Socialism vs. the American way of life will be on the 2020 ballot

Why are you addressing 'right wingers'? I doubt any are still here.

 

the right wing doesn't understand the problem due to their special pleading of the term, socialism.

 

I think they understand 'the problem' a whole lot better than the average Cafe Socialist.

 

I've yet to find a right winger who can correctly define "communism". "Socialism" is another one that stumps them but they believe their personal opinions on it.

 

It already is the issue whether you realize it or not

 

I gave you this link previously ? - but, here it is again. https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-conservative-case-for-universal-healthcare/

 

There is the textbook defination that anyone can google

According to karl marx socialism is just a waystation between capitalism and communism

The old soviet union so beloved by bernia sandars was a marxist socialist country where the central government owned the means of production

Modern socislists like ocasio-cortez and the Democratic Socialists of America have a slightly different agenda

because they have given up the idea that progressives are capable of managing the production so they grudgingly accept some private propriety

 

Which definition is ¨änything I don´t like¨ long hair on men, short hair on girls, women with small breasts, women who require men to bathe regularly, people who like cats instead of dogs, dancing, sex, Hispanics, muslims, Catholics, Devin Nunes mom and any of the 10000 things that bewitch, befog and beguile the conservative .....uh....mind

I guess that is better than pedophilia, which is the kick they were on a few months ago.

 

Those who push the anti-socialism issue have already lost.

 

We are at a disadvantage with voters under 30 who have been throughly brainwashed by the lib educators

Our weakest generation will someday by the majority whether I like it or not

 

I need numbers on how that would work in the US. How much would taxes go up and on whom would they go up? How would doctor and hospitals be affected and what would that do to their numbers? How long would we wait for voluntary surgery such as knee and hip replacement? How many people get a free ride while the working class pay their bills?What effect would socialized healthcare have on overall quality? How would this effect new cutting edge procedures and drug development?

 

Explain the success Socialism in the context of Mao's Socialist ideal as implemented in China.

Start here:

https://www.libertynation.com/why-socialism-failed-maos-china/

 

Textbook definitions are published by capitalist publishing companies and they define it with a capitalist slant that is false. It take a deeper look and a greater understanding of both history and Marx.

That is vaguely correct, but the meaning behind it in all probability won't measure up.

See? That's a half-baked idea that is fundamentally incorrect. According to Marx and everyone else, socialism would be a socioeconomic system in which the working class actually owns and actually directs the MoP. 1) the USSR was not that at any time, and 2) Bernie never "loved" the USSR. So, wrong again.

Wrong. There has been no "giving up". It's a different strategy.

See? I told you no right winger has ever shown a real understanding of it. Thanks for the continuing evidence.

 

no, they don't.

 

Our little socialistas are constantly using wealth inequality to create a population of dissatisfied people who they can count on at the polls. There is no way to address the wealth disparity narrative constitutionally or even humanely.

Our free market economy guarantees equal opportunity. That's the best a government of for and by the people can do. Socialists come back every 2 years promising equal outcomes they can't deliver and seduce the same saps they made promises they couldn't keep during the previous election cycle. If socialists could deliver, they wouldn't have to come back year after year. We'd have universally equal outcomes.

 

Hoover Dam is a classic example of the stereotypical definition of public sector means of production.

 

Socialism is about equality and equal protection of the law; unlike Capitalism.

 

They've got you pretty well brainwashed. Failed ideologies have to be good at something. Brainwashing and bullying are Socialist strong points. Fidel was great at it:



Can you imagine how US Socialists could have possibly thought they owned the Hispanic --- Cuban American --- vote in Florida after they rewarded Fidel's genocide by opening trade? Socialists sure do have a sense of humor. I'll hand you that.

 

Special pleading much? Civil strife does that. How many people die during any war. You allege it was "socialism" not civil strife or a civil war.

 

Almost all of these are Capitalist nations who decide to divert and use some taxpayer money often with their consent in the main to fund a general public benefit. The United States has for we poor people Section 8, SSI, Medicaid, SSDI, SNAP, reduced bus fares, reduced AMTRAK fares, government demands for accessibility under the law the ADA and other charity benefits. So is that Socialism, no the system paying for these for me is Capitalist that is the same for most of those nations listed Hong Kong is communist due to being attached to China and they embraced Capitalism as far as they could to survive.

 

The communist party claimed to be representing the interests of the workers

Meaning the soviet dictatorship was the people

It was a lie

But everything libs adore about the soviet union was badically a lie

 

Yet it didn't and never did except by coincidence.

Glad you agree.

I don't know of libs adoring anything about the USSR.

So you still don't show any actual understanding of this, like I said originally.

 

As stated previously - the new edge drug development diatribe is a falsehood. Part of the problem with the profit motive is that it encourages companies not to develop cures in some cases. If you have a drug that treats the symptoms - why would you want to develop a cure as this would drastically reduce profits.

The specific numbers on how this would work in the US can not be provided. There are way too many unknown variables some of which are based on how they would implement it. For example - do we make all hospitals "State Owned" or do we just switch how these hospitals get paid ?

No more people would necessarily get a "free ride" than currently get a free ride. It is not like we do not provide healthcare to those on welfare. The problem is that the Gov't pays extortion level rates for that healthcare. It is not like a US citizen can walk into a German Hospital and get free care.

Your "wait time" question is partially answered in the link - we are middle of the road in terms of care. This means that there are socialized systems out there that are managing to provide better care - for roughly half the cost.

We should be at lower costs per person than in these other countries due to a much higher population = more pricing power.

We paid 3.5 Trillion dollars in 2017 for healthcare. This is crazy. Regardless of how we make changes .. using 60% as a realistic figure (obtained via just mirroring one of the numerous other systems out there - this does not consider that we should be able to do better). This means that 1.4 Trillion dollars is on the table - per year = 14 Trillion over 10 years.

That is 70% of our entire debt. This is a massive amount of money. Imagine the economic boom we could create by putting an extra 1.4 Trillion dollars per year into infrastructure - technology - and ramping up our economy to compete in the third millennium.

I don't understand why you would think taxes would go up ? They don't need to go up at all. You could keep the payments people are making exactly the same as they are now - and taxes the same. The difference is that instead of your monthly insurance payments going to the insurance company - it goes to a different company - one owned by the Gov't.

In the example above - the Govt keeps the excess and does stuff with it. Instead - after a year or two as it would take time to implement - your insurance payments could be reduced - not increased.

The money is already there - its already being paid. You asked "how many people get a free ride and who will pay the bills" - this is already happening. We are already paying well over 1 Trillion dollars/year into medicare/medicaid.

I don't know about you but - I am sure I speak for the majority when I say that I am incensed by some corporate take over - the new owners then raising the cost of a two pack epipen from $100 ( a product which costs 30 bucks to make) to $600. This is friggen extortion. What is the difference between this and holding a gun so someone's head and demanding money ?

Then to find out that in the UK - the cost of the same product is 69 dollars enrages one further. If this is not a form of "Monopolism" here in the US - I don't know what is ? There are laws on the books against Monopolism/Oligopolism.

This is a classic example of one of the problems of unrestricted capitalism. How about we just allow some corporation to have a monopoly on water .. Why not ? its all fair game right ?... and charge half of your monthly income on the privilege to stay alive - on the basis that "Well this company is using the profits to do research (similar to your drug research claim) to benefit humanity"

Or am I just crazy for thinking that raising the price of an epipen from 100 to 600 dollars is wrong ?

 

Wherever socialists go, there seems to be "civil strife".

Civil strife shows up at restaurants when socialists meet people with whom they disagree.

Civil strife showed up in the front yard of Ted Cruz to scare his wife and children.

Civil strife showed up in the Soviet Union under the father of Democratic Socialism, Vladimir Lenin.

Civil strife show up under Mao.

Civil strife attempted to destroy a 16 year old kid because he wore the wrong hat.

Everywhere socialists go, civil strife follows. We usually refer to the result of intolerance driven civil strife as communism. Although, when civil strife showed its head under national socialism, we called it Nazism.