The Case for Socialism

It is obvious you don't understand "my government," It is corrupt to be sure but it isn't socialist.

 

So, several things.
1. Socialism nearly cratered your nation, I assume you're english. If not, apologies. I'd point out though that socialism as practiced across European nations falls into two camps, the French communist kind (Italy, Greece, etc) and the Scandinavian kind. The English kind doesn't really exist anymore thanks to the efforts of ms Thatcher who remedied all that. But the swirl down the drain of bottom feeding almost did the British in.
2. The US offers opportunity that transcends government allocated success. In fact, in spite of governments best efforts to produce success, they have generally always failed. Solyndra ring a bell?
3. Socialism generally squashes success. Lots of examples, where would you like to start? If you have to live in the worst ghetto in the old Soviet, was that, in your mind, success? Hard to know. Folks have differing standards of living the believe they are willing to accept.

I have a pension, it's called social security. Does it pay what I want it to? Not hardly which is why I have personal 401Ks, IRAs, etc and invest. I have to.

Ask the Chinese how well socialism is about to work for them given the inverse pyramid of demographics they constructed for themselves. That crash is coming. wait and see.

 

LOL... voted for... Sure, lots of folks have voted for it, just not most folks. Try harder.

 

There is no need to steal tax money to give someone else a tax break. Its a simple matter of not collecting from someone else.

Our system is pretty darn successful, and people are happy under Western European variants, while Cuba's system has been a disaster, as was the USSR experiment.

 

I didn't say it was socialist. Quite the contrary.

 

Yeahright. So where does the tax money come from to pay for things that taxes on the rich and on corporations previously paid for if they're cut?

 

So you support socialism, but don't really have it in your own country.

 

If you prefer forced labor & no pay to avoid taxes then so be it.

I prefer being able to choose my job, and get paid, and then I pay taxes like everyone else.

 

You are incorrect. Long before Obama, programs kept able bodied people comfortable sitting at home. They were even rewarded for having more babies. Currently, we have record levels of obesity and illness. 1/3 of Americans are diabetic or pre-diabetic. The last thing we need is more socialism. Im glad you like it.

 

I see you can't or WON'T answer my question. So you deflect. And your deflection is non-existent nonsense.

 

I think there’s a lot of confusion as to the difference between socialism, socialist and communism.

Socialism is the state nationalizing the running of some essential services on behalf of the people and not for profit businesses. Usually this means healthcare, transport or the utilities; things that people need to be able to afford in order to survive.

Socialist policies are ideological and the belief is that the government is needed to control private enterprise. California the state and the country Venezuela are examples of this. It doesn’t work.

Communism is the state take-over of all businesses and the abolition of capitalism and wealth ownership. That doesn’t work either.

Under socialism, if the government get it wrong running a nationalized service you can vote them out and vote someone else in who you think will do a better job. You can’t do that with a business whose job it is to screw every penny out of you that they can and throw you to the dogs if you can’t pay.

 

There is nothing to answer. No system is 100% perfect, but ours is a heck of a lot better than what you are selling. Its true that the previous admin tax cuts sent deficits skyrocketing, but it can be fixed by a more balanced approach. We can tweak and fine tune it as we go, but places like Cuba have much bigger problems.

 

For a realistic view of where unrestrained individualism and capitalism led.
http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/undestanding-the-society-we-live-in.601719/

 

You share the same confusion as Bernie Sanders who calls Denmark socialist because they have taxpayer funded social services. His comments have caused lot of confusion and also provided lot of political ammo to his critics.

Social democracy <> Democratic socialism.

Democratic socialism is socialism (state owned and operated means of production) and they got there via democratic elections as opposed to violent revolution (as was the case in USSR, Cuba and Cambodia).

 

It's interesting that while I have clarified and detailed and justified and specified what socialism is and what it is not, those who hold a false, capitalist and confused view mostly continue to cling to their nonsense and refuse to address my points and comments to prove them incorrect. Instead they just continue to restate their flawed propaganda without questioning it at all. Repeat, repeat, repeat, as though if said enough times it will become true. Watch.....

Tell us where you get that, and "from experience" will not suffice. We need some authoritative sourcing.

Yup, while preserving capitalism, eh?

Tell us where you get that, and "from experience" will not suffice. We need some authoritative sourcing.

Neither are instances of socialism.

How can that be if communism would be stateless?

In reality, I can agree with that.

 

Again, I see you can't or WON'T answer my question. So you deflect. And your deflection is non-existent nonsense.

You pretend my question cannot be answered. My question was "where does the tax money come from to pay for things that taxes on the rich and on corporations previously paid for if they're cut?"

Dodge, deflect, avoid.

 

I get it from ten years of study at various University’s. I don’t need google and links for something so basic. Don’t forget to quote me as the source if you use them.

Capitalism exists nicely under socialism. It’s just that some things are not open to individual profit.

I didn’t say that California or Venezuela are instances of socialism. I said they’re examples of socialist ideological policies.

Under communism, the state as in the government.

 

I answered the question (the cuts led to deficits aka they could not pay for the difference), but you didn't like the answer so you accuse me of deflecting.

 

What happens if you hold a belief that the state finds unacceptable. During Covid, the left was talking about denying healthcare to those who were not unvaccinated. What happens if you are the wrong demographic? During Covid, the Biden administration denied monoclonal antibodies to white people due solely to their race. It is despicable to the extreme to force people pay for everybody elses healthcare and then put them into the back of line for healthcare while the eaters (like politicians and welfare recipients) get premier healthcare services on their dime.

 

Ambiguous. You hide behind ambiguity. You didn't list any of the books you were assigned in your "university's". (Are you sure you attended any? I mean "ten years of study" and you post the possessive form instead of the plural form?)

Ah! The old "capitalism is socialism" ploy. Then why has the USA engaged in every kind of opposition and trickery to kill socialism in Cuba for about 50 years and against Venezuela, Russia, China, and every country that tried to transition to socialism? Why spend so much money on a non-existent threat?

Socialism is the antithesis of capitalism. It would end capitalism and it's private ownership for private profit and you know it. And yet you play this ridiculous game.

Yet without socialism. Got it.

It wouldn't exist under communism.

See what propaganda has accomplished for you? It has rendered you confused and unaware of your confusion. VERY successful!

 

First you said "there is nothing to answer" and now you claim you answered me. Who TF do you think you're fooling?

Yeah bunk. But you sorta admit that tax cuts for the rich and for corporations increased deficits which will be partially borne by the working class via taxation. And that's the point that you first denied: tax cuts for the rich shift the burden more to the working class. IOW it's a redistribution of wealth from the workers to the rich.

 

Wow. Silly questions.

And why would anyone want to deny healthcare to people who "are not unvaccinated"?

 

List any books? It was decades ago. Am I supposed to remember the titles of hundreds of books I read over the course of years? I was a teacher, retired now and why I have the knowledge to write posts with a minimum of links. What I write is my own content off the top of my head. Your level of forum critique I take with a pinch of salt.

Some things are just basic knowledge. For instance, if you were to tell me that the earth is flat, or the sun revolves around the earth would I need to write a long post on that with links and arguments? You of course could come back at me with a quote from the Flat Earth Society to tell me I’m wrong. That’s the google generation for you.

Just the other day I was in conversation with someone who told me Ukraine could win against Russia, that there were no foreign volunteers in Ukraine and that the KGB still existed in a communist Russia. At your level of knowledge there’s no hope of any kind of meaningful debate.

 

In the same post where I said there is nothing to answer I also explained the deficit issue. If you are confused, its on you, so please don't try to project it on me.

Sort of? I flat out said (twice) that is resulted in deficits. The working class got a tax cut too, which is also making things worse, since 50% of Americans actually dont pay any income taxes at all, and that being the case, the burden was not shifted on the working class. The cuts were stupid, and the outcome was obvious, because they cut taxes while hiking spending by 20%. Republicans have always been fiscally reckless, even though they insist the opposite.

 

Socialism is the gateway drug to being communists