Economies are like having cancer.
For this scenario, we'll pretend everyone has cancer. They have the basic handicaps of cancer patients, but not being arsed to look those up, I don't know what they are. Their lives would no doubt be improved if they didn't have cancer, but since everyone has it it's all right for now, and life can at least be lived, with all sorts of comforts.
We'll call everyone 'middle class' to begin with. So Middle Class is just having cancer.
Pure Capitalism is like chemotherapy--it might very well make you strong enough to beat the cancer (upper class), it might do nothing, and it may even weaken you enough to kill you (lower class/poverty).
Pure Communism is like not getting treatment--The playing field is leveled. No one draws the short straw, no one dies from treatment. But no one excells--no one is cued.
Anything in between (i.e. Socialism) is just a shade of gray of our black and white economics systems.
And I know, only a Sith deals in absolutes.
Certainly both of these sides have their pros and cons.
I am sorry for how politically incorrect this sounds--I am in no way of the belief that the Middle Class (of which I am most certainly a part) is inferior to the upper class, as I can certainly survive, but certainly things would be easier if I were rich.
So what do you guys think?
Which option would you go for?
EDIT: I added a sentence to the Communism line to blur my obvious (albeit unintentional) bias against it. I also changed the original sentence.
This post has been edited by TheOrator: 15 March 2007 - 07:27 PM