The Problem with Socialism

[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.

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.

Yes, socialism is all about corruption…

 

[Fenton Lum]

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

You have a blended economy and many "socialist" healthcare systems are kicking your healthcare system's ass. Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay before "Obamacare", which is not socialist at all given that it was crafted at the Heritage Foundation and then further tweaked by the health insurance and pharma industries..

 

[boedicca]

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).

So chock-full-o misinformation, it's difficult to know where to start.

I will address the "infant mortality" rating. The U.S. definition of an infant is at a lower number of weeks than other part of the world. We go to heroic rates to save premature babies that are allowed to die and not counted as infant deaths elsewhere. So, that statistic is a lie.

And the National Health Service in England is hardly an investment, unless you consider killing off old and sick people a societal benefit (which you likely do).

 

[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.

Yes, socialism is all about corruption…

Of course, and capitalism as we all know is by definition bereft of any and all corruption. Sheesh pard.

 

[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

You have a blended economy and many "socialist" healthcare systems are kicking your healthcare system's ass. Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay before "Obamacare", which is not socialist at all given that it was crafted at the Heritage Foundation and then further tweaked by the health insurance and pharma industries..

Socialism is a cancer to any sort of freedom…

 

[SassyIrishLass]

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.

I don't have the time nor the energy to go into it but this is a great article why it doesn't work.

Why Socialism Failed | Mark J. Perry

 

[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.

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.

Yes, socialism is all about corruption…

Of course, and capitalism as we all know is by definition bereft of any and all corruption. Sheesh pard.

Socialism is deadly to any sort of prosperity, except the greedy kind.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

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.

This fails as a preach to the choir fallacy.

No one of significance or merit ‘advocates’ for ‘socialism.’

And any conservative who believes that ‘socialism’ poses some sort of a ‘threat’ exhibits only his stupidity and ignorance of ‘socialism.’

 

[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).

So chock-full-o misinformation, it's difficult to know where to start.

I will address the "infant mortality" rating. The U.S. definition of an infant is at a lower number of weeks than other part of the world. We go to heroic rates to save premature babies that are allowed to die and not counted as infant deaths elsewhere. So, that statistic is a lie.

And the National Health Service in England is hardly an investment, unless you consider killing off old and sick people a societal benefit (which you likely do).

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.

Please do go on. I said WHO numbers, yeah? So your point is we're really at 38th in infant mortality as opposed to 39th?

The U.S. definition of an infant is at a lower number of weeks than other part of the world. So, that statistic is a lie.

I'd like to learn more, where can I dig into this? A study perhaps that will flesh this out more? Not really interested in a media interpretation, thanks.

 

[Fenton Lum]

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.

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.

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.

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.

Yes, socialism is all about corruption…

Of course, and capitalism as we all know is by definition bereft of any and all corruption. Sheesh pard.

Socialism is deadly to any sort of prosperity, except the greedy kind.

God I'm glad we're safe frome greed here.

 

[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.

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.

This fails as a preach to the choir fallacy.

No one of significance or merit ‘advocates’ for ‘socialism.’

And any conservative who believes that ‘socialism’ poses some sort of a ‘threat’ exhibits only his stupidity and ignorance of ‘socialism.’

Socialism and freedom are like oil and water, fuck socialism and the jackass it rode in on...

 

[Rustic]

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.

Yes, socialism is all about corruption…

Of course, and capitalism as we all know is by definition bereft of any and all corruption. Sheesh pard.

Socialism is deadly to any sort of prosperity, except the greedy kind.

God I'm glad we're safe frome greed here.

All the flaws in the American system are do to socialism, exclusively...

 

[boedicca]

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).

So chock-full-o misinformation, it's difficult to know where to start.

I will address the "infant mortality" rating. The U.S. definition of an infant is at a lower number of weeks than other part of the world. We go to heroic rates to save premature babies that are allowed to die and not counted as infant deaths elsewhere. So, that statistic is a lie.

And the National Health Service in England is hardly an investment, unless you consider killing off old and sick people a societal benefit (which you likely do).

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.

Please do go on. I said WHO numbers, yeah? So your point is we're really at 38th in infant mortality as opposed to 39th?

The U.S. definition of an infant is at a lower number of weeks than other part of the world. So, that statistic is a lie.

I'd like to learn more, where can I dig into this? A study perhaps that will flesh this out more? Not really interested in a media interpretation, thanks.

Here you go. And learn how to use a search engine.

Postgraduate Research Training in Reproductive Health - Fudan University, Shanghai - What is the definition of live birth?

 

[Fenton Lum]

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

You have a blended economy and many "socialist" healthcare systems are kicking your healthcare system's ass. Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay before "Obamacare", which is not socialist at all given that it was crafted at the Heritage Foundation and then further tweaked by the health insurance and pharma industries..

Socialism is a cancer to any sort of freedom…

It was most certainly lethal and cancerous to all the human beings in any way related to the gentleman pictured as your footer. Genocidally in fact.

 

[Fenton Lum]

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.

Yes, socialism is all about corruption…

Of course, and capitalism as we all know is by definition bereft of any and all corruption. Sheesh pard.

Socialism is deadly to any sort of prosperity, except the greedy kind.

God I'm glad we're safe frome greed here.

All the flaws in the American system are do to socialism, exclusively...

But of course. This is like arguing over religion for some of you. You are simply belivers, so you don't need to think.

 

[Rustic]

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

You have a blended economy and many "socialist" healthcare systems are kicking your healthcare system's ass. Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay before "Obamacare", which is not socialist at all given that it was crafted at the Heritage Foundation and then further tweaked by the health insurance and pharma industries..

Socialism is a cancer to any sort of freedom…

It was most certainly lethal and cancerous to all the human beings in any way related to the gentleman pictured as your footer. Genocidally in fact.

Yes, socialism is extraordinarily deadly to Indians...

 

[Rustic]

Yes, socialism is all about corruption…

Of course, and capitalism as we all know is by definition bereft of any and all corruption. Sheesh pard.

Socialism is deadly to any sort of prosperity, except the greedy kind.

God I'm glad we're safe frome greed here.

All the flaws in the American system are do to socialism, exclusively...

But of course. This is like arguing over religion for some of you. You are simply belivers, so you don't need to think.

I've lived under a socialist society, have you?

 

[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).

So chock-full-o misinformation, it's difficult to know where to start.

I will address the "infant mortality" rating. The U.S. definition of an infant is at a lower number of weeks than other part of the world. We go to heroic rates to save premature babies that are allowed to die and not counted as infant deaths elsewhere. So, that statistic is a lie.

And the National Health Service in England is hardly an investment, unless you consider killing off old and sick people a societal benefit (which you likely do).

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.

Please do go on. I said WHO numbers, yeah? So your point is we're really at 38th in infant mortality as opposed to 39th?

The U.S. definition of an infant is at a lower number of weeks than other part of the world. So, that statistic is a lie.

I'd like to learn more, where can I dig into this? A study perhaps that will flesh this out more? Not really interested in a media interpretation, thanks.

Here you go. And learn how to use a search engine.

Postgraduate Research Training in Reproductive Health - Fudan University, Shanghai - What is the definition of live birth?

So China is the rest of the world and we're 38th instead of 39th in infant mortality for the most expensive helathcare system on the planet? And you want to cite communist society research? That's the deal?

 

[bripat9643]

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.

Is this new? I've already read most of his other books.

 

[there4eyeM]

When everything is either extreme right or evil incarnate, discussion cannot take place. What we see in this thread is name calling and cliché spouting. There are nuances between laissez faire, anything goes 'capitalism' and Stalin's bloody hand on the tiller of a totalitarian form of Marxism.
Most people not identifying themselves as the militant right are open to some exchange of ideas. They also realize that modern societies have various formulas for economics and government that have elements of capitalism tempered with provisions for the common good.
If extremists want to make certain young people reject them, they should continue on their present path.