Collective wealth leads to collective well-being

[JustAGuy1]

To be transparent and to make this known I am not advocating for communism or even socialism with this opinion, it's just some personal thoughts.

The problem with labels especially emotionally-charged labels is they're used as slurs and flung like turds, without stopping to define what they actually mean. The Cult of Ignorance is required to simply accept that these are "BAD" but can never explain why. Even though the public library, public parks and museums, the military, the communications infrastructure, the highway system, the water supply, the fire department, the agencies that keep planes from flying into each other, broadcast stations from bleeding into each other and unsafe drugs from producing Thalidomide babies, Social Security, Medicare, the postal service -- is ALL Socialism.

Twit.
Quantify the Tax Rate we need kid, c'mon you can do it.

Personally I think reading comprehension should be taxed. The less you have, the higher the tax.

You're broke dood.

I didn't think so. You twits can NEVER quantify the amount you think needs to be taken from "the people". You have ONE, just ONE idea for every perceived ill in Society. TAKE MORE MONEY FROM THE CITIZENRY. YOUR STUPIDITY IS SHOWN BY USING THE SAME TIRED CRAP. Police,fire,roads, bridges. Blah, Blah, Blah

 

[flacaltenn]

What I am mainly focusing on is the aspects of individualism that yields itself to value the success of the individual above all else. That there can only be one winner.

The 1st sentence there is what I just addressed... To fix poverty, you DO most of the time have to change the "individualism" of the afflicted... If you've EVER TRIED to help by coaching GED or working Head Start as I have, you'd understand that.. There needs to be a buy-in from the AFFLICTED individual to work towards better "work preparedness" so that they contribute MORE to society than they take.

The 2nd sentence is a very bad misconception.. Rich people haven't EVER stole anything from me.. Not Bill Gates, not Serena Williams, not my Supermarket chain.. WHO exactly is STEALING from you? Money is NOT LIMITED.. When the economy GROWS, more people benefit. It is NOT a fixed pie for 300 million people to fight over...

The largest employer in the country is SMALL BUSINESS.. That's your hair shop, your gym, your tire store or gas station.. Are THEY stealing from you??? They do what they can to pay fair wages according to the SKILLS of the workforce.. There are some waitresses making MORE than "average" American salaries for instance..

This concept that "there is only one winner" is some kind of bad indoctrination disease that you've gotten from somewhere. Businesses START every day to serve the public.,. And they only start because SOMEONE took the RISK to do that. You don't LIKE RISK... There's that word again.. And some have to fail.. But the WINNERS all have a history of being losers.. But most eventually hit on a good or service that makes them LOTS of money.

 

[flacaltenn]

To be transparent and to make this known I am not advocating for communism or even socialism with this opinion, it's just some personal thoughts.

The problem with labels especially emotionally-charged labels is they're used as slurs and flung like turds, without stopping to define what they actually mean. The Cult of Ignorance is required to simply accept that these are "BAD" but can never explain why. Even though the public library, public parks and museums, the military, the communications infrastructure, the highway system, the water supply, the fire department, the agencies that keep planes from flying into each other, broadcast stations from bleeding into each other and unsafe drugs from producing Thalidomide babies, Social Security, Medicare, the postal service -- is ALL Socialism.

Twit.
Quantify the Tax Rate we need kid, c'mon you can do it.

Personally I think reading comprehension should be taxed. The less you have, the higher the tax.

You're broke dood.

I didn't think so. You twits can NEVER quantify the amount you think needs to be taken from "the people". You have ONE, just ONE idea for every perceived ill in Society. TAKE MORE MONEY FROM THE CITIZENRY. YOUR STUPIDITY IS SHOWN BY USING THE SAME TIRED CRAP. Police,fire,roads, bridges. Blah, Blah, Blah

And "police, fire, roads, and bridges" IS NOT what the OP is talking about at all... It's REDISTRIBUTION of wealth that is the subject here really...

 

[Pogo]

To be transparent and to make this known I am not advocating for communism or even socialism with this opinion, it's just some personal thoughts.

The problem with labels especially emotionally-charged labels is they're used as slurs and flung like turds, without stopping to define what they actually mean. The Cult of Ignorance is required to simply accept that these are "BAD" but can never explain why. Even though the public library, public parks and museums, the military, the communications infrastructure, the highway system, the water supply, the fire department, the agencies that keep planes from flying into each other, broadcast stations from bleeding into each other and unsafe drugs from producing Thalidomide babies, Social Security, Medicare, the postal service -- is ALL Socialism.

Twit.
Quantify the Tax Rate we need kid, c'mon you can do it.

Personally I think reading comprehension should be taxed. The less you have, the higher the tax.

You're broke dood.

I didn't think so. You twits can NEVER quantify the amount you think needs to be taken from "the people". You have ONE, just ONE idea for every perceived ill in Society. TAKE MORE MONEY FROM THE CITIZENRY. YOUR STUPIDITY IS SHOWN BY USING THE SAME TIRED CRAP. Police,fire,roads, bridges. Blah, Blah, Blah

And "police, fire, roads, and bridges" IS NOT what the OP is talking about at all... It's REDISTRIBUTION of wealth that is the subject here really...

Again --- "police, fire, roads, bridges" (et al) is PAID FOR by redistribution of wealth. The weasel-worders here are making distinctions without differences. And they're doing that soley because they think they have emotionally-charged words in their quiver. And that is not argument.

 

[Pogo]

To be transparent and to make this known I am not advocating for communism or even socialism with this opinion, it's just some personal thoughts.

The problem with labels especially emotionally-charged labels is they're used as slurs and flung like turds, without stopping to define what they actually mean. The Cult of Ignorance is required to simply accept that these are "BAD" but can never explain why. Even though the public library, public parks and museums, the military, the communications infrastructure, the highway system, the water supply, the fire department, the agencies that keep planes from flying into each other, broadcast stations from bleeding into each other and unsafe drugs from producing Thalidomide babies, Social Security, Medicare, the postal service -- is ALL Socialism.

Twit.
Quantify the Tax Rate we need kid, c'mon you can do it.

Personally I think reading comprehension should be taxed. The less you have, the higher the tax.

You're broke dood.

I didn't think so. You twits can NEVER quantify the amount you think needs to be taken from "the people". You have ONE, just ONE idea for every perceived ill in Society. TAKE MORE MONEY FROM THE CITIZENRY. YOUR STUPIDITY IS SHOWN BY USING THE SAME TIRED CRAP. Police,fire,roads, bridges. Blah, Blah, Blah

I DIDN'T EVEN BRING UP any amounts, Evelyn Wood. YOU DID. That's what the reference to reading comprehension MEANS, You're erecting a strawman I never invoked. That's dishonest.

 

[Natural Citizen]

And "police, fire, roads, and bridges" IS NOT what the OP is talking about at all... It's REDISTRIBUTION of wealth that is the subject here really...

Yeah, pretty much.

We pretty much already have that scenario going on if we're being honest about it.

 

[flacaltenn]

Grace Is Stoked

Here's a couple questions you have to ask yourself to win any hearts and minds to your proposal here..

1) How much money would it take to "economically equalize" a 19 year old former gang banger who quit HS in 11th grade for the rest of his life?? The answer is somewhere around $1.25 MILLION... Check my math. $25K for 50 years...

2) How many of those can you "fund" from $Trillion of confiscated wealth? Without fixing the underlying dysfunctions that got them stuck there?


3) What would you REQUIRE of him in exchange for this redistribution? A GED, vocational school, a future clean criminal record, etc???

4) Do you think a "living wage" is a HUMANE concept? Is it fair to KEEP a worker in MENIAL, mind numbing tasks for the rest of their lives? Should we keep them COMFORTABLE at dead end jobs that MIGHT be automated or disappear because you've strained the employer ability to keep an adequate workforce to RUN the biz?

 

[flacaltenn]

The problem with labels especially emotionally-charged labels is they're used as slurs and flung like turds, without stopping to define what they actually mean. The Cult of Ignorance is required to simply accept that these are "BAD" but can never explain why. Even though the public library, public parks and museums, the military, the communications infrastructure, the highway system, the water supply, the fire department, the agencies that keep planes from flying into each other, broadcast stations from bleeding into each other and unsafe drugs from producing Thalidomide babies, Social Security, Medicare, the postal service -- is ALL Socialism.

Twit.
Quantify the Tax Rate we need kid, c'mon you can do it.

Personally I think reading comprehension should be taxed. The less you have, the higher the tax.

You're broke dood.

I didn't think so. You twits can NEVER quantify the amount you think needs to be taken from "the people". You have ONE, just ONE idea for every perceived ill in Society. TAKE MORE MONEY FROM THE CITIZENRY. YOUR STUPIDITY IS SHOWN BY USING THE SAME TIRED CRAP. Police,fire,roads, bridges. Blah, Blah, Blah

And "police, fire, roads, and bridges" IS NOT what the OP is talking about at all... It's REDISTRIBUTION of wealth that is the subject here really...

Again --- "police, fire, roads, bridges" (et al) is PAID FOR by redistribution of wealth. The weasel-worders here are making distinctions without differences. And they're doing that soley because they think they have emotionally-charged words in their quiver. And that is not argument.

It's demonstrably wrong to assert that. INFRASTRUCTURE is ANY KIND of redistribution.. Roads, bridges, fire, and security is ALREADY a mix of govt or the private sector or some hybrid... When the GOVT does this thing, it generally issues BONDS to pay for it... That's people VOLUNTARILY INVESTING in funding of most of this initial building cost of this infrastructure.. It results in EQUAL benefits for all.

So it's not worth COMPARING these things to robbing Peter to pay Paul...

 

[Grace Is Stoked]

What I am mainly focusing on is the aspects of individualism that yields itself to value the success of the individual above all else. That there can only be one winner.

The 1st sentence there is what I just addressed... To fix poverty, you DO most of the time have to change the "individualism" of the afflicted... If you've EVER TRIED to help by coaching GED or working Head Start as I have, you'd understand that.. There needs to be a buy-in from the AFFLICTED individual to work towards better "work preparedness" so that they contribute MORE to society than they take.

The 2nd sentence is a very bad misconception.. Rich people haven't EVER stole anything from me.. Not Bill Gates, not Serena Williams, not my Supermarket chain.. WHO exactly is STEALING from you? Money is NOT LIMITED.. When the economy GROWS, more people benefit. It is NOT a fixed pie for 300 million people to fight over...

The largest employer in the country is SMALL BUSINESS.. That's your hair shop, your gym, your tire store or gas station.. Are THEY stealing from you??? They do what they can to pay fair wages according to the SKILLS of the workforce.. There are some waitresses making MORE than "average" American salaries for instance..

This concept that "there is only one winner" is some kind of bad indoctrination disease that you've gotten from somewhere. Businesses START every day to serve the public.,. And they only start because SOMEONE took the RISK to do that. You don't LIKE RISK... There's that word again.. And some have to fail.. But the WINNERS all have a history of being losers.. But most eventually hit on a good or service that makes them LOTS of money.

I agree about point #1. It's why i've emphasized culture change being vital to these ideas to potentially work.

Your second point is confusing though. I have not mentioned yet in this entire topic anything about rich people stealing, so i'm not sure how that relates to my second sentence which was entered on the attitude that many people have which is that winning is the top priority. As for the "one winner" comment the best example I can give is with sports, and in turn what is taught to millions of children (for this example ages up until puberty) through sports, and that is that there can only be one winner. You play to win. Win at all costs in may cases. If you don't win you lost. If you don't score you are slumping or not trying hard enough. Kids are taught these as values growing up and they contribute to idea that everything is a competition and that you can only succeed if you play to win. They grow up and then apply that same value to business in many ways and in turn teach it to their kids once they become adults.

I use this example because youth sports to me is a great example of how culture can change (in my personal opinion for the better) by making it less about individual achievement but more about collective enjoyment of sport. Same would go for life and business in my opinion after that. A person that is raised to fight and win, to beat the other person, to beat the other business, to see compromise and collaboration as weakness, to see someone less successful and associate their personal value as an American or even as a person to that to me that person is an example of a culture that is hostile to progress and togetherness.

Keep in mind I am not saying that there aren't lazy people or moochers on this planet and in this country, there are, but for many people raised in America if you aren't winning by a certain age or if you see not shot at winning then you have no shot at happiness or success and so what's the point? they give up. It's like how many people here view success and happiness as driving a Mercedes and getting that big title they've worked 20 years for, and that's normal in this country, would you agree? Whereas there are other people, admittedly me, that sees a Mercedes and a big title and it does nothing for me. On a personal note success and happiness to me is my little house, a great husband and cycling partner, my cuddly dog, morning coffee, cool co-workers, and weekly game night with friends. I work at my church and do interior design on the side and my husband has a small business as a carpenter. There are many people in this country that would look at us and wonder why we aren't trying to do more, to move up in our jobs, to grow our business, to get a bigger house, to have two cars instead of sharing our one because as a kid that's what you are taught in most households. Culture starts like that, and that's where it would need to start for the future in my opinion.

When a kid is raised to see something like healthcare as something that affects every American equally and that we are all part of the system and that our health isn't dependent on how much we win in life then you will see changes happen. Participating in our healthcare system through income taxes and sales taxes and so one will be viewed as an investment in our country's future as Americans and not as something that is to be thought of as having money taken from me to pay for slackers. We would be raised to believe that we are all in this together. Yes, I know that sounds naive on the surface, but culture takes time, and we got to our current system because of that too so it's not impossible.

 

[DOTR]

But many worked very hard to get an education or start a business and managed their money wisely

You're right about productive workers whether they be labor or management; some of the hardest-working (and most greedy) people I've met have been small business owners.

I'm not referring to those individuals when I complain about shareholder privilege.

"I mean speculators who buy and sell stock on the secondary market which, as I understand it, comprise about 99% of stock market activity?

The Divine Right of Capital by Marjorie Kelly: A Summary

"Today, our worldview has a bias – that stockholders are to be paid as much as possible, while employees are to be paid as little as possible. 'Income for one group is declared good, and income for another group is declared bad.'

"Nowhere is this more clear than in our financial statements. Here’s the basic formula you’ll find on financial statements:

Capital Income + Retained earnings = Revenue – (Employee income + Cost of materials)

"Kelly uses some simple algebra to show that this formula could just as easily be re-written as:

"Employee income + Retained earnings = Revenue – (Capital income + Cost of materials)"

We may have a mutual enemy

the large wall st investors were prime movers in the drive to outsource production from America to china

but bernie bots like the one who started this thread are true socialists who just want other peoples wealth and dont care about the source

socialism kills innovation and economic growth

We do have a mutual enemy. The wealthy elites have formed a coalition with the underclass against the middle and working classes.

Its like the example of two wolves and a sheep stranded on an island voting on what have for dinner

That’s exactly how it works. The elites shear the middle class and hand out the pickings in exchange for votes. You are made to fund your own demise.

 

[DOTR]

What I am mainly focusing on is the aspects of individualism that yields itself to value the success of the individual above all else. That there can only be one winner.

The 1st sentence there is what I just addressed... To fix poverty, you DO most of the time have to change the "individualism" of the afflicted... If you've EVER TRIED to help by coaching GED or working Head Start as I have, you'd understand that.. There needs to be a buy-in from the AFFLICTED individual to work towards better "work preparedness" so that they contribute MORE to society than they take.

The 2nd sentence is a very bad misconception.. Rich people haven't EVER stole anything from me.. Not Bill Gates, not Serena Williams, not my Supermarket chain.. WHO exactly is STEALING from you? Money is NOT LIMITED.. When the economy GROWS, more people benefit. It is NOT a fixed pie for 300 million people to fight over...

The largest employer in the country is SMALL BUSINESS.. That's your hair shop, your gym, your tire store or gas station.. Are THEY stealing from you??? They do what they can to pay fair wages according to the SKILLS of the workforce.. There are some waitresses making MORE than "average" American salaries for instance..

This concept that "there is only one winner" is some kind of bad indoctrination disease that you've gotten from somewhere. Businesses START every day to serve the public.,. And they only start because SOMEONE took the RISK to do that. You don't LIKE RISK... There's that word again.. And some have to fail.. But the WINNERS all have a history of being losers.. But most eventually hit on a good or service that makes them LOTS of money.

I agree about point #1. It's why i've emphasized culture change being vital to these ideas to potentially work.

Your second point is confusing though. I have not mentioned yet in this entire topic anything about rich people stealing, so i'm not sure how that relates to my second sentence which was entered on the attitude that many people have which is that winning is the top priority. As for the "one winner" comment the best example I can give is with sports, and in turn what is taught to millions of children (for this example ages up until puberty) through sports, and that is that there can only be one winner. You play to win. Win at all costs in may cases. If you don't win you lost. If you don't score you are slumping or not trying hard enough. Kids are taught these as values growing up and they contribute to idea that everything is a competition and that you can only succeed if you play to win. They grow up and then apply that same value to business in many ways and in turn teach it to their kids once they become adults.

I use this example because youth sports to me is a great example of how culture can change (in my personal opinion for the better) by making it less about individual achievement but more about collective enjoyment of sport. Same would go for life and business in my opinion after that. A person that is raised to fight and win, to beat the other person, to beat the other business, to see compromise and collaboration as weakness, to see someone less successful and associate their personal value as an American or even as a person to that to me that person is an example of a culture that is hostile to progress and togetherness.

Keep in mind I am not saying that there aren't lazy people or moochers on this planet and in this country, there are, but for many people raised in America if you aren't winning by a certain age or if you see not shot at winning then you have no shot at happiness or success and so what's the point? they give up. It's like how many people here view success and happiness as driving a Mercedes and getting that big title they've worked 20 years for, and that's normal in this country, would you agree? Whereas there are other people, admittedly me, that sees a Mercedes and a big title and it does nothing for me. On a personal note success and happiness to me is my little house, a great husband and cycling partner, my cuddly dog, morning coffee, cool co-workers, and weekly game night with friends. I work at my church and do interior design on the side and my husband has a small business as a carpenter. There are many people in this country that would look at us and wonder why we aren't trying to do more, to move up in our jobs, to grow our business, to get a bigger house, to have two cars instead of sharing our one because as a kid that's what you are taught in most households. Culture starts like that, and that's where it would need to start for the future in my opinion.

When a kid is raised to see something like healthcare as something that affects every American equally and that we are all part of the system and that our health isn't dependent on how much we win in life then you will see changes happen. Participating in our healthcare system through income taxes and sales taxes and so one will be viewed as an investment in our country's future as Americans and not as something that is to be thought of as having money taken from me to pay for slackers. We would be raised to believe that we are all in this together. Yes, I know that sounds naive on the surface, but culture takes time, and we got to our current system because of that too so it's not impossible.

In other words you use the educational system and youth sports to attack and destroy the culture funding both and you do it by turning their kids into your acolytes.
Could even Stalin have come up with a more devious plan?

 

[Grace Is Stoked]

What I am mainly focusing on is the aspects of individualism that yields itself to value the success of the individual above all else. That there can only be one winner.

The 1st sentence there is what I just addressed... To fix poverty, you DO most of the time have to change the "individualism" of the afflicted... If you've EVER TRIED to help by coaching GED or working Head Start as I have, you'd understand that.. There needs to be a buy-in from the AFFLICTED individual to work towards better "work preparedness" so that they contribute MORE to society than they take.

The 2nd sentence is a very bad misconception.. Rich people haven't EVER stole anything from me.. Not Bill Gates, not Serena Williams, not my Supermarket chain.. WHO exactly is STEALING from you? Money is NOT LIMITED.. When the economy GROWS, more people benefit. It is NOT a fixed pie for 300 million people to fight over...

The largest employer in the country is SMALL BUSINESS.. That's your hair shop, your gym, your tire store or gas station.. Are THEY stealing from you??? They do what they can to pay fair wages according to the SKILLS of the workforce.. There are some waitresses making MORE than "average" American salaries for instance..

This concept that "there is only one winner" is some kind of bad indoctrination disease that you've gotten from somewhere. Businesses START every day to serve the public.,. And they only start because SOMEONE took the RISK to do that. You don't LIKE RISK... There's that word again.. And some have to fail.. But the WINNERS all have a history of being losers.. But most eventually hit on a good or service that makes them LOTS of money.

I agree about point #1. It's why i've emphasized culture change being vital to these ideas to potentially work.

Your second point is confusing though. I have not mentioned yet in this entire topic anything about rich people stealing, so i'm not sure how that relates to my second sentence which was entered on the attitude that many people have which is that winning is the top priority. As for the "one winner" comment the best example I can give is with sports, and in turn what is taught to millions of children (for this example ages up until puberty) through sports, and that is that there can only be one winner. You play to win. Win at all costs in may cases. If you don't win you lost. If you don't score you are slumping or not trying hard enough. Kids are taught these as values growing up and they contribute to idea that everything is a competition and that you can only succeed if you play to win. They grow up and then apply that same value to business in many ways and in turn teach it to their kids once they become adults.

I use this example because youth sports to me is a great example of how culture can change (in my personal opinion for the better) by making it less about individual achievement but more about collective enjoyment of sport. Same would go for life and business in my opinion after that. A person that is raised to fight and win, to beat the other person, to beat the other business, to see compromise and collaboration as weakness, to see someone less successful and associate their personal value as an American or even as a person to that to me that person is an example of a culture that is hostile to progress and togetherness.

Keep in mind I am not saying that there aren't lazy people or moochers on this planet and in this country, there are, but for many people raised in America if you aren't winning by a certain age or if you see not shot at winning then you have no shot at happiness or success and so what's the point? they give up. It's like how many people here view success and happiness as driving a Mercedes and getting that big title they've worked 20 years for, and that's normal in this country, would you agree? Whereas there are other people, admittedly me, that sees a Mercedes and a big title and it does nothing for me. On a personal note success and happiness to me is my little house, a great husband and cycling partner, my cuddly dog, morning coffee, cool co-workers, and weekly game night with friends. I work at my church and do interior design on the side and my husband has a small business as a carpenter. There are many people in this country that would look at us and wonder why we aren't trying to do more, to move up in our jobs, to grow our business, to get a bigger house, to have two cars instead of sharing our one because as a kid that's what you are taught in most households. Culture starts like that, and that's where it would need to start for the future in my opinion.

When a kid is raised to see something like healthcare as something that affects every American equally and that we are all part of the system and that our health isn't dependent on how much we win in life then you will see changes happen. Participating in our healthcare system through income taxes and sales taxes and so one will be viewed as an investment in our country's future as Americans and not as something that is to be thought of as having money taken from me to pay for slackers. We would be raised to believe that we are all in this together. Yes, I know that sounds naive on the surface, but culture takes time, and we got to our current system because of that too so it's not impossible.

In other words you use the educational system and youth sports to attack and destroy the culture funding both and you do it by turning their kids into your acolytes.
Could even Stalin have come up with a more devious plan?

No that's not what I am saying or implying. This is not a communistic plot. Capitalism does not require a person to be cruel, to be all about winning, to value title, money, and success above all things. When it comes to youth sports it should be about togetherness, sportsmanship, and most of all, fun. Just like sports, life and work should also share many of those traits. You don't rid yourself of ambition or even competitiveness, i'm not saying that, but having that success or even the fun be at the expense of someone else is a toxic aspect of culture in my opinion and it's a part of American culture in many way. You can train to win, you can study to do well, you can work hard to reach a goal, those are things that absolutely are human traits and create good things from, but it can't just be about you and the goal shouldn't be to never look behind you to help someone else move forward.

 

[Grace Is Stoked]

Grace Is Stoked

Here's a couple questions you have to ask yourself to win any hearts and minds to your proposal here..

1) How much money would it take to "economically equalize" a 19 year old former gang banger who quit HS in 11th grade for the rest of his life?? The answer is somewhere around $1.25 MILLION... Check my math. $25K for 50 years...

2) How many of those can you "fund" from $Trillion of confiscated wealth? Without fixing the underlying dysfunctions that got them stuck there?


3) What would you REQUIRE of him in exchange for this redistribution? A GED, vocational school, a future clean criminal record, etc???

4) Do you think a "living wage" is a HUMANE concept? Is it fair to KEEP a worker in MENIAL, mind numbing tasks for the rest of their lives? Should we keep them COMFORTABLE at dead end jobs that MIGHT be automated or disappear because you've strained the employer ability to keep an adequate workforce to RUN the biz?

1. I don't know how much money it would take. As it relates to the systems I detailed out he would still have to pay out of pocket for healthcare to reach his deductible before other services became "free". And as for education and "free" college he'd have to finish his GED to qualify for admission to a college.

2. Can you explain this question better please? I'm not looking to confiscate wealth.

3. It's not about redistribution of wealth it's about everybody contributing equally and creating a system that citizens invest in as a society. What he would have to do in exchange would depend on what he is wanting I guess.

4. I think a set living wage is humane but not necessarily realistic in my opinion, and no a person should not be kept in a menial job for the rest of their lives unless they are happy and want to.

 

[CWayne]

In order to FORCE the CEO to pay into the same system, the central authority would have to control the means of production - i.e. socialism. You can put all the lipstick you like on that pig, but it's still a pig.

In the case of healthcare I would have our government run it yes and it would be funded through taxation, however, that CEO would invest into that system, the company itself would invest into that system, and the employees would all invest into that system. All invest in that system and use that system and all have equal interest in seeing it succeed.

When there is a gun to your head, it isn't investment.


America has the most advance health care system in the world, you're dedicated to changing that...

I am dedicated to seeing a culture change which will then allow other changes.

So, do you think the culture of 57 genders and drag queens converting 4 year olds is superior to the culture of a strong family ties from the 50's ? The Marxists declared war on our culture, so you're not pleased with the results?

The culture change i'm talking about is inwardly the moving away from individualism and towards instead a culture of thinking about the good of the many. It's also outwardly transitioning away from American exceptionalism and into a humble American nationalism. As for 57 genders and drag queens that's not the aspects of culture that i'm talking about really.

No thank you.

The majority cannot be trusted; ever.

I will NOT subsume myself for the betterment of a collective that will just walk all over me and mine in their own interest.

 

[flacaltenn]

I agree about point #1. It's why i've emphasized culture change being vital to these ideas to potentially work

That's quite a hefty task to "change cultures" because you have a large majority of the poor that DO NOT VALUE academics or schooling.. Part of this Herculean job would be KEEP kids in school and lower our abominable HS drop-out rates. That's NOT the problem of people who DO value such things.. And that's that one example of underlying "cultural" changes to decrease poverty and "the gap" that MONEY just won't fix...

In FACT -- if you waive a "guaranteed minimum income" or "livable wage" in FRONT of these vunerable kids, you WILL MAKE THINGS WORSE, not better in terms of drop out rates and academics... Because they'll BAIL earlier.

Your second point is confusing though. I have not mentioned yet in this entire topic anything about rich people stealing, so i'm not sure how that relates to my second sentence which was entered on the attitude that many people have which is that winning is the top priority. As for the "one winner" comment the best example I can give is with sports, and in turn what is taught to millions of children (for this example ages up until puberty) through sports, and that is that there can only be one winner. You play to win. Win at all costs in may cases. If you don't win you lost. If you don't score you are slumping or not trying hard enough. Kids are taught these as values growing up and they contribute to idea that everything is a competition and that you can only succeed if you play to win. They grow up and then apply that same value to business in many ways and in turn teach it to their kids once they become adults.

The winning only comes from achievements that people do to SERVE SOCIETY and make everyone else's life better.. Bill Gates is great example.. I don't "love" him, but he gave me the ability in the 90s to bail from Silicon Valley burnout and start an engineering consulting biz... He put on my desktop the ability to have EVERYTHING that a Fortune 500 company had in terms of tools for a very reasonable price... We were BOTH winners.. There's "no scoring" here in a sports sense because CREATIVE IDEAS lift everyone.. It makes EVERYONE richer..

And sports is a poor analogy of "shared secure life" that you're trying to achieve here.. Sports SHOULD be competitive, there SHOULD be winners and losers. But the teams are SELECTED for skills and performance. If your team HAD to draft from only those that WANTED to play -- with no regard for skills or dedication -- you wouldn't be as competitive.. OR if your girls in track were FORCED to compete against "trans" male athletes -- that wouldn't be fair -- as MANY women are finding out...

So even tho teams are supposed to be the most skilled and most dedicated people and that violates the "equality" you're looking for ---- ONE team still loses.. But it's a FAIR fight between the BEST the school can draft... Not a diversity scored "representative slice of the school"..

If you are a student athlete and have been drafted for sports, you're AN ELITE at that school for those talents and hard work..

That's not the working population of America.. We're NOT on the same team.. I don't identify with folks that have chronically made the bad choices or suffered from systemic poor education.. As a country -- we couldn't even agree on "what's for dinner" never mind how much income/wealth redistribution needs to be made..

I'm WITH YOU in changing cultural and SYSTEMIC causes of poverty.. I'm not with you if the GOVT is primary power of enforcement and everyone gets the same "participation" trophy..

Like I told you, a lot of what you call "cultural change" COULD be done within the free markets without increasing GOVT force to comply. .. It's just that companies aren't doing the maximum social good they are capable of because they've become POLITICAL animals that CRAVE influence and power in DC more than working on making good and services subsidize their poorer customers...

 

[flacaltenn]

3. It's not about redistribution of wealth it's about everybody contributing equally and creating a system that citizens invest in as a society. What he would have to do in exchange would depend on what he is wanting I guess.

They CANT contribute equally because they ARE poor.. That's why we have a graduated income tax where 1/2 the workers pay NOTHING in Fed Income taxes...

If it's NOT redistribution -- then what do want "everyone" to contribute EQUALLY? Time? Money? cheerleading services?

Contributions CANT be equal if it's money... But MAYBE public service, even tho the "poor leading poor" would be a terrible idea...

 

[georgephillip]

but bernie bots like the one who started this thread are true socialists who just want other peoples wealth and dont care about the source

socialism kills innovation and economic growth

Capitalists believe incentive comes from the profit motive, i.e., the extraction of surplus value from workers for personal, material gain.

Profit doesn't have the same meaning in a socialist society because the exploitation that produces private fortunes is replaced by cooperation.

One works for the good of the community instead of oneself.

https://www.mondragon-corporation.com/en/about-us/governance/mission-vision-and-values/

 

[georgephillip]

What do you expect? You want a small business owner to bust ass and take all the risks, the just give it all away to lazy schlubs for free?

How are you defining "small business"?
Do you mean those companies with more than 100 employees?
If so, those employees are risking homelessness for themselves and their family by working for a capitalist whose principal contribution is appropriating wealth he or she did not create.

 

[DustyInfinity]

This is my first attempt at creating a thread and I wasn't sure if this belongs in Politics or not but since the topic hits on several political issues of today I think it's probably fitting. To be transparent and to make this known I am not advocating for communism or even socialism with this opinion, it's just some personal thoughts.

What i'm talking about is using capitalism, free trade, free markets and our collective wealth as a nation to create collective well-being by investing in our society. That investment (taxes) would yield benefits like "free" medical care, dental care, education, maternity/paternity leaves, pre-k, among other benefits and programs provided for all citizens while also reducing the uncertainty millions of American feel everyday around these topics, the risk that millions of Americans take everyday for these topics, the lack of mobility and the the anxiety and stress that millions of Americans are under because of these issues. Reduced stress, reduced fear, reduced individual risk, reduced inequity in turn yields increased happiness, increased hope, increased societal investment, and increased collective well-being. There is a lot of detail that would go into taxation and what constitutes as "free" but that's something i'm open to discussing as this evolves.

People will often view higher taxes as a burden, and will also view higher taxes that would go towards increased government provided programs as socialist, however, if all citizens and companies truly contribute towards these programs and social programs by using the wealth we all create then it should be viewed as an investment, not a burden in my opinion. You are investing in the collective well-being of all people, including yourself, and if we are all contributing, if we are all putting our money into the effort, if we are all sacrificing a greater percentage of our personal gain for the greater collective good then what you end up with is a shared system that in essence purchases quality of life. No system is perfect, but closing the gap, creating a society that views success as something to share and not hoard, and putting the good of the many above the individual is in my opinion something to work towards.

At the bottom of every discussion/argument about Socialism/Collective versus Freedom/Free Markets is the main difference between you and me... You believe in ASSURING a "zero risk" life for everyone at the expense of others. You said exactly that in your Opening Post.

Nothing is "free".. And YOUR freedom/liberties are as much damaged by taking away your economic choices as they are by restricting your Civil Liberties.. You believe that HUGE govt has the wisdom, compassion, dedication to do even MORE than they've already failed at...

"Democratic Socialism" is what it ALWAYS starts out as.. In Zimbabwe, Nicaragua, Venezuela, Cuba and all the other "progressive revolutions"... What happens when the economy crashes, we LOSE our lead in innovation, research and products -- and the people start to "collectively slide" to the bottom of standards of world living?

These "do-gooders" need to take more choices and powers from you.. Maybe start to control speech, round up dissidents. AND SOON -- your choices and freedom are no more...

You want everyone else to "lift up" a person who maybe break-danced or tokked their way thru HS and quit at the 11th grade to a RISK FREE life. OR worse, depend on monstrous, inept, and slow-moving govt to make this happen.. Or even a college grad that chose Music History as a major rather than a profession that is MORE VALUED by society with concomitant increased financial security as society rewards them for what they can contribute, not what "bureaucrats" can do for them..

Most of the time, the folks who BELIEVE this also have a bloated view of what government is capable of. A govt that has MISMANAGED EVERY "UNIVERSAL" program, should NEVER be trusted with MORE "universal" programs.. A government that could not produce a "Marketplace Health Insurance" website for less than a $Bill and MONTHS late IS NOT your "technology benchmark" for success..

I've got some experience with the ACA Obamacare program.. It is the MOST INTRUSIVE and LEAST transparent way of CHOOSING your healthcare.. In fact, there are FEW choices that even make sense. And the plans get WORSE EVERY YEAR... And let's not make that about "political stunts" and party wars.. The FACT IS --- Americans cannot count on their govt to even FUNCTION anymore...

AND YOU WANT MORE OF THIS???? Are you CRAZY????

I’m not a socialist or a communist though and I am supportive of free markets. What I am saying is to use the success of the free market and the wealth gained through capitalism to be partnered with a increased societal effort to reduce inequity, reduce some the negative aspects of individualism by considering the collective good in what we do as a country, and make it so that all citizens regardless of their income contribute to the systems that we all will equally use. Its capitalism but a more compassionate capitalism in my opinion.

I will say that I failed in my first post to mention the cultural change and the mindset change that would be necessary for this to work. As we are right now in this country with the deep divides and conflicting ideas of what is “American” or not it would be unrealistic unfortunately in my opinion. The key change would have to be a new mindset that values the good of the many over the success of the individual. Let me be clear im not talking about shared misery but instead creating a much larger middle class by closing income gaps and having everyone invest into the shared systems. If we are all invested and using the same systems we all have a more equal motivation to have it succeed in my opinion.

Any time you remove the individual in the name of common good, you are going against human nature. The results are horrific. I respect your intentions, but a society that keys on individualism is required for maximized well being. You can't socially engineer a middle class. Shared systems lead to the opposite of any motivation. The only way to change the 'mindset' towards collectivism is authoritarianism and crushing the individual.

I could have done a better job explaining my position on individualism but i'll try now to explain it more. I'm not saying that a person can't be themselves or even remove individualism as a whole. I agree that "self" is important and that individual expression and opinions matter and should matter. What I am mainly focusing on is the aspects of individualism that yields itself to value the success of the individual above all else. That there can only be one winner. That being on top of the mountain alone is a better view and better accomplishment than being there with others. Basically it's the motivation for success that I am emphasizing and how that either helps the collective many or just the individual. Does that make sense?

So for example in the United States we push kids at a young age want to be the best, to want to defeat that other person. The victory is most important, the status that comes with that victory is what matters. Our current culture rewards that mindset and even encourages it in nearly all aspects of life here. Success is determined based off of the money you have, the salary you get, the car you drive, the title at work that you have, the amount wins and trophies that you have. For me, personally, I don't find that to be a rewarding view of life or how we as a culture and society should view success or be teaching as success. Do your best, but also be supportive, be cooperative, show solidarity. Are you happy? Does that new material possession make you happier or would a better relationship with your neighbors actually be more rewarding and make you happier in the long term? When it comes to work and your job, do you want to be the best or do you want to simply like what you do? Liking what you do will bring more long term happiness and quality of life for you than trying to get to the top in my opinion, and in turn if society as a whole thought like that then perhaps it would create a more unified country, a happier country, and less stressed country.

This transitions into things like healthcare and education in my opinion. A society that that favors the winners and looks down on those that couldn't compete as well will have programs that and systems that will reflect that mindset. You get what you pay for basically. A society that views success as a team win will create systems that emphasize that because if a teammate struggles it can affect the team as a whole. You can either coach that teammate and help them get better or you can cut that person and give up on them. If the team is invested in the success of the team then everybody typically has the same goal and vision. If the country viewed healthcare for everybody as a way to invest in Americans then perhaps more people would be willing to want to try a little harder and be part of the team. But when you have millions of people who look at that as weakness. They look at this topic as "why do I need to help that person, they just need to work harder on their own" then sure, it won't work, because that person is about "i" not "we" in my opinion.

Ask yourself why we as a country will pull together for the common good in the case of emergencies or national crises, but yet all the days before and after that common good is labeled as something bad? We can come together to fight a war but not to help Americans with healthcare? It's odd to me.

I love it when people explain their positions. Thank You. It is a brave thing to do. I believe it is a mistake to say one person's success means that someone else has to do without. I myself fell victim to that thinking when I was young until my father set me straight. There is no downside to your neighbors if you succeed. It is actually the opposite. Your success could lead to opportunities for others. It is not a zero sum game. An individual's success does not adversely affect others.

I am a staunch believer that we should teach our children self reliance. I wish people would take pride in taking care of themselves, and realize that a nation where people can't care for themselves has no chance of caring for the 'common good.' I will say this however. You did strike a chord with me on competition. I realize it is a pillar of successful economics, and that it lowers prices and produces superior results, but it does seem draconian. It makes me shake my head when a store has three more of the same kind of store move right next door, and then it closes its doors. I always wondered if there was some way that did not have to happen. If a mom and pop store wouldn't have to shutter when megamart moves next door. I know it makes me sound like a commie, but it always seemed brutal when the next new thing can put you out of business in a blink.

 

[georgephillip]

Because shareholders OWN the fucking corporation. Employees are hired by the shareholders to do a job for money.

Your knowledge of economics may not be as extensive as you imagine:

What Good Are Shareholders?

"In legal terms, shareholders don’t own the corporation (they own securities that give them a less-than-well-defined claim on its earnings).

"In law and practice, they don’t have final say over most big corporate decisions (boards of directors do)."

Please convince me you know enough about this subject to be aware that only one percent of the total value of equity on Wall Street is actual investment in the sense of new money going into firms?

The remaining 99% is pure speculation.