Hacker News Reader

Comment by brazukadev | Hacker News Reader

> This sentence does not apply because a "social market economy" does not forbid the generation of profits. Profits are to be shared with the populace to pay for social policies, which is happening.

Sure. But that is as socialist as it was the National Socialist German Workers Party.

View on HN

The continued reference to "socialism" here is a strawman. The discussion started with pembrook's complaint https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45512714 and then had selfmodruntime explaining how the system works starting with https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45513552 . At no point did either person describe the system as "socialism". selfmodruntime was even explicit in referring to "'Social market economy'... a regulated market economic model [,] designed to sit exactly in the middle between laissez faire capitalism and socialism". But interlocutors continually insisted on dragging it back to "socialism" simply because selfmodruntime denied that it was "capitalism", applying a false dichotomy.

What you, mfru and dns_snek did here is not respectful, open-minded discourse and I'm amazed that selfmodruntime put up with it that long.

> At no point did either person describe the system as "socialism"

> What you, mfru and dns_snek did here is not respectful, open-minded discourse

Give me a break, the original complaint, the one you linked but apparently didn't read, went even further, likening the European economy to communism:

> The USSR was supposed to be a cautionary tale. Not a guidebook!

I met selfmodruntime at their discussional level. The "USSR guidebook" quote was uncalled for and plain hyperbole. It also was factually incorrect.

I have re-visited and re-read all of my comments. Nowhere did I mention a USSR guidebook anywhere! This must have been from another commenter. Sorry!

Thanks! I am trying to educate only!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com