Socialism 101

It depends, Hoover Dam could not be allowed to fail. The private sector should not enjoy that same privilege and immunity without a not-for-profit Cause.

 

I'm not going to let you extend the logic to the point that you aren't even addressing the issue.

If the money is loaned out for investment even if the business fails did it do more good in the public sector or private.

If you are going to argue for confiscatory taxation you must first show that the money will do more good in public sector than the private. Otherwise you are just arguing for revenge theft.

 

Such as what? Cure for polio? Nope. Cure for cancer? Nope. Cure for anything? Nope.

 

Yes, it's very expensive because we have excessive government regulations.

Do you know HOW to lower the price of an economic commodity like healthcare??????

You either increase the supply and/or lower the demand. The ACA for example, does the opposite of both. The end result is MORE MANDATED COVERAGE=higher prices. Shafting providers out of payments may lower prices initially but wait until enough physicians jump ship which is already occurring and the government will HAVE to RAISE reimbursements and start rationing care to cut costs instead......

The BEST way to provide the most product with the least amount of resources would be to eliminate government AND insurance from the healthcare equation.

Dude..... Americans are fat, lazy, uneducated, spoiled entitlement brats as a generality. They vote for whoever the corporate media tells them to vote for or whoever promises to give them the most stuff for nothing.

Look? We've had the same exact results with either party in charge and yet.....98% of Americans trip over themselves to get to the voting booth to vote for their favorite letter.

 

America's healthcare is very expensive because it's profit driven.

 

Oh geez.... All that crap has been debunked millions of times.

1. Access DOES NOT EQUAL QUALITY...... Do you claim a Lamborghini is POOR QUALITY because not everyone can afford one?

2. Our mortality rates are due to homicides by FIREARMS and accidental deaths, as in Americans drive long distances in these things called cars, and poor lifestyle choices. Take the homicides and accidental deaths by firearms out of the equation alone and get back to me.

3. Infant mortality is calculated differently in each country. When a premature baby is born, we actually count it as a birth.........

4. Check your source for your information. It's likely some crap socialist source advocating for socialist healthcare and access for everyone.

I'm not wasting anymore time on debunking crap that's been debunked. You can read plenty of research by REAL experts that know our healthcare system is the best in the world. The problems with it are cost and accessibility, NOT quality, especially when measured against socialist healthcare where you have to wait 6 months for a specialist..... Why is there a shortage of specialists in socialized healthcare? We'll let you figure it out.

 

America's healthcare is very good because it's profit driven.

 

Ok so ACA didn't just mandate levels of coverage most Americans will never use.........

Profit driven=competition=lower prices. Once again, the reason why our healthcare is so expensive is excessive government regulation, like ACA for example.

 

I find the value of a post for real useful information is inversely proportional to the number of ROFLOL icons......
In this case you have just dismissed real data, with halfassed assumptions.
And dodged the real issue, why does health care cost so much in the US with our "free market" system?
And why does it cost less, a lot less, where they have more government involvement, the more government involvement, the lower the cost....

 

No, it doesn't. It goes into the same tirade about selfish and greedy blah blah blah because we won't give spoiled rotten entitlement brats their little "goodies" your politicians promised them for votes.

1. moral argument nothing more than selfish and greed which is HIGHLY amusing coming from someone that demands we hand OUR EARNINGS over to someone who didn't EARN them..... I think it's pretty obvious WHO is selfish and greedy.

2. No collective responsibility for citizens?????? My arguments are based in HUMAN DEVELOPMENT. Show me ONE individual who obtained human development by being handed other people's earnings?

Not my fault, progressives are in general, co-dependent and lack any understanding of basic human development principles.

You CLAIM that handing out welfare is the caring and compassionate thing to do while those on state aid continue to pile up approaching 100 million Americans. Looks like SOMETHING is WRONG with your ridiculous ideology.

Here's a newflash for you. The VERY BASIC TASK a human being needs to accomplish BEFORE they can grow as a human being is PROVIDE for their OWN NEEDS. You CANNOT move to the next level of growth and development until you can meet this VERY basic fundamental need. Handing someone something for nothing may put some food in their belly short term, but long term it can and in most cases cause harm, damage.

Irrelevant.

Really? And you can cite this in the constitution? Or perhaps you can cite the progressive income tax system out founding fathers left in place?

 

Unfortunately for you, I READ where you got your data you never linked. READ the conclusions...... Read the part about firearms and accidental deaths, how it impacts the US mortality rates. It's contained right in the report you never linked!

We don't have a "free market" system. It COSTS SO MUCH because government in collusion with health insurance corporations, have all but ILLIMINATED any competition.

 

First thing is to remove the hyperbole and propaganda and the just plain wrong.


A.Politically-Socialism is founded on egalitarianism. Every citizen of the state has the same right to economic goods as any other,regardless of their ability to create, produce etc. We see this ideology behind modern day progressives e.g. you deserve a "living"wage regardless of what you produce, the demonization of anyone who's financially better off regardless of their extra skill, creativity etc.

B. Economically-In order to ensure the equal distribution of economic goods, the state determines what to produce and who will produce. There's only a handful of command system economies left because of obvious shortcomings to the economic system..... e.g. North Korea, Cuba.
Rationale– factually wrong.
The list of reasons why socialism fails as an economic system are numerous:

1. Little to no private property

2. No incentive to create AKA ingenuity and innovation

3.Inefficiency of a centralized government producing and distributing goods and services

4. The state determines what is produced and how it's produced instead of consumers who actually consume the goods......

ad infinitum

Rationale for removing – simple assertions without argument.

What do we have today on the left????

Well, there's few actual"socialists" left. MOST people with any kind of ability to think understands that socialism as en economic systems FAILS hardcore. There's SOME that will call for turning healthcare over to the government completely or nationalized oil, etc. but their stupidity and inability to study history is few and far between.

What we have now is the modern day progressive or democratic socialist. They're more than happy to have capitalism produce wealth. They just think they're entitled to a larger piece of the pie, sometimes with the only caveat of being born..... In other words, they want capitalism to fuel their perpetual welfare state as they EXPECT the government to redistribute wealth accordingly because they "deserve" it for doing nothing.


Rationale for removing – hyperbole.


What they FAIL to realize is EVERY dollar spent on "welfare"(not general welfare) has to be taken directly from "producers".

Take healthcare for example. The U.S had led on R&D in healthcare for decades. If we had a socialized healthcare system like the rest of the world, the entire world would likely be decades behind in medical diagnosis and treatment. Some nations are catching up on R&D but only because Americans put forth the initial R&D effort.

In short: The left wants the benefits of capitalism and the benefits of socialism at the same time. They want their cake and eat it too.That's why I like to characterize them as blood sucking leeches.

I have a moral issue against modern socialism too. The state has no moral justification to use force in order to take from one who earns and hand to another who didn't. That's called robbery under any other circumstances. A MORAL society respects the ability of others and their private property. If a government collects taxes, it SHOULD be used as a benefit to the entire society e.g. infrastructure,research, education.

Rationale for removal– factually wrong, claims without evidence, hyperbole, normative statements.

Not much left is there?

 

Perhaps you'd like to provide this evidence of a "robbery". I hear all the time about how rich people steal from those who have nothing to begin with but I've never seen anyone prove it.

Actually, one of the first posts was a poster advocating for national oil in the U.S. Apparently it's not as irrelevant as you thought.

 

You did an excellent job of providing a logical/rational counterpoint.

Let me see if I can summarize your post...... "You're wrong!"

 

A fair summary I think. Yes, you are wrong

 

Hey look? You want to pick a point and debate it? I'm all about it. Bring something other than "You're wrong!".

 

That's communism, not socialism. Do some research and try again.

 

What do you mean by nationalizing it? Handing it over to some central government like the feds?

 

Here are the robbers of workers labors, who take their wages and profits at the point of a gun.


https://nyse.nyx.com/

Its irrelevent to the thread, or are saying we can discuss your grandmas skateboard?

 

What a marvelous idea and one I have advocated for a long time.

 

More like who provides for your retirement assuming you're not dumb enough to rely on SS alone.

- - - Updated - - -

Both founded on the same principles and ideology.

 

Retirement! What have you been smoking? They don't provide anything but misery to workers, and steal the food right off his children's table!!

 

So once more, why are you in favor of the system that costs twice as much as any other system and delivers at best equal results (if you ignore the bad results).....?

 

This is wrong .
When the means of production are owned by the state we have state capitalism.
Social ownership means that those who work the means own them .
In a perfect communist society everything (outside civil services) is private and everyone is self employed ... and of course there is no state.

This is a big discussion , if consumers are benefited from quality products and prices how profit is generated ?
Easy to answer : by exploiting the most expensive commodity , labor .
And this brings us to the point where laborers are also consumers and are exploited in order to get benefit from the commodities they make through their labor , remove the capitalist factor and everything will be much better.

Yes Tito allowed cooperatives but still not a single step was taken towards communism and stalling on the phase of perpetual socialism can only do harm . The role of the state either in capitalism or in transitional socialism is to favor the elites whoever they are capitalists or party members & vanguardists which makes little difference for the worker.

Sovietia and the eastern block had their own theories about cost-benefit and this is why their economies were so different commodity wise too.
Capitalism is chaotic and this is due to creative accounting

 

Even if that were true, which it's not, that doesn't make them interchangeable. You might just as well say that capitalism is identical to feudalism. Don't expect people to take you too seriously in a discussion on economics if in your first post you demonstrate a fundamental misunderstanding of basic concepts.