Why Socialism would be very difficult to adopt in the U.S.

[Buzz Jenkins]

Another reason: extreme resistance by the majority of us that do not want socialism and who regularly exercise our Second Amendment right. Honestly, most socialists, anarchists, communists, or whatever the fuck the far left wants to call themselves generally cannot operate a weapon worth a shit. How are you going to overcome the resistance to such stupidity? Throw your bongs and Widespread Panic CDs at us?

Find a corner or under your bed and keep playing with your little "weapon" Buzzy.

(what a dolt !!!)

You are a chicken shit, slobbering leftist clown. I know what democratic socialism is. It is based on the faulty premise that there is a finite amount of wealth and that the wealthy has what they have because it was usurped from society as a whole and, thereby, denied to others. Thus a correction is needed in order to even the playing field. That correction is implement by the government - a strong central government - through tax policy, heavy regulation of capitalistic enterprises, fees and costs assessed against those with means and redistributed to the underclass by way of subsides and services. All the while the focus is shifted away from individualism and to the general welfare of people, thereby undermining the incentive for the creation of a prosperous private sector based economy.

You are seriously fucked up in your head if you think this is a superior means of organizing society and distributing resources. This nonsense will result in a larger and more intrusive government and sentence the poor and middle class to perpetual dependence upon the state. In short, you are advocating the loss of freedom.

 

[regent]

Today most western nations are a mixture of socialism and capitalism, and generally the argument is about the percentages of each.

I actually agree.......so, my questions remain......Why are right wingers so scared of the term socialism, while in the midst of practicing it?....AND
Why are countries that openly accept socialism (the democratic kind) have populations that are rated so much happier than ours?

Socialism is an undefined scare word and used for years by conservatives to scare the bejabbers out of Americans thinking it was a direct road to communism. Some conservatives still use it that way, but now many Americans have their doubts and may realize that while not a road to communism, still not seem to know what is?

 

[Buzz Jenkins]

Today most western nations are a mixture of socialism and capitalism, and generally the argument is about the percentages of each.

I actually agree.......so, my questions remain......Why are right wingers so scared of the term socialism, while in the midst of practicing it?....AND
Why are countries that openly accept socialism (the democratic kind) have populations that are rated so much happier than ours?

Socialism is an undefined scare word and used for years by conservatives to scare the bejabbers out of Americans thinking it was a direct road to communism. Some conservatives still use it that way, but now many Americans have their doubts and may realize that while not a road to communism, still not seem to know what is?

Moron, nobody wants what you got to offer. You are in a distinct minority.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

Socialism is the fastest path to poverty ever conceived by the political class. Yet it never effects them, they get to float above the fray of ruined lives and opportunities because they are the ones sucking up your money in the name of fairness. There's a reason there is no such thing as a Donald Trump in socialist/communist nations. Because nobody is allowed to rise up and make money on their own. Only government officials get that kind of wealth and it comes at the cost of everyone else being miserable and voting for their daily bread as a token of their fealty. You can hate Trump, The Walton family, The Koch brothers etc. but in the end by denying them you deny yourself a better life.There will never be a Zuckerberg, Gates or Jobs in socialism because they are held down by the government making everything fair. There also won't be any jobs for people or products you actually want. No advancement in technology or anything else that comes from people working to make something better. In socialist countries you only get what the government officials can come up with. And I'm sure you can imagine the nothing that would come from congress if they were in charge of making the next Iphone. Socialism will expect these same people will do the same job for an average fair wage when in reality they won't even have the opportunity to do so under the thumb of regulation. In the end you get...nothing. No advancements, no jobs, no productivity. Look no further than China for this example. They don't invent they can only steal or produce what someone else has invented. But I guess you do make sure everyone dies with the same amount of money. That seems fair.

 

[OnePercenter]

Socialist ideals help the middle class prosper.

Wrong. Socialism is keeping the middle class down.

Taxed based services are Socialist ideals in that they are funded by everyone.

They are funded by everyone whether anyone wants them or not.

That's why it sucks.

So which tax based services don't you want?

 

[OnePercenter]

They are funded by everyone whether anyone wants them or not.

That's why it sucks.

Yeah....I feel the same way about funding city parks on the other side of town.....LOL

So why should you have to fund them?

Because the people on the other side of the town half to fund yours.

 

[OnePercenter]

Socialism is always democratic, communism NEVER. Try and figure that out, hater dupe.

Communism and social are always voted in. And the only way to get rid of it is war.

Where was communism ever voted in?

What difference does that make? When has anyone ever voted to allow the state to confiscate their property? It will never happen, which means socialism can never be adopted by a majority vote.

So you admit communism was never voted in. Err, people are perfectly fine with taxes, it's how every country works. Damn socialists.

Communism is socialism, numskull, and what you call "socialism" is more accurately called the welfare state.

The biggest chunk of welfare goes to corporations and the rich, how can that be Socialism?

 

[bripat9643]

Socialist ideals help the middle class prosper.

Wrong. Socialism is keeping the middle class down.

Taxed based services are Socialist ideals in that they are funded by everyone.

They are funded by everyone whether anyone wants them or not.

That's why it sucks.

So which tax based services don't you want?

I don't want any of them.

 

[regent]

So what is socialism?

 

[bripat9643]

They are funded by everyone whether anyone wants them or not.

That's why it sucks.

Yeah....I feel the same way about funding city parks on the other side of town.....LOL

So why should you have to fund them?

Because the people on the other side of the town half to fund yours.

In other words, for no logical reason. You're just saying we're all stuck on the beggar-thy-neighbor merrygoround.

 

[bripat9643]

So what is socialism?

Read the thread. However, the self-described "socialists" in this thread can't give you a coherent definition. They're all saying that socialism is a form of capitalism.

 

[Arizona Willie]

America is ALREADY a socialist country.

Most of our institutions are socialistic in nature.

Much of our society is socialistic in nature.

Even some of our biggest and richest FOR PROFIT corporations are socialistic.

Don't think so?

The Insurance Industry collects money from many people and pays out to those in need according to the policies.

THAT IS THE ESSENCE OF SOCIALISM.

The risk is spread over society and the benefits go to those who need them.

Of course, in America, the companies get a profit for providing the services of aggragating the funds and dispersing them to those who benefit from the policies.

Insurance companies are some of Americas LARGEST corporations and they are based on socialistic principles.

Many other people have mentioned or will mention some of the other socialistic elements of American society.

America is, in fact, a socialistic representative democracy.

But not for long.

If the Republicans have their way, they will fix it so corporations not only are people but the only ones allowed to vote.

There will be a wealth test for voting and unless you are a millionaire you won't be allowed to vote.

SOCIALISM is neither good nor evil in itself. It's how it's implemented that problems can come in --- but those problems also come in with laissez-faire capitalism too. In fact they are much worse with unrestricted capitalism without regulations.

========

Of course, there are many reasons why socialism is an anathema for many Americans....mostly in the right wing political sphere.

First, we are a nation that spews the rhetoric that we "love peace", but the reality is that we are neo-colonists (the euphemistic term for regime changers) we spend an inordinate amount of tax dollars on defense/offense (just listen to Carly Fiorina's speeches) and any country that has succeeded with socialism seldom indulges in war.

Second, we are so multicultural and multi-ethnical that most middle class (and poorer class) white skinned folks openly state, "I will NEVER be willing to give my hard earned money to those mooching darkies.)

But most of all, we could never easily become "socialists" (although many morons on the right think that Obama has already made us such)...because the term is hugely misunderstood by the uneducated masses who would willingly pay huge amounts of money to some private entity for a particular service, and bitch and moan when taxed by the federal government for that same service.

 

[Dragonlady]

What difference does that make? When has anyone ever voted to allow the state to confiscate their property?

Eminent Domain
The power to take private property for public use by a state, municipality, or private person or corporation authorized to exercise functions of public character, following the payment of just compensation to the owner of that property.

Federal, state, and local governments may take private property through their power of eminent domain or may regulate it by exercising their police power. The FIFTH Amendment to the U.S. Constitution requires the government to provide just compensation to the owner of the private property to be taken.

When the government confiscates all productive enterprises, it isn't going to pay "just compensation." It couldn't possibly pay the owners a fair price for their property. And under eminent domain the people vote to let the state take someone else's property, not their own. The conversion to socialism would require the state to take control of all businesses and all farms. That is never going to be accomplished without bloodshed.

You are just willfully ignorant. Socialism does not control the means of all production. That would be communism. Socialism requires societies to provide a well regulated framework in which private enterprise can prosper, including education for all of the population so that businesses have workers who are capable and useful, health care so that disease and illness don't devastate the population, a strong military for the defence of the nation, and a system of laws and courts to handle disputes and criminals.

The US is already a socialist country. But conservatives are so opposed to socialist ideas that they have strangled the benefits with expensive means tests, so that, like health care, massive amounts of money are wasted on making sure no one is getting a benefit they don't qualify for. Drug testing of welfare recipients being a prime example.

 

[nat4900]

Drug testing of welfare recipients being a prime example.

Agree with almost all you stated in your post.....And regarding the selected citation (above), please bear in mind that the requirement for drug testing welfare recipients was instigated by folks (like Scott, governor of FL) who saw a means of great profits under the guise of "indignation"

 

[nat4900]

Obama, scared to really fix our health care system, opted instead to appease the private insurers by subsidizing the premiums paid for an additional 15 million underinsured or wholly uninsured Americans.

The better system would have been, LOWER premiums to be paid by the uninsured to go directly into the Medicare offices....this would have eliminated the ridiculous profits made by some health care insurers, eliminated the pre-existing conditions caveats, without impacting the service delivery to doctors and hospitals.

The above example is a form of social democracy...practiced by virtually ALL industrialized and wealthy countries on the planet.

 

[Arizona Willie]

And every state that has instituted mandatory drug testing has found that very few people getting government assistance used drugs.

How could they? They can't afford them.

Getting high is fine and dandy but it don't fill your stomach.

The right ALWAYS thinks everyone is out to phuck them and steal their money ( taxes ).

But when they test the people they get results they don't like.
Testing proves them WRONG.

========

Drug testing of welfare recipients being a prime example.

Agree with almost all you stated in your post.....And regarding the selected citation (above), please bear in mind that the requirement for drug testing welfare recipients was instigated by folks (like Scott, governor of FL) who saw a means of great profits under the guise of "indignation"

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Of course, there are many reasons why socialism is an anathema for many Americans....mostly in the right wing political sphere.

First, we are a nation that spews the rhetoric that we "love peace", but the reality is that we are neo-colonists (the euphemistic term for regime changers) we spend an inordinate amount of tax dollars on defense/offense (just listen to Carly Fiorina's speeches) and any country that has succeeded with socialism seldom indulges in war.

Second, we are so multicultural and multi-ethnical that most middle class (and poorer class) white skinned folks openly state, "I will NEVER be willing to give my hard earned money to those mooching darkies.)

But most of all, we could never easily become "socialists" (although many morons on the right think that Obama has already made us such)...because the term is hugely misunderstood by the uneducated masses who would willingly pay huge amounts of money to some private entity for a particular service, and bitch and moan when taxed by the federal government for that same service.

Interesting post.

I have several issues with it, though.

First, Socialism isn't about process...it's about ends. The same with capitalism.

America is about process as much as it is ends.

There is a big big difference.

You're dead wrong. They are both about process. Capitalism isn't concerned with which products a people want. It's about the best way for the population to get them.

Why would I debate this with you ?

You just said what I did.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Interesting post.

I have several issues with it, though.

First, Socialism isn't about process...it's about ends. The same with capitalism. America is about process as much as it is ends.

There is a big big difference.

If you follow your own logic, then you may be saying that America is not capitalistic?

Thanks for pointing that out.

My post makes no sense.

America (not capitalism).....is about process.

 

[BluesLegend]

Socialism would be difficult to adopt in the USA because armed citizens would rise up and throw the puke socialist traitors in prison!

 

[regent]

Is Social Security socialism?