Socialism?

[Phrost]

So, why don't you move to a place like Somalia? I'm pretty sure you can go there and live your life whichever way you want to, without any government bothering you.

Socialist Godwin.

 

[Dancing David]

Somalia is the socialist Godwin?



I thought it was Norway.

 

[Francesca R]

I prefer making my way on my own merits without other people having a say in what I do with the fruits of my labors and talent.

John Rawls thinks you would not wish to gamble on that were you electing from behind a veil of ignorance, since you neither chose nor morally deserve your talents.

I reckon he's right, too.

 

[Francesca R]

Socialism is when the collective controls wealth and property as opposed to individuals getting to chose for themselves what they do with what they've earned.

Hey, you know what . . .

[ . . . t]his is like being lectured on skepticism by a fundamentalist.

 

[Dr Adequate]

Are progressive tax brackets combined with need-based social programs socialist?

No, that's just common sense.

 

[Phrost]

In fact, capitalism as an economical system was meant to distribute wealth better than previous systems. And it was hugely successful at that - after capitalism was introduced the middle class grew to be the dominant class, and the lower and upper classes shrunk.

Yes but it was the individual him/herself that redistributed the wealth via enterprise, not the government doing it by force.

 

[JJM 777]

You should embrace Socialism (or Social Democracy) if you wish that the state takes better care of the poorest fragments of society, and if you wish that the state gives more health services etc. to all citizens regardless of their ability to pay for them.

 

[Hallo Alfie]

Socialism works great in theory.
Like so many things it's the practical application that fails when human beings (egos) become involved.

 

[GreNME]

I prefer making my way on my own merits without other people having a say in what I do with the fruits of my labors and talent.

Why do you hate the American system?

ETA:

Yes but it was the individual him/herself that redistributed the wealth via enterprise, not the government doing it by force.

Right, because trusts, monopolistic practices, and greed never amount to removing, blocking, or refusing access to choice.

 

[icerat]

Socialism works great in theory.
Like so many things it's the practical application that fails when human beings (egos) become involved.

Much like capitalism. And democracy!

The first thing to realise is there is no textbook "socialist" country on the planet. Cuba might be closest.

Social democracies, like much of western europe, are a somewhat different beast. Some of Obama's policies have commonalities with these social democracies, however they're almost as far from the boogie man socialism as american-style capitalism is.

 

[Phrost]

Right, because trusts, monopolistic practices, and greed never amount to removing, blocking, or refusing access to choice.

What? Where have I said I'm for monopolies or trusts?

Please point it out for me, because otherwise your argument is asinine. It's not a dichotomy, there are various grades between Socialism, and Evil Cigar-Smoking Robber Barons.

 

[Toke]

What? Where have I said I'm for monopolies or trusts?

Please point it out for me, because otherwise your argument is asinine. It's not a dichotomy, there are various grades between Socialism, and Evil Cigar-Smoking Robber Barons.

What!!11!!!
The next may be that socialism is not Stalin or Mao's dictatorships and starvation of their populations.

 

[GreyICE]

See: My signature.

 

[mhaze]

Socialism works great in theory.
Like so many things it's the practical application that fails when human beings (egos) become involved.

I don't see the problem as the effect of ego, but instead the effect of the lack of natural feedback loops in the totalitarian models. These cause corrections in method and practice in a free market system, but in a socialist system are clumsy and ineffective.

Essentially capitalism eg free market is numerous continuous experiments in progress hence a sort of evolution of market practices, industry and resulting generation of excess wealth.

So I'm not even sure I agree with your starting premise "socialism works great in theory" - actually the reverse should be true in theory, and that should be borne out by practice.

 

[Peephole]

Socialism works great in theory.

Yeah, just look at the failure that is Europe.

 

[Phrost]

What!!11!!!
The next may be that socialism is not Stalin or Mao's dictatorships and starvation of their populations.

Keep it in mind then; it works both ways. The minute someone mentions they're a libertarian, some of you folks break out Somalia and the Robber Baron cards faster than Al Sharpton plays the race one.

 

[Toke]

Keep it in mind then; it works both ways. The minute someone mentions they're a libertarian, some of you folks break out Somalia and the Robber Baron cards faster than Al Sharpton plays the race one.

I live in Denmark, and find the comparison to communist dictatorships rather offensive.

If you were to insist that there should be no government, Somalia or Congo outside the capital are the only current comparisons.

If you were to insist on a dictatorship with the state owing all means of production Cuba is one comparison, the USSR another.

If you were to praise the merits of capitalism with minimal government regulation, there is a choice ranging from the US to african or central american dirt-piles with brought politicians.

 

[Grizzly Bear]

Why should I embrace Socialism? This is a serious questions to which I'd appreciate even handed answers please.

Well... there's always German toilets. I've read they're designed with a catcher so that refuse lands on it and facilitates inspection of its contents.

 

[Phrost]

I live in Denmark, and find the comparison to communist dictatorships rather offensive.

If you were to insist that there should be no government, Somalia or Congo outside the capital are the only current comparisons.

If you were to insist on a dictatorship with the state owing all means of production Cuba is one comparison, the USSR another.

If you were to praise the merits of capitalism with minimal government regulation, there is a choice ranging from the US to african or central american dirt-piles with brought politicians.

Come on now, there's no room for reasonable expression or middle ground in a political debate. How dare you refuse to stereotype someone or marginalize their views by lumping them in with one extreme or another? What are you, some kind of neutrality nazi?

 

[Beerina]

Because you appreciate having the government provide certain essential public services, such as the emergency services, armed forces to protect you, communication channels and regulatory bodies to make sure you don't eat poisoned food.

Just a thought.

What about the remaining $2 trillion of the US' annual budget?