Leftist economics makes no sense

In a broad sense, I am talking big picture.

Leftist economics ( i.e. socialist, progressives ) makes no sense. Today's American progressives want equality of outcome. No rich, no poor. Tax the rich and give the money to the poor. And they argue for a comprehensive cradle to grave welfare state welfare state.

Then when you ask a leftie "and who is going to pay for these welfare programs?" They say the rich.

CHALLENGE! Hold on one second. If you live in a classless society you can't turn to the rich to pay for your welfare state because there are no rich.

 

What is 'leftist economics' when it's at home? Not the nuttiness that caused the bankers' slump,clearly; some strange ghost in the heads of American weirdoes, I suppose. Ugh!

 

Well if leftist economics dont work, how would you explain the presence of so many Leftist economies in the G20

 

This is a poor evaluation. First, they aren't after equality of outcome (they merely want a lower poverty rate). The welfare state, in contrast, isn't specific to 'American progressives'. Its a basic requirement for a well oiled capitalist system, particularly given its tendency towards mass unemployment.

Your whole argument is based on nonsense

 

They don't think that far ahead. They never do. Lefties never think beyond today. That's why they are always surprised by the inevitable new problems that pop up tomorrow as a result of the failed policies they put in place today. They never learn.

 

This is empty whinge. Try and pretend you have some economic comment to justify it!

 

People who advocate a classless society (socialists, communists) aren't the ones advocating extensive welfare systems. You're incorrectly linking socialists to what you would call "liberals".

We (speaking for communists such as myself) view the advocation of welfare systems as a move to preserve capitalist society by alleviating social tensions that could eventually lead to it's downfall, not a step towards a classless society. The difference between conservatives and liberals is that liberals are more pragmatic when it comes to preserving capitalism.

 

You can always go to marxists.org and read about left economics , i am sure that you will be surprised .

I think Lenin said something like "capitalists will survive all the crises if the working class are paying for them" .

 

What exactly is the US Left doing to reduce poverty?

 

They don't have power. Consensus politics will also encourage the status quo; which is a social wage associated with very little real redistribution

 

You ignored my question - What exactly is the US Left doing to reduce poverty?

 

Have you considered the possibility that the economic policies you're (vaguely) describing make no sense to you not because they actually makes no sense but because you've failed to understand them?

 

Detail the Left's economic policies to us.

The intention of each, how it was implemented, and what the results are to date.

 

That would take too long. Left wing economic policies are quite diverse, reflecting the quite distinct political economic approaches adopted.

 

No. Not least because I've no idea what "the left" is meaning today (the definition shifts constantly) and I'm no economic expert anyway so couldn't do the subject justice. I could only given you my personal, layman's opinion but I won't do that here and be associated with the purely political labels of hate.

I was just making a general point; Just because something appears senseless to you doesn't automatically mean it is.

I'm sure there are plenty of independent professional sources of information about any specific economic policies or wider socio-economic concepts people might care to learn about. Maybe you or the OP could read up and explain in more detail exactly what aspects of which policies you actually object to, discussing the economics without the political baggage. Entirely up to you of course.

 

Pick your 10 "favorite".

The intention of each, how it was implemented, and what the results are to date.

 

You don't know what the left means, but you associate the discussion with the politics of hate?

Gee, which side makes the other out to be mean and greedy?

The left says we need to lower the cost of medical care (Affordable Care Act), yet their "solution" increases the cost. Does that make sense?

The left says education is important, and needs to be improved, and they have put a lot of money and programs in place to improve it. Has education got better?

What the left says, doesn't talley with the results of their method.

Is there a reason you disagree with the statement? If so, that is what we want to know.

 

Why would I do that? I follow market socialism and therefore have no interest in summarising the policies supported by what the fellow calls 'progressives'. Show some work ethic!

 

Gee, here it looked like you were well versed in left wing economic policies

Now, it looks like you don't know, but can't let on your level of ignorance.

Amusing - you are the one that refuse to do any work....

 

Its not as homogeneous (and authoritarian) as your right wing dear chap. And no, I do not cheer your bone idleness. If you'd like to attack a specific policy then go ahead and try. Your choice would amuse me. I'll give you 8 or so hours to craft something. It best be of good quality!

 

Ha ha ha.

You proclaim expertise, yet swerve and dodge to avoid answering any questions.

It can't be laziness, you have more than 23,000 posts.

It can only be ignorance.

 

The lefts model doesnt work on the very basic level of big forever growing govt, their endless thirst to give more to the non productive and of course their leaking (sometimes open) border policies.

Every single dollar the govt gets comes from private industry or debt. With debt comes repayments meaning they have to raise even more money, the more they expand govt and welfare the more they have to slug company/ private industry workers for the money. Many companies who have to compete in a global environment go bust or move their operation and jobs overseas. We now have less of a base now to slug and more people to supply with govt services..... so up with the taxes again, and around and around we go!

Sure govt jobs create some economic activity for private industry, but its a false economy. If it werent all we'd need to do is employ half the population in comfy govt jobs, the rest will find employment in the booming private sector. It just doesnt work like that, while it stimulates some activity its always at a net loss to private industry. The loss somewhere else is greater!

The only answer is smaller, more efficient govt / govt services to keep the overheads down on business.

 

You had over 8 hours and that's the best you can manage? Can't you even refer to one leftist policy that you can critique (with validity)?

I blame Fox News!

 

The point is that the term (and use of "the right" is no better) is used to lump together concepts or people that it's been predetermined the speaker is going to dislike. It's not about an honest definition about different political ideas (something that is much more complex as to work with a simply binary split), it's about feeding an "us and them" attitude, which is never constructive.

I don't know the details but I doubt it's that straight forwards. Is the increase short term or long term? Is the increase overall or just shifting a cost to the state? Is the increase a result of bad policy or corrupt people taking advantage of the shifting situation? Is there really an increase in cost or is it political rhetoric? It's not going to be a simple question of "good or bad" is it.

Education is a decade-long if not inter-generational process so it's hardly relevant to lay failing educational standards at the feet of any short-term government. It's a wider societal issue and again a more complex issue that a simple good or bad assessment.

Incidentally, neither of these are economic policies (beyond everything being to an extent), which was the focus of the OP.

I disagree with the focus of the statement. It lumps a who load of entirely different policies together and seeks to judge them on perceived partisan political basis rather than any rational economic one. The whole left/right conflict is everything that is wrong with politics today, especially in the US, and there is absolutely no good reason to promote it further.

 

My problem with leftist economics is not economic in nature - the policies may or may not create prosperity, I find them wrong because they coerce individuals. Period.