We’ve tried nationalism on for size, why not socialism?

I am on the pretty far right, and I believe that most Americans have too much stuff.

I also believe that it's their business, and not mine to judge for them.

 

The people that want your stuff have plenty.
They just want you to supply their needs so their stuff can be used for fun.

 

We're trying out national socialism right now. Maybe we can move on to socialism after Trump's out.

 

Maybe you can pay your own way and stop trying to get your hands on other people's stuff

 

Take a lesson from an old woman who lived & suffered through socialism and explains how the people were tricked into accepting it and later found themselves enslaved. Towards the end of this presentation she reveals the key to keeping the people free. It's perhaps the best anti-socialist education I've ever seen.

 

Socialist are just cowards to afraid to openly embrace their communist beliefs. Some would say that is untrue, but follow the socialist path and it all ends up just where Marx wanted it. Its like liberals saying gun control isn't about banning all guns, a total lie when you follow the path to completion...

 

Because I want to keep what i have worked for. plain and simple.

 

Unemployed? You should look in the paper there's plenty of jobs.

It will mean giving up your benefits of course.

 

Because no country that adopted socialism never became a great country but in many cases became shithole countries.

 

But the difference between you and the left is that they think they should have the raw undiluted power to decide how much and of what everyone gets

 

The only thing that was removed by the bill you site was Glass-Steagle the only thing Glass-Steagle did was let our banks get to big to fail which did not half to happen either. All Glass-Steagle was was a bit of out moded bank specific anti trust legislation. NOthing in Glass Staegle would have or could have prevent the bursting of the housing bubble.

 

And there it is...

Behind every leftist who claims they are simply liberal and interested in helping the poor and afflicted is a socialist who wants to do away with capitalism and the free market. And then it's property rights, individual liberty and freedom, all in the name of the collective.

Best part of this nonsense is this:

"All I will say about Venezuela is it is an example of socialist policies being implemented poorly..."

This is golden; it's what leftists have said about the Soviet Union, East Germany, Cambodia, Cuba... All the places where socialism reaches its logical conclusion.

They simply didn't do it "right."

 

Trump isn't as divisive as Obama. Trump loves everyone, unless they're illegally here or they're trying to screw the U.S. with high tariffs.

Race relations were set back 30 years under Obama.

 

I treat everyone the same. I recommend everyone do that.

 

Which should quickly lead any rational actor to the conclusion that it cannot be done right and then trying to explore why that might be.

 

No thank you socialism... because history.

Because the holocaust.
Because the Gulags. Because Mao, because Hitler, because Stalin, because Polpot.

Because 100's of millions of systematic murders the like of which the human race had never before seen and never has since.
The darkest period in human history.

Oh yeah. I want socialism here.
Of course. Why wouldn't I?
What could go wrong.

 

Whenever I have doubts or questions, I like to check the scoreboard. America and its capitalistic system is beating everyone else in a blowout. I don't think I want to try out a losing system just to see if it fits, like the NE Patriots won't try out a Brady replacement QB graduating from Pisgah U even if he had a pretty good season.

 

My friend, sht happens. I am not talking about the poor regulations promulgated by bureaucrats. I am talking about the regulations
that are put in place because of abuse and there is much abuse. I am in business for 30 years and was affected by regulations
that were caused by the abuse of others. My suggestion was to not to eliminate regulations that affect the public in a major way and there are many. To cheerfully slash without weighing the effect on people is idiotic and only serves to permit business to take advantage for profit.

 

Trump's behavior is that of love? He is the most divisive president in history as he attacks our institutions, our allies, individuals, separates families, sidles up to dictators, gives huge tax breaks to the wealthy and starts a trade war that will have a huge negative effect on working middle-class Americans.
He is indeed a love child.

 

Hey, you can convince your state to do it then fine. Test it out and we will see how it works. That is the beauty of our system. You can try wacky things and if it blows up in your face it does not hurt all of us.

 

Since when has our country been founded on the principal of government ensuring happiness? I don't think this is a responsibility of government, and its far too "loose" in terms of quantitative benchmarks to be able to provide. All I see is a large slippery slope that allows power hungry politicians to make decisions based on making people happy... which is impossible. You can never satisfy all of the people all of the time.

How about instead, we provide a government that gets out of the way, and allows people to find happiness in the format that best serves them?

Show me a country that is comparable in size and complexity, geography, diversity, etc. that has successfully implemented socialism?

Pure socialism is similar to pure capitalism, or laissez faire capitalism, its dangerous. In fact, most places have instituted an economic and social system that is a mixture of the two to some varying level of degrees. Most of the countries that have leaned more socialist, are typically smaller, less populated, less diverse and complex, and even in those cases, several are failing. Greece included.

Why is my compliance with single payer required for it to work? Why do I have to participate against my will to achieve YOUR happiness?

Abundance is the antithesis of supporting socialist policies.

I have done my research, and based on nearly everything I see, here are the root reasons for support of socialism:

1. Social justice. Remove the ability over ownership of commerce as a means to reduce the ultra wealthy, and ultimately level the playing filed.

2. Ability to obtain an arbitrary standard of living, simply by breathing. People who support these concepts feel entitled to a certain level of happiness, which ultimately comes back to providing a minimum standard of living.

3. Attempts to provide "equal outcomes" rather than "equal opportunities".

In short, we are a country that has seen tremendous success in innovation, research and development, and economic explosion because people are not guaranteed a minimum standard of living. Instead, they are free to achieve as much or as little as desired. The only people that I have ever met that support socialism are those who are too lazy or too incapable to make it, and expect that we mitigate wealth and make everybody low income earners as a better solution than the wealth gap that exists in the current system.

I.e. socialist are generally the losers.

 

Uh... it's the envy of the world? Its nearly broke. Its massively inefficient compared to private retirement systems.

I would MUCH rather deal with my investment fund manager and company than deal with the government SS office.

In short, SS sucks. It doesn't actually provide a sustainable retirement plan, its nearly broke, its hugely inefficient, and basically sucks.

 

Sir those are far and away in the minority these days.

 

Why can't we have both? We'll just be National Socialists.

*smirk*

 

Haha, I see what you did there...