Yes, please. We might call these “post-scarcity socialism”, “welfare-state socialism” (or “welfare liberalism” to Americans), and “Communist Party socialism”.
(Of course, there is the argument that we could be living in a post-scarcity society today if it weren’t for the increasing fraction of wealth held by the ultra-rich.)
There is a very old Soviet joke about the what would happen if socialism (of the Communist Party rule variety) were to be established in the Sahara. The answer is that after a couple of years a severe shortage of sand would develop...
(Of course, there is the argument that we could be living in a post-scarcity society today if it weren’t for the increasing fraction of wealth held by the ultra-rich.)
I am unaware of a serious version of such an argument.
(Of course, there is the argument that we could be living in a post-scarcity society today if it weren’t for the increasing fraction of wealth held by the ultra-rich.)
Yes, please. We might call these “post-scarcity socialism”, “welfare-state socialism” (or “welfare liberalism” to Americans), and “Communist Party socialism”.
(Of course, there is the argument that we could be living in a post-scarcity society today if it weren’t for the increasing fraction of wealth held by the ultra-rich.)
There is a very old Soviet joke about the what would happen if socialism (of the Communist Party rule variety) were to be established in the Sahara. The answer is that after a couple of years a severe shortage of sand would develop...
I am unaware of a serious version of such an argument.
(For some value of “post-scarcity” smaller than an American might have in mind.)