Sosialisme: Perbedaan antara revisi

Sistem sosialis dibagi menjadi dua, dalam bentuk nonpasar dan [[Pasar (ekonomi)|pasar]].<ref name="Kolb">{{cite book |last=Kolb |first=Robert |title=Encyclopedia of Business Ethics and Society, First Edition |publisher=SAGE Publications, Inc |date=19 October 2007 |isbn=978-1412916523 |page=1345 |quote=There are many forms of socialism, all of which eliminate private ownership of capital and replace it with collective ownership. These many forms, all focused on advancing distributive justice for long-term social welfare, can be divided into two broad types of socialism: nonmarket and market.}}</ref> Sosialisme nonpasar melibatkan penggantian [[pasar faktor]] dan [[uang]] dengan kriteria teknis berdasarkan [[Kalkulasi dalam barang|perhitungan yang dilakukan dalam bentuk barang]], dan dengan demikian menghasilkan mekanisme ekonomi yang berfungsi sesuai dengan [[Hukum nilai|hukum ekonomi]] yang berbeda dari [[kapitalisme]]. Sosialisme nonpasar bertujuan untuk menghindari ketidakefisienan dan [[Krisis ekonomi|krisis]] yang secara tradisional diasosiasikan dengan [[akumulasi kapital]] dan sistem profit.{{refn|<ref>{{cite book |last=Bockman |first=Johanna |title=Markets in the name of Socialism: The Left-Wing origins of Neoliberalism |publisher=Stanford University Press |year=2011 |isbn=978-0-8047-7566-3 |page=20 |quote=socialism would function without capitalist economic categories—such as money, prices, interest, profits and rent—and thus would function according to laws other than those described by current economic science. While some socialists recognised the need for money and prices at least during the transition from capitalism to socialism, socialists more commonly believed that the socialist economy would soon administratively mobilise the economy in physical units without the use of prices or money.}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Steele |first=David Ramsay |title=From Marx to Mises: Post Capitalist Society and the Challenge of Economic Calculation |publisher=Open Court |date=1999 |isbn=978-0-87548-449-5 |pages=175–77 |quote=Especially before the 1930s, many socialists and anti-socialists implicitly accepted some form of the following for the incompatibility of state-owned industry and factor markets. A market transaction is an exchange of property titles between two independent transactors. Thus internal market exchanges cease when all of industry is brought into the ownership of a single entity, whether the state or some other organization...the discussion applies equally to any form of social or community ownership, where the owning entity is conceived as a single organization or administration.}}</ref><ref>''Is Socialism Dead? A Comment on Market Socialism and Basic Income Capitalism'', by Arneson, Richard J. 1992. Ethics, vol. 102, no. 3, pp. 485–511. April 1992: "Marxian socialism is often identified with the call to organize economic activity on a nonmarket basis."</ref><ref>''Market Socialism: The Debate Among Socialists'', by Schweickart, David; Lawler, James; Ticktin, Hillel; Ollman, Bertell. 1998. From "The Difference Between Marxism and Market Socialism" (pp. 61–63): "More fundamentally, a socialist society must be one in which the economy is run on the principle of the direct satisfaction of human needs...Exchange-value, prices and so money are goals in themselves in a capitalist society or in any market. There is no necessary connection between the accumulation of capital or sums of money and human welfare. Under conditions of backwardness, the spur of money and the accumulation of wealth has led to a massive growth in industry and technology ... It seems an odd argument to say that a capitalist will only be efficient in producing use-value of a good quality when trying to make more money than the next capitalist. It would seem easier to rely on the planning of use-values in a rational way, which because there is no duplication, would be produced more cheaply and be of a higher quality."</ref><ref>''The Economics of Feasible Socialism Revisited'', by Nove, Alexander. 1991. p. 13: "Under socialism, by definition, it (private property and factor markets) would be eliminated. There would then be something like ‘scientific management’, ‘the science of socially organized production’, but it would not be economics."</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Socialism and Capitalism: Are They Qualitatively Different Socioeconomic Systems? |last=Kotz |first=David M. |accessdate=19 February 2011 |website=University of Massachusetts |url=http://people.umass.edu/dmkotz/Soc_and_Cap_Diff_Syst_06_12.pdf |format=PDF}} "This understanding of socialism was held not just by revolutionary Marxist socialists but also by evolutionary socialists, Christian socialists, and even anarchists. At that time, there was also wide agreement about the basic institutions of the future socialist system: public ownership instead of private ownership of the means of production, economic planning instead of market forces, production for use instead of for profit."</ref><ref name="Toward a Socialism for the Future, in the Wake of the Demise of the Socialism of the Past 1">''Toward a Socialism for the Future, in the Wake of the Demise of the Socialism of the Past'', by Weisskopf, Thomas E. 1992. Review of Radical Political Economics, Vol. 24, No. 3–4, p. 2: "Socialism has historically been committed to the improvement of people's material standards of living. Indeed, in earlier days many socialists saw the promotion of improving material living standards as the primary basis for socialism's claim to superiority over capitalism, for socialism was to overcome the irrationality and inefficiency seen as endemic to a capitalist system of economic organization."</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Prychito |first=David L. |title=Markets, Planning, and Democracy: Essays After the Collapse of Communism |url=https://archive.org/details/marketsplanningd0000pryc |publisher=Edward Elgar Publishing |date=2002 |isbn=978-1-84064-519-4 |page=[https://archive.org/details/marketsplanningd0000pryc/page/n21 12] |quote=Socialism is a system based upon de facto public or social ownership of the means of production, the abolition of a hierarchical division of labor in the enterprise, a consciously organized social division of labor. Under socialism, money, competitive pricing, and profit-loss accounting would be destroyed.}}</ref>}} Sebaliknya, [[sosialisme pasar]] mempertahankan penggunaan harga moneter, pasar faktor; dan dalam beberapa kasus, [[motif profit]], sehubungan dengan operasi perusahaan yang dimiliki secara sosial dan alokasi barang modal di antara mereka. Keuntungan yang dihasilkan oleh perusahaan ini akan dikelola secara langsung oleh tenaga kerja dari masing-masing perusahaan, atau diberikan ke masyarakat luas dalam bentuk [[dividen sosial]].<ref name="Social Dividend versus Basic Income Guarantee in Market Socialism, 2004">''Social Dividend versus Basic Income Guarantee in Market Socialism'', by Marangos, John. 2004. International Journal of Political Economy, vol. 34, no. 3, Fall 2004.</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=O'Hara |first=Phillip |title=Encyclopedia of Political Economy, Volume 2 |publisher=[[Routledge]] |date=2000 |isbn=978-0-415-24187-8 |page=71 |quote=Market socialism is the general designation for a number of models of economic systems. On the one hand, the market mechanism is utilized to distribute economic output, to organize production and to allocate factor inputs. On the other hand, the economic surplus accrues to society at large rather than to a class of private (capitalist) owners, through some form of collective, public or social ownership of capital.}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Pierson |first=Christopher |title=Socialism After Communism: The New Market Socialism |url=https://archive.org/details/socialismafterco0000pier |publisher=Pennsylvania State Univ Press |date=1995 |isbn=978-0-271-01478-4 |page=[https://archive.org/details/socialismafterco0000pier/page/96 96] |quote=At the heart of the market socialist model is the abolition of the large-scale private ownership of capital and its replacement by some form of ‘social ownership’. Even the most conservative accounts of market socialism insist that this abolition of large-scale holdings of private capital is essential. This requirement is fully consistent with the market socialists’ general claim that the vices of market capitalism lie not with the institutions of the market but with (the consequences of) the private ownership of capital...}}</ref> [[Perdebatan kalkulasi sosialis]] memperhatikan kelayakan dan metode alokasi sumber daya bagi sistem sosialis.