this post was submitted on 17 Mar 2025
728 points (98.9% liked)

Memes

48660 readers
1935 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Edie@lemmy.ml 7 points 19 hours ago (3 children)

That’s why most countries are what we call “mixed economies”, that mix elements of capitalism and socialism.

No. They are capitalist.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 6 hours ago
[–] yucandu@lemmy.world -2 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

By that logic, socialism cannot exist until the entire planet is socialist.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Close. Communism cannot exist until the entire planet is Socialist, but Socialism can be determined at a country level.

[–] yucandu@lemmy.world 0 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

This seems needlessly arbitrary and reductive. Socialism exists all around us, it isn't defined by a country's borders.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

I don't know what this means, Socialism is not a gas.

[–] yucandu@lemmy.world 1 points 35 minutes ago (1 children)

No, socialism is when the people own the means of production. That doesn't require national borders, nor do I take your trolling response to be a positive indicator of arguing in good faith.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 1 points 5 minutes ago

The post I wrote here goes over why that doesn't actually apply. The reason we consider countries to be relative barriers (until Communism is achieved and thus this becomes irrelevant) is because there is a degree of genuine sovereignty in countries regarding their economics. A publicly owned structure in Mexico is owned by Mexican citizens, not US citizens. Once the world is Socialist, this will begin to blur and break down towards Communism, but we aren't there yet.

[–] stickly@lemmy.world -1 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

I'm not sure how that link is supposed to refute anything? It says basically what the comment above says without using the phrase "mixed economies".

If you meant the power structure and public/private balance is heavily capitalist for Nordic countries then you'd probably want to post something else supporting that statement.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

Hey, I'm the author of that post! I don't see how my post says the same thing at all, it very much talks about which aspect, private or public, has power in society is what determines the nature of its economy.