Alright so the term programs is the word you prefer to injections. I wasn’t saying such programs make the country not capitalistic, I was just saying many people who vote democrat want capitalism with more social programs.
You may be right that if they read more theory they would be more apt to ditch capitalism, but many of them are programmed to reject any talk of other systems.
Kay this is just semantics at this point, so ultimately it’s unimportant because delving this deep into it distracts from the overall conversation.
With that said, wouldn’t the existence of a post office and other socialized services make the US (and basically every nation state in existence) by strict definitions, a mixed economy? Like if we had to keep to first year undergrad levels.
To be clear for the back row, being this pedantic about semantics not only distracts from the overall conversation but when made as a serious point is at best a sign of ignorance, and at worst it’s an argument made in bad faith in order to move the goal post. This comment is meant as an aside. Ultimately like everything else an economy is a spectrum, and strict categories are more often than not caused by our desire to make things simple.
No economy is “pure,” what determines if an economy is Capitalist or Socialist is what is primary. Trying to say that Capitalism or Socialism describes a specific section of an economy results in issues like drawing hard lines where they shouldn’t and can’t be drawn.
Those are social programs. Socialism and Capitalism are systems overall, the presence of the post office in the US does not alter that character.
Alright so the term programs is the word you prefer to injections. I wasn’t saying such programs make the country not capitalistic, I was just saying many people who vote democrat want capitalism with more social programs.
You may be right that if they read more theory they would be more apt to ditch capitalism, but many of them are programmed to reject any talk of other systems.
Kay this is just semantics at this point, so ultimately it’s unimportant because delving this deep into it distracts from the overall conversation.
With that said, wouldn’t the existence of a post office and other socialized services make the US (and basically every nation state in existence) by strict definitions, a mixed economy? Like if we had to keep to first year undergrad levels.
To be clear for the back row, being this pedantic about semantics not only distracts from the overall conversation but when made as a serious point is at best a sign of ignorance, and at worst it’s an argument made in bad faith in order to move the goal post. This comment is meant as an aside. Ultimately like everything else an economy is a spectrum, and strict categories are more often than not caused by our desire to make things simple.
No economy is “pure,” what determines if an economy is Capitalist or Socialist is what is primary. Trying to say that Capitalism or Socialism describes a specific section of an economy results in issues like drawing hard lines where they shouldn’t and can’t be drawn.