like Obamacare that seem very socialistic. But I don’t that means that are country is becoming socialistic.
1. In my opinion, the classroom example was a good parallel to what socialism is like. In an environment where everything is leveled whether it’s in a classroom in economy, the initiative and incentive to do better and improve one’s results or gains is lost. The result is due to the overachievers that lose their motivation and the underachievers that never have to work harder, since they can just depend on the overachievers to boost them up. As motivation decreases and laziness and demoralization increases, the overall situation, in the case the economy or class average, is worsened because no one puts in any effort.
ReplyDelete2. Socialism can yield some benefits because it allows people to have opportunities that they otherwise would not have had if it were a capitalistic economic system. One of the opportunities that socialism can entail is a higher education for all, like in Germany, where college is guaranteed to all people like K-12 is in the U.S., which can increase the number of educated people. There are also possible economic gains that can be obtained from a socialistic economic system: more educated people results in a higher quality workforce. In terms of technology, a nation’s technology and standard of living can increase because a portion of the taxes is dedicated to public projects like roads, airports, and national defense, but the only problem is that the government decides where the money will go to improve and advance. Although I appreciate the purpose of helping the lesser that is involved in socialism, especially guaranteed college, I don’t like the fact that it is at the expense of the richer. This type of economic system can cause the lesser fortunate to become less motivated and less self-sufficient, and more dependent on the help of the government, who use the rich’s hard-earned money to aid them.
3. Many people think that President Obama is trying to impose socialism on our nation primarily because of his Obama Care Policy, which offers health insurance for all. Many of his opponents say that he is trying to divide the nation by trying to pit the different classes (middle class, high class, etc) against each other. In my opinion, I think that some of these accusations are true to an extent, because Obama’s policy may resemble some aspects of a socialistic economic system. His programs and policies, although allow for the government to help people, also allows the government to interfere more with people’s lives. On the other hand I also think that the Republicans are using the “Obama Wants Socialism” campaign in the wrong way, because many aspects of socialism aren’t terrible.
1. The classroom example discussed above is a valid analogy to why economists say that a capitalistic society will increase standards of living over a socialistic system. Competition helps capitalism thrive and that is what motivates people to do the best job and keep improving. If you work hard and get the same amount of money as someone who is lazy then that makes you mad and want to stop trying as hard.
ReplyDelete2. An advantage with a socialistic economy is the benefit of not having the chance of monopolies growing in firms that causes other smaller businesses to disappear and no social division with everyone having the same amount of income but Socialism does tend to have a negative effect in an economy because some products aren't bought which can cause negative effects on peoples lives.
3. Yes, I do think that that statement may be a bias view coming from Republicans who lost to Obama's reelection, but at the same time I do think that Obama is starting to lead us towards socialism. His health care programs, such as Obamacare, have been a step towards socialism and I think that he would want to see more of these types of programs passed. The statement is not purely biased and there is factual evidence of how health care programs being passed under the Obama administration have affected the society in a good and bad way. Although,I do not think that he wants to lead us to become total socialism.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete1.The classroom analogy is a valid analogy. We could say for example the occupy wall street, we could say that was the bickering between the students after no one was getting the grade. A capitalist society would be better because the achievements that the government will put out would make the people work harder to get there. The socialist party isn't helping the situations because the poor is angry that they aren't getting enough money and the rich is mad that they are sharing wealth with the poor.
ReplyDelete2. Although i don't agree with it, a socialist economy helps distribute all the wealth throughout the country. A socialist society also prevents the social classes to grow larger. I don't agree with this system because it limits people's ability to do better things. Without a bigger objective or free market we are kind of stuck right in the middle.
3. I believe that the republicans are just saying that because they want control of the white house. But i see why they would say that. Obama has passed many new things during his presidency, let's say for example Obamacare. One of the biggest things Obama has done to say that he might be socialist is that he put up a tax policy on the rich because Obama thinks they need to pay their fair share.
1. I think the classroom grading experiment discussed is a valid analogy. If we get the same reward disregarding the amount of work we did, there is no reason for us to work hard because we are not going to get full credit of amount of work we did. For those who does not do work will be more lazy and inefficient because they get certain amount of reward even though they did not do anything. Therefore, the standard of living will decrease exponentially. On the other hand, capitalistic society enhances standard of living because people are rewarded proportionally to their work. The more they work, the more they earn. This mindset leads them to work harder and therefore increase standard of living
ReplyDelete2. Socialistic system reduces the gap between the rich and poor because there is lee inequality of income compared to capitalist economy. Whereas capitalist system leads to rich-get-richer and poor-get-poorer cycle, socialist system leads to equal economic status among people through equal distribution of incomes. I strongly support the military and defense aspect of socialism in U.S. because it guarantees safety of every citizen regardless of their economic status. Military and defense has to be enforced because everyone living in this country has right to be protected.
3. I do not know much about American politics so it is hard to answer this question. But one thing I know is that Obamacare is forces equality of consumption, which follows the principle value of egalitarian distribution of income. Regarding this, I would have to guess that President Obama is leading the nation towards socialism at least a little bit. But I also think unsupported bias by Republicans coexist because it is how politics work almost every time.
Blog 2
ReplyDelete1. I do not think classroom grading experiment is an accurate representation of socialism. Some are right in saying humans always want to win the easiest way possible but those who work hard might have to sacrifice for a lower grade in the attempted to get the slackers to step it up. In addition, Those at the bottom might be inspired to work harder to help grow the class average. Finally, once the average grade is a F, then even the slackers will start to pick up their weight because to a certain extent, they also care about the grade. I believe everyone wants the best for them and if that is doing more for others, than they will. Although, competition is good as long as everyone starts the race at the same point.
2. One advantage to socialism is the possible end to poverty and income inequality by making everyone equal. While I do support free market economics, I believe that welfare programs such as Medicare are very important. Health care needs to be available to all people which would raise the standard of living for most low income people. A socialist base for the lower income groups, I think, would be beneficial to the economy and nation because it can elevate them to a point where they have the opportunity of being able to compete.
3. Republicans will complain that the mighty beast known as Obama, is throwing our nation into the depths of socialism but this is not true. While programs like the Affordable Care Act and the GM bailout are going against capitalism, the fears of the Republicans are coming from their political beliefs. Coming from a Liberal, I can honestly say that Obama has done conservative moves such as supporting the Trans-Pacific-Trade-Agreement. I believe the Republicans will complain for that sake of complaining as well, at the very sound of "tax increase of the rich" they start yelling and screaming and calling Obama a socialist. Obama is simply trying to level the playing field so more opportunity can be reach by more people.
1. Yes, I feel that the classroom grading experiment is a valid analogy as to why most economists say that capitalism increases standards of living much faster than socialism. When everyone gets the same grade or income, their incentive to do better in order to increase their standard of living decreases. Why would they want to work hard if their hard work wouldn’t pay off?
ReplyDelete2. The idea of socialism seems to be fair and secure because of the fair distribution of income. However, it’s actually the opposite. The harder one works, the more he or she will succeed. In a socialistic system, one person might work harder than another, and still receive the same income. If humans were robots, then we might all work with the same amount of effort to receive the same amount of money. But this is simply unrealistic. No, I do not support the aspects of socialism that I understand in the US. I think America is all about creating one’s own success; self-made men. It’s the American Dream!
3. I don’t think that President Obama is trying to actually change our economy from capitalism to socialism. However, I do believe he has certain socialistic views that he tries to pursue, such as wealthier people paying higher taxes than poorer people. I think Republicans fear that he is leading us away from true capitalism, which is frustrating because our capitalist economy is characteristic of America.
1. In my opinion, the classroom grading analogy is perfect because before reading the blog I was a bit cloudy on the meaning of socialism. But after reading it I believe that it is something that does not belong in any economy especially the United Sates’ economy. Those who study very little and get the same grades as those who study their butts off are compared to the people who take advantage of the communist economy and decide not to work hard because they are guaranteed a grade, wage or payment of some sort.
ReplyDelete2. The positive in a socialistic system is that everyone will be equal and there will be no group of people that are below the poverty line (unless all of the citizens are living in poverty because of socialism.) The distinction between class lines would shrink and eventually there would be very little class distinctions. With this being said I personally believe that everyone should work for what they get and that there should not be free handouts
3. I think in some aspects he is leading us towards socialism but not entirely. I think that it is good that he is trying to have free college for everyone and that he is increasing the number of things that are intended to help the lower class like Obamacare. But I don’t really think he understands that all of these things cost a lot of money and use a lot of the economy’s precious resources. I think that the resources being used to fund and maintain these laws and plans could be used in a better way that could benefit our country a lot more.
1) The classroom analogy given in this article is a completely logical and valid example of what socialism can be like. If everyone gets the same income no matter how hard or little they work, it would not promote people to do better and strive for greatness. Instead, everyone would slack off because they do not need to work as hard to get paid. Capitalistic economies fare much better in that it pushes the population of people to do the absolute best that they can so that they can make money and be successful. Standards of living would greatly be increased with a capitalistic society when compared to a socialist society. If everyone is equal and gets the same amount, then the economy will slowly deteriorate and never grow, leading to a bad standard of living. If competition is in play and people strive for greatness, the standard of living will rise and be better for most people and continue to grow.
ReplyDelete2) There are a few positives that are able to be achieved through a socialist economy. First off, people who have low end jobs such as a janitor can make the same amount of money as a world class surgeon. Because of this, it levels the playing field for all people regardless of their jobs. In America, health care is of great importance, and it is one of the benefits that all people get for being an American Citizen. This falls under one of the benefits of having a socialist idea in our economy. Although health care is a wonderful thing, I disagree with many socialist ideas and aspects, and am lead to believe that it is an absolutely horrible economic system.
3) I think that President Obama is not leading our country towards socialism. I do not follow politics a whole lot, but socialism is not a very good economic system and way of life to enact, and our country would not let something like that happen. Obama can only do so much to push our country one way, but at the end of the day it is up to the American people and our government to decide what our economy is and should be. Republicans may say that Obama is pushing us towards socialism because Obama happens to be a democrat, which causes tension. Everyone is titled to their own opinion, and my opinion is that Obama is not the best president, but he is not pushing us towards a socialist economy. Obama has done a fairly good job of balancing a mixed economic system and not shifting it towards straight socialism or straight capitalism.
1. Yes, I believe that the analogy is definitely valid. A capitalistic society is much more efficient than a socialistic system on many fronts. Those that work hard are rewarded and those that do not work hard fail, it is that simple. In a socialistic society, less people are motivated to work, and less is accomplished.
ReplyDelete2. One large positive that can be achieved through a socialistic system is the fact that the amount of extremely poor people will be lower, but there is a negative to this as well. With less extremely poor people, there become a lot less middle/ upper class citizens to drive the economy.
3. Honestly, I do not know enough about Obama and his administration to answer this validly. But, I will say it does seem that Obama has too much control over the nation and many of his methods do seem borderline socialistic. There may definitely be bias from the Republicans as well, as their usually is by both parties.
1. I think the classroom analogy really aids in explaining a socialistic system compared to a free market system. In the socialistic system, everyone is rewarded equally regardless of what they contribute to society. People living in a country with a socialistic system have no incentive to work harder or produce better things because it will not change what they receive in return which will keep the standards of living constant and the quality and design of products constant. Free market systems let you determine your own success and the rewards you will receive which pushes businesses to create better quality and better designed products thus increasing standards of living. It is natural for Americans to want to follow in the footsteps of successful people and those successful people got the title of "successful" through their own hard work and incentive to create their own desired quality, their own desired design, and their own desire to expand their company. A free market economy allows for the path to be successful as in a socialist economy does not and diminishes the work ethic as everyone receives equal rewards.
ReplyDelete2. One of the positives to socialism is the equality of all people. This allows for everyone to be in the same social class as everyone is in the same ballpark for income. In America, the free market system has created multiple social classes based on income which can create tense relations between peoples because of the different benefits and consequences between the classes. Equality ensures that everyone is stable financially and the same rates apply to everyone like the welfare system that offers unemployed citizens financial aid for healthy survival. A downside to the welfare system is that because unemployed citizens are receiving free money for doing nothing and thus lose their interest in finding a real job.
3. I strongly believe Obama is trying to push towards socialism. This information is factual and some evidence is Obama's push towards more jobs for the American people. Another example is that Obama wanted to reduce lower class taxes and increase upper class taxes. Obama wants Obama Care for everyone which is definitely a socialistic view due to everyone having the same coverage and paying the same premiums. These policies were meant for the help for the people through the government but this just adds to the intervention by the government in the US economy which is another socialist characteristic. Obama does not want an out right socialistic economy because if he did then he would have already made it clear to the public. The exaggerations made by the Republicans may not be true about "total socialism by Obama" but there are still some pros for socialism and heart in our president.
1. The classroom grading experiment is a perfect example of how a socialistic system would operate. The whole example makes sense because the actions taken by the students would be exactly how I would act in that situation. But this example is also a good way to look at a socialistic system in very basic terms. When applied to a country’s economy, you can begin to see how problem can start to form.
ReplyDelete2. In theory, a socialistic system would benefit a person who is in the upper class because they would have to pay the same amount as somebody in a lower class. However this system would be very hurtful to somebody in the lower class because they would have to pay the same amount as a person in the upper class. In the United States, I strongly support institutions that help unemployed people find jobs.
3. I think that this statement is both fueled by bias and truth. When I think of Obama’s actions leading the country towards socialism, I mainly think of ObamaCare and the universality of the program. Republicans may still hold a grudge against Obama based on the fact that he does not support some things that republicans do. However, biases aside, actions that Obama has taken do point the U.S. into becoming more socialistic.
1. The classroom grading experiment discussed in the blogpost is a great analogy for how a communist system would play out. Since the hardworking students don’t get the rewards for the work they put in, there is no incentive to try their best. In a capitalistic economy where skilled workers are paid more for better work, there is actual incentive to work hard so that their standard of living rises.
ReplyDelete2. With a socialistic system, the rich people are taxed more and the money benefits the community as a whole. The money goes toward national defense and public utilities that would potentially help everyone in the community. I would support a slight increase in taxes for the wealthy. A huge gap between the rich and poor would hurt the cohesiveness of society and could potentially harm economic relationships.
3. I wouldn’t say President Obama is leading the nation to socialism, but some of his policies seem to reflect some concepts of socialism. I definitely understand how Republicans would want to see Obama in this light. They, just like any group not in control, wants to portray the leader in a bad way, so that they might look better, or even just the lesser of two evils.
1. The analogy used here is spot on in my eyes. In the free market system or in economic systems leaning more toward the free-market system, people are rewarded differently based upon the amount of effort that they have shown in their job. However, within a communistic system or socialist system, all people are awarded the same for varying degrees of work. That being said, governments in historically socialist countries tend to not favor those who do not produce, and like to have them thrown in jail. Just saying.
ReplyDelete2. The advantages of the socialistic system are simple: everyone is the same. nobody is paid more than their neighbor, and everyone is given equal reciprocation for their work. This benefits those who would be not trying as hard as the rest of society. If I were to apply anything from the communistic system to the U.S., it would be the more even distribution of wealth. I'm not saying to get rid of the wage gap entirely, but a reduction would certainly help the populous.
3. I believe that the following statement can be made: Obama is moving us towards a society that is attempting to pay for and support those who cannot support themselves, like in socialism. However, Obama is certainly not moving us toward a socialist system, as that would be lunacy.
1. The classroom grading experiment was, in my opinion, a valid analogy. The analogy really shows that according to socialism, no matter how hard you work, it wouldn`t really make a difference because in the end the output is the same for everyone. The analogy also presented that through capitalism, there is more of an incentive to strive and do well and earn things rather than being treated the same as someone who did not work as hard as you did.
ReplyDelete2. A positive that can be achieved through a socialistic system is that the lower class can in a way, rise in society. This can happen because socialism makes everyone equal, even the poor. Overall I would have to say that this would be the only good thing about socialism, because other than that you need to work and earn your wealth and respect. Socialism takes away the reward of the hard work you put into everything you do and shares the outcome with everyone and this is not how the U.S. should operate.
3. This is a significantly harsh accusation toward Obama, because I do not believe he is leading our nation into socialism. I don`t believe he is leading us to socialism because I think he is just simply looking out for those lower income families and appealing to the lower class because those are the people that make up the majority of this nation. The view that Obama is a socialist is just an exaggeration of the Republicans who want control of the White House.
1. The classroom grading experiment described in the blog is a valid analogy for the system of socialism. In that structure of society, those who do not work hard become dependent on those who are putting in the effort, removing the hard workers' motivation.
ReplyDelete2. The concept of economic equality is given an interesting perspective by socialism. In theory, having a socialist system would technically give a level of stability to the people. However, people contribute various goods and services to the economy and perform at different levels of skill. Because of the large spectrum of economic diversity, it would not make any sense to adapt a socialistic system. Although this may equalize the distribution of wealth among the people, the well being and spirit of the American people would be at risk. Most people would be extremely upset over the idea of a fixed amount of reward, no matter the amount of hard work or sloth. In addition to the diminishing of integrity, America would slowly begin to lose economic advancement.
3. I do not think that Obama is leading the nation towards socialism. Many people do feel as if Obamacare is a socialistic structure, which may seem to adheres to the beliefs of socialism. To answer the question, I do not think that Obamacare means that Obama is leading the nation towards socialism. Obama has tried to find an equilibrium for healthcare- many may say that he has succeeded at this but many say he has failed. It is truly a matter of opinion and political affiliation.
1. I think the grading experiment in the classroom and the socialist society is a valid analogy because people have no incentive to work more because everyone supposedly gets the same. I agree with economists that say capitalistic society will increase the standard of living faster. There is incentive to work harder and succeed despite the increased taxes on the very wealthy.
ReplyDelete2. The positives of a socialistic society would be in providing health care to everyone and controlling the extremely small percentage of wealthy so that they contribute more to society.
3. I disagree that President Obama is leading this country into socialism. I believe this another political tactic for the Republicans that do not seem to agree on anything except putting down our president.
1. The classroom grading experiment is a valid analogy about why capitalistic society increases the standards of living faster than a socialistic system. In a capitalistic system people can receive bigger rewards for working hard (like getting good grades after studying hard) while in a socialist system, people are not as motivated to work hard because their reward won't be as big (like students no longer studying hard because they believe other students will just bring down their own grade. Having more people working hard and reaping the benefits of it allows standards of living to increase very quickly.
ReplyDelete2. A socialistic system can reduce poverty by keeping everybody at the same wealth level. Aspects of socialism in the US that I support (though I believe need tweaking) are food stamps and Universal Healthcare, because food and medicine are basic human rights that nobody should be without.
3. I believe that the only real argument that Republicans can make about President Obama leading the nation to socialism is his Obamacare act, the rest of their accusations are just to pander to conservatives and try to stop Obama from increasing liberal changes made.
1. The classroom grading experiment is a valid analogy in my opinion. In a capitalistic society, citizens will be much more motivated to put in harder work as compared to a socialistic system. In a socialistic system, the quality of work will drop significantly due to a lack of motivation among citizens. With no incentive, citizens will do the very least possible.
ReplyDelete2. A positive that can be achieved through a socialistic society is equality for all and the quality of life for all citizens will be maintained at a stable level. In a capitalistic society, there are the extremes such as severe poverty. Although this may occur in a socialistic system, it is much more unlikely. I do not support socialism as I believe that if you put the hard work in, you should receive the reward in the end. Your hard work should not be distributed among those who did not put as much effort in.
3. I do not believe President Obama is leading the nation towards socialism. Although, he does support some aspects of socialism at times. The tax issue is definitely one that can be argued to be socialistic, as the more wealthy will have their taxes increased and be required to pay for more than those who do not have as much income for things such as national security. Saying that he is leading our nation to be completely socialistic may be a little extreme as he is slowly implementing a few tactics that may be socialistic, but not enough to make the U.S. a socialistic society.
1. Yes, in my opinion the classroom analogy is accurate because it exemplifies the lack of motive that workers would have if the money earned by the wealthy ended up in the poors' pocket for less work.
ReplyDelete2. Potential positives to socialism are a lack of unemployment, less poverty, and equality among the workforce. A positive aspect of socialism in the U.S. is equal treatment and equal human rights.
3. I'm not sure Obama is leading the U.S. towards socialism per say, but he has incorporated socialistic ideas which can also be viewed as him wanting to promote equality and end racism and sexism. All in all, I think it is mostly bias, and Obama is not moving towards socialism.
1. I think it is a fair analogy, because it made me understand how if the benefits are high, the efforts are great. In the analogy, we see how no one ended up trying, because they weren't getting any benefit out of it.
ReplyDelete2. I believe some aspects of a socialistic economy can benefit us, but not all.. Minimum wage is a good example, that everyone in a state has to make at least a certain amount of money, but if everyone made that same amount, regardless of the job, it would be unfair. I don't 100% agree with the healthcare system today, but it is an example of a more suitable socialistic economy.
3. I think the republicans may be saying this because they are bias. Obama is making some changes like healthcare that lean towards socialism, but he is trying to do them out of good, since he wants everyone to be covered. He is trying to help out the lower class and that is why a lot of wealthy republicans do not like him.
1. Yes, I do believe the classroom grading experiment is a valid analogy. People run on motivation and having the proper incentives. There would be no reason or motivation to work hard if you were rewarded exactly the same as someone who did half the work that you did. The standard of living would decrease because people wouldn't do their best in things, they'd all do the bare minimum and nothing great could be achieved.
ReplyDelete2. I don't really think there are many positives that can be achieved through socialism. However, the poor would greatly benefit and it could thereotically end poverty. However, I don't agree with these claims because I think they would all inevitably fail and ruin our economy. There are no aspects of socialism that I strongly support.
3. I do believe that President Obama is leading us toward socialism. Obama has brought forth many socialist ideas and policies like Obamacare. Republicans may have a bias but, I do believe that it seems like the president is slowly integrating socialism into our economy
1. Yes classroom analogy demonstrates the socialism. Socialism is a system where everyone benefits. However capitalism is a system where one or some people lead everyone. Classroom analogy does show both sides of capitalism and socialism.
ReplyDelete2. Positives that can be achieved through socialistic system are everyone is equal. There is no one is greater than the other. Most benefited one in this system will be the poor ones. I do not think that socialism idea is strongly in US but it kind of does exists.
3. I do believe there are some points that President Obama is leading to the socialism but I don’t think that is that problematic. Rather I believe that Republicans are exaggerating about it. Presidents Obama has made some policy that was socialism related.
1) I think that the analogy is a valid one as to why most economists say that a capitalistic society will increase standards of living much faster than a more socialistic system. In the classroom, the motivated students who did well stopped putting forth their best effort because they knew the kids who do not study or care will drag there scores down anyways. Just as in a socialist society, the poor people who do little or no work to help themselves and make a difference get money from those who work hard and are motivated to make a difference. In a capitalist classroom and society, the kids who tried the hardest would get what they deserve and the kids who do not put forth a substantial effort would get what they deserve.
ReplyDelete2) Depending on how you look at it, one positive to socialism is that those who really are trying but still need help paying for things such as health care will hopefully get what they need. One aspect of socialism that I agree with is that everyone has to pay some amount of taxes, which in return help the nations pay for roads, schools, healthcare, and things that have a positive effect on society. Although the wealthier people have to give up a much larger sum of their money than the poor do, I agree with the idea of everyone chipping in to help out the greater good.
3) I think that people have to be careful when they say things like, "Obama is a socialist." That is a very extreme statement. I believe that some of the things he has done, such as Obamacare, have socialistic qualities, but I do not think he is trying to complete the nation completely to socialism. I think he is trying to find a balance.
1. Yes, I do believe the classroom grading experiment is a valid analogy. People run on motivation and having the proper incentives. There would be no reason or motivation to work hard if you were rewarded exactly the same as someone who did half the work that you did. The standard of living would decrease because people wouldn't do their best in things, they'd all do the bare minimum and nothing great could be achieved.
ReplyDelete2. An advantage with a socialistic economy is the benefit of not having the chance of monopolies growing in firms that causes other smaller businesses to disappear and no social division with everyone having the same amount of income but Socialism does tend to have a negative effect in an economy because some products aren't bought which can cause negative effects on peoples lives.
3. I think that although some Republicans might be true, the allegations might be hyped up or intensified. The views are biased because they may dislike him because he is a Democrat, but it is true that his views might be socialistic. One example of this is ObamaCare. This is a way of making sure everyone receives medical care and is equal.
1. I believe the classroom grading experiment is an effective analogy describing the effects of a socialist economy, as it accurately portrays that a lack of competition in industry would subsequently inhibit economic growth and the standard of living as a whole. If a doctor and a retail worker hypothetically made similar salaries in the United States, no one would want to be a doctor because of the extensive education and training required; it would be much simpler to go into retail with little training and make the same amount of money.
ReplyDelete2. Although many believe that Universal Healthcare is one of the positives of a socialistic economy, I believe this to be untrue. Universal healthcare does not mean everyone has access to healthcare, and it includes problems such as extremely long wait lists and restrictions on physician choices. The best economies in the world always incorporate capitalistic ideals into thier system; even if it is a socialistic idea such as universal health care.
3. On this issue; I cannot say for certain. Although bias can turn to hearsay in politics, I feel as though Obama is incorporating some basic socialist ideals into the US Economy, but more to model those nations such as Switzerland and Germany than to push a socialist agenda. National Health care just happens to be on the forefront of the debate, as it affects every American pretty directly, and is used constantly as either slander or praise for the US economy. Redistribution of wealth is another socialist principle that the United States has incorporated since the presidency of FDR, but it does help the lives of many Americans. Although It is true that in Obama’s first term welfare spending jumped almost 32%, Republicans like to pin the idea itself on president Obama, and many use this argument to call Obama a “communist”. It is my opinion that He and his staff have simply not found the correct way to give money to people who are actually in need of it. In a strictly economic sense, It is my belief that Obama has just been incompetent,but I do not see him pushing a socialist agenda.
1.) Yes I do believe that the classroom analogy is an excellent way to portray socialism. Is demonstrates how the poor drag down the wealthy and how the wealthy have to sacrifice to increase the standard of living of the poor. If everyone got payed the same regardless of profession, there would be no incentive to have a challenging occupation and people would all begin to pursue easier careers.
ReplyDelete2.) The only positive that comes right off the head is healthcare. It helps those you cannot afford healthcare and allows them to get treatment for disease and injury. It also does not interfere with the demand of high paying jobs and still allows balance in society.
3. I am aware of the accusations by the Republicans that Obama is pushing to make America a socialist nation intentionally. I do not believe with these accusations, however. I feel like Obama has been trying to do his best for the economy. Healthcare is something which is very useful for all Americans, especially those who would not be able to afford it otherwise. I believe that Obama has the right intentions for the country, but they are just misunderstood.
1. I believe that the analogy is effective, because it shows how the amount of work you put into what you're doing affects the quality of response you receive.
ReplyDelete2. the advantages of socialism are that, in theory, it should increase the wealth of everybody as to make all people equal. This would eliminate class warfare, and everyone should receive the same advantages. However, even Marx himself said in his communist manifesto that a communist system would require a world-wide centralized government, but Marx failed to account for the complexities of regulating a single world government under the socialistic system. The theoretical government would need to regulate every aspect of society, which, as we know, is nearly impossible.
3. I am aware of these such accusations, but I believe that Obama is not trying to move us toward total socialism, but rather more toward a more balanced system. I believe that what he is specifically referring to is the reallocation of wealth, or the better reallocation of wealth to balance out the difference in pay, or the perceived difference of pay. I find it hard to believe that any free-market, republican system would willingly elect and keep an executor that would move the economy to socialism.
Don't get yourself stocked down and feel irritated because you are broke and bankruptcy,here is Mr Lorenzo, who lend me the sum of $200,000.00 when I was broke and can't fix up myself. Mr Lorenzo helped me with an easy loan no stress on much of my financial documents,my loan was guaranteed and sent to me within a couple of working days. I was so overwhelmed when I saw my cell phone pop up with bank alert, I smiled because I knew my brokenness and problems are over..Stand up on your feet and be strong, just contact Mr Lorenzo Diego >mrlorenzodiegoloanfirm@outlook.com. You may be lucky like me and get an end to your bankruptcy and problems.
ReplyDeleteHELLO EVERYONE,
ReplyDeleteLOANS OFFERING 2%, We Are Certified to Offer the Following Types of Loans * Personal Loans (Unsecured) * Business Loans (Unsecured) * Debt Consolidation Loans * Improve Your Home * Investment Loans.We are honored to meet your financial needs. Credit problems should not stop you from getting the loan you need. we can finance up to $ 10,000 to $ 100,000,000 anywhere in the world as long as our 2% ROI can be guaranteed on these projects.If you are interested, please contact us today mrlorenzodiegoloanfirm@outlook.com with the following information below:
Full name:
Job status:
Amount of loan requested:
Country:
Greetings, Mr Lorenzo Diego