The US is already Socialist

No, you are merely repeating inaccuracy. Its the same abuse of the economic spectrum that we see from the right wing.

 

Your arm waving is all over the south 300 acres.

 

the US is not purely capitalistic. that isn't going to stop being true. No country is purely socialist or capitalist.

 

We are the only creatures that pursue our own destruction, and think we are really clever doing it.

 

You keep coming out with nonsense vocab. The US is capitalist. Indeed, it is neoliberal (i.e market fundamentalist). Of course there is intervention (from price fixing to public good provision). That's a natural part of capitalism. Indeed, capitalism is inherently unstable and profit will not be reproduced under any laissez-faire drivel.

 

The lack of credible critique only confirms what I said. You need to learn some political economy and then get back to me. I look forward to it!

 

the US is partially capitalist, and partially socialist. that is not debatable, nor will it stop being true no matter how hard you stomp your feet.

 

Its certainly not debatable. A socialist economic paradigm and a capitalist economic paradigm are mutually exclusive. A simple definition of capitalism gives it away somewhat...

"Capitalism is an economic system in which surplus value is extracted in the production process by using wage labour and utilized in the circulation process to sustain capital accumulation"

The existence of government intervention doesn't mean 'socialistic'. That's drivel on a par with 'tax is theft'

 

no matter how many times you repeat this, it will not change the fact that the no country is purely capitalist or purely socialist.

 

Ideologues obsess over their airy-fairy fantasies of slavishly undiluted dogmas, subjecting every aspect of governance to their prissy "pc" demands, but the pragmatic reality is that all the most successful nations on earth are integrations of socialistic and capitalistic desiderata.

Theoretical pipe dreams aside, what actually works best is what works best.

 

What is more socialist than forcing senior citizens and single and childless home owners to pay taxes to educate children that are not theirs??Something we have done virtually since the inception of theUSA.

 

I understand this was just a heavy handed way of responding to posters thinking that single payer is the leap into socialism. they keep pointing to failing european countries that are 2x more government intrusives that most dems want to go.

 

You're like someone that is convinced 2 plus 2 can't equal 4. I've given an economic definition of capitalism, using that to prove your folly. Perhaps you'd like to refer to an economist that talks about "its a bit capitalist, a bit socialist". Good luck!

 

Another way to consider definitions is to consider the definitive free market. Anything less that a 100% free market is tending to socialism by definition. They are opposite ends of a spectrum.

When I was in college, a professor assigned us to solve a real-world problem using a solution that was neither capitalist or socialist.

You can't. Any real solution to a real problem combines elements of socialism and capitalism.

 

The existence of market socialism demonstrates your folly

 

There is not now nor has there ever been a truly FREE MARKET,someone ALWAYS has their thumb on the scale or some other way of slanting the transaction in their favor.

 

Imagine that folk actually think a free market would be a good thing? Weird!

 

Here's the reason why I don't criticize other nation's welfare/social systems;

…….BECAUSE The US is the 2nd largest social spender after France.

Really?

Yep!



https://topforeignstocks.com/2019/0...-a-percentage-of-gdp-in-oecd-countries-chart/

 

Being socialized or social, and socialism are two entirely different things -- not even close. Socialism is a prescribed economic construct. It has nothing to do with people being social. Are you insinuating that only capitalism is subject to corrupting forces?????? The potential for any wealth through greed is the basis of capitalism (not to mention the basis for most things.) Capitalism, like any system, needs rules and regulation, though it ain't "closing loopholes" whatever that means. A pure laissez-faire capitalistic system would be chaos if not anarchy. But laws and regulations are the solution to that problem, not upsetting the entire fruit basket, or horn of plenty, as it were.

 

Welfare and social spending do not make nor define socialism.

 

The generic definition of SOCIALISM is: a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole. It differs from CAPITALISM in that it is administered publicly rather than privately, is nonprofit, and is instituted for the benefit of all, rather than select individuals or groups. It can be either products or services.

Certainly, socialism is also vulnerable to corrupting forces, but greed is the motivating factor in either case, and naturally, capitalism is a MUCH greater catalyst.

The rest of your post only reinforces my point that our country is NECESSARILY a combination of capitalism and socialism.

 

Can you give even ONE example of uncompromised capitalism in a functioning democracy??? That is the REAL issue proposed in this thread.

 

So what you're saying is that socialism is
a brick houuuse

 

If you know how to do that, you would win the Nobel Prize

 

"all the things we think we need to keep us from killing ourselves off. " Yes, because that's what animals do. While we are animals, we are at the top of the food chain.
"The principles of nature worked flawlessly for millions of years, and never got to "the last creature left".
"WE are the first species in history likely to be the cause of or own extinction. WE are the destroyers, the usurpers, the spoilers." Two statements that oppose each other. Can't have it both ways.