Collective wealth leads to collective well-being

[Mac-7]

However involuntary taking of money from people who earn it and giving the money to deadbeats who didnt earn it is a form of socialism

What do shareholders do to earn their dividend checks compared to the employees who create the profits those common-law entitlements derive from?

A Legal Theory of Shareholder Primacy

"Shareholder primacy is a foundational concept.

"The principle of profit maximization goes to the most basic question: What is the purpose of the corporation and corporate law?

"Although normative debate has persisted over many generations of economic history and academic scholarship, we are in a shareholder-centric era as a factual matter.

"Yet, remarkably, the question of whether shareholder primacy is positive law remains unresolved even today."

That varies from person to person

Some people are born into money

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

and others didnt

many Americans squandered their best chances at life

 

[Maxdeath]

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.

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.

Awesome!

How much tax and on what?

To be fair i'm not a tax expert and so the exact number would need to be analyzed, but I think a good starting point would be at least 25% personal income tax regardless of income. After that depending on your income the % would be higher for each tax bracket. It wouldn't go over 50% for any bracket but the top bracket would expect to have their income tax rate be around that mark. Ultimately the gap between the lowest income tax bracket and the highest income bracket would not be nearly as significant as it is now. In addition, higher taxes on all any and all stock market transactions, capital gain, dividends, and so on, a corporate tax rate increase to at least a flat rate of 25% as well with earnings dictating increased rates similar to personal income tax rates. The largest sectors such as energy, primarily oil and natural gas companies would have up to 50% of earnings reinvested into social programs as well as power plants and power companies with a minimum of 25%. I'd say that an increased sales tax/value added tax would be a reasonable addition as well.

The basic premise is that everybody of all brackets and companies as well pay into the system as equally as possible based on income, revenues, and so on. When the CEO and the front line worker contribute towards the same healthcare, the same education, the same social safety nets, then in my opinion there is a greater shared interest in seeing it run well and run equally.

at least 25% personal income tax regardless of income.

In addition to current taxes?

Which taxes do you mean? What I am saying is a standard base rate of 25% personal income tax for everybody but then that goes up incrementally depending on your income and earnings.

Which taxes do you mean?

Income taxes.

View attachment 311604

What are the new rates for each bracket?

One thing people always forget is that is only the federal tax burden. There is still the state and city to consider. Then there are the hidden taxes on top of that such as those on gasoline, tires, cigarettes and on and on.
Then you have people complaining that we can end inequality by higher taxes. While in the same breath saying that not only do they not make enough they don't have enough.
It just goes to show the lack of understanding and thinking of a large amount of the population.

 

[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.

 

[georgephillip]

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)"

 

[Mac-7]

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

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

I also believe that many corporations pay far less than they should in taxes, and they are also required to maximize profits for the benefit of shareholders instead of their employees

See, this tells me that you don't understand what a corporation is and how it works.

.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

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.

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?

You are the quintessential commie.

.

 

[georgephillip]

I also believe that many corporations pay far less than they should in taxes, and they are also required to maximize profits for the benefit of shareholders instead of their employees

See, this tells me that you don't understand what a corporation is and how it works.

.

See, this tells me that you don't understand what a corporation is and how it works.

Would you care to explain the current low rate of corporate taxation and/or why shareholders are entitled to more of a corporation's profits than its employees are?

Shareholder primacy - Wikipedia

"In his landmark book, Capitalism and Freedom, the economist Milton Friedman, advanced the theory of shareholder primacy which says that 'corporations have no higher purpose than maximizing profits for their shareholders.'

"Friedman said that if corporations were to accept anything but making money for their stockholders as their primary purpose, it would 'thoroughly undermine the very foundation of our free society.'[6]

"His article, 'The Friedman doctrine', was published September 13, 1970 in The New York Times"

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Would you care to explain the current low rate of corporate taxation and/or why shareholders are entitled to more of a corporation's profits than its employees are?

Because shareholders OWN the fucking corporation. Employees are hired by the shareholders to do a job for money. Corporate taxation is DOUBLE taxation. Please tell me you understand that shit and I don't need to explain it. Please. Tell me you are at least informed to that degree.

"In his landmark book, Capitalism and Freedom, the economist Milton Friedman, advanced the theory of shareholder primacy which says that 'corporations have no higher purpose than maximizing profits for their shareholders.'

Milton Friedman is a hero to me, just so you know. He was one of the greatest economic minds EVER!!!


Tell me, what is the purpose of a corporation if NOT to maximize profits for shareholders? (this should be fun)

.

 

[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.

You obviously dont know what socialism is

an example: the military is not a form of socialism

we should do things collectively that cannot be done individually

and defense is one of those things

Is the national military a private enterprise?

No?

Then it's government.
Just like the power grid, the roads, the airways, the airwaves, the internets, the social safety nets such as they are, the post office, the local library, the municipal water supply, the local fire department, and so on.

That's one of two things. It's either socialism, or it's cherrypicking. You can't go "NO SOCIALISM" and then follow it with " except for this, and that, and that over there, and this too, oh and also this...". It's a matter of degree. Government handles things of a scale too large and too universal to be elective. It's just a matter of how much.

Are you aware there was once a time when your local fire department was a subscription service? Like a paywall? And that if you hadn't personally paid them their protection money and your house caught fire, they'd come by and watch if they came at all? That didn't pan out well for the community, so now it's ----- socialism. Covers everybody. Because COMMUNITY invests in itself.

However involuntary taking of money from people who earn it and giving the money to deadbeats who didnt earn it is a form of socialism

Are you calling the military "deadbeats"? Or firefighters? Mail carriers? The CDC?

 

[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.

 

[Mac-7]

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.

You obviously dont know what socialism is

an example: the military is not a form of socialism

we should do things collectively that cannot be done individually

and defense is one of those things

Is the national military a private enterprise?

No?

Then it's government.
Just like the power grid, the roads, the airways, the airwaves, the internets, the social safety nets such as they are, the post office, the local library, the municipal water supply, the local fire department, and so on.

That's one of two things. It's either socialism, or it's cherrypicking. You can't go "NO SOCIALISM" and then follow it with " except for this, and that, and that over there, and this too, oh and also this...". It's a matter of degree. Government handles things of a scale too large and too universal to be elective. It's just a matter of how much.

Are you aware there was once a time when your local fire department was a subscription service? Like a paywall? And that if you hadn't personally paid them their protection money and your house caught fire, they'd come by and watch if they came at all? That didn't pan out well for the community, so now it's ----- socialism. Covers everybody. Because COMMUNITY invests in itself.

However involuntary taking of money from people who earn it and giving the money to deadbeats who didnt earn it is a form of socialism

Are you calling the military "deadbeats"? Or firefighters? Mail carriers? The CDC?

According to your goofy definition all government activity is socislism

but thats wrong

government does raise the army and navy for national defense

thats because not even the richest American could afford their own privately owned aircraft carrier

but we can expect every able bodied person to provide for their own basic needs

today we socialism in the form of the wipe-every-nose welfare state

but that is a perversion of what made America great

 

[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.

You obviously dont know what socialism is

an example: the military is not a form of socialism

we should do things collectively that cannot be done individually

and defense is one of those things

Is the national military a private enterprise?

No?

Then it's government.
Just like the power grid, the roads, the airways, the airwaves, the internets, the social safety nets such as they are, the post office, the local library, the municipal water supply, the local fire department, and so on.

That's one of two things. It's either socialism, or it's cherrypicking. You can't go "NO SOCIALISM" and then follow it with " except for this, and that, and that over there, and this too, oh and also this...". It's a matter of degree. Government handles things of a scale too large and too universal to be elective. It's just a matter of how much.

Are you aware there was once a time when your local fire department was a subscription service? Like a paywall? And that if you hadn't personally paid them their protection money and your house caught fire, they'd come by and watch if they came at all? That didn't pan out well for the community, so now it's ----- socialism. Covers everybody. Because COMMUNITY invests in itself.

However involuntary taking of money from people who earn it and giving the money to deadbeats who didnt earn it is a form of socialism

Are you calling the military "deadbeats"? Or firefighters? Mail carriers? The CDC?

According to your goofy definition all government activity is socislism

but thats wrong

government does raise the army and navy for national defense

thats because not even the richest American could afford their own privately owned aircraft carrier

but we can expect every able bodied person to provide for their own basic needs

today we socialism in the form of the wipe-every-nose welfare state

but that is a perversion of what made America great

Correct, and because not even the riches American can afford to run fire departments, deliver the mails, screen proposed drugs, keep planes from flying into each other, etc etc etc etc etc. It's no different.

 

[Mac-7]

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.

You obviously dont know what socialism is

an example: the military is not a form of socialism

we should do things collectively that cannot be done individually

and defense is one of those things

Is the national military a private enterprise?

No?

Then it's government.
Just like the power grid, the roads, the airways, the airwaves, the internets, the social safety nets such as they are, the post office, the local library, the municipal water supply, the local fire department, and so on.

That's one of two things. It's either socialism, or it's cherrypicking. You can't go "NO SOCIALISM" and then follow it with " except for this, and that, and that over there, and this too, oh and also this...". It's a matter of degree. Government handles things of a scale too large and too universal to be elective. It's just a matter of how much.

Are you aware there was once a time when your local fire department was a subscription service? Like a paywall? And that if you hadn't personally paid them their protection money and your house caught fire, they'd come by and watch if they came at all? That didn't pan out well for the community, so now it's ----- socialism. Covers everybody. Because COMMUNITY invests in itself.

However involuntary taking of money from people who earn it and giving the money to deadbeats who didnt earn it is a form of socialism

Are you calling the military "deadbeats"? Or firefighters? Mail carriers? The CDC?

According to your goofy definition all government activity is socislism

but thats wrong

government does raise the army and navy for national defense

thats because not even the richest American could afford their own privately owned aircraft carrier

but we can expect every able bodied person to provide for their own basic needs

today we socialism in the form of the wipe-every-nose welfare state

but that is a perversion of what made America great

Correct, and because not even the riches American can afford to run fire departments, deliver the mails, screen proposed drugs, keep planes from flying into each other, etc etc etc etc etc. It's no different.

Thats not socialism

its just the proper role of government

but forcing one American to support unproductive people is consistent with the marxist standard of from each according to ability, to each according to need

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Here is a business exam question for all you USMBtards:

A bunch of workers want a piece of the action because they feel like they are being cheated (even though they agreed to work for wages) and those greedy shareholders who collectively own the publicly-traded corporate employer are not sharing in the profits. What should these workers do?

A. Individually save money and buy shares.
B. Set up a LLC and pool their savings, then buy even more shares.
C. Shift to an economic system that mandates all corporations divest all shareholders of shares and distribute those shares equally to all the workers.

If you answered "C" you are a fucking commie. To he a commie is to be a thief, because you have no problem stealing property from others at the point of the government gun.

 

[Mac-7]

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.

You obviously dont know what socialism is

an example: the military is not a form of socialism

we should do things collectively that cannot be done individually

and defense is one of those things

Is the national military a private enterprise?

No?

Then it's government.
Just like the power grid, the roads, the airways, the airwaves, the internets, the social safety nets such as they are, the post office, the local library, the municipal water supply, the local fire department, and so on.

That's one of two things. It's either socialism, or it's cherrypicking. You can't go "NO SOCIALISM" and then follow it with " except for this, and that, and that over there, and this too, oh and also this...". It's a matter of degree. Government handles things of a scale too large and too universal to be elective. It's just a matter of how much.

Are you aware there was once a time when your local fire department was a subscription service? Like a paywall? And that if you hadn't personally paid them their protection money and your house caught fire, they'd come by and watch if they came at all? That didn't pan out well for the community, so now it's ----- socialism. Covers everybody. Because COMMUNITY invests in itself.

However involuntary taking of money from people who earn it and giving the money to deadbeats who didnt earn it is a form of socialism

Are you calling the military "deadbeats"? Or firefighters? Mail carriers? The CDC?

According to your goofy definition all government activity is socislism

but thats wrong

government does raise the army and navy for national defense

thats because not even the richest American could afford their own privately owned aircraft carrier

but we can expect every able bodied person to provide for their own basic needs

today we socialism in the form of the wipe-every-nose welfare state

but that is a perversion of what made America great

Correct, and because not even the riches American can afford to run fire departments, deliver the mails, screen proposed drugs, keep planes from flying into each other, etc etc etc etc etc. It's no different.

One more thought

most schools, fire departments, and hospitals began as private entities

indeed the greatness of America was largely built by the private sector not government

 

[Pogo]

Here is a business exam question for all you USMBtards:

A bunch of workers want a piece of the action because they feel like they are being cheated (even though they agreed to work for wages) and those greedy shareholders who collectively own the publicly-traded corporate employer are not sharing in the profits. What should these workers do?

A. Individually save money and buy shares.
B. Set up a LLC and pool their savings, then buy even more shares.
C. Shift to an economic system that mandates all corporations divest all shareholders of shares and distribute those shares equally to all the workers.

If you answered "C" you are a fucking commie. To he a commie is to be a thief, because you have no problem stealing property from others at the point of the government gun.

Ah, nothing like Argument from Emotion to make a "rational" point.

Dismissed.

 

[Pogo]

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.

You obviously dont know what socialism is

an example: the military is not a form of socialism

we should do things collectively that cannot be done individually

and defense is one of those things

Is the national military a private enterprise?

No?

Then it's government.
Just like the power grid, the roads, the airways, the airwaves, the internets, the social safety nets such as they are, the post office, the local library, the municipal water supply, the local fire department, and so on.

That's one of two things. It's either socialism, or it's cherrypicking. You can't go "NO SOCIALISM" and then follow it with " except for this, and that, and that over there, and this too, oh and also this...". It's a matter of degree. Government handles things of a scale too large and too universal to be elective. It's just a matter of how much.

Are you aware there was once a time when your local fire department was a subscription service? Like a paywall? And that if you hadn't personally paid them their protection money and your house caught fire, they'd come by and watch if they came at all? That didn't pan out well for the community, so now it's ----- socialism. Covers everybody. Because COMMUNITY invests in itself.

However involuntary taking of money from people who earn it and giving the money to deadbeats who didnt earn it is a form of socialism

Are you calling the military "deadbeats"? Or firefighters? Mail carriers? The CDC?

According to your goofy definition all government activity is socislism

but thats wrong

government does raise the army and navy for national defense

thats because not even the richest American could afford their own privately owned aircraft carrier

but we can expect every able bodied person to provide for their own basic needs

today we socialism in the form of the wipe-every-nose welfare state

but that is a perversion of what made America great

Correct, and because not even the riches American can afford to run fire departments, deliver the mails, screen proposed drugs, keep planes from flying into each other, etc etc etc etc etc. It's no different.

Thats not socialism

its just the proper role of government

but forcing one American to support unproductive people is consistent with the marxist standard of from each according to ability, to each according to need

All you're doing is calling it two different things depending on which ones you choose to accept.

As I said ---------- cherrypicking.

 

[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.

 

[Mac-7]

You obviously dont know what socialism is

an example: the military is not a form of socialism

we should do things collectively that cannot be done individually

and defense is one of those things

Is the national military a private enterprise?

No?

Then it's government.
Just like the power grid, the roads, the airways, the airwaves, the internets, the social safety nets such as they are, the post office, the local library, the municipal water supply, the local fire department, and so on.

That's one of two things. It's either socialism, or it's cherrypicking. You can't go "NO SOCIALISM" and then follow it with " except for this, and that, and that over there, and this too, oh and also this...". It's a matter of degree. Government handles things of a scale too large and too universal to be elective. It's just a matter of how much.

Are you aware there was once a time when your local fire department was a subscription service? Like a paywall? And that if you hadn't personally paid them their protection money and your house caught fire, they'd come by and watch if they came at all? That didn't pan out well for the community, so now it's ----- socialism. Covers everybody. Because COMMUNITY invests in itself.

However involuntary taking of money from people who earn it and giving the money to deadbeats who didnt earn it is a form of socialism

Are you calling the military "deadbeats"? Or firefighters? Mail carriers? The CDC?

According to your goofy definition all government activity is socislism

but thats wrong

government does raise the army and navy for national defense

thats because not even the richest American could afford their own privately owned aircraft carrier

but we can expect every able bodied person to provide for their own basic needs

today we socialism in the form of the wipe-every-nose welfare state

but that is a perversion of what made America great

Correct, and because not even the riches American can afford to run fire departments, deliver the mails, screen proposed drugs, keep planes from flying into each other, etc etc etc etc etc. It's no different.

Thats not socialism

its just the proper role of government

but forcing one American to support unproductive people is consistent with the marxist standard of from each according to ability, to each according to need

All you're doing is calling it two different things depending on which ones you choose to accept.

As I said ---------- cherrypicking.

Not at all

a fire department is there for the benefit of everyone

Many Americans pay enough in taxes due to their hard work to buy a new car every year

but some deadbeat welfare bum is driving that car