History Is Clear: Socialism Isn't the Cure. So Why Do Millennials Like It?

[Andylusion]

I see.


- YOU accuse US of wanting "SOCIALISM" (in the extreme sense of the word)
- we explain to you that we don't want SOCIALISM like venezuela or china
- we then say "we like limited socialism like in Norway, where they have a MIX of capitalism and some socialist programs (cheap/affordable health care and education)
- you then shout "THERE IS NO SUCH THING as LIMITED SOCIALISM!"

even though we can all see Norway and Sweden and Denmark on our globes....

you are truly insane

Good thing you have a microscope

what's the population of those three countries combined?

This is a pretty legit question, and the answer is that the three of them combined are about the same population as Florida.

But there's a better example of a system that has limited socialism, and you're probably standing in it. We are a capitalist society, obviously, but we also have:

- Social Security
- Medicaid and Medicare
- VA Health Care
- The GI Bill
- All of the military, for that matter
- Cops and fire fighters
- Secret Service and Border Patrol
- Public defenders
- Trash collection, sewers, and landfills
- Crash-free airports
- Roads, bridges, and trains- Public transportation
- Public prisons
- Public libraries and museums
- Public parks and zoos
- Public schools, colleges, and universities
- Pell Grants and government scholarships
- The US Postal Service
- The National Weather Service
- The Peace Corps
- Agriculture and energy subsidies
- Decent food, clean air, clean water
- The CDC
- OSHA
- FEMA
- Snow removal
- Streetlights
- Streets

And a lot more. All of these are examples of socialist programs within our capitalist society.

Social Security is a Ponzi scheme. The population will pay for security, healthcare, police, fire, and local government to get us roads . That’s not socialism, that’s money pooled for basic life.

First of all, your list only covers about a quarter of mine.

But more to the point, we all put our money into a pot, and then that money is used to pay for all of these goods and services that benefit us all. That is the core of democratic socialism, and it has been going on for your whole life.

Case in point: Ever see one of these? This is a cast iron fire company plaque from the 19th century. Back then, you had to pay a fire company (literally, a company) to cover your house, and they would give you one of these plaques to put beside your front door. If your house caught on fire, and if you didn't have a plaque, they would literally stand by and watch your house burn to ashes. That was what fire protection looked like when it was unchecked capitalism. Eventually, cities started creating public fire departments, paid by public funds, and it was so much cheaper and more effective that the only place you see these plaques any more are in antique shops.

My point: You don't need to be afraid of socialist elements in our gloriously capitalistic society. They're good for us. The word is not inherently evil.

I highly doubt that it was "cheaper". However, I have no problem with a fire department, since I understand the logic of having external costs, such as your house burning, could catch my house on fire.

And I have no problem with police of military obviously, since a fundamental duty of the government is to protect people's rights.

That is not true of nearly everything else.

we all put our money into a pot, and then that money is used to pay for all of these goods and services that benefit us all.

False. Police benefit everyone... yes. But social security most certainly does not. It has never benefited me in my entire life. Given that it has $40 trillion in unfunded liabilities or some such amount... it likely never will benefit me.

Same with Medicare. Same with the VA. Same with everything else you listed.

None of those things have ever benefited me.

Further, you fail to grasp the incentives your system creates. The more you take care of people, the less incentive they have to work and earn money. Equally the more you tax them to force them to pay into the pot, the less incentive they have to work.

Famously Ronald Reagan became a Republican specifically because in the movie business, he figured out that with 70% tax rates, there was no reason to keep working. He would make a film, that put him in the top marginal tax bracket, and then just quit for the rest of the year. He'd go to his ranch, and ride horses until the next year.

Take Social Security. Had a lady I worked with, intentionally not save any money ever for anything. She spent every dollar she ever made within a week. I asked her point blank, what was her plan for retirement? "10 more years, and I can just collect Social Security".

So think about that. She had no motivation to work harder, because she will intentionally be on the government dole for the rest of her life. A full time ward of the state.

So here is an individual that is contributing less into the system... and taking more out of the system.... than she would have if there had been no system.

If Social Security didn't exist, she would be working more, and spending wisely, and saving for retirement. Instead she is living more irresponsibly than if the system never existed.

That is why your system fails. That is why every socialized country in the world, has ended in ruins.

Venezuela was a net exporter of food. They socialized it. Why didn't it work? Why didn't everyone paying into the pot, to provide everyone food, work?

Because those who were working to buy food, stopped working so much, because food was cheap. Equally those that were working to provide the food, stopped working because it wasn't worth it to do so anymore.

Result... mass starvation. They paid in less and less... and pulled out more and more.

Eventually in the words of Thatcher.... you run out of other people's money.

Your system..... does not work. Never has.... never will.

 

[Andylusion]

To Conservatives...

Trying to help the wealthy is.......Patriotism
Trying to help the people is.....SOCIALISM

Giving free shit to lefties doesn't really help the people.

"Give a man a fish, and you'll feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish, and you've fed him for a lifetime."

.

Words to live by

But what do you do when all the fish in the pond are gone ??
Conservatives say......Not my problem, we taught you how to fish

Problems is they act the same way whether the pond is full or empty.

It's like when I got my first apartment back in 1980. I hung a bird feeder on my back porch. When summer came, I finally got to meet my elderly neighbor. He told me that what I am doing for the birds might be doing them more harm than good. He said leaving the feeder out in the colder months is a good thing because there is much less food available for the birds. But if I leave it out all year long, the birds will depend on it so much, they will forget how to obtain food of their own.

Should I become uninterested in feeding the birds any longer, or if I move to another apartment, those birds will likely die off.

I always remembered his words; not because of the birds, but because after a few years, I finally realized that's what government does to it's people--keep out the feeder year after year.

That needs to be framed, and put in a university for economics.

 

[Pellinore]

Good thing you have a microscope

what's the population of those three countries combined?

This is a pretty legit question, and the answer is that the three of them combined are about the same population as Florida.

But there's a better example of a system that has limited socialism, and you're probably standing in it. We are a capitalist society, obviously, but we also have:

- Social Security
- Medicaid and Medicare
- VA Health Care
- The GI Bill
- All of the military, for that matter
- Cops and fire fighters
- Secret Service and Border Patrol
- Public defenders
- Trash collection, sewers, and landfills
- Crash-free airports
- Roads, bridges, and trains- Public transportation
- Public prisons
- Public libraries and museums
- Public parks and zoos
- Public schools, colleges, and universities
- Pell Grants and government scholarships
- The US Postal Service
- The National Weather Service
- The Peace Corps
- Agriculture and energy subsidies
- Decent food, clean air, clean water
- The CDC
- OSHA
- FEMA
- Snow removal
- Streetlights
- Streets

And a lot more. All of these are examples of socialist programs within our capitalist society.

Social Security is a Ponzi scheme. The population will pay for security, healthcare, police, fire, and local government to get us roads . That’s not socialism, that’s money pooled for basic life.

First of all, your list only covers about a quarter of mine.

But more to the point, we all put our money into a pot, and then that money is used to pay for all of these goods and services that benefit us all. That is the core of democratic socialism, and it has been going on for your whole life.

Case in point: Ever see one of these? This is a cast iron fire company plaque from the 19th century. Back then, you had to pay a fire company (literally, a company) to cover your house, and they would give you one of these plaques to put beside your front door. If your house caught on fire, and if you didn't have a plaque, they would literally stand by and watch your house burn to ashes. That was what fire protection looked like when it was unchecked capitalism. Eventually, cities started creating public fire departments, paid by public funds, and it was so much cheaper and more effective that the only place you see these plaques any more are in antique shops.

My point: You don't need to be afraid of socialist elements in our gloriously capitalistic society. They're good for us. The word is not inherently evil.

I highly doubt that it was "cheaper". However, I have no problem with a fire department, since I understand the logic of having external costs, such as your house burning, could catch my house on fire.

And I have no problem with police of military obviously, since a fundamental duty of the government is to protect people's rights.

That is not true of nearly everything else.

we all put our money into a pot, and then that money is used to pay for all of these goods and services that benefit us all.

False. Police benefit everyone... yes. But social security most certainly does not. It has never benefited me in my entire life. Given that it has $40 trillion in unfunded liabilities or some such amount... it likely never will benefit me.

Same with Medicare. Same with the VA. Same with everything else you listed.

None of those things have ever benefited me.

Further, you fail to grasp the incentives your system creates. The more you take care of people, the less incentive they have to work and earn money. Equally the more you tax them to force them to pay into the pot, the less incentive they have to work.

Famously Ronald Reagan became a Republican specifically because in the movie business, he figured out that with 70% tax rates, there was no reason to keep working. He would make a film, that put him in the top marginal tax bracket, and then just quit for the rest of the year. He'd go to his ranch, and ride horses until the next year.

Take Social Security. Had a lady I worked with, intentionally not save any money ever for anything. She spent every dollar she ever made within a week. I asked her point blank, what was her plan for retirement? "10 more years, and I can just collect Social Security".

So think about that. She had no motivation to work harder, because she will intentionally be on the government dole for the rest of her life. A full time ward of the state.

So here is an individual that is contributing less into the system... and taking more out of the system.... than she would have if there had been no system.

If Social Security didn't exist, she would be working more, and spending wisely, and saving for retirement. Instead she is living more irresponsibly than if the system never existed.

That is why your system fails. That is why every socialized country in the world, has ended in ruins.

Venezuela was a net exporter of food. They socialized it. Why didn't it work? Why didn't everyone paying into the pot, to provide everyone food, work?

Because those who were working to buy food, stopped working so much, because food was cheap. Equally those that were working to provide the food, stopped working because it wasn't worth it to do so anymore.

Result... mass starvation. They paid in less and less... and pulled out more and more.

Eventually in the words of Thatcher.... you run out of other people's money.

Your system..... does not work. Never has.... never will.

Let me clarify: When I said "benefit us all," I meant they benefit our society as a whole. I doubt that there's anyone who has taken advantage of every one of these services. Mea culpa.

But my point was not to get into a point-by-point debate about whether each one of these is a good idea or not. All I wanted to show was that they exist. We have them, we pay for them, we (as a country) use them. That mixed economy is *our* system, like it or not.

 

[Wyatt earp]

what's the population of those three countries combined?

This is a pretty legit question, and the answer is that the three of them combined are about the same population as Florida.

But there's a better example of a system that has limited socialism, and you're probably standing in it. We are a capitalist society, obviously, but we also have:

- Social Security
- Medicaid and Medicare
- VA Health Care
- The GI Bill
- All of the military, for that matter
- Cops and fire fighters
- Secret Service and Border Patrol
- Public defenders
- Trash collection, sewers, and landfills
- Crash-free airports
- Roads, bridges, and trains- Public transportation
- Public prisons
- Public libraries and museums
- Public parks and zoos
- Public schools, colleges, and universities
- Pell Grants and government scholarships
- The US Postal Service
- The National Weather Service
- The Peace Corps
- Agriculture and energy subsidies
- Decent food, clean air, clean water
- The CDC
- OSHA
- FEMA
- Snow removal
- Streetlights
- Streets

And a lot more. All of these are examples of socialist programs within our capitalist society.

Social Security is a Ponzi scheme. The population will pay for security, healthcare, police, fire, and local government to get us roads . That’s not socialism, that’s money pooled for basic life.

First of all, your list only covers about a quarter of mine.

But more to the point, we all put our money into a pot, and then that money is used to pay for all of these goods and services that benefit us all. That is the core of democratic socialism, and it has been going on for your whole life.

Case in point: Ever see one of these? This is a cast iron fire company plaque from the 19th century. Back then, you had to pay a fire company (literally, a company) to cover your house, and they would give you one of these plaques to put beside your front door. If your house caught on fire, and if you didn't have a plaque, they would literally stand by and watch your house burn to ashes. That was what fire protection looked like when it was unchecked capitalism. Eventually, cities started creating public fire departments, paid by public funds, and it was so much cheaper and more effective that the only place you see these plaques any more are in antique shops.

My point: You don't need to be afraid of socialist elements in our gloriously capitalistic society. They're good for us. The word is not inherently evil.

I highly doubt that it was "cheaper". However, I have no problem with a fire department, since I understand the logic of having external costs, such as your house burning, could catch my house on fire.

And I have no problem with police of military obviously, since a fundamental duty of the government is to protect people's rights.

That is not true of nearly everything else.

we all put our money into a pot, and then that money is used to pay for all of these goods and services that benefit us all.

False. Police benefit everyone... yes. But social security most certainly does not. It has never benefited me in my entire life. Given that it has $40 trillion in unfunded liabilities or some such amount... it likely never will benefit me.

Same with Medicare. Same with the VA. Same with everything else you listed.

None of those things have ever benefited me.

Further, you fail to grasp the incentives your system creates. The more you take care of people, the less incentive they have to work and earn money. Equally the more you tax them to force them to pay into the pot, the less incentive they have to work.

Famously Ronald Reagan became a Republican specifically because in the movie business, he figured out that with 70% tax rates, there was no reason to keep working. He would make a film, that put him in the top marginal tax bracket, and then just quit for the rest of the year. He'd go to his ranch, and ride horses until the next year.

Take Social Security. Had a lady I worked with, intentionally not save any money ever for anything. She spent every dollar she ever made within a week. I asked her point blank, what was her plan for retirement? "10 more years, and I can just collect Social Security".

So think about that. She had no motivation to work harder, because she will intentionally be on the government dole for the rest of her life. A full time ward of the state.

So here is an individual that is contributing less into the system... and taking more out of the system.... than she would have if there had been no system.

If Social Security didn't exist, she would be working more, and spending wisely, and saving for retirement. Instead she is living more irresponsibly than if the system never existed.

That is why your system fails. That is why every socialized country in the world, has ended in ruins.

Venezuela was a net exporter of food. They socialized it. Why didn't it work? Why didn't everyone paying into the pot, to provide everyone food, work?

Because those who were working to buy food, stopped working so much, because food was cheap. Equally those that were working to provide the food, stopped working because it wasn't worth it to do so anymore.

Result... mass starvation. They paid in less and less... and pulled out more and more.

Eventually in the words of Thatcher.... you run out of other people's money.

Your system..... does not work. Never has.... never will.

Let me clarify: When I said "benefit us all," I meant they benefit our society as a whole. I doubt that there's anyone who has taken advantage of every one of these services. Mea culpa.

But my point was not to get into a point-by-point debate about whether each one of these is a good idea or not. All I wanted to show was that they exist. We have them, we pay for them, we (as a country) use them. That mixed economy is *our* system, like it or not.

You sound like a girl..


I dont fight girl posters

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I see.


- YOU accuse US of wanting "SOCIALISM" (in the extreme sense of the word)
- we explain to you that we don't want SOCIALISM like venezuela or china
- we then say "we like limited socialism like in Norway, where they have a MIX of capitalism and some socialist programs (cheap/affordable health care and education)
- you then shout "THERE IS NO SUCH THING as LIMITED SOCIALISM!"

even though we can all see Norway and Sweden and Denmark on our globes....

you are truly insane

Good thing you have a microscope

what's the population of those three countries combined?

This is a pretty legit question, and the answer is that the three of them combined are about the same population as Florida.

But there's a better example of a system that has limited socialism, and you're probably standing in it. We are a capitalist society, obviously, but we also have:

- Social Security
- Medicaid and Medicare
- VA Health Care
- The GI Bill
- All of the military, for that matter
- Cops and fire fighters
- Secret Service and Border Patrol
- Public defenders
- Trash collection, sewers, and landfills
- Crash-free airports
- Roads, bridges, and trains- Public transportation
- Public prisons
- Public libraries and museums
- Public parks and zoos
- Public schools, colleges, and universities
- Pell Grants and government scholarships
- The US Postal Service
- The National Weather Service
- The Peace Corps
- Agriculture and energy subsidies
- Decent food, clean air, clean water
- The CDC
- OSHA
- FEMA
- Snow removal
- Streetlights
- Streets

And a lot more. All of these are examples of socialist programs within our capitalist society.

Social Security is a Ponzi scheme. The population will pay for security, healthcare, police, fire, and local government to get us roads . That’s not socialism, that’s money pooled for basic life.

First of all, your list only covers about a quarter of mine.

But more to the point, we all put our money into a pot, and then that money is used to pay for all of these goods and services that benefit us all. That is the core of democratic socialism, and it has been going on for your whole life.

Case in point: Ever see one of these? This is a cast iron fire company plaque from the 19th century. Back then, you had to pay a fire company (literally, a company) to cover your house, and they would give you one of these plaques to put beside your front door. If your house caught on fire, and if you didn't have a plaque, they would literally stand by and watch your house burn to ashes. That was what fire protection looked like when it was unchecked capitalism. Eventually, cities started creating public fire departments, paid by public funds, and it was so much cheaper and more effective that the only place you see these plaques any more are in antique shops.

My point: You don't need to be afraid of socialist elements in our gloriously capitalistic society. They're good for us. The word is not inherently evil.

Socialism is Socialism no matter how you slice it or dice it. Democrat Socialism is a warm up word to sneak Socialist ideas into the country. The current leader of this so-called Democrat Socialism spent his honeymoon in the USSR.

Did you ever hear of a volunteer fire department? Yes, those volunteer fire departments exist all over the country in small towns and country areas. And yes, they do have the system you speak of, which is fire insurance paid to the department to purchase and upkeep fire equipment, as well as pay the volunteers when they have to respond to a fire. If you don't pay, your house or barn burns to the ground.

Do we have socialist like programs? Yes we do. How are those programs doing anyway? SS promised me I could retire at the age of 65. They changed that to 67 because they're trying to find a way to make the depleting funds last. How about Medicare? Yah, that's going broke too, and has to be funded by income tax dollars on top of the payroll tax we pay. Medicaid? Same thing.

How about HUD? Well, HUD moved lowlifes into my suburb next door. I've had the police there about six times in the last two years, and other neighbors have called on them when I didn't. If they do work, it certainly isn't normal hours, because they come home all hours in the morning, yell at each other, setting their car alarms off, slamming car doors, waking all of us up who have to get up for work in the morning.

These are just a few Socialist programs we have that brought us nothing but problems. The Democrat soliton to our problems? More social programs. The definition of insanity is doing the same things over and over again, and expecting different results each time.

 

[basquebromance]

there have now been 2 biopics about Hugo Chavez...why not make it a trilogy with a new film that shows Venezuelans eating their pets and cow manure?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

what's the population of those three countries combined?

This is a pretty legit question, and the answer is that the three of them combined are about the same population as Florida.

But there's a better example of a system that has limited socialism, and you're probably standing in it. We are a capitalist society, obviously, but we also have:

- Social Security
- Medicaid and Medicare
- VA Health Care
- The GI Bill
- All of the military, for that matter
- Cops and fire fighters
- Secret Service and Border Patrol
- Public defenders
- Trash collection, sewers, and landfills
- Crash-free airports
- Roads, bridges, and trains- Public transportation
- Public prisons
- Public libraries and museums
- Public parks and zoos
- Public schools, colleges, and universities
- Pell Grants and government scholarships
- The US Postal Service
- The National Weather Service
- The Peace Corps
- Agriculture and energy subsidies
- Decent food, clean air, clean water
- The CDC
- OSHA
- FEMA
- Snow removal
- Streetlights
- Streets

And a lot more. All of these are examples of socialist programs within our capitalist society.

Social Security is a Ponzi scheme. The population will pay for security, healthcare, police, fire, and local government to get us roads . That’s not socialism, that’s money pooled for basic life.

First of all, your list only covers about a quarter of mine.

But more to the point, we all put our money into a pot, and then that money is used to pay for all of these goods and services that benefit us all. That is the core of democratic socialism, and it has been going on for your whole life.

Case in point: Ever see one of these? This is a cast iron fire company plaque from the 19th century. Back then, you had to pay a fire company (literally, a company) to cover your house, and they would give you one of these plaques to put beside your front door. If your house caught on fire, and if you didn't have a plaque, they would literally stand by and watch your house burn to ashes. That was what fire protection looked like when it was unchecked capitalism. Eventually, cities started creating public fire departments, paid by public funds, and it was so much cheaper and more effective that the only place you see these plaques any more are in antique shops.

My point: You don't need to be afraid of socialist elements in our gloriously capitalistic society. They're good for us. The word is not inherently evil.

I highly doubt that it was "cheaper". However, I have no problem with a fire department, since I understand the logic of having external costs, such as your house burning, could catch my house on fire.

And I have no problem with police of military obviously, since a fundamental duty of the government is to protect people's rights.

That is not true of nearly everything else.

we all put our money into a pot, and then that money is used to pay for all of these goods and services that benefit us all.

False. Police benefit everyone... yes. But social security most certainly does not. It has never benefited me in my entire life. Given that it has $40 trillion in unfunded liabilities or some such amount... it likely never will benefit me.

Same with Medicare. Same with the VA. Same with everything else you listed.

None of those things have ever benefited me.

Further, you fail to grasp the incentives your system creates. The more you take care of people, the less incentive they have to work and earn money. Equally the more you tax them to force them to pay into the pot, the less incentive they have to work.

Famously Ronald Reagan became a Republican specifically because in the movie business, he figured out that with 70% tax rates, there was no reason to keep working. He would make a film, that put him in the top marginal tax bracket, and then just quit for the rest of the year. He'd go to his ranch, and ride horses until the next year.

Take Social Security. Had a lady I worked with, intentionally not save any money ever for anything. She spent every dollar she ever made within a week. I asked her point blank, what was her plan for retirement? "10 more years, and I can just collect Social Security".

So think about that. She had no motivation to work harder, because she will intentionally be on the government dole for the rest of her life. A full time ward of the state.

So here is an individual that is contributing less into the system... and taking more out of the system.... than she would have if there had been no system.

If Social Security didn't exist, she would be working more, and spending wisely, and saving for retirement. Instead she is living more irresponsibly than if the system never existed.

That is why your system fails. That is why every socialized country in the world, has ended in ruins.

Venezuela was a net exporter of food. They socialized it. Why didn't it work? Why didn't everyone paying into the pot, to provide everyone food, work?

Because those who were working to buy food, stopped working so much, because food was cheap. Equally those that were working to provide the food, stopped working because it wasn't worth it to do so anymore.

Result... mass starvation. They paid in less and less... and pulled out more and more.

Eventually in the words of Thatcher.... you run out of other people's money.

Your system..... does not work. Never has.... never will.

Let me clarify: When I said "benefit us all," I meant they benefit our society as a whole. I doubt that there's anyone who has taken advantage of every one of these services. Mea culpa.

But my point was not to get into a point-by-point debate about whether each one of these is a good idea or not. All I wanted to show was that they exist. We have them, we pay for them, we (as a country) use them. That mixed economy is *our* system, like it or not.

No, we don't all use them. If you drop dead at the age of 65 on your birthday, your heirs get everything you worked for except Social Security. All that money you and your employers paid throughout the years was not only never invested, but put back into that pot you speak of. Same thing with Medicare.

 

[DustyInfinity]

Capitalism isn't fair because some people can succeed. We can't have that, and must create legislation to stop it.

 

[EvMetro]

Result... mass starvation. They paid in less and less... and pulled out more and more.

Eventually in the words of Thatcher.... you run out of other people's money.

Your system..... does not work. Never has.... never will.

Thatcher was correct, but lefties are not concerned about this happening.

 

[Andylusion]

what's the population of those three countries combined?

This is a pretty legit question, and the answer is that the three of them combined are about the same population as Florida.

But there's a better example of a system that has limited socialism, and you're probably standing in it. We are a capitalist society, obviously, but we also have:

- Social Security
- Medicaid and Medicare
- VA Health Care
- The GI Bill
- All of the military, for that matter
- Cops and fire fighters
- Secret Service and Border Patrol
- Public defenders
- Trash collection, sewers, and landfills
- Crash-free airports
- Roads, bridges, and trains- Public transportation
- Public prisons
- Public libraries and museums
- Public parks and zoos
- Public schools, colleges, and universities
- Pell Grants and government scholarships
- The US Postal Service
- The National Weather Service
- The Peace Corps
- Agriculture and energy subsidies
- Decent food, clean air, clean water
- The CDC
- OSHA
- FEMA
- Snow removal
- Streetlights
- Streets

And a lot more. All of these are examples of socialist programs within our capitalist society.

Social Security is a Ponzi scheme. The population will pay for security, healthcare, police, fire, and local government to get us roads . That’s not socialism, that’s money pooled for basic life.

First of all, your list only covers about a quarter of mine.

But more to the point, we all put our money into a pot, and then that money is used to pay for all of these goods and services that benefit us all. That is the core of democratic socialism, and it has been going on for your whole life.

Case in point: Ever see one of these? This is a cast iron fire company plaque from the 19th century. Back then, you had to pay a fire company (literally, a company) to cover your house, and they would give you one of these plaques to put beside your front door. If your house caught on fire, and if you didn't have a plaque, they would literally stand by and watch your house burn to ashes. That was what fire protection looked like when it was unchecked capitalism. Eventually, cities started creating public fire departments, paid by public funds, and it was so much cheaper and more effective that the only place you see these plaques any more are in antique shops.

My point: You don't need to be afraid of socialist elements in our gloriously capitalistic society. They're good for us. The word is not inherently evil.

I highly doubt that it was "cheaper". However, I have no problem with a fire department, since I understand the logic of having external costs, such as your house burning, could catch my house on fire.

And I have no problem with police of military obviously, since a fundamental duty of the government is to protect people's rights.

That is not true of nearly everything else.

we all put our money into a pot, and then that money is used to pay for all of these goods and services that benefit us all.

False. Police benefit everyone... yes. But social security most certainly does not. It has never benefited me in my entire life. Given that it has $40 trillion in unfunded liabilities or some such amount... it likely never will benefit me.

Same with Medicare. Same with the VA. Same with everything else you listed.

None of those things have ever benefited me.

Further, you fail to grasp the incentives your system creates. The more you take care of people, the less incentive they have to work and earn money. Equally the more you tax them to force them to pay into the pot, the less incentive they have to work.

Famously Ronald Reagan became a Republican specifically because in the movie business, he figured out that with 70% tax rates, there was no reason to keep working. He would make a film, that put him in the top marginal tax bracket, and then just quit for the rest of the year. He'd go to his ranch, and ride horses until the next year.

Take Social Security. Had a lady I worked with, intentionally not save any money ever for anything. She spent every dollar she ever made within a week. I asked her point blank, what was her plan for retirement? "10 more years, and I can just collect Social Security".

So think about that. She had no motivation to work harder, because she will intentionally be on the government dole for the rest of her life. A full time ward of the state.

So here is an individual that is contributing less into the system... and taking more out of the system.... than she would have if there had been no system.

If Social Security didn't exist, she would be working more, and spending wisely, and saving for retirement. Instead she is living more irresponsibly than if the system never existed.

That is why your system fails. That is why every socialized country in the world, has ended in ruins.

Venezuela was a net exporter of food. They socialized it. Why didn't it work? Why didn't everyone paying into the pot, to provide everyone food, work?

Because those who were working to buy food, stopped working so much, because food was cheap. Equally those that were working to provide the food, stopped working because it wasn't worth it to do so anymore.

Result... mass starvation. They paid in less and less... and pulled out more and more.

Eventually in the words of Thatcher.... you run out of other people's money.

Your system..... does not work. Never has.... never will.

Let me clarify: When I said "benefit us all," I meant they benefit our society as a whole. I doubt that there's anyone who has taken advantage of every one of these services. Mea culpa.

But my point was not to get into a point-by-point debate about whether each one of these is a good idea or not. All I wanted to show was that they exist. We have them, we pay for them, we (as a country) use them. That mixed economy is *our* system, like it or not.

Whether "we want it" or not, does not change the fact that it could be, and I would argue is, bad for the country.

"We want it" is the argument of a toddler. You put out ice cream, and the toddler wants ice cream for breakfast lunch and dinner, and then cries they have a stomach ache.

I get it that the public wants free education, free health care, free phones, free housing, free transportation, free food, free 'living wage' and on and on and on.

That does not mean it is good, or right, or even moral.

Again, look at Greece. Greece should be a very informative example of why we need to re-think how we are doing things. People in Greece warned in the 90s, and during the 2000s, that they could not afford the endless government pensions and spending they wanted.

But every time they tried to reform the system in Greece, people started screaming "We want it". The adult toddlers came out screaming that they paid into system, and they deserve their pensions. The exact same thing we see in the US, when people point out that we have $140 Trillion dollars in unfunded liabilities with Medicare and Social Security.

Then they went broke. And you saw old pensioners laying on the sidewalks, crying because there was no money, and people were burning sticks and wood, because they couldn't even afford natural gas in the winter. They had a 4 month long smog alert in Athens, from all the people burning wood.

Moreover, you say it benefits society as a whole, but I'm saying it doesn't. The bottom line is, it doesn't. Paying people to not work, does not benefit me, any more than taxing me for benefits I don't get, doesn't benefit me. And I promise you, I'm not alone. Hundred million or more people in this country gain no benefits from these programs.

You can't sit there and claim "this is a benefit for all of society" right having it pointed out that a large massive chunk of society does not benefit from it.

Lastly, saying that our system is a mixed economy, is irrelevant. Yes, we know this. The point we're discussing is whether that is good or not.

Our claim is that it is not good. How many times do you see massive food shortages? Or shortages of office paper? Or shortages of construction material? How many times do you see people lined up around the block, waiting to get into home depot because their service is terrible? Or have month long waiting lists for Wendy's?

You never see that. You never do.

How many times do you see shortages of doctors, or long waiting lists at government run hospitals? All the time. Constantly. In the US, and elsewhere.

In Canada, where the majority of the system is socialized, you see private companies, where Canadians will pay for health care, that they supposedly get free.

Timely Medical | Timely Surgery at Affordable Prices

Timely Medical in Canada sends people to the US to pay for care, literally every single week. Every week. It's a for-profit company, helping people escape socialized care that is supposedly free.

The socialized systems in our country, are the systems that have the problems.

Look at mortgages. We have more regulations on banks, than any other country in the world today. No other country has more regulations. Yet the sub-prime crash originated here.

So yes, we have a mixed system, and that's where all our problems are.

 

[rightwinger]

But what do you do when all the fish in the pond are gone ??
Conservatives say......Not my problem, we taught you how to fish

Indeed lefties are likely to crowd out the pond where they were taught to fish, and strip every last fish out of it, instead of finding other ponds, lakes, streams, rivers, and oceans.

Find a righty, and he will point you to another body of water that will contain fish.

Very good
It assumes that the poor have the mobility to move to other ponds and that they will be allowed to fish once they get there

Happens to every migration where the poor move en mass to new locations

Leftyism can be a crippling curse, but there are probably ways to overcome it long enough to find a righty who will point you to another body of water that contains fish.

Ever hear of the story about the ant and the grasshopper? This story polarizes lefties as well.

Actually, it is righties who close the ponds you have been fishing in
If you are unable to move to another pond, they blame you

I am familiar with the grasshopper and the ants. The ants struggle and work day and night so that one ant can become incredibly wealthy. Any ant that can’t keep up get driven from the group

 

[Wry Catcher]

Good thing you have a microscope

what's the population of those three countries combined?

This is a pretty legit question, and the answer is that the three of them combined are about the same population as Florida.

But there's a better example of a system that has limited socialism, and you're probably standing in it. We are a capitalist society, obviously, but we also have:

- Social Security
- Medicaid and Medicare
- VA Health Care
- The GI Bill
- All of the military, for that matter
- Cops and fire fighters
- Secret Service and Border Patrol
- Public defenders
- Trash collection, sewers, and landfills
- Crash-free airports
- Roads, bridges, and trains- Public transportation
- Public prisons
- Public libraries and museums
- Public parks and zoos
- Public schools, colleges, and universities
- Pell Grants and government scholarships
- The US Postal Service
- The National Weather Service
- The Peace Corps
- Agriculture and energy subsidies
- Decent food, clean air, clean water
- The CDC
- OSHA
- FEMA
- Snow removal
- Streetlights
- Streets

And a lot more. All of these are examples of socialist programs within our capitalist society.

Social Security is a Ponzi scheme. The population will pay for security, healthcare, police, fire, and local government to get us roads . That’s not socialism, that’s money pooled for basic life.

First of all, your list only covers about a quarter of mine.

But more to the point, we all put our money into a pot, and then that money is used to pay for all of these goods and services that benefit us all. That is the core of democratic socialism, and it has been going on for your whole life.

Case in point: Ever see one of these? This is a cast iron fire company plaque from the 19th century. Back then, you had to pay a fire company (literally, a company) to cover your house, and they would give you one of these plaques to put beside your front door. If your house caught on fire, and if you didn't have a plaque, they would literally stand by and watch your house burn to ashes. That was what fire protection looked like when it was unchecked capitalism. Eventually, cities started creating public fire departments, paid by public funds, and it was so much cheaper and more effective that the only place you see these plaques any more are in antique shops.

My point: You don't need to be afraid of socialist elements in our gloriously capitalistic society. They're good for us. The word is not inherently evil.

I highly doubt that it was "cheaper". However, I have no problem with a fire department, since I understand the logic of having external costs, such as your house burning, could catch my house on fire.

And I have no problem with police of military obviously, since a fundamental duty of the government is to protect people's rights.

That is not true of nearly everything else.

we all put our money into a pot, and then that money is used to pay for all of these goods and services that benefit us all.

False. Police benefit everyone... yes. But social security most certainly does not. It has never benefited me in my entire life. Given that it has $40 trillion in unfunded liabilities or some such amount... it likely never will benefit me.

Same with Medicare. Same with the VA. Same with everything else you listed.

None of those things have ever benefited me.

Further, you fail to grasp the incentives your system creates. The more you take care of people, the less incentive they have to work and earn money. Equally the more you tax them to force them to pay into the pot, the less incentive they have to work.

Famously Ronald Reagan became a Republican specifically because in the movie business, he figured out that with 70% tax rates, there was no reason to keep working. He would make a film, that put him in the top marginal tax bracket, and then just quit for the rest of the year. He'd go to his ranch, and ride horses until the next year.

Take Social Security. Had a lady I worked with, intentionally not save any money ever for anything. She spent every dollar she ever made within a week. I asked her point blank, what was her plan for retirement? "10 more years, and I can just collect Social Security".

So think about that. She had no motivation to work harder, because she will intentionally be on the government dole for the rest of her life. A full time ward of the state.

So here is an individual that is contributing less into the system... and taking more out of the system.... than she would have if there had been no system.

If Social Security didn't exist, she would be working more, and spending wisely, and saving for retirement. Instead she is living more irresponsibly than if the system never existed.

That is why your system fails. That is why every socialized country in the world, has ended in ruins.

Venezuela was a net exporter of food. They socialized it. Why didn't it work? Why didn't everyone paying into the pot, to provide everyone food, work?

Because those who were working to buy food, stopped working so much, because food was cheap. Equally those that were working to provide the food, stopped working because it wasn't worth it to do so anymore.

Result... mass starvation. They paid in less and less... and pulled out more and more.

Eventually in the words of Thatcher.... you run out of other people's money.

Your system..... does not work. Never has.... never will.

I got so far ^^^ as "it's all about me". A very simple and cynical view of the safety net.

Without Social Security many people would starve, or steal. I'm sure you don't care if they eat, unless they steal directly your food, or food from the grocer who will need to raise prices, which will indirectly effect you.

Providing health care to the poor who will suffer from serious and sometimes communicable disease might not effect you, if you don't go out in public.

 

[rightwinger]

What is Socialism?

Where the Government controls the means of production, labor and sets prices

Very few nations on earth have absolute socialism. The US is not even close. Doing things to help the people is not socialism

 

[Mac1958]

What is Socialism?
Where the Government controls the means of production, labor and sets prices
Very few nations on earth have absolute socialism. The US is not even close. Doing things to help the people is not socialism

Nice try, but probably too complicated.
.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

But what do you do when all the fish in the pond are gone ??
Conservatives say......Not my problem, we taught you how to fish

Indeed lefties are likely to crowd out the pond where they were taught to fish, and strip every last fish out of it, instead of finding other ponds, lakes, streams, rivers, and oceans.

Find a righty, and he will point you to another body of water that will contain fish.

Very good
It assumes that the poor have the mobility to move to other ponds and that they will be allowed to fish once they get there

Happens to every migration where the poor move en mass to new locations

Leftyism can be a crippling curse, but there are probably ways to overcome it long enough to find a righty who will point you to another body of water that contains fish.

Ever hear of the story about the ant and the grasshopper? This story polarizes lefties as well.

Actually, it is righties who close the ponds you have been fishing in
If you are unable to move to another pond, they blame you

I am familiar with the grasshopper and the ants. The ants struggle and work day and night so that one ant can become incredibly wealthy. Any ant that can’t keep up get driven from the group

Actually, we live in a society where many of the ants are working, and giving to the ants that don't feel like working. The ants don't do this freely of course, they are forced to.

The ants with the most are that way because they traded their services or products in exchange for food, and the ants that gave them the food did so willingly--not by force of government.

 

[rightwinger]

But what do you do when all the fish in the pond are gone ??
Conservatives say......Not my problem, we taught you how to fish

Indeed lefties are likely to crowd out the pond where they were taught to fish, and strip every last fish out of it, instead of finding other ponds, lakes, streams, rivers, and oceans.

Find a righty, and he will point you to another body of water that will contain fish.

Very good
It assumes that the poor have the mobility to move to other ponds and that they will be allowed to fish once they get there

Happens to every migration where the poor move en mass to new locations

Leftyism can be a crippling curse, but there are probably ways to overcome it long enough to find a righty who will point you to another body of water that contains fish.

Ever hear of the story about the ant and the grasshopper? This story polarizes lefties as well.

Actually, it is righties who close the ponds you have been fishing in
If you are unable to move to another pond, they blame you

I am familiar with the grasshopper and the ants. The ants struggle and work day and night so that one ant can become incredibly wealthy. Any ant that can’t keep up get driven from the group

Actually, we live in a society where many of the ants are working, and giving to the ants that don't feel like working. The ants don't do this freely of course, they are forced to.

The ants with the most are that way because they traded their services or products in exchange for food, and the ants that gave them the food did so willingly--not by force of government.

More Conservative blame the victim

Out of one hundred ants, ninety five work and almost all the money goes to five ants The ants that are struggling are not getting that revenue

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Indeed lefties are likely to crowd out the pond where they were taught to fish, and strip every last fish out of it, instead of finding other ponds, lakes, streams, rivers, and oceans.

Find a righty, and he will point you to another body of water that will contain fish.

Very good
It assumes that the poor have the mobility to move to other ponds and that they will be allowed to fish once they get there

Happens to every migration where the poor move en mass to new locations

Leftyism can be a crippling curse, but there are probably ways to overcome it long enough to find a righty who will point you to another body of water that contains fish.

Ever hear of the story about the ant and the grasshopper? This story polarizes lefties as well.

Actually, it is righties who close the ponds you have been fishing in
If you are unable to move to another pond, they blame you

I am familiar with the grasshopper and the ants. The ants struggle and work day and night so that one ant can become incredibly wealthy. Any ant that can’t keep up get driven from the group

Actually, we live in a society where many of the ants are working, and giving to the ants that don't feel like working. The ants don't do this freely of course, they are forced to.

The ants with the most are that way because they traded their services or products in exchange for food, and the ants that gave them the food did so willingly--not by force of government.

More Conservative blame the victim

Out of one hundred ants, ninety nine work and almost all the money goes to one ant. The ant that is struggling is not getting that revenue

Deciding to drop out of school, not pursue an income, having children you can't afford is not being a victim. They are a product of their own doing.

You want to see a victim, look to government. Thanks to government, I lost my healthcare insurance. Thanks to government, I may be losing my career, and at 60 years old, very difficult to start a new one. That's victimhood.

 

[rightwinger]

Very good
It assumes that the poor have the mobility to move to other ponds and that they will be allowed to fish once they get there

Happens to every migration where the poor move en mass to new locations

Leftyism can be a crippling curse, but there are probably ways to overcome it long enough to find a righty who will point you to another body of water that contains fish.

Ever hear of the story about the ant and the grasshopper? This story polarizes lefties as well.

Actually, it is righties who close the ponds you have been fishing in
If you are unable to move to another pond, they blame you

I am familiar with the grasshopper and the ants. The ants struggle and work day and night so that one ant can become incredibly wealthy. Any ant that can’t keep up get driven from the group

Actually, we live in a society where many of the ants are working, and giving to the ants that don't feel like working. The ants don't do this freely of course, they are forced to.

The ants with the most are that way because they traded their services or products in exchange for food, and the ants that gave them the food did so willingly--not by force of government.

More Conservative blame the victim

Out of one hundred ants, ninety nine work and almost all the money goes to one ant. The ant that is struggling is not getting that revenue

Deciding to drop out of school, not pursue an income, having children you can't afford is not being a victim. They are a product of their own doing.

You want to see a victim, look to government. Thanks to government, I lost my healthcare insurance. Thanks to government, I may be losing my career, and at 60 years old, very difficult to start a new one. That's victimhood.

More blame the victim

Those who create the wealth get a very small share of it
Meanwhile, our government protects those who monopolize available wealth

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Leftyism can be a crippling curse, but there are probably ways to overcome it long enough to find a righty who will point you to another body of water that contains fish.

Ever hear of the story about the ant and the grasshopper? This story polarizes lefties as well.

Actually, it is righties who close the ponds you have been fishing in
If you are unable to move to another pond, they blame you

I am familiar with the grasshopper and the ants. The ants struggle and work day and night so that one ant can become incredibly wealthy. Any ant that can’t keep up get driven from the group

Actually, we live in a society where many of the ants are working, and giving to the ants that don't feel like working. The ants don't do this freely of course, they are forced to.

The ants with the most are that way because they traded their services or products in exchange for food, and the ants that gave them the food did so willingly--not by force of government.

More Conservative blame the victim

Out of one hundred ants, ninety nine work and almost all the money goes to one ant. The ant that is struggling is not getting that revenue

Deciding to drop out of school, not pursue an income, having children you can't afford is not being a victim. They are a product of their own doing.

You want to see a victim, look to government. Thanks to government, I lost my healthcare insurance. Thanks to government, I may be losing my career, and at 60 years old, very difficult to start a new one. That's victimhood.

More blame the victim

Those who create the wealth get a very small share of it
Meanwhile, our government protects those who monopolize available wealth

There is no such thing as "available wealth." It's a lie that's been told to you. Anybody in this country can make as much money as they desire. There is no limit because there is no available wealth.

The people who create the wealth are those who took a risk, invested their own money, took on all the responsibilities in creating their product or services. Workers do not create wealth, we simply do the work. Saying workers are the ones who created the wealth is as ridiculous as saying the roadies helped create that hit song that put them on tour.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Indeed lefties are likely to crowd out the pond where they were taught to fish, and strip every last fish out of it, instead of finding other ponds, lakes, streams, rivers, and oceans.

Find a righty, and he will point you to another body of water that will contain fish.

Very good
It assumes that the poor have the mobility to move to other ponds and that they will be allowed to fish once they get there

Happens to every migration where the poor move en mass to new locations

Leftyism can be a crippling curse, but there are probably ways to overcome it long enough to find a righty who will point you to another body of water that contains fish.

Ever hear of the story about the ant and the grasshopper? This story polarizes lefties as well.

Actually, it is righties who close the ponds you have been fishing in
If you are unable to move to another pond, they blame you

I am familiar with the grasshopper and the ants. The ants struggle and work day and night so that one ant can become incredibly wealthy. Any ant that can’t keep up get driven from the group

Actually, we live in a society where many of the ants are working, and giving to the ants that don't feel like working. The ants don't do this freely of course, they are forced to.

The ants with the most are that way because they traded their services or products in exchange for food, and the ants that gave them the food did so willingly--not by force of government.

More Conservative blame the victim

Out of one hundred ants, ninety five work and almost all the money goes to five ants The ants that are struggling are not getting that revenue

That's because they don't deserve that revenue. The people who deserve the revenue are the ones that created it. You can't get a job at a grocery store stocking shelves and claim you should earn just as much as the company that put that store there.