Why doesn't socialism work?

ENOUGH of the rat-hole one liners, please!

Either you substantiate the claims you make in rebuttal by collateral evidence or one shuts-up and moves-on!

One-liners are the bane of this "supposed" DEBATE FORUM !!!!!!!

 

What "above"?

Learn how to "quote" the person's rebuttal when rebutting. (Not easy on a "smart"-phone, is it!!!))

This is a DEBATE FORUM not a one-liner MESSAGE BOARD .... !

 

You are full of it. You don't understand accounting, business finance, or economics. I tried to open a discussion of worker cooperatives, pro and con, but I can see I was wasting my time.

BTW, my daughter is the VP of a major bank and responsible for commercial loans of $25+m.

 

What's with you? My post included quotes of what I was responding to.

 

BS has NEVER BEEN an appropriate argument in a debate-forum.

Especially as one-liner sarcastic-rebuttal ...

 

Frankly, I thought the same.

But your remarks were simply not relevant to issue being discussed - largely because you have no idea whatsoever of alternative political-thinking.

Which is a great American mental fallacy. The Great Recession proved how painfully rotten is the capital-system (meaning Finance Industry) in the US because it was being insufficiently supervised.

And apparently, for that thought to FINALLY SINK IN it has become apparent that you will need even a larger dose of a GREAT RECESSION to understand that a Social Democracy is a far better alternative system of governance (in a capitalist financial system) than that of the US!

Really! The last Great Recession has taught YOU-PLURAL nothing, absolutely nothing regarding the innate unfairness of the American system-of-governance.

You-plural elected a smart-guy (Obama) to get you out of the mess in which his predecessor had placed you-plural. Then in the next mid-terms you Obama's you-know-whats off by turning the HorR (from which all spending-bills must exit first) over to the Replicant Party. Which then forced the US into five more long, long, long years of no job-creation because it refused any further Stimulus-Spending!

You don't care to believe that? Then look at the underlying proof in this BLS-chart here!

 

Obviously your daughter is way better informed than you are on the topic and FTR I was a VP in charge of Commercial Loan COMPLIANCE for one of the top 3 banks prior to retiring after several DECADES in the banking sector.

Furthermore you were ONLY DENIGRATING worker owned businesses rather than attempting to have a discussion about them.

So denial of the content of your own posts CONFIRMS that the disqualification is JUSTIFIED!

Have a nice day!

 

We are all born socialists. We are all born selfish and shortsighted. We're all socialists until we grow up and earn our own money. Socialism is something that we provide to small children as we teach them to take authority over and responsibility for themselves. Socialism is one of age is a Peter Pan Syndrome; it is a desire to remain in the socialism of their youth.

 

I've simply asked you to refer to an economic study that supports your position. Since then you've gone into grunt dodge mode. Please put that right.

 

So, in your claimed expertise ... you never ran across a business with unsecured credit? That's absurd.

The only thing I said about worker-owned businesses is that they have a hard time attracting large amounts of capital. Why would you disagree with something so obvious?

I didn't backtrack. Who are you kidding?

 

Yeh, I know. But how does that make their reporting valid or invalid depending on whether they agree with me or not?

Should have read your links before posting them if you don’t like their content or question their validity.

That’s pretty obvious. What I’m asking is why one shows a pretty big drop in student performance overall and one doesn’t. The only thing they agree on is the widening gap between achievers and non achievers.

 

Socialism is also worker-owned businesses. The military and police (you wouldn't want them privatized, would you?) and public education.

 

ALL credit is SECURED in one way or another. Only once have I encountered a commercial loan that did not have collateral however it was secured by a PERSONAL guarantee of payment. If I told you who had signed that surety note you would understand why the loan was granted but I am not at liberty to divulge it. FTR that particular commercial bank had NEVER had a single loan default in their entire history because they only made commercial loans to Fortune 100 corporations.

Because anyone who has any actual KNOWLEDGE of Commercial Lending knows that is patently FALSE! Do you want to KNOW who actually does have a hard time attracting large amounts of capital? The criminal IMPOTUS because he has a crappy track record with US banks. Not one of them will lend him a dime these days which is why he is in bed with Russian money launderers instead.

Are you DENYING your own words denigrating worker owned corporations?

 

You know, if I had it to do over again, I would entitle this thread "Can worker ownership and control of the means of production succeed as an economic model?"

This, or alternatively, "government ownership and control of the means of production" is what I wanted to discuss.

75% of the posts I spawned are given over to quibbling over definitions.

Is it too late to ask of everyone, "Can worker ownership and control of the means of production" work in today's world? ( The label doesn't matter.)

 

The union always promotes members' issues as the overriding priority. We're years behind in using computer technology in schools because teachers are convinced widespread computer use will take teachers' jobs. NEA "research" and publications downplay the value of computers.

Huh? Who says I'm rejecting my sources?

Comparing PISA to NAEP requires comparing the tests and methodology. I'm not interested enough to make the effort.

 

Don't need a study I cited actual history. If you don't want to discuss oh well.

 

Government ownership isnt socialism. Perhaps know the basics before posting?

 

"Garden variety?" Not sure who you're talking about.

The people running the Fed day-to-day aren't the Warren Buffetts. They're hirelings.

People whose money was tied up in a business are the ones I'm talking about.

 

So your stance is so water tight you dont actually need evidence? Wowsers.

Back in the real world, supply side economics is obvious nonsense. We saw that with Thatcherism: quadruping of unemployment, and with an economic reset following deindustrialisation, a low skilled equilibrium characterised by working poverty and zero hour contracts.

 

The history is the evidence compare the years I cited.

 

You've provided nothing. Post-truthing is the norm in the US now? Just stating 'I have evidence, I just wont give any' is standard practice?

 

I'm interested in redistributing income with measures like a negative income tax.

Trumper dumb. You assume answers are either "do nothing" or have government set up a bureaucracy.

You're a historian?

 

It doesn't work. Either the lowest income is too low or the marginal tax rate too high.

Much better to go for a minimum income guarantee with multiple tax rates to ensure progressivity.

 

Canada has a much higher immigration rate.



https://www.indexmundi.com/factbook/compare/canada.united-states/demographics

 

And?