The Problem with Socialism

[Fenton Lum]

I don't do safe spaces. There are no such things.

There are no such things as Safe Spaces....okay, whatever

"Neither of them are capable of staying on topic."
Lassie

Wow, is that the best that Politburo HQ could come up with?

How far have you wandered from the topic again shoog?

It's amazing you've put together several comments without insulting people.

Try it out for yourself? Converse before you asign everyone to a category?

 

[Lucy Hamilton]

There are no such things as Safe Spaces....okay, whatever

"Neither of them are capable of staying on topic."
Lassie

Wow, is that the best that Politburo HQ could come up with?

How far have you wandered from the topic again shoog?

It's amazing you've put together several comments without insulting people.

Try it out for yourself? Converse before you asign everyone to a category?

Huh? I and others have pointed to the issue that you and Jack4jill tend to do a lot of insulting in your comments, so yes it's incredible you've strung together a few comments sans insults.

Congratulations to you both

 

[Fenton Lum]

Public education has never worked?

Yes it's worked by indoctrinating children in the Political Correctness insanity and other Leftist nonsense, thanks to the Leftist Teachers Unions.

Which is why it's best to have children educated in Private Schools.

Segregation on the other hand is terrific. Homs school your spawn, no one cares.

"Homs school your spawn,"

Not the greatest idea to be educating children in Homs.

You got it shoog, but you couldn't defend it and had to deflect.

Defend WHAT exactly?

Come on, you're not that thick, there's a thread and an attempt at a conversation here and all you did was jump in with your "leftists" this-n-that shit. So yeah, when that;s how you come in, it's gonna fly back at ya. Wanna reset?

Damn, let me fix that for you ---

So yeah, when that's how you come in, it's gonna fly back at ya. Wanna reset?

 

[Fenton Lum]

and others

Lassie and I have some history, she found she couldn't hang and now she's bitter.

 

[Lucy Hamilton]

Yes it's worked by indoctrinating children in the Political Correctness insanity and other Leftist nonsense, thanks to the Leftist Teachers Unions.

Which is why it's best to have children educated in Private Schools.

Segregation on the other hand is terrific. Homs school your spawn, no one cares.

"Homs school your spawn,"

Not the greatest idea to be educating children in Homs.

You got it shoog, but you couldn't defend it and had to deflect.

Defend WHAT exactly?

Come on, you're not that thick, there's a thread and an attempt at a conversation here and all you did was jump in with your "leftists" this-n-that shit. So yeah, when that;s how you come in, it's gonna fly back at ya. Wanna reset?

Damn, let me fix that for you ---

So yeah, when that's how you come in, it's gonna fly back at ya. Wanna reset?

I commented that it's best for children to be privately educated, rather than them to be subjected to the Leftist rubbish that's pushed into their minds in Government operated schools....your response to this was:

"Segregation on the other hand is terrific. Homs school your spawn, no one cares."

 

[regent]

Just so long as posters don't try defining, socialism we're OK.

 

[Fenton Lum]

Segregation on the other hand is terrific. Homs school your spawn, no one cares.

"Homs school your spawn,"

Not the greatest idea to be educating children in Homs.

You got it shoog, but you couldn't defend it and had to deflect.

Defend WHAT exactly?

Come on, you're not that thick, there's a thread and an attempt at a conversation here and all you did was jump in with your "leftists" this-n-that shit. So yeah, when that;s how you come in, it's gonna fly back at ya. Wanna reset?

Damn, let me fix that for you ---

So yeah, when that's how you come in, it's gonna fly back at ya. Wanna reset?

I commented that it's best for children to be privately educated, rather than them to be subjected to the Leftist rubbish that's pushed into their minds in Government operated schools....your response to this was:

"Segregation on the other hand is terrific. Homs school your spawn, no one cares."

Having drifted way too far from the topic. But hey, I'll bite.

What do you consider "leftist" rubbish?
No public instituions of learning at all?
Families without the economic ability, their kids go uneducated?

Sounds like you just want kids to hear only one side the the universe, one you can control. Is that what you're acusing the "leftists" of?

 

[Fenton Lum]

Just so long as posters don't try defining, socialism we're OK.

Or that we already have elements of it in american society.

 

[Fenton Lum]

"Homs school your spawn,"

Not the greatest idea to be educating children in Homs.

You got it shoog, but you couldn't defend it and had to deflect.

Defend WHAT exactly?

Come on, you're not that thick, there's a thread and an attempt at a conversation here and all you did was jump in with your "leftists" this-n-that shit. So yeah, when that;s how you come in, it's gonna fly back at ya. Wanna reset?

Damn, let me fix that for you ---

So yeah, when that's how you come in, it's gonna fly back at ya. Wanna reset?

I commented that it's best for children to be privately educated, rather than them to be subjected to the Leftist rubbish that's pushed into their minds in Government operated schools....your response to this was:

"Segregation on the other hand is terrific. Homs school your spawn, no one cares."

Having driffted way too far from the topic. But hey, I'll bite.

What do you consider "leftist" rubbish?
No public instituions of learning at all?
Families without the economic ability, their kids go uneducated?

Sounds like you just want kids to hear only one side the the universe, one you can control. Is that what yo're acusing the "leftsist" of?

And then further above before you joined:

Privatized gains versus socialized losses for the Wall Street bankster class
Internalized profits versus externalized risk and expense for the “job creator” class
Socialism for the aristocracy versus laissez faire capitalism for the masses

This is the current american paradigm. You feel otherwise?

 

[Fenton Lum]

Lucy? Are you there?

 

[Fenton Lum]

Lucy? Are you there?

Lucy? Are you there?

Ok, well, anyway, like I was saying before you joined in:

I’m referring more to the cannibalization of American society at large. Until we evolve away from what some (perhaps you?) advocate we will continue to borrow to maintain a level of empire and consumption this society can no longer afford, wages will continue to fall for the workers the “job creators” exploit, poverty will continue to spread, permanent war of empire will continue unabated, privatized prison system mass incarceration will continue and spread in our post industrial society, human beings will continue to be commoditized regardless of “which” political party wins, and the public will continue to get 90% of what they see and hear (and believe in when it comes to people like you) from a half dozen corporations spewing a false perceptual reality while judicial fiat continues to be leveraged to strip citizens of basic constitutional rights. The system will do to us whatever we allow and all we would have to do is stop participating and cooperating.

The more the unsubstantial people get squeezed, the more they have to focus on getting by the daily grind. The republican party went batshit crazy over my lifetime and the democratic party morphed into the republican party I grew up with and a lot of that happened in my opinion during the previous Clinton's administration. All the democratic party has to do isactas if they're a bit "left" of the republican party, which brings us back to the lesser of the two evils, and that's for the most part on social issues. It's all pretty bipartisan when it comes to corporate societal wealth extraction.

On Bill Clinton' watch; the FCC was deregulated, mass incarceration shot way up and Hilary made some snide reference to black kids caught up in the system as super predators, various global trade agreements, and the welfare reform biz at a time when 70% of the recipients were children.

Over half of all discretionary spending goes to the military and we continue to be the biggest military arms dealers on the planet. Often they get turned back on us, but hey, it's good for business. We can't even really figure out exactly what we spend on empire, a lot of it gets hidden.

If one looks at the rest of the developed industrial countries on the planet, the vast majority of them invest back into society regarding healthcare and education. All this talk of being globally competitive, requires an educated population. Expanding public education for the masses to include a college education keeps us competitive - it's an investment in society. Instead we've turned it into a for profit industry and turn kids whose parents can't pay for college into debt peons.

And how exactly does leaving worker healthcare on the backs of American employers (for however much longer that lasts, they're wiggling more and more out of that) make those employers competitive with employers in nations with single payer healthcare programs that have better healthcare outcomes at less cost?

For the most expensive healthcare system on the planet, also the system in which costs are climbing most aggressively on the planet, we enjoy these WHO ratings; 39th in infant mortality, 43rd in adult female mortality, 42nd in adult male mortality, 46th in life expectancy.

I'd love to hear your thoughts, I don't think we have a healthy society, and I don't see an inflection point in this 5-6 decadeish long trajectory. Further more from a political system point of view, I don't think "either" side has any intention of doing anything about it - which is to say, this shit works for them. There will not be a top down resolution, it's on us, all of us. The "leftist" vs "rightist" bullshit is just that, bullshit, right where they system wants us all. Unaware of the bigger picture, reacting emotionally from institutional imprinting, and totally unable to coherently recognized who is friend (common interests) and foe (benefitting from the cannibalization of american society).

 

[MikeK]

This book should be required reading in the p-schools, but we all know it won't.

From the author of 'The Real Lincoln'...one of the greatest history books ever written. It should also be required reading for all Americans, but we all know it won't.

One thing Thomas DiLorenzo knows very well is that approximately one out of every ten thousand Americans is capable of engaging in an intelligent discussion of socialism. The truth is even well-educated political scholars engage in strenuous debate over what exactly constitutes the truest and most viable form of socialism.

Unfortunately the vast majority of contemporary Americans have been convinced, largely by persistent right-wing propaganda, that socialism is just another word for what in fact is communism. But the fact is socialism is to communism what democracy is to anarchy. Both are extreme comparisons which are rooted in sheer political ignorance.

Remember when "socialism" was a dirty word?

Socialism was made a "dirty word" in the 1950s by the ravings of a ruthless political opportunist, Senator Joseph McCarthy, who managed to achieve prominence by exploiting the political ignorance of the average American. He did this by repetitiously implanting the notion that the U.S. had been infiltrated by communists and we were in danger of being enslaved by the likes of Joseph Stalin. The tragedy of this comedy is the percentage of Americans who actually believed what this opportunistic demagogue was telling them.

Now students at America's elite universities are parroting socialist talking points and "sure-thing" Hillary Clinton is struggling to win the Democratic nomination against a 74-year-old avowed socialist who promises to make the nation more like Europe. What's happened? Do Americans need a reminder about the dangers of socialist ideology and practices?

The reason students at elite universities are "parroting" socialist principles is Americans at large have outgrown the kind of raw political ignorance that served the interests of the McCarthyites of the '50s and have a more intelligent understanding of what socialism is and how certain socialist policies, when applied to regulating our capitalist system, will be beneficial to the vast majority of the common People.

Those who still regard the very word, socialism, with negative connotation should understand that some of the most substantially beneficial components of America's social structure are Social Security, Medicare and Public Primary Education. These are socialist policies.

Try to imagine what America would be like without them.

Thomas DiLorenzo, economics professor and senior fellow at the Ludwig von Mises Institute, deconstructs the retrograde ideology that has suddenly become disturbingly hip in The Problem with Socialism.

The gimmick in Prof. DiLorenzo's presentation is its effort to convey the impression that because Bernie Sanders has declared himself a socialist his ambition is to transform America into a socialist nation. But anyone with a basic understanding of politics and world history knows the only nations which have ever adopted an extreme form of socialism (communism) are those nations whose economies had been totally ruined by prolonged war or lack of resources (e.g., Russia, China, etc).

The U.S. is the diametric opposite of any such consideration. But this doesn't mean our highly successful capitalist system is not in need of certain socialist-oriented regulations to prevent the kind of thing we see happening in the emergence of the economic One Percent, which threatens to eradicate the American Middle Class.

 

[Fenton Lum]

There it is.

 

[Wry Catcher]

This book should be required reading in the p-schools, but we all know it won't.

From the author of 'The Real Lincoln'...one of the greatest history books ever written. It should also be required reading for all Americans, but we all know it won't.

Remember when "socialism" was a dirty word? Now students at America's elite universities are parroting socialist talking points and "sure-thing" Hillary Clinton is struggling to win the Democratic nomination against a 74-year-old avowed socialist who promises to make the nation more like Europe. What's happened? Do Americans need a reminder about the dangers of socialist ideology and practices?

Thomas DiLorenzo, economics professor and senior fellow at the Ludwig von Mises Institute, deconstructs the retrograde ideology that has suddenly become disturbingly hip in The Problem with Socialism.

The Problem with Capitalism:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/14/us/politics/sheldon-adelson-donald-trump.html

Eisenhower and Golwater warned amerca about this, back when "conservatives" were, well, ... conservative.

And yet the five conservative members of the USSC voted to overturn efforts by The Congress to regulate the amount of money intruding into politics. Are you suggesting the self defined conservatives of today are Conservatives in name only, aka plutocrats?

 

[Fenton Lum]

This book should be required reading in the p-schools, but we all know it won't.

From the author of 'The Real Lincoln'...one of the greatest history books ever written. It should also be required reading for all Americans, but we all know it won't.

Remember when "socialism" was a dirty word? Now students at America's elite universities are parroting socialist talking points and "sure-thing" Hillary Clinton is struggling to win the Democratic nomination against a 74-year-old avowed socialist who promises to make the nation more like Europe. What's happened? Do Americans need a reminder about the dangers of socialist ideology and practices?

Thomas DiLorenzo, economics professor and senior fellow at the Ludwig von Mises Institute, deconstructs the retrograde ideology that has suddenly become disturbingly hip in The Problem with Socialism.

The Problem with Capitalism:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/14/us/politics/sheldon-adelson-donald-trump.html

Eisenhower and Golwater warned amerca about this, back when "conservatives" were, well, ... conservative.

And yet the five conservative members of the USSC voted to overturn efforts by The Congress to regulate the amount of money intruding into politics. Are you suggesting the self defined conservatives of today are Conservatives in name only, aka plutocrats?

That would be exactly what I'm saying, and I would apply the same observation to the "other" side as well.

 

[Rustic]

This book should be required reading in the p-schools, but we all know it won't.

From the author of 'The Real Lincoln'...one of the greatest history books ever written. It should also be required reading for all Americans, but we all know it won't.

One thing Thomas DiLorenzo knows very well is that approximately one out of every ten thousand Americans is capable of engaging in an intelligent discussion of socialism. The truth is even well-educated political scholars engage in strenuous debate over what exactly constitutes the truest and most viable form of socialism.

Unfortunately the vast majority of contemporary Americans have been convinced, largely by persistent right-wing propaganda, that socialism is just another word for what in fact is communism. But the fact is socialism is to communism what democracy is to anarchy. Both are extreme comparisons which are rooted in sheer political ignorance.

Remember when "socialism" was a dirty word?

Socialism was made a "dirty word" in the 1950s by the ravings of a ruthless political opportunist, Senator Joseph McCarthy, who managed to achieve prominence by exploiting the political ignorance of the average American. He did this by repetitiously implanting the notion that the U.S. had been infiltrated by communists and we were in danger of being enslaved by the likes of Joseph Stalin. The tragedy of this comedy is the percentage of Americans who actually believed what this opportunistic demagogue was telling them.

Now students at America's elite universities are parroting socialist talking points and "sure-thing" Hillary Clinton is struggling to win the Democratic nomination against a 74-year-old avowed socialist who promises to make the nation more like Europe. What's happened? Do Americans need a reminder about the dangers of socialist ideology and practices?

The reason students at elite universities are "parroting" socialist principles is Americans at large have outgrown the kind of raw political ignorance that served the interests of the McCarthyites of the '50s and have a more intelligent understanding of what socialism is and how certain socialist policies, when applied to regulating our capitalist system, will be beneficial to the vast majority of the common People.

Those who still regard the very word, socialism, with negative connotation should understand that some of the most substantially beneficial components of America's social structure are Social Security, Medicare and Public Primary Education. These are socialist policies.

Try to imagine what America would be like without them.

Thomas DiLorenzo, economics professor and senior fellow at the Ludwig von Mises Institute, deconstructs the retrograde ideology that has suddenly become disturbingly hip in The Problem with Socialism.

The gimmick in Prof. DiLorenzo's presentation is its effort to convey the impression that because Bernie Sanders has declared himself a socialist his ambition is to transform America into a socialist nation. But anyone with a basic understanding of politics and world history knows the only nations which have ever adopted an extreme form of socialism (communism) are those nations whose economies had been totally ruined by prolonged war or lack of resources (e.g., Russia, China, etc).

The U.S. is the diametric opposite of any such consideration. But this doesn't mean our highly successful capitalist system is not in need of certain socialist-oriented regulations to prevent the kind of thing we see happening in the emergence of the economic One Percent, which threatens to eradicate the American Middle Class.

Socialism has zero redeeming qualities, Millions people would perish in a socialist system like progressives want.
Millions want nothing to do with the inadequacies of socialist living, and should not be forced to participate in the shit show...
...and even more so no one should even be expected try socialist living.

 

[Fishlore]

The controlling forces in human society are physical or material. Human relations are dominated by two factors: biological relationships and economic conditions. Combined, these influences shape existence, which determines consciousness.

The 20th century produced an unprecedented set of conditions in American society, primarily through the Great European Civil War 1914-1945. Those conditions began a period of significant decline beginning with the oil shocks of the 1970s. In simple terms, the days of America's unprecedented hegemony began drawing to a rapid close.

The social problems produced by the deflation of the great World War bubble, which saw a USA, whose GDP was half of the planetary total in 1945, have not been successfully handled, largely because the American federal government presides over a nation whose states are too heterogeneous, economically and culturally, to enable sustained, coordinated national policy.

Our internal differences and contradictions are reaching a crisis point. We can survive as a confederacy, but to act as a major player on the international scene requires an internal coherence which is simply beyond us. Our success rate declines and the cost of our efforts increases steadily. America's days as a super power are rapidly drawing to a close.

 

[FA_Q2]

The problem is never in history has it ever worked and for some reason idiots keep trying it

What would you consider Europe?

Going down the shitter...have you been paying attention to Greece, Spain, etc? Socialism starts out great...then the inevitable happens...they run out of other people's money. Same song, same verse every time

Irrelevant.

The trope that socialism does not work is incorrect. There are socialist nations that can and do exist - some of them doing decently well. None of them approach the success that the US has achieved but blankly stating that socialism always fails is not going to move the conversation forward or - the real problem - show why free markets are so much better. It only severs to entrench people in their belief of socialism.

 

[Fenton Lum]

This book should be required reading in the p-schools, but we all know it won't.

From the author of 'The Real Lincoln'...one of the greatest history books ever written. It should also be required reading for all Americans, but we all know it won't.

One thing Thomas DiLorenzo knows very well is that approximately one out of every ten thousand Americans is capable of engaging in an intelligent discussion of socialism. The truth is even well-educated political scholars engage in strenuous debate over what exactly constitutes the truest and most viable form of socialism.

Unfortunately the vast majority of contemporary Americans have been convinced, largely by persistent right-wing propaganda, that socialism is just another word for what in fact is communism. But the fact is socialism is to communism what democracy is to anarchy. Both are extreme comparisons which are rooted in sheer political ignorance.

Remember when "socialism" was a dirty word?

Socialism was made a "dirty word" in the 1950s by the ravings of a ruthless political opportunist, Senator Joseph McCarthy, who managed to achieve prominence by exploiting the political ignorance of the average American. He did this by repetitiously implanting the notion that the U.S. had been infiltrated by communists and we were in danger of being enslaved by the likes of Joseph Stalin. The tragedy of this comedy is the percentage of Americans who actually believed what this opportunistic demagogue was telling them.

Now students at America's elite universities are parroting socialist talking points and "sure-thing" Hillary Clinton is struggling to win the Democratic nomination against a 74-year-old avowed socialist who promises to make the nation more like Europe. What's happened? Do Americans need a reminder about the dangers of socialist ideology and practices?

The reason students at elite universities are "parroting" socialist principles is Americans at large have outgrown the kind of raw political ignorance that served the interests of the McCarthyites of the '50s and have a more intelligent understanding of what socialism is and how certain socialist policies, when applied to regulating our capitalist system, will be beneficial to the vast majority of the common People.

Those who still regard the very word, socialism, with negative connotation should understand that some of the most substantially beneficial components of America's social structure are Social Security, Medicare and Public Primary Education. These are socialist policies.

Try to imagine what America would be like without them.

Thomas DiLorenzo, economics professor and senior fellow at the Ludwig von Mises Institute, deconstructs the retrograde ideology that has suddenly become disturbingly hip in The Problem with Socialism.

The gimmick in Prof. DiLorenzo's presentation is its effort to convey the impression that because Bernie Sanders has declared himself a socialist his ambition is to transform America into a socialist nation. But anyone with a basic understanding of politics and world history knows the only nations which have ever adopted an extreme form of socialism (communism) are those nations whose economies had been totally ruined by prolonged war or lack of resources (e.g., Russia, China, etc).

The U.S. is the diametric opposite of any such consideration. But this doesn't mean our highly successful capitalist system is not in need of certain socialist-oriented regulations to prevent the kind of thing we see happening in the emergence of the economic One Percent, which threatens to eradicate the American Middle Class.

Socialism has zero redeeming qualities, Millions people would perish in a socialist system like progressives want.
Millions want nothing to do with the inadequacies of socialist living, and should not be forced to participate in the shit show...
...and even more so no one should even be expected try socialist living.

Socialism's been pretty good to Wall Street, professional sports franchises, big pharma, big agribusiness, and for major corporate entities for a long time in america.

 

[Rustic]

The problem is never in history has it ever worked and for some reason idiots keep trying it

What would you consider Europe?

Going down the shitter...have you been paying attention to Greece, Spain, etc? Socialism starts out great...then the inevitable happens...they run out of other people's money. Same song, same verse every time

Irrelevant.

The trope that socialism does not work is incorrect. There are socialist nations that can and do exist - some of them doing decently well. None of them approach the success that the US has achieved but blankly stating that socialism always fails is not going to move the conversation forward or - the real problem - show why free markets are so much better. It only severs to entrench people in their belief of socialism.

Long term it's never worked. dumbass