It's Official!! Liberal Democrats are Socialists!!

[Annie]

There are quite a few here who think that only degenerates and lazy people are on welfare. They are walls against implementing social programs.

Based on upward mobility. http://economist.com/world/na/PrinterFriendly.cfm?Story_ID=3518560

She basically ate very little because she couldn't afford it, which created an iron deficiency and her anemica, but she turned out all right in the end. I don't think a person with only street smarts could have done that in her place. She is an exceptional person, and that is why she succeeded.

Most people aren't drug dealers. Applying for a scholarship is not a risk, you don't lose anything for not recieving it. Going to college without the scholarships and no accounted way to pay for some of it is a risk. Taking student loans and the like are a risk. Most people don't take the delayed gratification risk of just plain college either. You're my source on that one :tng:.

Let's start with the EPI homepage, so we all know what we are talking about:

http://www.epinet.org/

Unemployment rate and long-term unemployment continue to diverge
The unemployment rate and long-term unemployment (i.e., the share of those unemployed for more than six months) have historically run parallel courses. But in this recovery, the relatively low unemployment rate hasn't been matched by declines in long-term unemployment, which is about 60% higher than the norm. Get the facts at a glance in this week's Snapshot.

The frivolous case for tort law reform
Tort litigation has been blamed for a host of ills: driving liability insurance premiums to excessive levels, reducing real wages and overall employment, undermining corporate profits, dampening productivity growth, and discouraging research and development. But macroeconomic trends since the early 1990s are especially inconsistent with the argument that supposedly high and rapidly rising tort costs have inflicted serious harm on the economy. Yet the legal system's critics continue to argue that there is a tort liability "crisis" that warrants changing the system. To get a clear understanding of why changing the tort system will have little effect on the economy and might even hurt job creation rather than help it, read EPI's Briefing Paper, The Frivolous Case for Tort Law Reform.

The trouble with telecommunications policy
While cell phones, high-speed Internet access, interactive cable, and satellite TV services have become commonplace features of the new century, telecommunications policy remains an antiquated remnant of the old one. The unintended consequence of these federal and state policies is to support the worst employers with favorable tax and regulatory treatment, while greatly disadvantaging good employers and their workers and unions. EPI's new book, Racing to the Bottom, explains why the FCC and Congress need to re-examine current telecommunications policy and create a level playing field to encourage competition across the growing number of traditional and innovative access technologies that make up U.S. telecommunications.

Productivity growth and Social Security's future
In the White House's rush to dismantle and privatize Social Security, one important factor frequently gets overlooked in discussions regarding the program's future feasibility: the effect of future productivity growth. For a clear-headed analysis, read the Issue Brief, Productivity Growth and Social Security's Future.

Strong, broad-based job growth surpasses expectations
In contrast to the recent spate of disappointing reports on the economy, last month's job market performance was surprisingly upbeat. But the real question is which of the recent months' labor market performances represent the real underlying trend in job growth? Get the facts at a glance in this month's Jobs Picture.

Uptick in jobs not reaching young college graduates
Although payrolls increased by 274,000 jobs in April, the labor market remains tough for today's young college graduates. It has been 20 years since young college graduates have experienced employment rates as low as those in 2003 and 2004. This month's JobWatch details the employment situation of this group and analyzes the decreasing rate of employer-provided health insurance that these grads are faced with when they do find work.

Growth rate slows in first quarter of 2005
The news is not encouraging: domestic demand for U.S. production is down and labor income has yet to see much gain from the recovery, all pointing to continued weakness in future GDP growth. For a full analysis, read EPI's GDP Picture.

Shortfall in Social Security funds not inevitable
Changing economic trends have been responsible for the bulk of the financing shortfall of Social Security; the shortfall can be remedied by policy adjustments rather than a drastic overhaul of the system. Find out how in this EPI Issue Brief from economist L. Josh Bivens.

Social Security Issue Guide
Check out EPI's online Issue Guide on Social Security, a downloadable resource with fact sheets, figures, and links to other important publications on the subject of Social Security. This Issue Guide has been newly updated to reflect information about the recent debate over Social Security privatization.

Re-examining the charter school debate
Widely acknowledged past research on charter schools reported that these students were more likely to be proficient on their state's reading and math exams when compared to students in the nearest public school with a similar racial composition. But this past research citing a "charter advantage" inadequately controlled for differences in racial composition and socioeconomic status. When one directly takes into account racial composition and poverty, the perceived advantage of charter schools vanishes completely. For a more thorough analysis of this important education issue, read the Briefing Paper, Advantage None—Re-Examining Hoxby's Finding of Charter School Benefits.

Unemployment insurance increases likelihood of health care coverage
New research presented in the issue brief, Finding the Better Fit, shows that jobseekers who receive unemployment insurance have better odds of receiving employer-sponsored health insurance coverage in their next job.

The tax gap crisis
According to the latest estimates, as much as $353 billion in taxes—16% of the total owed—went unpaid in 2001. Recovery of unpaid taxes would eliminate the bulk of projected federal budget deficits over the next 10 years. EPI's Briefing Paper, Do-It-Yourself Tax Cuts, provides an overview of what a former IRS commissioner calls "the crisis in tax administration" and discusses some remedies to address this problem.

Charter schools: the evidence on enrollment and achievement
When federal statistics showed test scores lower in charter than in regular schools, some charter school supporters insisted this must result from charter schools enrolling harder-to-teach minority students. Data show, however, that typical charter school students are not more disadvantaged, yet their average achievement is not higher. EPI's book, The Charter School Dust-Up: Examining the evidence on enrollment and achievement, reviews the existing research on charter schools and suggests how such debates could be improved: by carefully accounting for the difficulty of educating particular groups of students before interpreting test scores, and by focusing on student gains, not their level of achievement at any particular time.

 

[IControlThePast]

Because the system is evil. It cripples those who it claims to help, making them idle people and draining society of greater good those individuals could do with hard work and draining society of the greater good the hard working citizens could do if they weren't supporting those who are given no motivation of work.

It makes people ungrateful for gifts they are given. The services of the welfare state create a citizenship who believe they are entitled to benefits without working for them. And it makes those who are giving the benefits bitter because it is not a gift freely given and a gift not gratefully received, but received with demands for more.

It is evil because it unnecessarily allows government to intrude into individual lives and thus takes away their freedom. The more government is allowed to intrude in our lives, the less freedom we have.

But Social Democrats are against the welfare state, and actually for cutting some social programs . They agree with you about recieving benefits and not working. Even so, the social welfare programs have hardly the funding that corporate ones do. Overall, welfare only makes up a small part of the budget, I think less than 5%. Most of that 5% you pay, taking away your freedom, is going towards corporate welfare.

Let's start with the EPI homepage, so we all know what we are talking about:

http://www.epinet.org/

So basically your site says that unemployed people are not getting jobs in the future. That probably has to do with outsourcing or machines eliminating their jobs here.

I'm talking about being able to escape the povety cycle, and keeping our market economy meritocratic, as well as helping provide social insurance in event of insecurity between jobs, provided the people on the programs are honestly working to obtain new jobs.

 

[Annie]

But Social Democrats are against the welfare state, and actually for cutting some social programs . They agree with you about recieving benefits and not working. Even so, the social welfare programs have hardly the funding that corporate ones do. Overall, welfare only makes up a small part of the budget, I think less than 5%. Most of that 5% you pay, taking away your freedom, is going towards corporate welfare.



So basically your site says that unemployed people are not getting jobs in the future. That probably has to do with outsourcing or machines eliminating their jobs here.

I'm talking about being able to escape the povety cycle, and keeping our market economy meritocratic, as well as helping provide social insurance in event of insecurity between jobs, provided the people on the programs are honestly working to obtain new jobs.

What site are you speaking of? EPI, well that was your source...

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Ah, but social democrats are against the welfare programs that allow people to be lazy. Like how Clinton eliminated welfare handouts, but supported using government money to provide transportation to work for people who would be otherwise unable to afford it, and who need that transportation to work. Sweden has a socialist system and manages to have a higher standard of living than the US.

An extreme distribution of wealth, such as the top 1% own 99% doesn't work out either, because it creates a whole host of social and stability problems. Where does that leave systems that create that kind of wealth distribution? The redistribution works out if it doesn't support programs that make people lazy, as Sweden can show.

People keep pointing to Sweden as the "great example" of a working socialist system....but it isn't.
It's falling apart. FYI:

A System that Doesn’t Work

As the standard of living has fallen over the past ten years, it has become evident to almost all observers that the Swedish system no longer works. Hakan Gergils, a member of the Swedish Civil Rights Movement and an adviser to Swedish industry, noted in Economic Affairs (October/ November 1989) that “This development has created a new class of poor people. The number of Swedes in this category increased to 600,000 last year, which means that around 10 percent of the adult population in Sweden cannot earn their living by working. They have to rely on public support for housing, food, clothing, etc. The most astonishing thing is that the new class includes a large number of well-educated people. A great number of full-time working men and women with, under normal circumstances, an acceptable income, have been trapped into dependency by the progressive tax system.”

Another eyewitness account came from Jacob Arfwedsson, who left Sweden to pursue a doctorate in political science at the Catholic University of Parris. While doing specialized studies under Professor Claes Ryn (another Swedish-born intellectual of rare ability) at the Catholic University of America, Arfwedsson pointed out to this writer in April 1990 that the whole complex of social services in Sweden is falling apart. The Social Democratic government had to renege on its promise to provide care for all children by 1991; desperately ill people have to go abroad because the waiting lists for hospital care in Sweden are years long.

The Wall Street Journal (February 22,1990) editorializes: “The reality of today’s Sweden is the lingering myth of a cradle-to-the-grave Welfare Paradise. The myth is based on an enormous system of subsidies—from food consumption to having children and even reaching old age. Savings are non-existent and investments are flowing abroad. That the gravy train is sputtering can be seen in the degradation of services, particularly medical care, and increasing poverty. Conditions in Sweden, of course, are still a far cry from those in Eastern Europe. But since the economic problems of both arise from the same socialist theory, countries trying to escape the grips of a statist nightmare have little reason to emulate Sweden’s welfare system.”

As one whose life has been rather evenly divided between his native Sweden and his new homeland, the United States, it is sad to see the glitter flaking and the glamour fading from the nation that gave him birth. But socialism, whether of the Marxist, democratic, or nationalist kind, is bound to fail. It is, in its various forms, a system of institutionalized envy. If the failure of the Swedish experiment in cradle-to-grave welfarism serves as an eye-opener to those who would imitate it, then it will have served an important purpose.

http://www.fee.org/vnews.php?nid=2318

 

[007]

Nope, we can't . Honestly what's so bad about Democratic socialism? It supports a very broadly capitalist system with only a few minor social elements to make the system more humanitarian, and even advocates that we should cut some taxes and cut some welfare programs.

Hmmmm... so we've got a commie on the board now aye?

 

[IControlThePast]

What site are you speaking of? EPI, well that was your source...

The Economist article I posted a link to back there about the decline of upward mobility. Here it is again http://economist.com/world/na/PrinterFriendly.cfm?Story_ID=3518560

People keep pointing to Sweden as the "great example" of a working socialist system....but it isn't.
It's falling apart. FYI:

Your article is from 1990, about the 1990 recession which came about because Sweden kept its unemployment too low, creating inflation. That's all been fixed and in the past, and now Economic forcasts for Sweden are looking good.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Sweden

Hmmmm... so we've got a commie on the board now aye?

Nope

 

[sitarro]

What is amazing is how great our poor have it compared with anywhere else in the world . Color TV , cable , cell phones , DVD players , spinner wheels . . . I have seen all of these in the poorest neighborhoods in America , socialism would probably be turned down by the poor in the United States .
Oh , by the way Icontrol , Bill Clinton didn't do shit about welfare , it was the Republican lead Congress that got that through .As a matter of fact Bill Clinton also had nothing to do with the economy either , the only thing he did was demean women , lie to congress , rent out the Lincoln bedroom and betray our country by selling the North Koreans our technology .
:2guns:

 

[Comrade]

The Economist article I posted a link to back there about the decline of upward mobility. Here it is again http://economist.com/world/na/PrinterFriendly.cfm?Story_ID=3518560



Your article is from 1990, about the 1990 recession which came about because Sweden kept its unemployment too low, creating inflation. That's all been fixed and in the past, and now Economic forcasts for Sweden are looking good.

Sweden used to have the lowest tax and spending rate of any free Western nation, and at one time ranked the most weathy of all nations in the world, in the seventies.

Since it enacted socialist policy, it has faced economic stagnation and a drab 2.2% annual increase in its GNP, and now ranks 33 of out the 225 nations of the world, finding itself competing with France among the poorest West European nations who have also adopted the 'utopia' of big government.

Sweden is also facing what appears to be an unsurmoutable problem in dealing with racial and religious diversity with its rapidly growing Muslim population and concurrent massive increase in crime and poverty among them.

The welfare state is completely incapable of buying off this problem, and Sweden will continue to spiral down into relative poverty compared to the more dynamic capitalist driven Western economies.

 

[IControlThePast]

What is amazing is how great our poor have it compared with anywhere else in the world . Color TV , cable , cell phones , DVD players , spinner wheels . . . I have seen all of these in the poorest neighborhoods in America , socialism would probably be turned down by the poor in the United States .
Oh , by the way Icontrol , Bill Clinton didn't do shit about welfare , it was the Republican lead Congress that got that through .As a matter of fact Bill Clinton also had nothing to do with the economy either , the only thing he did was demean women , lie to congress , rent out the Lincoln bedroom and betray our country by selling the North Koreans our technology .
:2guns:

I will be the first to admit, socialism does not help developing countries. Industrialization is best done through capitalism. We have much better poor than many places through the world, through our mixed economy, but not the best. Sweden has better, and so do six other countries.

Ok then, maybe it would make you happy if we title this thread "It's Official!! Many Republicans are Socialists" :tng:? Despite who actually did the reforms (they are centrist and Clinton was a large supporter of the Third Way) they are what the Social Democrats are about

Sweden used to have the lowest tax and spending rate of any free Western nation, and at one time ranked the most weathy of all nations in the world, in the seventies.

Since it enacted socialist policy, it has faced economic stagnation and a drab 2.2% annual increase in its GNP, and now ranks 33 of out the 225 nations of the world, finding itself competing with France among the poorest West European nations who have also adopted the 'utopia' of big government.

Sweden is also facing what appears to be an unsurmoutable problem in dealing with racial and religious diversity with its rapidly growing Muslim population and concurrent massive increase in crime and poverty among them.

The welfare state is completely incapable of buying off this problem, and Sweden will continue to spiral down into relative poverty compared to the more dynamic capitalist driven Western economies.

Now there are more than five times the numbers of nations there were in the 70s, and many of the new ones created hold valuable oil supplies. Sweden doesn't have much to work with in terms of exports. They don't have many natural resources outside a bit of iron. The can't grow wine like France and have relatively little culture to export, but they remain a leading exporter.

Sweden has about the 10th most economically free country in the world. There's not too much big government there compared to other places. Right now the Industrial growth rate of the US is only 0.3%. You are looking at the recession, which was not the fault of Socialism, when you look at the long term GNP, and that skews the result. However, Sweden managed to deal with the recession rather quickly and without incurring too much debt. Right now forcasts are good, despite the mentioned social problem.

 

[yeula]

Socialism means that the government owns all business and there is no privately owned businesses.

Is anyone going to say that America is Socialist?

Whats wrong with taking care of Seniors after they have worked all their lives and are old and can't work anymore?

Whats wrong with programs such as the GI Bill which helped millions into the middle class?

Whats wrong with programs such as Head Start which helps little kids whose parents are on welfare so that they can grow up and have a chance in life?

You people act like social programs are evil rather then programs designed to help people who are disadvantaged. I thought Jesus helped the disadvantaged.

Tell me this - what do you call it when corporations who don't need the money feed at the government trough?

When walmart pays slave wages the people who are doing the right thing and WORKING cannot afford housing, health care, food or anything else so that many times corporations are the ones that benefit when the government takes care of people.

Are you against the perks that government workers get - including the sludge that makes up the republican party? These people will get health care and a pension and other perks while they work and when they retire.

Every single person who works whether they are plumbers, hairdressers, lawyers, clerks, ditchdiggers, or anything else is contributing to the ecomomy and the General Welfare and doing their share. Why should government workers be the only ones to get these benefits? Everyone is ENTITLED to adequate health care. We should be giving ourselves Universal health care and we could do that with all the money we've put in the pockets of those at haliburton.

George Bush got millions of dollars when he got a baseball team in TX that the TAXPAYERS had paid for. Thats a redistribution of wealth. When walmart pays slave wages to the ones who produce the wealth thats a redistribution of wealth.

Bush promised that Iraq's oil would pay for its rebuilding but as it turns out WE are paying for it and the oil money is going into someone's elses pockets <BUSH CHENEY family) thats a redistribution of wealth.

 

[5stringJeff]

Socialism means that the government owns all business and there is no privately owned businesses.

Is anyone going to say that America is Socialist?

Whats wrong with taking care of Seniors after they have worked all their lives and are old and can't work anymore?

Whats wrong with programs such as the GI Bill which helped millions into the middle class?

Whats wrong with programs such as Head Start which helps little kids whose parents are on welfare so that they can grow up and have a chance in life?

You people act like social programs are evil rather then programs designed to help people who are disadvantaged. I thought Jesus helped the disadvantaged.

Tell me this - what do you call it when corporations who don't need the money feed at the government trough?

When walmart pays slave wages the people who are doing the right thing and WORKING cannot afford housing, health care, food or anything else so that many times corporations are the ones that benefit when the government takes care of people.

Are you against the perks that government workers get - including the sludge that makes up the republican party? These people will get health care and a pension and other perks while they work and when they retire.

Every single person who works whether they are plumbers, hairdressers, lawyers, clerks, ditchdiggers, or anything else is contributing to the ecomomy and the General Welfare and doing their share. Why should government workers be the only ones to get these benefits? Everyone is ENTITLED to adequate health care. We should be giving ourselves Universal health care and we could do that with all the money we've put in the pockets of those at haliburton.

George Bush got millions of dollars when he got a baseball team in TX that the TAXPAYERS had paid for. Thats a redistribution of wealth. When walmart pays slave wages to the ones who produce the wealth thats a redistribution of wealth.

Bush promised that Iraq's oil would pay for its rebuilding but as it turns out WE are paying for it and the oil money is going into someone's elses pockets <BUSH CHENEY family) thats a redistribution of wealth.

Wow... you know, I can't figure out if you are serious, or if you're just posting a bunch of leftie talking points to see what happens.

But to give you the short answer, people should be able to take care of themselves. It's called personal responsibility, and it's the #1 plank in the conservative agenda.

 

[yeula]

god damn you might have a point there. I bet you got all your brilliance at a public school and that means they should all be shut down.

 

[GotZoom]

Wow... you know, I can't figure out if you are serious, or if you're just posting a bunch of leftie talking points to see what happens.

But to give you the short answer, people should be able to take care of themselves. It's called personal responsibility, and it's the #1 plank in the conservative agenda.

You know......Darin hasn't been online all day. I bet he is this clown just having fun with us.

 

[musicman]

You know......Darin hasn't been online all day. I bet he is this clown just having fun with us.

I've never seen Darrin and Yeula in the same place.

Coincidence? I THINK NOT!

 

[GotZoom]

I've never seen Darrin and Yeula in the same place.

Coincidence? I THINK NOT!

Come on Darin....come out....we know it's you....

You got us.....very good.

 

[yeula]

What is happening is not for fun. Its for winning. Cheating is the only way you crooks can win. Boy it didn't take long before you resorted to dirty tricks. I came. I saw. I conquered. I take no satisfaction in doing so however because there was never any contest. Stupid rightwing morons.

 

[Said1]

You know......Darin hasn't been online all day. I bet he is this clown just having fun with us.

Just like Snufalufagus!

 

[GotZoom]

What is happening is not for fun. Its for winning. Cheating is the only way you crooks can win. Boy it didn't take long before you resorted to dirty tricks. I came. I saw. I conquered. I take no satisfaction in doing so however because there was never any contest. Stupid rightwing morons.

I'm sorry...you're garbled...breaking up....I can't hear you....what?...what?...say it again......you are breaking up

 

[Said1]

I'm sorry...you're garbled...breaking up....I can't hear you....what?...what?...say it again......you are breaking up

 

[Annie]

There are quite a few here who think that only degenerates and lazy people are on welfare. They are walls against implementing social programs.

and well there should be, it should be difficult and short, anything else creates dependency.

Based on upward mobility. http://economist.com/world/na/PrinterFriendly.cfm?Story_ID=3518560

She basically ate very little because she couldn't afford it, which created an iron deficiency and her anemica, but she turned out all right in the end. I don't think a person with only street smarts could have done that in her place. She is an exceptional person, and that is why she succeeded.

Rubbish, NOT towards your Mom, she should be very proud of herself and good for her for raising you to admire her. Rubbish to the fact that there are many that haven't a 'middle class' or better background that do succeed with both college and enterprise. How they find it? Damn if we could answer that we'd be a much better country.

Most people aren't drug dealers.

no duh! That was an 'extreme' example.

Applying for a scholarship is not a risk, you don't lose anything for not recieving it.

Sure it is, you put your being on the line, really.

Going to college without the scholarships and no accounted way to pay for some of it is a risk. Taking student loans and the like are a risk.

My kids are all going to college, without my help. Loans, scholarship, grants, and work. It can be done. Though it is hard!

Most people don't take the delayed gratification risk of just plain college either. You're my source on that one :tng:.

Not sure what you mean by that, I finished 2 degrees after high school. Went back for a third and now finishing up my masters.