|
but instead of an authoritarian regime, It could be a social-democracy Seems pretty clear to me. In a social democracy according to the contribution, the workers vote and agree to everyone's share of profit, instead of your boss exploiting your labor and pocketing it for himself. This is the difference between exploitation and fair compensation for one's contribution. This is not "social democracy". This is where you are wrong. Communism is where the state owns the means of production and any profits are absorbed into the governmental coffers. What I described here is where a collective of workers own the company and THEY as owners decide how PROFIT is shared. Under a Social Democracy, the government charges this corporation and its employees taxes and in return provides social benefits which are necessary for quality of life. This government also has an interest in providing for the welfare of it's citizens and prevent them from being exploited by greedy individuals. Capitalism is where one or a few (Private), or shareholders (public), who have zero contribution to labor make all of the rules and keep all of the profits and can decide on a whim if they don't like someone, they can dismiss them. Unregulated capitalism is where the government DOES NOT provide worker protections and workers are at the mercy of their greedy employer. This is the worst case as it is like an old style monarchy. Whatever pleases the king is law. OK Monkey, class dismissed. Thank you for attending Civics by Shotacon. Please be sure to leave a 5-star review on our website. ![]() |