A two part question for those considering Socialism

LOLOL.. Saddam was NO threat to anyone. Iraq was already broken by 2 decades of war and sanctions.

 

I remind all of the forum, that is solely your opinion. Seems Clinton, the congress and even the UN did not agree with you.

Since you adore Hillary, just listen to her explain.

 

So Hillary was stupid.. She should have been listening to the Arabs, Europeans, oilmen, historians and diplomats.

 

Trouble was for Saddam is he had struck other nations and coveted oil that was not his for far too long.

 

Gad, Robert.. Iraq shares an oilfield with Kuwait. KSA forgave his OPEC quota debt he incurred during his war with Iran.. Kuwait didn't even though Kuwait has been stealing Iraq oil for years..

Sadam had NO beef with any of the neighbors (except Kuwait) but he had been driven out of Kuwait a decade earlier.

You really know NOTHING at all about Iraq or what happened.

.

 

Based on your arguments socialism doesn’t exist. Every product and every job is the result of capitalism, at least according to all your posts, right? So we have nothing to worry about in regards to the US ever becoming Socialist. Glad we cleared that up.

 

Rand? Ok. You've lost all credibility. She wrote fiction.

 

You really dont know a damned thing about human nature or evolution. Lol.

 

It exists just as Scientology or Catholicism exists, and they are very real. However, just as we will never be going to heaven or hell, or removing Thetans from our bodies, so we will never be able to live without capitalism in a Socialist State.

I invited everyone to supply an example of an exception, and have recieved none so far.

It’s not about whether or not we’ll be excised of Thetans, burn in hell, go to heaven or have a Socialist State. It’s about enduring the rituals, ceremonies, costs and madness of believers as they try to do those things to appease their delusions. That’s the problem. Socialists are as mad as Hatters, and will make our society poor and bankrupt while they try to build their impossible schemes.

 

The problem I see is that never happens, unless you want to consider equality in misery as 'from each, to each.' When we look at Socialist societies throughout history, as well as in current systems, they are destroyers of prosperity....There can be no better examples than Cuba, or Venezuela....

Can you provide an example of a Socialist country where this happens..? This sounds more like a capatialist aspect....

Problem with that is that, while it all sounds equitable in black and white, we know from experience that the average man looses in a Socialist construct to the connected, government class. Or, if you prefer an oligarchal set up. So, what happens is that innovation suffers, invention suffers, and ultimately unless some form of capatalistic structure is introduced people suffer, and die, or revolt leading to ever more authortarian crack down.

I think we do a fair job of that in this country with plenty of opportunity to foster not only innovation, and invention, but success...The dream of having an idea, and taking the chance with the possibility to succeed is unmatched by Socialism. What we have to watch, and luckily the Founding Fathers thought of this, is that if we stick to our Constitution, and limit the Federal government, the states can be the incubators of innovation like they were envisioned...

Market fluctuation is a concern especially when planning your retirement, however it is a proven axiom that over time the market has never failed to deliver an average 5 to 8% overall return. What does SS offer? Less than 1%? So, I think while as we get older your formula is prudent, with young people starting out, their money has the ability to blow away what the average retiree of today looks forward to....

In short, as you can probably tell, I am not a 'big government' kind of person, and think that we need to operate closer to our founding principles of limited Federal Government....

 

Right...so there’s no such thing as a socialist society. So those wringing their hands and losing there minds over the possibility of the US becoming socialist can stop whining about it. At least there is one good thing that came about from one of your threads. Thanks!

 

I'm not proposing a socialist country, but rather to point out that unless you define socialism and capitalism you can't say what we have. I like our mix.
I don't have a big problem with the 401K concept, but I'm not sure how you force people to make that investment. If you don't we will be back in the same place we were when SS was created.
Once you force the investment how do you control which companies get the investment.

 

Part of life is making mistakes...We can't account for people that refuse to look at the big picture, but we also can't place that much trust in government to do the right thing either, they have proven that they don't deserve that trust.

 

Owning material things is the result of the markets which have been around for thousands of years. People are under the assumption that Capitalism is the markets. It isn't and the Oligarchs want to keep it that way. Keep you in the dark about the true nature of Capitalism.

Capitalism is a system of economics. There have only been three known systems in human history. Slavery (lasted the longest), then Feudalism (serfs and lords about 2,000 years), and now Capitalism (employer and employee around 300 years old). All are exploitive of the worker bee. Capitalism is an economic relationship. People always confuse Capitalism with the markets.

Personally, I have only met one person that understand the true nature of Capitalism so the oligarchs have done their job well.

 

Every job is the result of Capitalism but not every product.

 

And what economic system do you think would do better?

 

I want to live in a country that has a government that doesn't go beyond its appropriate purpose. Income redistribution is not an appropriate role for government. The woes of the middle class have resulted from economic globalism. Fixing that would be an appropriate role for government.

 

The jury is still out but most changes have never taken place without revolution. In my thinking, force is the worst way. I hope it does not have to come to that but I fear it could if people don't start getting some relief (medical and such).

There are some interesting worker-owned cooperatives to take a look at that are doing quite well and can hold their own with other types of corporations. https://usworker.coop/what-is-a-worker-cooperative/
https://www.mondragon-corporation.com/en/

I believe Mondragon in Spain was started by a priest.

 

Do you know of a single country like the one you long for?

 

It is much more than globalism. Capitalist corporations are/have flown the coop and are going where the labor is cheap. If you will notice the places they have flown are making out like bandits and creating a middle class and that middle class is more demanding. Once there is a middle class and they start demanding better wages, medical and such, the Corporations will move on to greener pastures. It is a vicious circle.

The rise of Southeast Asia and India are testaments to this. China is already seeing it.

 

The mass buy in needed to have a true revolution in these days is just not there...People are more than willing to watch the latest temper tantrum's of AntiFa on their tv with a glass of wine and some cheese and grapes, but participate? nah...Don't see it.

 

Not according to Larrikin

 

Taxes are "Wealth Redistribution/Socialism" The DOD exists because of Socialism. Obviously most taxes are generated by the means of production... what does this have to do with anything ? In pure Socialism - where the State owns most resources and means of production - taxes the DOD would depend utterly on business.

Your argument depends utterly on the type of economic system that exists. Obviously in a capitalist system the money to do things comes from private business - where else is it going to come from. The same is true in a socialist system sans the word "private".

 

I agree to a point. It may not happen in my lifetime but it will happen if there are no significant changes. I also wonder what will happen to jobs when AI starts taking away the jobs that we thought were not possible. How will the people live? So many unanswered questions.

 

I understand he believes that everything is the result of Capitalism. I don't agree. Capitalism is better than Feudalism but at the expense of .....?

Not just the worker but the very planet we live on. We are out here in space coated with a very thin blue coating called the atmosphere. If you have ever seen pictures of it from space, it is an eye-opener just how vulnerable it is. I doubt human-kind will live to have a revolution. Earth has a way of taking care of inhabitants that keep sticking it to her. She is going to get pissed off and wipe out the whole lot. lol

I say this because Capitalism cannot exist without growth. How far can our planet sustain this growth?