Socialism Doesn't Work?

Then why are socialist countries happier then the US?

Interesting how that works. When a nation cares for one another it becomes happier then a country that cares only for the few. Who knew that Christ was right.

2Corinthians 8:13-14

"For this is not for the ease of others and for your affliction, but by way of equality-- at this present time your abundance being a supply for their need, so that their abundance also may become a supply for your need, that there may be equality;"

https://www.yahoo.com/news/whos-happy-whos-not-norway-tops-list-us-063130417--politics.html

"A new report shows Norway is the happiest country on Earth, Americans are getting sadder, and it takes more than just money to be happy.

Norway vaulted to the top slot in the World Happiness Report despite the plummeting price of oil, a key part of its economy. Income in the United States has gone up over the past decade, but happiness is declining.

The United States was 14th in the latest ranking, down from No. 13 last year, and over the years Americans steadily have been rating themselves less happy.

"It's the human things that matter. If the riches make it harder to have frequent and trustworthy relationship between people, is it worth it?" asked John Helliwell, the lead author of the report and an economist at the University of British Columbia in Canada (ranked No. 7). "The material can stand in the way of the human."

 

Without regard to what you said, Trapper, any of the people who assert that "Socialism does not work" are asserting something that cannot be substantiated.

At best, a person making such an assertion can show that some countries that have attempted socialism have come up short...that faults in the economy continued to exist. That same thing holds for countries operating under a capitalistic system.

But...because socialism has not worked for country X...does not mean it would not work...and work much better than capitalism, for instance, for country Y.

Said another way...the fact that no country has been able to create a Utopia via a socialistic economy...does not mean that America, for instance, could not do it.

 

How do people believe polls taken such as this? Did you not see the polls for the presidential race. Yeah, they was way off. The reason I ask is because every time I hear, "a new poll has been taken", I realize that I was never asked. Nor was I ever. Could this be said from everybody, and they are merely making such polls up, to fit their narrative? Was you asked?

 

There is no such thing as pure socialism or pure Capitalism. Neither can exist on their own.

The US for example is not a capitalist country. Its economy relies entirely on government spending and government subsides. Banks, airlines, oil companies, could not exist without government help. If military spending were suddenly drastically cut the entire economy would collapse. It is in fact how we have gotten out of the great depression. Additionally, commodities such as Iphones, computers, etc, were entirely created by government spending related to the military. They are then handed to private industry to commercialize.

Whats needed isn't pure capitalism or pure socialism. What is needed is a solid mix, such as most of Europe has, that combined the best aspects of the two while guaranteeing a decent existence for all. A public road is socialism. However, in America, we have a grossly unequal system driven by corporate/elite control over the government. It is for them that polices are made and it is for the public that threats of war and social policy distractions are used to divert the public's attention from the fact that the government is handing public resources to the ultra wealthy no matter who is power.

Elections in the US are merely two competing power systems, backed by differing elites, vying for control. Typically repubs get heavy oil backing and military backing. Dems typically get bank and wall street backing.

But their differences are minor and either the wealthy continue to dominate to the point where something like the top 20 richest American have more wealth then the bottom 50%. That is a horribly immoral society, an embarrassment to the world and basically a third world society.

 

Capitalism indeed works without socialism, and it has. Personally I would agree when it comes to a government that a balanced system (reps and dems) works best. Having said that, once the balance is so vastly divided on our principals and morals, it is finished, and time will finish it. For a house divided cannot stand, neither can a nation/kingdom.

 

Socialism works extremely well on a neighborhood level- all over the world- and always has. That's because it's relatively apolitical at that level and criminal politicians can't wring any profits out of it.

 

How can capitalism have worked without socialism considering it has never existed without at least some elements of socialism. Can you give an example? How could your response have been so simple considering I wrote a paragraph?

 

It isn't Socialism that is broken. It's Democracy.

 

So when the Capitalist put his money in the bank and the bank gets robbed...is it capitalism that goes after the robber or socialism?

As with all things the Capitalist wants to privatize profits and socialize losses.

Government exists to protect the wealthy from the poor. What the poor get in return is some level of social services. All of you are socialists. The argument is over degrees.

 

Completely correct.

 

I receive zero social services from the government. What I have, I got on my own. It may not be much, but it most certainly was earned. It is because of the evil and corruption within our government that I steer clear of anything pertaining to government. I have 7 years of tax returns in which they owe me, and have not filed simply to stay clear of the government. I use cash, thus they have no idea what I purchase, and if everybody did this, they would have no means of determining the stock markets like they do now. Even when the credit card was first introduced, it was used to determine where the rich will put their investments. The technology they have now to do this, is far superior and grants them better results. And ignorant people who claim the rich get richer, are the ones allowing for it.

 

Really?

So you were completely home schooled?
Never received mail?
Driver driven a vehicle on a public street?
Never taken a bus, train, or airplane?
Never called the police, fire, or EM services?
Never bought groceries at a store?
Never even used an internet connection?

Maybe you should sit and consider all the socialism provided to you?

 

We do have socialist programs here. Welfare recipients receive monthly income, a free cell phone and free medical care. I wonder what their happiness level is compared to Norway.

 

In order for that to be studied you would have to find comparable income groups in Norway, which is impossbile, because they have a just and sane society that doesnt allow absurd gaps between Rich and poor.

 

Let's not pretend Scandinavian Social Democracies are Socialist. There is plenty of private enterprise happening in Norway or Denmark or [insert whatever else]. The workers do not own the means of production and the Government isn't in the business of trying to run all the nation's corporations.

Let's also not pretend that the US doesn't have government assistance, programs such as Medicaid, Medicare, Income Tax Credits, Public Schools, Public Roads and so on exist.

An argument for a Norwegian style society isn't an argue for Socialism, just a slightly different version of a Mixed Economy with slightly higher taxation and more government assistance, but not a government that is encroaching into everything. Norway is not necessarily a model to follow for most countries due to its oil wealth and small population.

Admittedly it is quite a dull argument to then say well, uhhh instead of 25% tax I think 32% would work a little bit better, or whatever. But it is a better starting point than 'Capitalism vs Socialism'. That debate is hopefully in the confines of history.

 

To all those socialists out there, I guess we need a 52% income tax rate to fund all these social programs you want to do, right???

 

You help a neighbor out- you're a socialist. You work in a bomb factory- you ain't.

 

How much can the taxpayer pay??? We can't afford to help out every *sob* case.

And, who's bomb factory? If you work in a bomb factory maybe you're a Palestinian terrorist.

 

Or an Israeli terrorist. Even then there are socialist pacifists on both sides of that particular one-sided struggle.
There ain't any such thing as a socialist bomb.

 

If only we had a test case to learn from...

 

As usual, socialists take the Bible out of context.

2 Corinthians 8 is about Christians donating to other Christians, specifically the Corinthian church is being asked to tithe to support other churches in Macedonia. It has nothing to do with socialism or the "progressives" concept of "equality".

 

Pure capitalism has never existed save in theory just as pure socialism has never existed. And this country with its capitalist/socialist system did work quite well for all until the parties became so partisan that working together became a "cardinal sin".

 

National Socialism the Nazi kind are much better than Socialism. Old Polish species. An rutten species.

 

Then even the Founding Fathers had the wrong idea. James Madison, for instance, said the following:

"The great object [of political parties] should be to combat the evil: 1. By establishing a political equality among all. 2. By withholding unnecessary opportunities from a few, to increase the inequality of property, by an immoderate, and especially an unmerited, accumulation of riches. 3. By the silent operation of laws, which, without violating the rights of property, reduce extreme wealth towards a state of mediocrity, and raise extreme indigence towards a state of comfort."

He also said:

"Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few. In war, too, the discretionary power of the Executive is extended; its influence in dealing out offices, honors, and emoluments is multiplied; and all the means of seducing the minds, are added to those of subduing the force, of the people. The same malignant aspect in republicanism may be traced in the inequality of fortunes, and the opportunities of fraud, growing out of a state of war, and in the degeneracy of manners and of morals engendered by both. No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare"

As to the scriptures, I am always amazed at how some seem to think that ther teachings therein are to be applied only to other "christians" especially by the right wing when it is their desire to justify greed, and a lack of concern for the well being of others.

 

Norway is a homogeneous nation-State with a population of 5 Million people - roughly the same population as Cook County, Illinois.

It's important to note that Norway does not have 8 carrier battle groups and two amphibious assault groups plying the Seven Seas protecting the US Dollar.