America: What's wrong with "socialism", anyway?

[BeAChooser]

However i do have to say that something does need to be done, maybe not socialism (even though i have to admit it would be better then where we are at now) something has to be done. Politicians, actors, directors, ceos etc make millions to billions of dollars every year (if not months for some) while the little guys bust thier asses off to make ends meet from paycheck to paycheck and still have taxes to pay. Some kind of cap of certain proffesions that doesnt really deserve the money they are making wouldnt be a bad idea.

Well I certainly hope you don't think the European socialists have the answer. Because they certainly have their privileged class too. In fact, income disparity in those countries is still just as great as here. Consider this. The Netherlands, which is often held up as a model by socialists (afterall, it has UHC!), still has a very lopsided distribution of income, despite the high taxes. The top 10 percent earn about 25% of the total income. The top 20 percent earn about 40% of income. And the next 20 percent earn about 23% of total income. Compare that to the US (http://www.heritage.org/Research/Taxes/images/9427120.gif and http://z.about.com/d/uspolitics/1/0/4/G/003_money_income.png ) where the top 5 percent earn about 22% of total income. The top 20 percent in the US earn about 50% of total income. The next quintile earns about 23%. In other words, the distribution of income between the two countries is rather similar. Also, about 10% of the Dutch live below the poverty line, which isn't all that different from the US (which has a much larger poor illegal immigrant problem). Some 14% of Dutch can't afford a week's vacation away from home (http://www.dutchnews.nl/news/archives/2010/01/dutch_unlikely_to_live_below_p.php).

Furthermore …

http://www.enotes.com/poverty-article

most poor American families own more luxury items and consumer appliances than average Europeans do. According to Human Development Report, the average per capita income in the Netherlands is $17,330, approximately three times larger than the per capita income of the poorest one-fifth in the United States. However, in 1994, nearly 93 percent of poor American families had a color television, almost 72 percent had at least one car, and approximately 60 percent had a microwave and a VCR. In comparison, in 1991 only 50 percent of all households in the Netherlands had a VCR and just 22 percent owned a microwave. Hence, as Bruce Bartlett writes, “Insofar as consumption is a truer measure of living standards than income, . . . many low-income Americans are far better off than their reported income suggests.”

The consequence of European socialist policies has been to make everyone poorer through substantially lower GDP growth over many years. The difference is now so large that the average American can buy all things that European governments supply for *free* and still have enough left over to take a nice vacation and/or buy a few toys each year.

 

[BeAChooser]

Also i want to ask, why is it everytime i hear the word socialism, barrack obama's name is followed soon after? I dont think he is really doing anything that would be considered "socialist".

Do you honestly believe that Obama isn't trying to turn this country into another Eropean-style social(ist) democracy?

And do you think all is well in Europe as a result of their system?

And do you have anywhere near the number of connections to socialists and communists that Obama does?

 

[DC]

Do you honestly believe that Obama isn't trying to turn this country into another Eropean-style social(ist) democracy?

And do you think all is well in Europe as a result of their system?

And do you have anywhere near the number of connections to socialists and communists that Obama does?

sometimes you sound like Stephen Colbert, but he is at least making fun.

 

[Jekyll's Guest]

The consequence of European socialist policies has been to make everyone poorer through substantially lower GDP growth over many years. The difference is now so large that the average American can buy all things that European governments supply for *free* and still have enough left over to take a nice vacation and/or buy a few toys each year.

Total, unadulterated pap.

Your 'average' American can easily be driven in to huge debt by even relatively minor illnesses, avoids doctor visits because of the cost, works harder and has less vacation that his European counterpart, and how many people do you know that are having a nice vacation every year in this economy?

Utter drivel.

 

[Raconteur]

BeAChooser: You're showing no indication that you understand the meaning of Socialism or Communism, at all. Can you not see that calling Obama a communist is completely ridiculous and cannot be defended by any rational argument?

 

[Jekyll's Guest]

BeAChooser: You're showing no indication that you understand the meaning of Socialism or Communism, at all. Can you not see that calling Obama a communist is completely ridiculous and cannot be defended by any rational argument?

I'd expect that kind of thinking...FROM A COMMUNIST!1!1!

 

[dafydd]

Total, unadulterated pap.

Your 'average' American can easily be driven in to huge debt by even relatively minor illnesses, avoids doctor visits because of the cost, works harder and has less vacation that his European counterpart, and how many people do you know that are having a nice vacation every year in this economy?

Utter drivel.

I second that.There is much to admire in American culture and history but I wouldn't live there for all the tea in China.

 

[Jekyll's Guest]

I second that.There is much to admire in American culture and history but I wouldn't live there for all the tea in China.

It's a great place, but I have day to day worries here I never even considered when I lived in an evil Socialist hellhole. The idea that the average Joe is whooping it up is so looney tunes it boggles belief.

 

[Earthborn]

Well I certainly hope you don't think the European socialists have the answer. Because they certainly have their privileged class too.

Not surprising, considering that the Netherlands is not a socialist country.

Consider this. The Netherlands, which is often held up as a model by socialists

Perhaps they should find better model, or admit that they are not really socialists.

(afterall, it has UHC!)

Universal healthcare, yes. But it does not have socialised healthcare.

Also, about 10% of the Dutch live below the poverty line, which isn't all that different from the US

It isn't all that different? That surprises me. Source?

(which has a much larger poor illegal immigrant problem).

I don't think illegal immigrants are counted in official poverty figures.

Some 14% of Dutch can't afford a week's vacation away from home (http://www.dutchnews.nl/news/archives/2010/01/dutch_unlikely_to_live_below_p.php).

6 weeks of paid staycation sucks.

http://www.enotes.com/poverty-article

The old "wealth is measured by how many expensive gadgets you buy from borrowed money" argument.

The difference is now so large that the average American can buy all things that European governments supply for *free*

Please name of few of these things that Americans have to buy but Europeans get for free, so I can order them from the government.

 

[Jekyll's Guest]

Please name of few of these things that Americans have to buy but Europeans get for free, so I can order them from the government.

Fill out forms 7a through 8g for your free weed, abortion and Che Guevera t-shirt.

 

[jimbob]

On the subject of the Netherlands being socialist: They can be argued to have invented the modern corporation (and the TLA - the VOC is proof of both).

 

[Kthulhut Fhtagn]

You really think that? LOL! Just what do you consider centrist ideas?

So centrism in the world of BAC is defined as whatever the majority of people think at that particular time. In other words, the definition of centrism is utterly relative to the person looking at the term. State Capitalism is centrist (not left-wing) in Singapore. "European Socialism" is centrist to a European and not left-wing like you claim. And whatever the tea-party wants is centrist because that's also what the majority of American's want. So you have a definition of centrism that is so arbitrary as to render it utterly meaningless. Why am I not surprised?

Or we have another example of BAC's unintentional Amero-centrism. The only people whose opinions matter on what defines centrism are the American people. That narrows things down a bit but it still leaves an utterly arbitrary definition. We could take a step back though and conclude it isn't Americans who are the deciding vote here but conservatives, giving his white-hot hatred of anything left of far right. Basically, whatever conservatives decide is centrist must be centrist because conservatism is the ideology of truth. Which would fall in line with BAC's massive conservative bias.

Edit by KF: Long-winded rant on what Americans want

Americans also voted for a "socialist" black man in a clear majority back in 2008. I'm curious what your point is here BAC. We elect representatives for a set amount of time and when the time comes to re-elect them we have the option to remove them from power. Are you suggesting that the president step down everytime his approval ratings dip below fifty percent? Should we govern solely from the polls? If that's the case why don't we abandon the representative system and adopt direct democracy?

Just because the Obama administration rammed through unpopular measures with the help of a bunch of other socialists in Congress doesn't make his policies "centrist".

I'm noticing a theme here; everyone who disagrees with you is a socialist. Even the conservatives on this board who think you're a loon are accused of being closet-Democrats, liberals, or socialists.

If you want a measure of whether his policies are "centrist", you need only look at his negative approval rating:

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/pub...ministration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

And there we have it. Following several massive appeals to popularity we get one huge logical fallacy that states Obama is a socialist because of negative approval ratings. Just like you know someone is a Democrat because they've said something untrue.

 

[Jekyll's Guest]

And there we have it. Following several massive appeals to popularity we get one huge logical fallacy that states Obama is a socialist because of negative approval ratings.

Here's another filthy socialist.

 

[DC]

Consider this. The Netherlands, which is often held up as a model by socialists

yeah i often hear from local socialists that we should change to a Parliamentary Monarchy, the proletariat loves the idea.

 

[Lurker]

In other words, the distribution of income between the two countries (USA versus Netherlands) is rather similar.

Sounds like Socialism in the Netherlands is ending up giving the same results as the US. But how is that possible? Socialism and Capitalism ending up with the same economic bell curve? Does that not violate every myth you believe about socialism, BAC?