I am not suggesting an alternative. I am saying your dichotomy, socialism=forced to work, capitalism=/= is incorrect because other coeresion exists in capitalism.
Based on what I've read on the soviet union, I'd say you are incorrect.
How is the SU an example of capitalism not being forced labor?
Are companies necessary? We can provide goods and services without the need for the creation of a company.
What is your definition of a company?
I am going off of your premise of a company being a business institution that needs financial backing.
No. It's still labor and should be compensated.
So if nobody wants ditches being dug, should they still be compensated?
Did I need to establish the premise that it was labor that in demand? Hence why it was labor?
There are plenty of those who are competent and hard working who aren't reward in capitalism.
That's because they don't satisfy the demands of the market. What would happen if i'm only good at art, and I took a test in calculus? Should the teacher give me an A+ because I'm good at art, even though the test is all about calculus?
Out of context.
Yet there are those who aren't hard working, or are doing competent work. Yet are rewarded. The investors. They are simply being rewarded for having money.
Money will always remain an effect and refuse to replace the individual as the cause.
Ok. Doesn't that still demonstrate how capitalism rewards those who do actually provide labor. Money is not labor.
If a person inherits wealth but he does not have the intellect to keep it, then he will lose it. Money will not serve the mind that does not match it.
X