Please don't take HN threads into generic ideological flamewar. It's always the same, therefore uninteresting.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Capitalism does encourage reward for innovation, which is why it works better... up to a point. Innovative people exist everywhere - it's part of who they are - but when no rewarded, they won't work. What we have in the US is that crafty, selfish businessmen manipulate the system and "invent" all kinds of walls that steal the rewards of innovation for themselves. Now we have tech "giants" and massive corporations that pay peanuts (in comparison with their actual profits off innovation), run the government, and want oppressive laws and treaties like the TPP.

As I'm fond of saying: In a capitalistic system, a few people end up with all the money and power. In a communistic system, a few people end up with all the money and power. The means are different, but the result is the same.

People come to the US for its socialist school system, or the security of its socialist policing and fire services. Or the benefits of a socialist military industrial complex that prop up half the country and invest huge amounts into socialist research and development. People come for the security of the socialist banking system named too big to fail. Show me someone who comes for the capitalist healthcare or prison service...

There are very few countries in the world that lived by the laissez faire rules of capitalism, because its been a disaster every time.

People want to go to the US because the US is wealthy. It's wealthy due to private businesses, low corruption, and the rule of law.

Sure, but how much of that is down to the socialist things i listed, and how much is down to Wall street? Even if you believe mostly the latter; The success of the financial services of Wall St and private enterprise in the US is a direct result of socialist policies. Can you imagine any of this success without socialist schools? can you imagine any rule of law with a private police force?

If a country is too far socialist or too far capitalist, the result is the same; the few gaining great power and privilege, while the many are powerless and suffering in poverty. Its obvious that a balance is needed, socialism can be very good at leveling the playing field for basic necessities, while regulated capitalism can be good at distributing power hierarchies while remaining fairly efficient.

The problem i see us facing right now is that capitalism has had a lobby on political power for fifty years and is preventing this balance, substituting its own power-wealth hungry pseudo-balance. This is why we have difficulty dealing with climate change, and why places like the US are struggling with a universal health system, or why the UK is dismantling theirs.

Don't US colleges have their own police? The rule of law seems to still apply. And I wouldn't consider the police to be "socialist".

>Can you imagine any of this success without socialist schools?

Yes.

I agree with your point on laissez-faire capitalism. Unfettered capitalism never works. However, pardon me for beating down the straw-man. You box things in by naming a select few "socialistic" systems that seem to work (only because they've been here with everything else) and selecting a few capitalistic industries that are obvious failure. If socialism was so successful, then why don't people go to OTHER socialist nations in higher rates?

But to answer why people come here, I'd say they come for freedom and the hope of a future - and many try to stay. The east coast is full of Indian doctors who come here for their degree and have no intention of ever going back to India.

Yes, of course. That is why the US was the first nation to send a man to space, or have high speed bullet trains, or have accessible healthcare for everyone. Oh wait.

It only invented transistors, lasers, zippers, the internet, carbon fiber, airbags, information theory, aluminum smelting, television, induction motors, alternating current, radio communications, GPS, LED lamps, florescent lamps, incandescent lamps, nuclear power, magnetic storage, RADAR, refrigeration, solar panels...

But hey, the Soviets beat us into space by about a month. All they had to do was murder a million of their political opponents and then starve their people for a few decades. You decide if it was worth it.

And if you think the US has a "free market" healthcare system you are quite mistaken.

Please don't do nationalistic or ideological flamewar on HN, even if someone else started it. Also, please don't snark. This is in the site guidelines:

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

> show me a socialist or communist country that innovates

Finland? China?

> Finland? China?

The Chinese just steal research papers and pretend they're theirs.

I'm not Chinese and not a fan of the PRC, but you can't honestly believe all research from China is stolen. Assuming proper nutrition and exposure to education, there are intelligent and innovative people everywhere. Probabilistically speaking, with those assumptions, the larger the population, the more of that innovative potential they're likely to have.

Also, it's efficient to steal ideas. I assure you, given the opportunity, businesses in the US frequently steal ideas/IP as well, they're just more careful about it because there's more consequences. Why do you think so many IP lawsuits exist.

Furthermore, stealing or copying a successful process is in human nature for survival, heck, it's part of the foundations of evolution. Most people are only concerned when it's their ideas being stolen but not when they "borrow" others'.

Oh for sure, there are smart people everywhere, as I note in a comment elsewhere. In this case, I was simply returning one overly simply retort with another.

The Chinese invented the compass, movable type and other things long before the west.

(I'm not Chinese)