Essay on Capitalism Vs. Socialism
1805 Words8 Pages
Comparisons between countries and regions before and after the advent of capitalism in Eastern Europe, Russia and Central Europe as well as a comparison of Cuba and the ex-communist countries provide us with an adequate basis to draw some definitive conclusions. Fifteen years of "transition to capitalism" is more than adequate time to judge the performance and impact of capitalist politicians, privatizations, free market policies and other restoration measures on the economy, society and general welfare of the population.
Economic Performance: Growth, Employment and Poverty
Under communism the economic decisions and property were national and publicly owned. Over the past 15 years of the transition to capitalism almost all basic…show more content…
Moreover economic inequalities have grown geometrically with 1% of the top income bracket controlling 80% of private assets and more than 50% of income while poverty levels exceed 50% or even higher. In the former USSR, especially south-central Asian republics like Armenia, Georgia, and Uzbekistan, living standards have fallen by 80%, almost one fourth of the population has out-migrated or become destitute and industries, public treasuries and energy sources have been pillaged. The scientific, health and educational systems have been all but destroyed. In Armenia, the number of scientific researchers declined from 20,000 in 1990 to 5,000 in 1995, and continues on a downward slide (National Geographic, March 2004). From being a center of Soviet high technology, Armenia today is a country run by criminal gangs in which most people live without central heat and electricity.
In Russia the pillage was even worse and the economic decline was if anything more severe. By the mid 1990's, over 50% of the population (and even more outside of Moscow and St. Peterburg - formerly Leningrad) lived in poverty, homelessness increased and universal comprehensive health and education services collapsed. Never in peace-time modern history has a country fallen so quickly and profoundly as is the case of capitalist Russia. The economy was "privatized" - that is, it was taken over by Russian gangsters led by the eight billionaire oligarchs who shipped over $200 billion dollars out of
Show MoreLeadership and Group Theory Midterm Essay
Capitalism vs. Socialism
September 21, 2013
Although Capitalism has a different meaning in various groups, the term is commonly acknowledged as “the private ownership of the means of production, and the coordination of the economy by the market” (Bresser-Pereira, 2012, p. 22). On the surface, the meaning of capitalism seems straightforward; referring to an economic system in which private individuals, rather than governments, own property and businesses. But beneath the surface, strong currents of opinion and theory swirl about the term. Yet in contrast, Socialism is more collective, it allows for everyone to benefit from the economy, instead of only…show more content…
In order for Socialism to be successful, leaders will need to employ influence that will reach groups who will exert a restraining influence. The group of Stakeholders or Wall Street want to keep Capitalism alive, because as it allows them to remain profitable. In a socialist economy they would not be able to use the decision method they are most noted for using, which is the “majority rules.”They would be required to be effective leaders. Make sound decisions and actually care about the benefit of everyone. Socialism allows for equal rights, and for any leader to be successful there has to be a group with his same vision. Member commitment is the key to positive behavior and attitude. When members of a group are included and treated equal, they are more apt to remain loyal to their leader and committed to the group’s goals. With Capitalism, there is always one goal and that is profits. Private businesses that continue to allow abuse of labor laws and wage contradiction will always favor Capitalism, because it will always generate profits and they do not care about what the “rest of the group thinks”. It is my strong belief that Socialism supports leadership and group dynamics, because of the nature of the term. Everyone is included as well as their input. When I vote for an elected official, I want them to have everyone’s best interest. Using a consensus system that allows anyone qualified to run for office regardless of their social status, and everyone