Is this what socialists want?

[Gmollster11]

The best part about this post is, that it is an attempt to ridicule others while it is making the author look as one hell of a clown not knowing that socialist programs exist just fine in a mixed model we are all living in.

Well done making an ass out of yourself well done.

You are showing your ignorance, but like so many other leftists, it's expected.

[d00mGuArD]

Socialists want people who own a greater proportion of the wealth to pay a greater proportion of the tax to keep money flowing through society and keeping the economy moving instead of investing and saving it all for decades and grinding everything to a halt.

But since they are paying a greater proportion of the wealth, will they receive a greater proportion of the services ? Or they will they just pay more to get the same thing as everyone else? (hint: paying more than others for the same item or service, is the definition of unfair)

[Acidbaron]

You are showing your ignorance, but like so many other leftists, it's expected.

"leftist", that's why you people look like fools. I'm a flemish conservative nationalist.

But keep on thinking that everyone that calls this train of thought to be nothing more than something produced by children incapable of individual thought and only believing what certain speakers from certain groups say. That will get you far in life, sheep.

[Daelak]

But since they are paying a greater proportion of the wealth, will they receive a greater proportion of the services ? Or they will they just pay more to get the same thing as everyone else? (hint: paying more than others for the same item or service, is the definition of unfair)

Of course they are receiving a greater proportion of services, like being in a system that makes ones hundreds of millions, if not billions year after year. That system goes away if you take away the ability of the consumer base to spend and invest into said system.

[Captain N]

Of course they are receiving a greater proportion of services, like being in a system that makes ones hundreds of millions, if not billions year after year. That system goes away if you take away the ability of the consumer base to spend and invest into said system.

In addition they're also paying a lower tax rate on their investments than people who file the same amount as working income do. There's more benefit to having $50,000 in investments than it is for the typical American working their ass off for the same amount. The wealthy are benefiting in huge ways before we even consider the other services.

[tehealadin]

There is no one "socialist". Like many things, it is a spectrum. I'd argue that all who would consider themselves socialists, or at least as having socialist leanings, believe that some things should exist for the public good, be publicly owned and that society as a whole should pay into them, with those on a higher income paying more (as it hurts them less).

As to what things should be for the public good and ownership, there will be disagreements. Some will argue that everything should be socialised, some will argue that it should be limited. Often, especially on the internet, socialists are portrayed as the former. I think socialism has some good ideas, but like anything, if taken to its extremes, is extremely harmful.

[kamuimac]

Let me preface this with saying yes the video is a couple years old but pretty sure it's still a good indicator of what socialists want out of society. Am I correct? Would really love to hear from some of the socialists on this site.

not surprising - since tax system funding free university education works more then well in EU taxing the richest and puting those money into free education would benefit everyone overall.

cba to watch it - but the clue is better taxation of rich i bet - which is very good idea.

[Molis]

I would be more for tax subsidized education if the recipient was held accountable for their education choices.

The world does not need anymore Native American Basket Weavers