Response to Socialism
Day 741, 18:30
•
Published in Ireland 
•
by
•
by Mystery Johnson
Response too:
I honestly don't see how socialism could be good for anyone. Personally, I would like to be able to do what I wish and when. Those who honestly believe in socialism, put your money where you mouth is and go live in china. That being said, here are the arguments presented by the other side:
Despite the opinion of Dan, state intervention has saved our country where the free market would have failed completely.
Due to the unusual nature of erepublik where a nation is started from simply nothing which can't possibly happen in the real world, socialized companies may do some good for awhile, but not indefinitely.
The idea that companies are going to employ brand new players successfully is ridiculous in the face of established facts. New players are simply not productive enough to be profitable.
You do realize that skill level 0's are only that way for 2 days right? For a start up company, employing level 0's for two days, and it's likely they'll stick around for a good while, at least until they're about level 3. Especially if you given them food and advice along the way. A lot of times, skill level 1 and 2 jobs are way too overpriced for companies to make a profit, therefore they hire a skill 0, and lost a few cents a day till he levels up. It's not bad business, it's strategy.
The jobs would simply not be there for new players if we left it to the market.
It is the duty of the state to train these players up, or else risk losing them immediately.
The duty of the state? That's a matter of opinion. When economics is used for political maneuvering it's often a bad thing, especially when others are depending on it.
This is pure speculation.
It's not speculation if you have witnessed it within your own company
Secondly, worker loyalty is established by a fair wage proportional to product prices, not when you started working.
Wrong, I always pay my workers well, it doesn't mean they always stick around. However, I had an employer that I talked with regularly and helped out with planning his business and I stuck with him even after finding better job opportunities, loyalty is an important part of business.
Lastly, there is no evidence that links low-skill state jobs to emigration.
Right, but what about the rates of only a handful of low skill players staying for long periods of time to play the game? They don't emigrate, because they can't, they don't have the knowledge base nor the funds, so they simply quit.
I'm sure there are a few cases, but I link most emigration to a lack of real political and military contest in this country.
This point I actually very much agree on with you.
It sounds even worse for the new players.
An aversion to socialism being an excuse to screw over new players is frankly irresponsible.
Who is screwing over new players? Socialism doesn't help, business owners can help things on their own.
Mystery Johnson,
Capitalist
I honestly don't see how socialism could be good for anyone. Personally, I would like to be able to do what I wish and when. Those who honestly believe in socialism, put your money where you mouth is and go live in china. That being said, here are the arguments presented by the other side:
Despite the opinion of Dan, state intervention has saved our country where the free market would have failed completely.
Due to the unusual nature of erepublik where a nation is started from simply nothing which can't possibly happen in the real world, socialized companies may do some good for awhile, but not indefinitely.
The idea that companies are going to employ brand new players successfully is ridiculous in the face of established facts. New players are simply not productive enough to be profitable.
You do realize that skill level 0's are only that way for 2 days right? For a start up company, employing level 0's for two days, and it's likely they'll stick around for a good while, at least until they're about level 3. Especially if you given them food and advice along the way. A lot of times, skill level 1 and 2 jobs are way too overpriced for companies to make a profit, therefore they hire a skill 0, and lost a few cents a day till he levels up. It's not bad business, it's strategy.
The jobs would simply not be there for new players if we left it to the market.
It is the duty of the state to train these players up, or else risk losing them immediately.
The duty of the state? That's a matter of opinion. When economics is used for political maneuvering it's often a bad thing, especially when others are depending on it.
This is pure speculation.
It's not speculation if you have witnessed it within your own company
Secondly, worker loyalty is established by a fair wage proportional to product prices, not when you started working.
Wrong, I always pay my workers well, it doesn't mean they always stick around. However, I had an employer that I talked with regularly and helped out with planning his business and I stuck with him even after finding better job opportunities, loyalty is an important part of business.
Lastly, there is no evidence that links low-skill state jobs to emigration.
Right, but what about the rates of only a handful of low skill players staying for long periods of time to play the game? They don't emigrate, because they can't, they don't have the knowledge base nor the funds, so they simply quit.
I'm sure there are a few cases, but I link most emigration to a lack of real political and military contest in this country.
This point I actually very much agree on with you.
It sounds even worse for the new players.
An aversion to socialism being an excuse to screw over new players is frankly irresponsible.
Who is screwing over new players? Socialism doesn't help, business owners can help things on their own.
Mystery Johnson,
Capitalist
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
Read-Voted-Subscribed
I myself don't prefer making Editorials via dissection, as Brian Boru has a history of doing. But yeah, I liked the common sense of the editors responses.
When I stated "emigration" that was not a mistake. Viability of our Market is in our hands. State Companies are not allowing independents to mediate at the Zero Skill Jobs. Most youngsters that get savvy go chasing foreign markets that have $1 Minimum wages.
It's really about having a "Social" Strategy Game. Correspondence and Helpful words from Private Companies signifies a good country.
http://www.erepublik.com/en/article/response-to-the-rebuttal-of-my-previous-article-socialism-vs-capitalism-1062168/1/20" target="_blank">http://www.erepublik.com/en/article/resp[..]/1/20
guys, at least link your articles
Post jobs at 2.01, no worries, no fuss.
Since when was china socialist? hehe
There is but a slight difference:
Both socialism and communism are based on the principle that the goods and services produced in an economy should be owned publicly, and controlled and planned by a centralized organization. Socialism asserts that the distribution should take place according to the amount of individuals' production efforts, however, while communism asserts that that goods and services should be distributed among the populace according to individuals' needs.