I've seen how many people in the United States and in Latin America are always talking about this. This discussion was almost dead after the cold war ended but it's starting to come up again. I'm interested to learn about this because it's a hot topic in my country and it's the cause of great debate and I wanted to know what the people around the world think about this.

United States, the world's wealthiest country works under one system (Capitalism) but some of its citizens complain about how their system leaves the poor people out of the screen.

China, the world's most populated country is ruled by the other system (Socialism) and it is actually lending money to the country above, but most of the people complain about the lack of personal freedom you face when you live in a country like this.

So the Questions are:
If you could rule your own country which system would you apply to your fellow citizens?
What would you change from the current systems that are being applied to the world right now?
Are you interested in any other system?

Limit yourself to intelligent answers.

EDIT: I'm worried this could start a flamewar. Please be nice!

I would impose on my people a benevolent left wing dictatorship, tempered by the occasional assassination. let's face it, everyone seduced by autocracy in the end. but on a more serious note i would prefer to have a much more inclusive democracy ie. rather than bipartisan politics i'd prefer more parts in partisan. No i wouldn't change the political system Australia has now because that always eventually is ruled by fascist right wing assholes. Finally am i interested in any other political system? anarchy; to me it doesn't make sense but i'd like people to explain it to me.

I may not agree with anarchists but to be fair with them i will quote one article to explain what does anarchism mean:



Source: http://www.infoshop.org/page/AnarchistFAQSectionA1

it seems illogical to promote anarchy as a good political system,<<so easy to take advantage of people's goodness

Economic and political make war.

Democracy, probably with PR. Left wing. With the right to assassinate any rubbish PMs/Presidents.

Laissez-faire capitalism.

Socialism.

Capitalism, let the people flourish!

I guess capitalism is as good as it's going to get.

The United States does not have a pure capitalist system. It has a mixed economy, incorporating socialist regulations and restrictions in a "free" capitalist market. China has a command economy, which has "free" sectors but is, for the most part, tightly regulated and controlled by the government.

Neither country - no country in the world - has a pure economic system of either capitalism or communism (the opposite of capitalism). "Socialism" is loosely defined as being in between capitalism and communism, and there's two subcategories: transitionary socialism, which Marx and Engels theorised would be the system set up to transition from capitalism to communism, and mixed socialism, which is the most prevalent today.

----------

I consider myself to be a socialist, and am in the process of formulating a new type of socialism which I believe is superior to all of the failed socialist and pseudosocialist economies we have today (welfare, corporate welfare, etcetera).

In my system, I envision that infrastructure is completely controlled by the public with equal access and benefit. This means, for example, that power plants and power lines are managed by either the government or a cooperative, not a private company, and everyone (who either pays taxes or becomes part of the cooperative) is allotted certain amount of electricity for essential purposes (such as heating and lighting) - people who use more will have to pay for the extra they use. In addition to the publicly-controlled infrastructure, other essential sectors (such as healthcare) will also be publicly-controlled with equal access and benefit for all.

Atop this public 'economy' will rest a free market of luxury goods and services. As another example, let's look at telecommunications: in my system the telecommunications infrastructure will be publicly-controlled - no cell phone companies charging exorbitant rates - but the products that make use of this infrastructure - cell phones, internet modems, etc. - will be made and sold within the free market.

Liberal socialism.

But then again, I've got a soul, and believe poor people are still humanbeings.

whats wrong with you all! i was expecting more left wing views from a bunch of commie faggots lol

Neither of these statements accurately depict the countries, their economic policies, nor the complaints lobbied against them.

Isn't it weird how no state is totally capitalist? Actually, I think Hong Kong has a a totally free economy, but I can't think of any others. If Hong Kong is any example, people should feel compelled to follow its lead... Isn't it one of the economically fastest-growing and most prosperous places on Earth?

Isn't it staggering that you will have succeeded where all of the great minds of the past have failed?

The essence of the free market, from a Hayekian perspective (which I advocate) is a kind of sober-minded humility: the contention that no one has the knowledge or ability to dictate an economy from on high. There are just too many factors, too many moving targets -- it's simply impossible to rationally plan an economy. It can't be done. No person or team possesses the knowledge needed to do so.



No, but it's pretty good.



"A liberal is a man who feels a great debt to his fellow man, which he proposes to pay off with your money."

Hong Kong isn't really analogous to a whole country because it's just a city with a highly-skilled workforce and almost no manufacturing sector. It's easy to apply capitalism to such a place and be successful.

My vision may not succeed, but I still feel it is better than the welfare socialism of today.

Social Capitalism, an improved version of the German system with a handful more liberal influences while still including a bit socialism(health care, a home, food, sanitary facilities and education for everybody, laws against discrimination) without turning it into a state in which people too lazy to work live just as good lives as people working their asses off.