Would Socialism really be that bad?

[gainesvilleg]

Socialism isn't about making everybody be equally wealthy. It is about not letting the weakest members of society starve and die because they have no means to support themselves. And it does work. Germany is a socialist democracy that is currently keeping financing half of Europe. What doesn't work is incompetence and corruption in government, that is why Spain, Italy, Greece are going down the shitter. Not because of socialism. And guess what, I can think of other countries that have rampant corruption in government and have come close to defaulting recently. You want to guess which they are?

Surprised you are still stuck in the 1800's but nobody starves in capitalist USA anymore. The homeless for the most part choose to avoid the shelters and public housing that are provided to them, and most of them eat more than is healthy for them. I remember reading a story just last week of a 300 pound "homeless" woman sitting naked at a bus stop so she could cool off LOL. I say "homeless" because she lived in public housing.

[Butler to Baby Sloths]

You mean who pays for the nice stuff, or the unemployment benefits?

[meathead]

Write a book sounds great! Oh yea, Karl Marx already wrote it. Sounds great on paper though!

say what you want but im right.hell America started the cold war,we demonize other counties to justify attacking them,America gives you a false since of freedom,and we are no more free then any other country.a false since that your votes matter.and a common emeny the people can take out.these are all the thing s hilter said that governments had to do.but he was crazy because America says he was,same goes for napoleon right?America teaches us that napoleon was the anti Christ and was an evil bad man.but he was an Allie to America and helped us many many times.funny how that stuff works right?

[Gheld]

I suggest reading "Atlas Shrugged" by Ayn Rand. It's over 50 years old and still remains relevant to this very topic.

Spoiler Alert: Ayn Rand obviously liked rough sex. And the John Galt speech repeats many things that are already said up to that point in the book, and can be skipped.

[Stormykitten]

Socialism is a good thing in a reasonable amount, just as capitalism and many other isms are. None of these work 100%, we're too random for that.

It's just too simplistic to slap these labels on when you're talking about a species with an uncharacteristic egoitistic/individualistic streak coupled with the traditional group living, down on a core level. Especially things like socialism will never ever work 100% while human beings have an ego, simply because there is no standard 'human' for everybody to be.

But I do think that some practices within its field is good. There are way too many that think that communism for example is bad through and through, while praising the greatly flawed capitalism to extremes - both have their good sides, and both certainly have their bad sides too, as we prove in the real world day after day.

[meathead]

You think if we had a system like communism that it would get rid of the 1%? Really? At least in our system you have the opportunity to be your own man and make something of yourself. Pay your dues to uncle Sam, follow the law, and you can do whatever you want.

Do you know who wants to keep the poor, poorer? The democrats. They're the one that raised taxes on cigarettes to like 4 dollars a pack. They are the ones that try to raise the sales tax, they are the ones that want to raise taxes on everything! Everyone below the poverty level smokes. They are doing more harm than good to the overall economic well being of the lower class. Some one working a minimum wage job makes like 5-6 bucks an hour after taxes... They smoke a pack a day... That means 28 dollars a week to the government. Times that by 52. 1.5k a year in taxes for someone making less than 15,000 a year. Then you have sales tax in most states. Let's not even talk about states with high alcohol taxes or ticket / court fees for violating some stupid rule or law. These people usually have families to support and bills to pay too. It also hurts other low income people like college students.

You can thank the Democrats for that.

dems or republican are both a load of shit.im taking about the core of America,its corrupt and was made to be that way from day one.do you think it actually matters who you vote for?our government tells you who to vote for and you do it,lol.gore won the popular vote over bush,but bush still became president,lmfao.

and no you can not do what every you want in America.go try and start up a car compain and watch what the big 3 "ford,gm,dodge" do to you.they will make you go threw hell and back so you do not have the chance compete against them at all.its happens before,
Preston Tucker for example.walmart what do you think they are doing to mom and pop shop owners?and they have the backing of the American goverment lol.sure from time to time someone can make it big,but you can do that anywhere.

o and i would like to add i never brought up communism at all,you did.if you want to know what i think is/was the best ran government that earths has every seen?well i would have to say the socialist government we seen in Germany when Hitler was in power. and no im not talking about the wars and all that.im talking about the way the government ran and did things for its people.Germany was the first county to have social security,worker rights,pensions plans,ect. it took Germany from one of the poorest nations post ww1-to the richest most powerful,most advanced nation on earth.so that alone should show you that socialism can and does work.hell our capitalist goverment had to steal german techs lol,we had to copy the german highway system.we had to copy there ss system,worker rights ect.dont let our goverment fool you and trick you into thinking that capitalism is the only goverment that works,because its not.

[Pat1234]

well i would have to say the socialist government we seen in Germany when Hitler was in power. and no im not talking about the wars and all that.im talking about the way the government ran and did things for its people.

The Nordic countries have a similar system to that today.

That wouldn't work in America tho.

[Flappy]

Yea, I'd say only a small percentage is 'unable'. The large portion is just unwilling. It's a helluva lot easier to just sit on their asses and collect unemployment.

Yes that is why it says "on behalf of".

[Gheld]

The Nordic countries have a similar system to that today.

That wouldn't work in America tho.

Workplace Health and Safety regulations.
Minimum wages.
40 hour standard work week with overtime compensation.
Paid vacation.

I lean towards anarchocapitalism personally, but I do enjoy some of the finer, smaller contributions of labour-centric socialism, particularly (and exclusively) as they pertain to the rights of the individual labourer. I don't support "big union" labour though.

EDIT: As far as the minimum wage point goes though, I think it should be enough that if somebody is paid minimum wage they should be able to subsist by working 40 hours a week, I don't support 'run-away' minimum wages that just end up driving inflation and screwing over the middle class.

[Rukentuts]

Yes that is why it says "on behalf of".

Yea, on behalf of themselves.

[Flappy]

Yea, on behalf of themselves.

Calm down- I'm agreeing with you.

[Rukentuts]

Calm down- I'm agreeing with you.

Sorry, I'm tired.

[Pat1234]

Workplace Health and Safety regulations.
Minimum wages.
40 hour standard work week with overtime compensation.
Paid vacation.

I lean towards anarchocapitalism personally, but I do enjoy some of the finer, smaller contributions of labour-centric socialism, particularly (and exclusively) as they pertain to the rights of the individual labourer. I don't support "big union" labour though.

EDIT: As far as the minimum wage point goes though, I think it should be enough that if somebody is paid minimum wage they should be able to subsist by working 40 hours a week, I don't support 'run-away' minimum wages that just end up driving inflation and screwing over the middle class.

I agree. I think it's good to have basic protections like that. People don't realize that a lot of places that employ minimum wage jobs barely make enough profit to pay the workers. Flipping burgers is no way to make a living. It's a good thing to do while you are learning a trade or going to college for a degree. You CAN live off a job like that when your young, but that is no way to go through life. If you are an unskilled worker you will be payed like one. It's harder to make it nowadays, it's going to be even harder 30 years from now when half our country doesn't speak English and we have a 60% income tax to pay off all of our debt.

[Nicola]

Do you know who wants to keep the poor, poorer? The democrats. They're the one that raised taxes on cigarettes to like 4 dollars a pack. They are the ones that try to raise the sales tax, they are the ones that want to raise taxes on everything! Everyone below the poverty level smokes. They are doing more harm than good to the overall economic well being of the lower class. Some one working a minimum wage job makes like 5-6 bucks an hour after taxes... They smoke a pack a day... That means 28 dollars a week to the government. Times that by 52. 1.5k a year in taxes for someone making less than 15,000 a year. Then you have sales tax in most states. Let's not even talk about states with high alcohol taxes or ticket / court fees for violating some stupid rule or law. These people usually have families to support and bills to pay too. It also hurts other low income people like college students.

You can thank the Democrats for that.

Oh and that cop that gave you a speeding ticket for going 5 over? He's a democrat too.

Are you just mad that you actually have to pay some money to ruin other peoples lives with your stupid cigarettes and that you got caught for driving to fast?

Why blame democrats for being stupid?
Noone is forcing you to buy cancer in a box and driving to fast...

[Pat1234]

Are you just mad that you actually have to pay some money to ruin other peoples lives with your stupid cigarettes and that you got caught for driving to fast?

Why blame democrats for being stupid?
Noone is forcing you to buy cancer in a box and driving to fast...

Those are examples of big government hurting poor people. But to you poor people are just stupid people right?

[ishootblanks]

If there are rich people in America. Then there HAS to be poor people..everyone cannot be rich the math on it is impossible. Someonone HAS to take the fall. If socialism were here at least we would all be equal. Imagine a world where people did not fight over money. Where the income gap from the rich and poor was not so wide.

Look around at the Occupy protests. People are growing restless at the system. They are upset, angry and frustrated. How much longer can we keep this up?

Greed is a terrible sin. While money is important it shouldn't be driving factor in our lifes. Imagine a world without the big corporate types with their Super Pac's..they are refusing to pay more in taxes yet donate 100 million to Mitt?..does that sound logical?...we will continue to be divided as a nation as long as the income gap is there. In order to be rich, there must be poor.

I don't want to live in a world where they deny people food stamps so they can send 100 million in aid to middle east. Where they don't help the very poor yet give the very rich all the benefits. The work just becomes another forum of being almost slave like to the system.

remember.. John Lennon was very rich.. and did not give away his wealth as he received it..

everyone wants to be a socialist so long as they are part of the ruling elite..

no thanks.. I'll take my chances on my own! but feel free to stop by for a beer all the same!

[Northy]

Socialism is nice in principal but next to impossible to adequately enact.

[Niteynite]

All socialism means is the government takes over certain things in our society, like schools, military, and hospitals. You know, things that shouldn't be run for profit! Too many people here in America have this impression that the free market is perfect and best left alone. The brainwashing they receive from groups like the Tea Party that strongly imply that if you need the government to help you, then you aren't having a tough time finding a job or getting health care, you are just lazy. True socialism brings equality to (mostly) everyone, but leaves very little room for personal advancement.

[ishootblanks]

That's a separate argument, albeit one I heavily agree on. I'm just pissed that I have to pay 25-30% b/w state and federal income tax and then I turn around and see people barking for 'free' college and 'free' healthcare to add to their food stamp collection and subsidized rent.

I doubt you paid much at all in federal taxes.. that's what Romney disclosed..

hell I'm in the 15% bracket (married filing jointly) and I only paid 3% after deductions..

---------- Post added 2012-07-14 at 05:01 AM ----------

All socialism means is the government takes over certain things in our society, like schools, military, and hospitals. You know, things that shouldn't be run for profit! Too many people here in America have this impression that the free market is perfect and best left alone. The brainwashing they receive from groups like the Tea Party that strongly imply that if you need the government to help you, then you aren't having a tough time finding a job or getting health care, you are just lazy. True socialism brings equality to (mostly) everyone, but leaves very little room for personal advancement.

give me an example of a functional nation that is truly socialist.. not just a big government capitalist society like most scandinavian nations

---------- Post added 2012-07-14 at 05:06 AM ----------

Workplace Health and Safety regulations.
Minimum wages.
40 hour standard work week with overtime compensation.
Paid vacation.

I lean towards anarchocapitalism personally, but I do enjoy some of the finer, smaller contributions of labour-centric socialism, particularly (and exclusively) as they pertain to the rights of the individual labourer. I don't support "big union" labour though.

EDIT: As far as the minimum wage point goes though, I think it should be enough that if somebody is paid minimum wage they should be able to subsist by working 40 hours a week, I don't support 'run-away' minimum wages that just end up driving inflation and screwing over the middle class.

so in other words you support American capitalism? minus the bit about minimum wage which can never be a true living wage until machines can automate enough of our lives that they can make obsolete most of the jobs that currently fit into the minimum wage job category.. which creates an whole new set of problems..

[exochaft]

I find a slight irony that some of this discussion has transgressed into a Capitalism vs Socialism/Communism. While Capitalism is pretty much a contradition of those two societies, it feels like people are saying the United States' government is Capitalism... it's a Republic the last time I checked, with capitalistic tendacies.

While we can get into a whole discussion over which system we would prefer to live under (and if you like the form of government in your country, far be it from me to tell you that you're wrong, it's your country!), as a citizen of the US I'd prefer the country to remain a Republic. I will admit that our form of government has begun to stray from what the Founders intended, however they knew exactly what would happen. Many of the great minds behind the US Constitution didn't just make up a form of government randomly, they had studied many forms of government and decided on our special form of a Republic (attempts at Democracies, monarchies, and socialistic forms of government have been around for thousands of years). If you want true insight into what they were thinking, please feel free to read documents such as the Federalist papers to see what they really meant.

I cannot do justice with such limited space, but I can generalize as best as possible the reasons why the Founders decided upon this form of government over things like democratic, socialistic, or authoritarian societies. I noticed quite a few posts citing the problems with all governments, and that is man can become corrupted... well, the Founders knew the governments (and the people that run the governments) tend to want to grow in power and become corrupt, hence the lengths at which the US Constitution goes to make sure the government cannot wrest the liberties of the people away. This lead to the separation of the governmental powers, checks/balances, the election system, the enumerated powers of branches of government/states/people, etc. The government is designed to be inefficient as to prevent them from assuming power over its citizens. However, even with all these systems in place, the Founders knew this system of government could still be corrupted. So what was to keep the government from doing so?

The citizens of the United States. It is the responsibility of the US citizens to ensure that their government remains as the Republic envisioned in the US Constitution. This is why the right to vote is supposed to be the most important duty of a citizen.

Now, I believe the US government is sliding towards a socialistic version of itself. This has been a slow process, starting over a hundred years ago, and the current result is what we have today. The two-word summation is soft despotism, feel free to look up what that is. Only the citizens of the country can rectify the situation, and those wishing for the country to degrade into a socialistic society know this. That is why tiny things have been added to the US government over the years, and while they are supposedly "for the good of the people," in the end they are a form of control. In order to prevent people from voting those in power out, the people are conditioned so that such occurrences do not happened.

If you want the most recent version of such control, as it's a pretty popular subject now, is nationalized healthcare. Well, first and foremost, dating back as far as Plato and his version of a Utopian society, Hobbe's Leviathan, and to more modern conceptions of Communism and Socialism, the big cornerstone of control lies in the centralized control of the health and well-being of the populace by whoever ran their respective societies. While I'd recommend people read these instead of taking my word for it, their concept of healthcare always resulted in a form of control by those in charge of the society. You think rationed healthcare based on what the government deems necessary and "death panels" are new concepts? They're needed for these societies to function, and these men stated explicitly why, the summarized version being for the good of the society. However, starting as early as Plato, the forms of government failed because they would all oppress the governed people in the end. Again, I'm doing broad stroke summaries, feel free to read each individual work to get the exact details.

I'd also like to tackle a different aspect of people's points of a socialistic society spreading the wealth and providing for everyone.

Having been part of a government-run healthcare system before, I'll let you know right now: it does NOT give everyone healthcare as advertised. If you're even lucky enough to get healthcare (yes, you can still be denied care with nationalized healthcare), compared to private healthcare you wait much longer to receive care and the quality of care is worse. Have you ever been told by your doctor, "Well, I want to do this procedure for you since it's better and has a higher success rate, but the regulations say I can't do that for you. I can perform this other procedure for you, but it's likely a waste of time and won't work."? Guess what... I was told that. Welcome to government-run healthcare.

The next argument that will be thrown around is how the poor cannot afford X and Y, some of which is healthcare. While it'd be easy for me to say that many cases of being "poor" are severely relative, especially in the US compared to other countries, I'll offer up my own personal experience. Yes, when growing up in the US I was poor as a child... we're talking "dinner is saltine crackers with a dab of ketchup" poor, assuming there was dinner that night. However, government didn't help my family out of poverty, our church and community did. Little by little, we worked hard and bettered our condition of living to where we are today. There was no sense of entitlement, in fact we hated receiving free things and made sure we earned what we got. No, I wasn't a criminal because of my poor upbringing, if you're wondering.

The whole concept of people working together for the betterment of other people is very good and alive, but its place is with the people, not a government. If the government comes along and says you need something, chances are it's something you can already get, whatever your circumstances may be. In the US (and likely elsewhere), if I asked you if you would trust a politician, what would you say? Likely, one would say no. If you say no, why do you think it's a good idea to let someone you don't trust control aspects of your life?

In closing, I'll offer a little bit of American history since it relates to the discussion at hand. When the US Constitution was being formed, there were mainly two sides to the discussion, the Federalists and Anti-Federalists. Some may automatically think these directly translate into Republican/Democrat, but that's actually not true as the current parties have evolved quite a bit over time. The Federalists wanted a weak, centralized government while leaving the bulk of the power to the States/citizens, and the Anti-Federalists wanted more of a confederacy of States with no central government. Notice something? Both sides were in agreement that the US did not want a big, centralized government holding the majority of power (like what the US has today). Unfortunately, in socialistic societies, the government must retain most, if not all, the power over the people... which is the exact same thing as oppression, the opposite of what the country was founded upon.