Democrats, can you give me a critique on socialism? Whats wrong with it?

Democrats, can you give me a critique on socialism? Whats wrong with it?

Democrats continually assert they're against socialism and they're really capitalists and they're just not moonbat crazy like the free market guys.

So I'm wondering what democrats find so unappealing about socialism, which social or socioeconomic byproducts of the theory do you find oppressive..

Most of us know why some features of modern industrialized societies lend themselves to more efficacious approaches under a "socialized" methodology. The admixture of socialized equal-treatment approaches (to education, health care, care for the elederly, for examples), only work when the capitalist free market approaches to OTHER areas of society are encouraged and rewarded for being in place. Private enterprise is the engint that feeds our demands for efficiency and equanimity in treatment of children, the poor, elderly, and the disabled.

A productive and advancing society CANNOT survive and thrive under a strictly socialist approach. Russia and Cuba have taught us that by example in the last 50-100 years.

We are smarter than Republicans and libertarians make us out to be, we know that we must employ "socialist" approaches to problem-solving ONLY when capitalist approaches are not working or are less efficient. A major area of this nexus is health care, where people would literally and needlessly die or become disabled were we not able to afford to care for their medical needs. The questions in health care all center around how to most efficiently distribute the services to the most number of people without leaving some people out and without overburdening others with excess costs.

Good post..

Socialism fails tho....
 
The Republicans seem to considers anything government does for the people to be an evil socialist plot, consumer protection, environmental protection, subsidies for the poor, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, civil rights protection, protection of workers, etc… I think it interesting that Lincoln, our first Republican president, did not feel that government for the people was wrong when he said, “and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.”

If you spend money to invade Iraq....that's PATRIOTISM

If you spend money to help Americans......that's SOCIALISM
 
"And yet innovation led to computerized 200+ Autobons and bullet trains, with cars running on computers and preventing traffic gridlock."

???Autobahns were Hitler's, Bullet trains japanese... and NOT...

Hitler was German. DUH. Oh, you missed the computerized cars and traffic system they have in place that even makes free road calls to assist stranded motorists, highway cams to moniter traffic & car warning systems to warn of accidents ahead. And better retirement & medical system than we have. Tsk! Where is your bullet trains dude?:lol:
 
He was acting in a national emergency, so I see no harm. He also controlled the banks we loaned to as well, didn't he? It is no different than Bush sending Black Water into the streets of New Orleans, or seizing assets of anyone he thinks is a "terrorist," or invading a sovereign country in a preemptive strike, or torturing, murdering and raping innocent chained & detained women and children.

Letting an auto company fail is not a "national emergency." Companies fail all the time.

He took over the goddamn company because 99.9% of UAW workers voted for him and he was paying them back by saving their jobs..

Then he created cash for clunkers to stimulate their cushy jobs.

Of course the result was millions of perfectly good used autos were destroyed - leaving those on a budget who needed a vehicle to supply and demand capitalism...

In short Obama stole money from the taxpayers and put it into the union pockets, smashed cars and the result of that smashing was the raising of value for used cars. So now poor people cant afford to buy cars...

I hope his non-union poor voting base remembers that..

Obama is a little bitch that panders to anyone who will vote for him or anyone that will listen to his bullshit and not pay attention to the end results to his actions.

GM was just one small part in the overall scheme of things, and delt with a failing corporation, not union workers. Cash for clunkers removed smog machines from the highways.

And Bush stole money and put it into corporate pockets with massive bailouts, granted no-bid contracts to his friends, invaded country's to put the war machine to work. I guess that makes Bush a little bitch and anyone who supported him.

Dude..... It had everything to do with unions... "Smog Machines?" where the fuck are you from bro??? Its funny how those big ass semi trucks are everywhere... Apparently you've never been in rush hour traffic in a major city hahaha....

Naw, Obama fuck would never take those union owned trucks away, thats his stimulus crew..

I believe you have a hard time just believing the truth....
 
The Republicans seem to considers anything government does for the people to be an evil socialist plot, consumer protection, environmental protection, subsidies for the poor, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, civil rights protection, protection of workers, etc… I think it interesting that Lincoln, our first Republican president, did not feel that government for the people was wrong when he said, “and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.”

If you spend money to invade Iraq....that's PATRIOTISM

If you spend money to help Americans......that's SOCIALISM

In what universe do states go to war??

You do realize its normally the states that are redistributing wealth?
 
Last edited:
Bullet trains are in Japan. So you're saying EU socialism works? True. COMMUNISM FAILS. Neo conservatism obviously fails (how many times do we have to boom and bust because of fraud and bubbles?) and so does unregulated medical care.
 
Last edited:
Democrats, can you give me a critique on socialism? Whats wrong with it?

Democrats continually assert they're against socialism and they're really capitalists and they're just not moonbat crazy like the free market guys.

So I'm wondering what democrats find so unappealing about socialism, which social or socioeconomic byproducts of the theory do you find oppressive..

As correctly noted several times already there was no such thing as ‘socialism,’ that in conjunction with the fact that liberals tend not to obsess over irrelevant and pointless subjects gives them no occasion to opine one way or the other on the matter. Except for some rare, isolated, failed experiments during the 19th Century, ‘socialism’ was never practiced in the US and it never will.

Consequently the issue is moot and this thread an example of pointless ignorance.
 
Bullt trains are in Japan. So you're saying EU socialism works? True. COMMUNISM FAILS. Neo conservatism obviously fails (how many times do we have to boom and bust because of fraud and bubbles?) and so does unregulated medical care.

Socialism fails and so does theocracies - agreed.

If EU socialism works than why the fuck are they in a rut? you know Grease throwing bricks n shit? they used the same fucking model.
 
Last edited:
Democrats, can you give me a critique on socialism? Whats wrong with it?

Democrats continually assert they're against socialism and they're really capitalists and they're just not moonbat crazy like the free market guys.

So I'm wondering what democrats find so unappealing about socialism, which social or socioeconomic byproducts of the theory do you find oppressive..

Most of us know why some features of modern industrialized societies lend themselves to more efficacious approaches under a "socialized" methodology. The admixture of socialized equal-treatment approaches (to education, health care, care for the elederly, for examples), only work when the capitalist free market approaches to OTHER areas of society are encouraged and rewarded for being in place. Private enterprise is the engint that feeds our demands for efficiency and equanimity in treatment of children, the poor, elderly, and the disabled.

A productive and advancing society CANNOT survive and thrive under a strictly socialist approach. Russia and Cuba have taught us that by example in the last 50-100 years.

We are smarter than Republicans and libertarians make us out to be, we know that we must employ "socialist" approaches to problem-solving ONLY when capitalist approaches are not working or are less efficient. A major area of this nexus is health care, where people would literally and needlessly die or become disabled were we not able to afford to care for their medical needs. The questions in health care all center around how to most efficiently distribute the services to the most number of people without leaving some people out and without overburdening others with excess costs.

Yes, I see the advancing society also failed under Capitalism, and we are borrowing trillions from China who is advancing up with every step we take downward. I can point out the failed Argentina and India if need be examples of failed capitalism.
 
Bullt trains are in Japan. So you're saying EU socialism works? True. COMMUNISM FAILS. Neo conservatism obviously fails (how many times do we have to boom and bust because of fraud and bubbles?) and so does unregulated medical care.

Socialism fails and so does theocracies - agreed.

If EU socialism works than why the fuck are they in a rut? you know Grease throwing bricks n shit? they used the same fucking model.

If capitalism works why are we in a rut and borrowing from commies? You know trillions in debt, and we used the capitalist model. Har Har............:lol::lol:
 
This is the democrat fantasy..

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5GYOsKLp6o&ob=av2e]‪Middle Class Rut - New Low (Official Video)‬‏ - YouTube[/ame]
 
Bullt trains are in Japan. So you're saying EU socialism works? True. COMMUNISM FAILS. Neo conservatism obviously fails (how many times do we have to boom and bust because of fraud and bubbles?) and so does unregulated medical care.

Socialism fails and so does theocracies - agreed.

If EU socialism works than why the fuck are they in a rut? you know Grease throwing bricks n shit? they used the same fucking model.

If capitalism works why are we in a rut and borrowing from commies? You know trillions in debt, and we used the capitalist model. Har Har............:lol::lol:


We're in a rut and borrowing from the commies cuz we tried to be too socialistic and spent money we didn't have on the social safety net for people that didn't need it. Throw in the incredible fraud and waste, and there you are. Wasn't capitalism, it was poor governance. By both political parties, nobody is blameless.
 
Too much emphasis on equality can stifle innovation. It can also stifle self-motivation. Both of these things have helped western civilization become what it is today.

It can also be kinda boring, too, if too much is centralized. I saw in East Germany how so many shops had the same products because they all came from the same factories...or maybe they were jsut planned the same. Either way, it was pretty drab.

And yet innovation led to computerized 200+ Autobons and bullet trains, with cars running on computers and preventing traffic gridlock. People are very self-motivated to better their positions in life, and their system is designed to let them do so, as they work from the bottom to the top of businesses, learning each aspect. With less competiveness, they are free to concentrate on quality, not quanity as occurs in America, and give consumers better services than we get. With their retirements and medical covered they work worry free. They even get free televison, like we get free radio.

I totally agree with you. The OP wanted a critique of socialism so I gave my view of the potential downsides to it...emphasis on potential.
 
Letting an auto company fail is not a "national emergency." Companies fail all the time.

He took over the goddamn company because 99.9% of UAW workers voted for him and he was paying them back by saving their jobs..

Then he created cash for clunkers to stimulate their cushy jobs.

Of course the result was millions of perfectly good used autos were destroyed - leaving those on a budget who needed a vehicle to supply and demand capitalism...

In short Obama stole money from the taxpayers and put it into the union pockets, smashed cars and the result of that smashing was the raising of value for used cars. So now poor people cant afford to buy cars...

I hope his non-union poor voting base remembers that..

Obama is a little bitch that panders to anyone who will vote for him or anyone that will listen to his bullshit and not pay attention to the end results to his actions.

GM was just one small part in the overall scheme of things, and delt with a failing corporation, not union workers. Cash for clunkers removed smog machines from the highways.

And Bush stole money and put it into corporate pockets with massive bailouts, granted no-bid contracts to his friends, invaded country's to put the war machine to work. I guess that makes Bush a little bitch and anyone who supported him.

Dude..... It had everything to do with unions... "Smog Machines?" where the fuck are you from bro??? Its funny how those big ass semi trucks are everywhere... Apparently you've never been in rush hour traffic in a major city hahaha....

Naw, Obama fuck would never take those union owned trucks away, thats his stimulus crew..

I believe you have a hard time just believing the truth....

I'm in Ca. I assume you are from the backwoods of Arkansas? Got a banjo on your knee? It funny how there was a list of eligiable autos that were smoggers and gas guzzlers. And no, I haven't been in rush hour traffic since 1990 when I retired. Here is truth for you backwoods boy.

The goal: Get those gas-guzzling, smog-secreting, dinosaur-of-a-drive vehicles off the road.

Trade in your car with Cash for Clunkers - San Francisco frugal family | Examiner.com

Nah, had nothing to do with unions. It had to do with a faux failing corporation on the take for campaign contributions. Unions built the corporation and allowed it to expand Internationally.
 
Last edited:
Too much emphasis on equality can stifle innovation. It can also stifle self-motivation. Both of these things have helped western civilization become what it is today.

It can also be kinda boring, too, if too much is centralized. I saw in East Germany how so many shops had the same products because they all came from the same factories...or maybe they were jsut planned the same. Either way, it was pretty drab.

And yet it's the liberals who are innovators. Odd that.
 
Democrats, can you give me a critique on socialism? Whats wrong with it?

Democrats continually assert they're against socialism and they're really capitalists and they're just not moonbat crazy like the free market guys.

So I'm wondering what democrats find so unappealing about socialism, which social or socioeconomic byproducts of the theory do you find oppressive..

I see this sort of thing from the extreme Right often and for the record, it's a big turn off to Independents. It's like when Liberals say that all Conservatives are Nazis.
Guess what? There is a LOT that Conservatives and The American Nazi / American Socialist (another Nazi party) agree on 100%. As a matter of of fact, the Nazis and Conservatives in this country agree almost exactly on the majority of issues.

I know lots of Liberals and I irritate the sh1t out of them my anti-union attitudes and such. But not one of them is a socialist. That phrase is so over-used it's unreal. Not one of them wants to take away the right to own property, to own a business, to make a profit.
Do they want the government to do things that aren't necessarily supposed to make a profit? Therein lies one difference. Liberals don't think that every single thing done, should be done for a profit. Some things are done to promote the general welfare.

I think we have a great country and for all our problems, I'm still proud of it. I've lived in other countries - including some with VERY LITTLE GOVERNMENT. No thanks. I like this one best.

America has always had social programs. That doesn't mean we're a socialist country.

It's that polar thinking, that identifies the extremes. "If you don't share my philosophy, you must be the other extreme."
"If you don't embrace Conservative values, you're a Socialist."
"If you don't embrace Liberal values, you're a Nazi."
Whatever.

I'm not "far right" I'm a libertarian.

You didn't answer the fucking question either.

I'm sorry. Are you having some feelings there sweetheart? Someone seems just a liiitle bit grumpy!

There are many definitions of socialism. Since you did not specify, I went with the most common. Of course, if you weren't so hysterical, you might have noticed that little bit about owning private property, making a profit, starting businesses and such.
Tell you what. You just go take a little nappie. Then when l'il Mr. Grumpyhead is feeling better, maybe you can talk just like the big boys and girls! Won't that be nice.
And don't worry, no one is laughing at you and you're um, poignant and insightful posts & replies... . :eusa_whistle:

And of COURSE you're a Libertarian! How nice for you. Now why don't you go over to your little club and explain how you guys are gonna eliminate the CIA, FBI, INS, Border Patrol, EPA, FDA, CRA of '64, Legalize all drugs and guns and nukes (it is my RIGHT to own nukes, according to the Glibertarian interpretation of the US Constitution!), US Marshals, FAA....
Yup, we're all just holding our breath waiting for that to happen! :lol:

You may now continue with your little temper tantrums.
 
How about taking over a fucking business and telling share holders to go fuck themselves??

But even you admitted he did and even once is too much even if you don't agree with my blatant assertion.

Obama violated the Fourth Amendment in my assertion.

He was acting in a national emergency, so I see no harm. He also controlled the banks we loaned to as well, didn't he? It is no different than Bush sending Black Water into the streets of New Orleans, or seizing assets of anyone he thinks is a "terrorist," or invading a sovereign country in a preemptive strike, or torturing, murdering and raping innocent chained & detained women and children.

Letting an auto company fail is not a "national emergency." Companies fail all the time.

He took over the goddamn company because 99.9% of UAW workers voted for him and he was paying them back by saving their jobs..

Then he created cash for clunkers to stimulate their cushy jobs.

Of course the result was millions of perfectly good used autos were destroyed - leaving those on a budget who needed a vehicle to supply and demand capitalism...

In short Obama stole money from the taxpayers and put it into the union pockets, smashed cars and the result of that smashing was the raising of value for used cars. So now poor people cant afford to buy cars...

I hope his non-union poor voting base remembers that..

Obama is a little bitch that panders to anyone who will vote for him or anyone that will listen to his bullshit and not pay attention to the end results to his actions.

When you have manufacturing sector of the US going under, there are all the tens of thousands of those jobs, then the tens of thousands who make parts, then the tens of thousands who manufacture the materials that make those parts, then the tens of thousands who serve those workers in restaurants and such, the doctors and nurses who take care of those tens of thousands, the houses that need to be build, then tens of thousands that build the houses and make THOSE materials, the teachers, and so on and so forth.

Are you sure you've thought this through all the way?

Consequence is something rarely thought about on the Right.
 
You don't know what the fuck socialism is...

Socialism ALWAYS progresses into communism.

You should really just shut up before you embarrass yourself further.

Can you name one - ONE - country that evolved from a partially-socialized means of production to a wholly-socialized means of production without revolution?

Just one, thanks.
 
Socialism fails and so does theocracies - agreed.

If EU socialism works than why the fuck are they in a rut? you know Grease throwing bricks n shit? they used the same fucking model.

If capitalism works why are we in a rut and borrowing from commies? You know trillions in debt, and we used the capitalist model. Har Har............:lol::lol:


We're in a rut and borrowing from the commies cuz we tried to be too socialistic and spent money we didn't have on the social safety net for people that didn't need it. Throw in the incredible fraud and waste, and there you are. Wasn't capitalism, it was poor governance. By both political parties, nobody is blameless.

Of course it was capitalism, failed capitalism that couldn't provide for the people, and corruption as always occurs with capitalism as the rich rise and poor fall. Capitalism is incompatiable with human behavior.
 
Actually, I'll throw this out there and then duck the flaming.

Socialism and Capitalism have one thing in common, they both sound pretty good on paper. It's when you actually try to carry them out with human beings that things go badly.

Capitalism sounds great on paper. You work hard, your work is rewarded consumerate with your efforts. The reality, though, is that more often than not, you are working very hard to make someone else rich. Someone with more money than you, and less decency. That's the reality, and the only way to beat the system is be part of it. Ugh.

Socialism sounds pretty awesome on paper. We take care of everyone, no one gets left behind. Sounds absolutely decent, and Jesus would approve. Except it, too, is contrary to human nature. If you know you are going to get fed and clothed regardless of your effort level, you just won't make much of an effort level. Pretty soon no one bothers.

So maybe we just need to come up with something other than this awful 16th century system vs. this awful 19th century system.

Capitalism is a self regulating model.

Capitalism is the only logical economic model...

Capitalism is self-regulating like Foxes watching a Henhouse. Come on, guy, get real. This last recession shows exactly what happens when you let them "self-regulate". They take all sorts of foolish risks for short term profit and they end up screwing it up for the rest of us.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top