That still depends on what we’re calling socialist. I’ve seen plenty of people call Western Europe socialist after all. Part of the argument here is against the lumping together of things under simplistic singular labels to call them all unconditionally bad or good. In this context, that label Is less than useless, we really need to talk about specific ideas, policies and principles. There are people calling it bad though. They say that anything provided by the government is socialism and anything socialism is bad. They’d accept privately funded literacy programs but if the private sector fails to provide, it’s that or nothing. Equally, some proponents of socialism will push too far the other way, expecting government provision and accepting zero private interference in anything like education. They’re all wrong. That kind of thing is always going to cost something, regardless of how we did it or the system it operated in. Even under the same system, there is a vast range of means to fund it and consequences of them. We could successfully provide something under a “socialist” model or a “capitalist” model without falling in to the extremes of either though. A mixed model has long been the best approach, as has been demonstrated in all Western countries today, including the US. The problem is that when anyone suggests any kind of adjustment or shift within the scope of that mixed model, the extremist on one side (or sometimes both!) accuse them of the opposite extreme.
A meme, I know I'm convinced. One can always count on internet memes, for accurate info...Please detail "WallStreet" bailouts, with current facts.
Demonstrate the inaccuracy. You will not be able to. You have partaken of Trump's snake oil, 'but that's okay.'
Please detail "WallStreet" bailouts, with current facts. "Cash for clunkers" and "economic stimulus checks" need not apply. Try posting facts, not random pics and words.
Okay. Wall street bail out. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_Economic_Stabilization_Act_of_2008
And...oil and gas subsidies. https://www.eesi.org/papers/view/fa...-closer-look-at-tax-breaks-and-societal-costs
US farm bailouts. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/14/us/politics/trump-farm-bailout-investigation.html
Pinocchios it may have been...but it happened. The US socialised Wall Street. https://www.commondreams.org/views/...t-bailouts-bernie-sanders-and-washington-post
I don't care who it was under. The US has a history of socialising losses. Capitalise the profit...socialise the losses........if they are big enough. Trump is doing that right now....I give you the ballooning deficit.
But you post a fake ass meme, depicting Trump officials, when it was Obama. You cant slide by on that bit of dishonesty. Remember saying this, hours ago? Demonstrate the inaccuracy. You will not be able to. I just did. You lied...yet again
LINK: Merriam-Webster ~ Socialism I'll get back to the rest of your post later. Just got off work and am tired.
The problem is that we should reward success. Socialism, and government run anything, rewards mediocrity. You've never worked for the federal government. I can tell. If you had, you would never suggest that the government be in charge of ANYTHING. It's one thing to be in fantasy land and say "yeah well the government will just take care of everything in my life, I just need to kick back and relax". The reality is much, much, different. Like to you and I, it doesnt make sense to air freight a pallet of copy paper to Guam. That's dumb right? Cause, you know, local stores have paper? We did it. We do it over and over, at $56,000 a trip. Common sense says that that is a waste of money, but government says "money is not an object". Never heard that phrase in my life until I started working for the government, and here I hear it at least once a week. Mission comes before cost, every time. That's why an Obama website costs 100x more than a normal website. Because government built it.
But Barack Obama who race agitated for eight years and politically weaponized several federal offices was . . . what?
Cuba runs out of TP....https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...let-paper-running-short-idUSTRE5792F420090810 Literally...the Cubans can afford to whip their own butts....this is what the Democrats want for America....
Q: Who said this? "These days, the American dream is more apt to be realized in South America, in places such as Ecuador, Venezuela and Argentina, where incomes are actually more equal today than they are in the land of Horatio Alger. Who's the banana republic now?" A: bernie "I don't mind if you call me a communist" sanders.
Nothing in life is anything like as simple. If government run things was unconditionally so disastrous, why would every single Western nation, including the US, have vast ranges of government run things? Again, we have all settled on mixed models because in general terms, that is what works best (or least worst). I'm not American but I've worked for both government and private organisations in the UK and there is often very little to tell them apart. That's your fantasy, not mine. I'm not proposing the government takes care of everything. I'm not proposing anything. The only thing I'm saying is that defining anything you don't like as socialism so you can justify hating it without actually having to apply any kind of rational intelligence is wrong. Government in general most certainly doesn't say that. The problems I most often faced in government organisations was the hoops we had to jump through to get anything funded. Maybe the problem in your case wasn't actually down to government but the individuals actually doing (or not doing) the work.
Many on the right were quite upset with Obama's Wall Street bailout, and auto bailouts..I wouldn't call Obama's actions socialism though...it was more like of a Fascist move....https://www.forbes.com/sites/billfl...ding-the-biggest-lie-in-history/#531dc63a47a6
