AOC is socialist. Is that bad?

bailing out failed banks and people just causes moral hazard which explains why people starve to death when they try bailouts. 1+1=2

 

They often do that. Primarily because they have no idea what Socialism is. It's just a 'soft' name for Communism.

 

as if you put someone on welfare and they say, thank you, this is enough, I'll never ask for more, and I'll raise my children not to feel they are entitled to welfare.

 

yes federal and state budgets are now $8 trillion and liberals are saying we need more socialist redistribution?? Its proof that socialism does not work.

 

They literally think it means free stuff and fun times. Paid for by someone else. Master/Slave.

 

Real socialism does work, but their weird fake version does not. All they are doing is frigging around with (ie, wasting) the profits of Capitalism.

 

People starved to death in 2008?



[

 

When bailouts were big enough 120 million starved to death under libsocialism.

 

where???

 

Where and when was this?

 

Wherever it's applied. Keeping in mind, real socialism is necessarily voluntary, and if it's voluntary then it necessarily works. It's a 'self-limiting' method of living. Any stable multi-generational family sharing a home, is Socialism. Assuming all adults contribute to the income and work of the property.

 

Socialism is when govt owns major industries, not when it runs fire and police, and not when husband & wife share house. Good grief!!


so·cial·ism
/ˈsōSHəˌlizəm/
noun

1. • (in Marxist theory) a transitional social state between the overthrow of capitalism and the realization of Communism.

 

Yes, but competition creates one or a very few winners along with many losers. Socialism works from a cooperative perspective to make everyone winners and avoid losers. Socialism is the better system, unless you want to continue having a handful of extremely rich, powerful individuals owning & controlling everything around you, like we have in America now. I see nothing admirable about that.

 

You never quite get it. There are not now, nor has there ever been 30 million illegals in America. I'm learning that a closed mind is a hard thing to penetrate.

 

Here we go again. . .30 million fictional illegal aliens. Whew. You're exhausting.

 

Well for starters, socialism is in complete contrast to every principal the United States, and liberty for the individual was founded on.

 

If Trump's growing immigrant incarcerations & family separations along our southern border are an example of what conservative leadership is, then I strongly oppose it.

 

There are bad individuals in EVERY political ideology. Stalin & Mao were bad liberals. Hitler, Mussolini, & Franco were extreme nationalists who shared many values with today's conservative factions. I don't think it's as easy as 1, 2, 3, assigning them to any hard core specific group or ideology. Every Ideology has good & bad representatives.

 

Marx was an economic philosopher who never lived under socialism or communism. For him it was all theoretical. Lenin liked to pretend to support socialism, but was totally a communist tyrant. His often quoted saying that you quote here is wrong. While I agree there are a few socialists who lean toward communism, just as a few conservatives lean toward right wing dictatorships, most don't. You can always find an example to illustrate ANYTHING, but that example doesn't represent the general reality. Most socialists, & especially those identifying themselves as "Democratic Socialists," want a cooperative system between capitalism & socialism that will continue using capitalism to create wealth & individual opportunity, while using socialism to provide social programs to spread the benefits of that wealth to all citizens.

 

I keep having to repeat myself. You're NOT listening. China was a COMMUNIST state, NOT a socialist one. Yes, China abandoned its COMMUNIST agenda in favor of capitalism, but that had NOTHING TO DO with socialism.

 

I've lived in America long enough to have seen "rioting in the streets" here. Rioting in the streets doesn't necessarily imply a failure of government. It can imply a failure of many different possibilities--including a harmful business policy.

How are you evaluating your statement that W Europeans live at 50% of our GDP? How does that inform us on comparing their daily lifestyle vs ours? How are we better off? How are they not? They have benefits that I know we don't. What are we getting for that extra 50% GDP that's so impressive to you?

 

Your post belies your ignorance on the topic.

 

I am hopeful that over time, gradually, more & more Americans will wake up & support these social changes. It benefits them most of all.

 

There are many ways to combine capitalism & socialism. Perhaps France's

Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Germany, etc., etc.. . .

 

They won't, because it doesn't. A master/slave arrangement (which is what American 'socialists' are seeking) will never be agreed to. And it absolutely DOES NOT benefit the most. It benefits only the 'master'.