The mentality of socialism versus capitalism

Not true. Those are actually insurance programs. Everybody pays from each paycheck for disability and social security.

If people don't pay into those things, they are not available.

That is much different than welfare programs.

I mean, mandating forced contribution is not the same as voluntary.

Are you seriously suggesting government, or politicians, operate at all within the confines of capitalism? LOL. Government is a monopoly and inherently anti-capitalism, anti-free markets in and of itself. If I don't like what the government is doing, is than an alternative government I can subscribe to?

 

LOL

Which FORCES other people to contribute (potentially involuntarily) to a system or program. That's called a mandate. It's not voluntary.

Really... you have understand these terms. I think they are just contrary to your defense of authoritarianism so you are playing like you can't figure it out.

 

I am using it quite correctly and accurately.

Forcing others to help[ those less fortunate is still violence and theft. There is no excuse for that crap. Voting for it does not justify it nor make the voter less of a despicable coward.

 

There are no controls and gthe rules are meaningless.

Everyone uses gthem properly due to individual choice and self interest which ALWAYS fworks better for all in general than forced collectivization

 

Actually, deaths from covid are higher, not lower according to researchers.

Proper treatment by whom? How?

Just kill them off early!

Unvaccinated folks are keeping the new case numbers up and that keeps people from going to "places with faces"—restaurants, bars, clubs, malls, etc. More virus means more people choosing to stay away. The unvaccinated are preventing an economic recovery that isn't dependant on massive government spending.

This is nonsense, even for children who can get "long covid."

Why don't you do some research instead of sucking up BS from wherever you get your ideas? Too much Joe Rogan rots your brain.

 

Socialism leads to communism.

 

All of them have too much government per capita and less freedom than Americans enjoy. I would do fine in those countries but I wouldn't trade any of them for the U.S.

New Zealanders, by the way, are not particularly friendly to immigrants. I went mountain climbing on the South Island one summer (our winter.) It is one of the most beautiful places on the planet. I don't care for the government there at all.

 

That's it exactly. When the circle of trust is intact, what goes around comes around. When you support the right people, everyone wins. When you support the wrong people, everyone ultimately loses.

Which is of course, the goal - as per your pic. You can't create a permanent underclass of dependent consumers, unless you first seduce them out of their independence.

 

Explain the obstacles which target race (and explain how they target it purely on race).

 

Why don't they? Not many of us under 50 are orphans, so what are you talking about?

 

Ridiculous. Welfare takes MONEY, lots of it.

 

And that's where collectivism comes in. When you have the support of a circle of trust, you can weather those temporary glitches.

 

You asked why I call myself a socialist.

 

Yeah, those 'private communities' aren't a thing in the rest of the world. We keep our places tidy because we're invested in the area, and don't want our property values eroded, or that high rent wasted. Once again, it's a people thing. People with no respect, no sense of self-preservation, and no investment in place, will trash the joint.

We have people like that here too, but they're not common. They stand out big time, too .. because we don't have entire neighbourhoods where it's tolerated. Even in the roughest urban/suburban areas, if you lived like some of the examples from America, eventually your neighbours are going to be p!issed off by your filth and disrespect, and start reporting you.

 

Private property is fundamental - especially for the common man. The rich can afford to risk a life of rent slavery, the common man cannot.

 

Making it even more important that they spend that 25 years paying down a mortgage.

 

1) Socialism IS communism. They're both collectivism.

2) Life is not equal for huge numbers of people - because First World Progressives have broken down the structures which give people strength and use far less resources (family/property/community), creating millions upon millions of isolated individuals, all requiring individual housing and upkeep. Why you think that wouldn't hog most of the world's resources, I can't even begin to understand.

3) Help is provided by your collective. If you choose not to create/safeguard your collective, then the only person 'punishing' you is yourself.

4) Right, which is why we should not be trying to fly solo. Fine if you're rich, you can afford to risk flying solo. However most of us aren't rich, so we rely on the social mammal habit of collectivism. Those who don't, either have the foresight of a three year old, or they simply refuse a life limited by the compromises and obligations of collective. If the latter, why do they then complain about the results of that choice? The answer can only be the former - they're as lacking in foresight as three year olds. Consider .. these are the people you would have us champion, while people literally starve to death outside the First World. Go you.

5) And the vast number of people on benefits who contribute almost nothing to those parks? You're really determined to create more of the same, ain't ya. Falling over yourself to reward dissolution.

 

1) Then they are doing it all very very wrong. That's a personal choice, and has nothing to do with 'the system' or 'the economy'. I know people with one low income job, doing quite well. I'm in that position myself - working part-time hours in a relatively low paid Govt role. We can do this because we've spent our lives making the wise choice, not the easy choice. We chose compromise and 'limitations to lifestyle', so that we would not end up working three jobs and struggling. Stop blaming the world for the poor choices of individuals.

2) Nonsense. MANY working and middle class people have increased their wealth in the past two years. It doesn't take a mega-business or inherited millions - it just takes foresight and careful living. Your frugal working class neighbours might have added another property to their modest portfolio .. gaining traction via unprecented low interest rates. That kind of stuff is happening all around you, but you choose to focus only on the much less common billionaire.

3) You tell us. It's the Welfare State which has created such people.

 

It IS NOT socialism - in any way.

All collectivism is predicated upon the 'work to eat' model. Those who don't participate in full, do not get to play.

And there is no 'redistribution', because there is nothing to redistribute. Only capitalism allows sufficient SURPLUS to engage in the aristocrat/serf redistribution game.

 

I'm not so sure about this country with the draconian abortion laws and the attacks on public education in Oklahoma, Texas and Florida. I used to think we had a step on Canada, but no longer until we stop attacking each other.

What don't you like about the government?

 

1) Capitalism puts the food on their mouths, the ungrateful b@stards.

2) No, State Socialism does that ... because it takes your property and resources, and removes all access to opportunity. It also destroys our survival instincts. A capitalist democracy is the only model which actually allows even the poorest and smallest to get ahead - and go as far as they want. Capitalism provides the framework for financial self-reliance, and democracy provides the freedom to choose your pathway there.

3) Citizen capitalists want more people engaging and generating, not less. It's Welfare Statists who create all the barriers, and keep them razor topped.

4) Meritocracy is the ONLY fair and just system.

 

It's a false dichotomy at best, a silly anecdote with no bearing on usual realities at worst. Capitalism and socialism need not be religions but rather tools for different purposes. Religious devotion to one or the other means you're trying to solve every problem with one tool when other tools are available.

You want innovation? Use some capitalism on that sector of the economy. Take advantage of greed to fuel growth. You want to make sure people get a fair shot at becoming innovators rather than wealth being continuously concentrated into fewer and fewer corrupt hands leading to a self-perpetuating cycle of unearned advantages squandering the talent of those who never had a shot? Use socialism on the delivery of education and healthcare.

The biggest key is to think about whether the incentives you set up lead to the outcomes you want. Greed is not always bad, but not always good either.

 

Couldn't possibly agree more, on all points.

 

You are finally right!! Life is NOT fair, and there is nothing that can (or should) be done about.

When I was but a boy, I would say to my father, "But that's not fair!!!" At this point I can't remember what I might have been referring to specifically, but he always responded the same. "Life isn't fair, son." After hearing those wise words, I finally absorbed them and understood the point he was trying to make, and to this day I consider that probably the best advice I ever got from him. Life is NOT fair, so you have to grab it by the horns and create your own version.

It's not enough to sit back and wait for someone else to do something to better your life, you've got to step up and do it yourself.

 

And in scenario where stepping up might be harder, make damned sure you have a support team to boost you.