Next time you hear someone criticizing socialism...

[dblack]

If Venezuela has become part of America we should ask them to create their own nation. As for socialism, America has always had streaks of it and continues to have streaks, as do many nations.
Would America have survived the Great Depression without the government helping people via forms of socialism?

Probably wouldn't have got into it without "forms of socialism".

 

[Likkmee]

If Venezuela has become part of America we should ask them to create their own nation. As for socialism, America has always had streaks of it and continues to have streaks, as do many nations.
Would America have survived the Great Depression without the government helping people via forms of socialism?

Doubtful.
WW2 was a fast cure as will be WW3

 

[regent]

If Venezuela has become part of America we should ask them to create their own nation. As for socialism, America has always had streaks of it and continues to have streaks, as do many nations.
Would America have survived the Great Depression without the government helping people via forms of socialism?

Doubtful.
WW2 was a fast cure as will be WW3

When people are hungry for ten years, a war may not be fast enough. Is that the Republican cure for Depressions, world Wars? Won't be long until Hitler is given credit for curing the Great Depression.

 

[danielpalos]

The next time you hear someone criticizing socialism...congratulate them for not being ignorant/uneducated/uninformed about the horrors of socialism like Angelo.

Why Capitalism Is Morally Superior to Other Systems

There are no truly free markets.

The hallmark of a truly free market is that all associations and relationships are based on voluntary agreement and mutual consent.

Social morals for free; Ten simple Commandments from a God, not the Expense of Government!

 

[Questioner]

At the basic level, economics is simply people transacting.

What policies, or lack thereof do you blame for the Great Depression, and how do you tie that to "capitalism". Be concise, please.

 

[Questioner]

The next time you hear someone criticizing socialism...congratulate them for not being ignorant/uneducate
The hallmark of a truly free market is that all associations and relationships are based on voluntary agreement and mutual consent.

Then no government is or has ever been a truly "free market".

Such an arrangement would only exist in the context of private relationships.

 

[Markle]

Would America have survived the Great Depression without the government helping people via forms of socialism?

The Depression of 1920-1921 was as deep and severe as that of 1929 however the government did little and we recovered quickly.

The Forgotten Depression of 1920 | Thomas E. Woods, Jr.

###

The actions taken by FDR extended the Great Depression by at least seven years.

FDR's policies prolonged Depression by 7 years, UCLA economists calculate
By Meg Sullivan August 10, 2004
Category: Research

Two UCLA economists say they have figured out why the Great Depression dragged on for almost 15 years, and they blame a suspect previously thought to be beyond reproach: President Franklin D. Roosevelt.

After scrutinizing Roosevelt's record for four years, Harold L. Cole and Lee E. Ohanian conclude in a new study that New Deal policies signed into law 71 years ago thwarted economic recovery for seven long years.

"Why the Great Depression lasted so long has always been a great mystery, and because we never really knew the reason, we have always worried whether we would have another 10- to 15-year economic slump," said Ohanian, vice chair of UCLA's Department of Economics. "We found that a relapse isn't likely unless lawmakers gum up a recovery with ill-conceived stimulus policies."

[…]

As union membership doubled, so did labor's bargaining power, rising from 14 million strike days in 1936 to about 28 million in 1937. By 1939 wages in protected industries remained 24 percent to 33 percent above where they should have been, based on 1929 figures, Cole and Ohanian calculate.

Unemployment persisted. By 1939 the U.S. unemployment rate was 17.2 percent, down somewhat from its 1933 peak of 24.9 percent but still remarkably high. By comparison, in May 2003, the unemployment rate of 6.1 percent was the highest in nine years.

Recovery came only after the Department of Justice dramatically stepped up enforcement of antitrust cases nearly four-fold and organized labor suffered a string of setbacks, the economists found.

"The fact that the Depression dragged on for years convinced generations of economists and policy-makers that capitalism could not be trusted to recover from depressions and that significant government intervention was required to achieve good outcomes," Cole said. "Ironically, our work shows that the recovery would have been very rapid had the government not intervened."

-UCLA-
LSMS368

Read more: FDR’s policies prolonged Depression by 7 years, UCLA economists calculate - Frontiers of Freedom

FDR's policies prolonged Depression by 7 years, UCLA economists calculate | History News Network

 

[g5000]

Ask them how well capitalism was doing in 1929.

I guess you don't know how the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics was doing in 1929, eh?

Goddam, the ignorance around here is fucking ridiculous!

 

[g5000]

The history of the Soviet Union between 1927 and 1953 covers the period in Soviet history from the establishment of Stalinism through victory in the Second World War and down to the death of Joseph Stalin in 1953. He sought to destroy his enemies while transforming Soviet society with aggressive economic planning, in particular a sweeping collectivization of agriculture and rapid development of heavy industry. Stalin consolidated his power within the party and the state and fostered an extensive cult of personality. Soviet secret-police and the mass-mobilization Communist Party served as Stalin's major tools in molding Soviet society. Stalin's methods in achieving his goals, which included party purges, political repression of the general population, and forced collectivization, led to millions of deaths: in Gulag labor camps and during famine.

History of the Soviet Union (1927–1953) - Wikipedia

 

[the other mike]

Ask them how well capitalism was doing in 1929.

I guess you don't know how the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics was doing in 1929, eh?

Goddam, the ignorance around here is fucking ridiculous!

Fear of the word socialism here is what's hilarious.
I'm not the one who keeps bumping this thread up sfb.

 

[g5000]

Ask them how well capitalism was doing in 1929.

I guess you don't know how the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics was doing in 1929, eh?

Goddam, the ignorance around here is fucking ridiculous!

Fear of the word socialism here is what's hilarious.
I'm not the one who keeps bumping this thread up sfb.

If I'm criticizing socialism, and I do, and some dumbass asks me how capitalism was doing in 1929, I will flame them right back and ask them how the USSR was doing in 1929.

And that's the end of the argument.

 

[bripat9643]

If Venezuela has become part of America we should ask them to create their own nation. As for socialism, America has always had streaks of it and continues to have streaks, as do many nations.
Would America have survived the Great Depression without the government helping people via forms of socialism?

Government interference turned a recession into the Great Depression.

Socialism has no positive aspects. None.

 

[Andylusion]

Ask them how well capitalism was doing in 1929.
View attachment 245504 View attachment 245506 View attachment 245505

To the extent that capitalism’s problems – inequality, instability (cycles/crises), etc. – stem in part from its production relationships, reforms focused exclusively on regulating or supplanting markets will not succeed in solving them. For example, Keynesian monetary policies (focused on raising or lowering the quantity of money in circulation and, correspondingly, interest rates) do not touch the employer-employee relationship, however much their variations redistribute wealth, regulate markets, or displace markets in favor of state-administered investment decisions. Likewise, Keynesian fiscal policies (raising or lowering taxes and government spending) do not address the employer-employee relationship.

Keynesian policies also never ended the cyclical instability of capitalism. The New Deal and European social democracy left capitalism in place in both state and private units (enterprises) of production notwithstanding their massive reform agendas and programs. They thereby left capitalist employers facing the incentives and receiving the resources (profits) to evade, weaken and eventually dissolve most of those programs.

It is far better not to distribute wealth unequally in the first place than to re-distribute it after to undo the inequality. For example, FDR proposed in 1944 that the government establish a maximum income alongside a minimum wage; that is one among the various ways inequality could be limited and thereby redistribution avoided. Efforts to redistribute encounter evasions, oppositions, and failures that compound the effects of unequal distribution itself. Social peace and cohesion are the victims of redistribution sooner or later. Reforming markets while leaving the relations/organization of capitalist production unchanged is like redistribution. Just as redistribution schemes fail to solve the problems rooted in distribution, market-focused reforms fail to solve the problems rooted in production.

Since 2008, capitalism has showed us all yet again its deep and unsolved problems of cyclical instability, deepening inequality and the injustices they both entail. Their persistence mirrors that of the capitalist organization of production. To successfully confront and solve the problems of economic cycles, income and wealth inequality, and so on, we need to go beyond the capitalist employer-employee system of production. The democratization of enterprises – transitioning from employer-employee hierarchies to worker cooperatives – is a key way available here and now to realize the change we need.

Worker coops democratically decide the distribution of income (wages, bonuses, benefits, profit shares, etc.) among their members. No small group of owners and the boards of directors they choose would, as in capitalist corporations, make such decisions. Thus, for example, it would be far less likely that a few individuals in a worker coop would earn millions while most others could not afford to send children to college. A democratic worker coop decision on the distribution of enterprise income would be far less unequal than what typifies capitalist enterprises. A socialism for the 21st century could and should include the transition from a capitalist to a worker-coop-based economic system as central to its commitments to less inequality and less social conflict over redistribution.

Capitalism Is Not the “Market System”



An OP should be 3-4 paragraphs, link, content.
Angelo

Copyright. Link Each "Copy & Paste" to It's Source. Only paste a small to medium section of the material.

USMB Rules and Guidelines

The problem is, the great depression was caused by socialism.

So was the great recession by the way.

Further, while it might seem counter intuitive, in the 1930s, under Capitalism, we *STILL* had a higher standard of living then the rest of the world.

Maybe you missed it, but go read what happened in Russia under socialism, with millions of starvation deaths.

While FDR was actually paying money to actually destroy food..... the Soviets had people dying of starvation.

So even in the worst government-caused depression in US history, we were *STILL* better off than the socialists dying in Soviet Russia.

 

[regent]

At the basic level, economics is simply people transacting.

What policies, or lack thereof do you blame for the Great Depression, and how do you tie that to "capitalism". Be concise, please.

Books are written on the causes of the Great Depression. You might start with Galbraith.

 

[Andylusion]

Ask them how well capitalism was doing in 1929.

I guess you don't know how the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics was doing in 1929, eh?

Goddam, the ignorance around here is fucking ridiculous!

Fear of the word socialism here is what's hilarious.
I'm not the one who keeps bumping this thread up sfb.

You don't have to reply. The moment you do... you are in fact the one who keeps bumping up the thread.

There's nothing wrong with that.

Regardless, if you complain about how Capitalism was doing in the 1930s, and post a picture trying to be ironic, of bread lines with a banner proclaiming capitalism has the highest standard of living...... then it is in fact fair to point out that hundreds of thousands, and possibly millions died under the Socialists, and many just from starvation.

Fact is even during the depression, we had a higher standard of living, than those under Socialism.

We do have fear of the word Socialism, and rightly so. No other word has destroyed nations and slaughtered people, than socialism.

That's a fact.

 

[regent]

Ask them how well capitalism was doing in 1929.
View attachment 245504 View attachment 245506 View attachment 245505

To the extent that capitalism’s problems – inequality, instability (cycles/crises), etc. – stem in part from its production relationships, reforms focused exclusively on regulating or supplanting markets will not succeed in solving them. For example, Keynesian monetary policies (focused on raising or lowering the quantity of money in circulation and, correspondingly, interest rates) do not touch the employer-employee relationship, however much their variations redistribute wealth, regulate markets, or displace markets in favor of state-administered investment decisions. Likewise, Keynesian fiscal policies (raising or lowering taxes and government spending) do not address the employer-employee relationship.

Keynesian policies also never ended the cyclical instability of capitalism. The New Deal and European social democracy left capitalism in place in both state and private units (enterprises) of production notwithstanding their massive reform agendas and programs. They thereby left capitalist employers facing the incentives and receiving the resources (profits) to evade, weaken and eventually dissolve most of those programs.

It is far better not to distribute wealth unequally in the first place than to re-distribute it after to undo the inequality. For example, FDR proposed in 1944 that the government establish a maximum income alongside a minimum wage; that is one among the various ways inequality could be limited and thereby redistribution avoided. Efforts to redistribute encounter evasions, oppositions, and failures that compound the effects of unequal distribution itself. Social peace and cohesion are the victims of redistribution sooner or later. Reforming markets while leaving the relations/organization of capitalist production unchanged is like redistribution. Just as redistribution schemes fail to solve the problems rooted in distribution, market-focused reforms fail to solve the problems rooted in production.

Since 2008, capitalism has showed us all yet again its deep and unsolved problems of cyclical instability, deepening inequality and the injustices they both entail. Their persistence mirrors that of the capitalist organization of production. To successfully confront and solve the problems of economic cycles, income and wealth inequality, and so on, we need to go beyond the capitalist employer-employee system of production. The democratization of enterprises – transitioning from employer-employee hierarchies to worker cooperatives – is a key way available here and now to realize the change we need.

Worker coops democratically decide the distribution of income (wages, bonuses, benefits, profit shares, etc.) among their members. No small group of owners and the boards of directors they choose would, as in capitalist corporations, make such decisions. Thus, for example, it would be far less likely that a few individuals in a worker coop would earn millions while most others could not afford to send children to college. A democratic worker coop decision on the distribution of enterprise income would be far less unequal than what typifies capitalist enterprises. A socialism for the 21st century could and should include the transition from a capitalist to a worker-coop-based economic system as central to its commitments to less inequality and less social conflict over redistribution.

Capitalism Is Not the “Market System”



An OP should be 3-4 paragraphs, link, content.
Angelo

Copyright. Link Each "Copy & Paste" to It's Source. Only paste a small to medium section of the material.

USMB Rules and Guidelines

The problem is, the great depression was caused by socialism.

So was the great recession by the way.

Further, while it might seem counter intuitive, in the 1930s, under Capitalism, we *STILL* had a higher standard of living then the rest of the world.

Maybe you missed it, but go read what happened in Russia under socialism, with millions of starvation deaths.

While FDR was actually paying money to actually destroy food..... the Soviets had people dying of starvation.

So even in the worst government-caused depression in US history, we were *STILL* better off than the socialists dying in Soviet Russia.

Socialism is not communism, despite all the efforts or conservatives to make it so. Of the many types of socialism, Scientific Socialism is the one that did lead to communism. Other socialisms, such as Christian Socialism did not.

 

[Andylusion]

At the basic level, economics is simply people transacting.

What policies, or lack thereof do you blame for the Great Depression, and how do you tie that to "capitalism". Be concise, please.

Books are written on the causes of the Great Depression. You might start with Galbraith.

He's wrong. I've read that theory before, and the facts do not support it.

Rustici on Smoot-Hawley and the Great Depression - Econlib

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0070AKF6C/?tag=ff0d01-20

The government caused the recession. Capitalism had nothing to do with it.

 

[Andylusion]

Ask them how well capitalism was doing in 1929.
View attachment 245504 View attachment 245506 View attachment 245505

To the extent that capitalism’s problems – inequality, instability (cycles/crises), etc. – stem in part from its production relationships, reforms focused exclusively on regulating or supplanting markets will not succeed in solving them. For example, Keynesian monetary policies (focused on raising or lowering the quantity of money in circulation and, correspondingly, interest rates) do not touch the employer-employee relationship, however much their variations redistribute wealth, regulate markets, or displace markets in favor of state-administered investment decisions. Likewise, Keynesian fiscal policies (raising or lowering taxes and government spending) do not address the employer-employee relationship.

Keynesian policies also never ended the cyclical instability of capitalism. The New Deal and European social democracy left capitalism in place in both state and private units (enterprises) of production notwithstanding their massive reform agendas and programs. They thereby left capitalist employers facing the incentives and receiving the resources (profits) to evade, weaken and eventually dissolve most of those programs.

It is far better not to distribute wealth unequally in the first place than to re-distribute it after to undo the inequality. For example, FDR proposed in 1944 that the government establish a maximum income alongside a minimum wage; that is one among the various ways inequality could be limited and thereby redistribution avoided. Efforts to redistribute encounter evasions, oppositions, and failures that compound the effects of unequal distribution itself. Social peace and cohesion are the victims of redistribution sooner or later. Reforming markets while leaving the relations/organization of capitalist production unchanged is like redistribution. Just as redistribution schemes fail to solve the problems rooted in distribution, market-focused reforms fail to solve the problems rooted in production.

Since 2008, capitalism has showed us all yet again its deep and unsolved problems of cyclical instability, deepening inequality and the injustices they both entail. Their persistence mirrors that of the capitalist organization of production. To successfully confront and solve the problems of economic cycles, income and wealth inequality, and so on, we need to go beyond the capitalist employer-employee system of production. The democratization of enterprises – transitioning from employer-employee hierarchies to worker cooperatives – is a key way available here and now to realize the change we need.

Worker coops democratically decide the distribution of income (wages, bonuses, benefits, profit shares, etc.) among their members. No small group of owners and the boards of directors they choose would, as in capitalist corporations, make such decisions. Thus, for example, it would be far less likely that a few individuals in a worker coop would earn millions while most others could not afford to send children to college. A democratic worker coop decision on the distribution of enterprise income would be far less unequal than what typifies capitalist enterprises. A socialism for the 21st century could and should include the transition from a capitalist to a worker-coop-based economic system as central to its commitments to less inequality and less social conflict over redistribution.

Capitalism Is Not the “Market System”



An OP should be 3-4 paragraphs, link, content.
Angelo

Copyright. Link Each "Copy & Paste" to It's Source. Only paste a small to medium section of the material.

USMB Rules and Guidelines

The problem is, the great depression was caused by socialism.

So was the great recession by the way.

Further, while it might seem counter intuitive, in the 1930s, under Capitalism, we *STILL* had a higher standard of living then the rest of the world.

Maybe you missed it, but go read what happened in Russia under socialism, with millions of starvation deaths.

While FDR was actually paying money to actually destroy food..... the Soviets had people dying of starvation.

So even in the worst government-caused depression in US history, we were *STILL* better off than the socialists dying in Soviet Russia.

Socialism is not communism, despite all the efforts or conservatives to make it so. Of the many types of socialism, Scientific Socialism is the one that did lead to communism. Other socialisms, such as Christian Socialism did not.

There is no Christian Socialism. That's mythology.

All the other flavors of Socialism, don't work. There is no example that does.

If you could point to even one single example of it working, anywhere in the world, at any time in human history. You would have a point. There is no such example.

 

[Andylusion]

If Venezuela has become part of America we should ask them to create their own nation. As for socialism, America has always had streaks of it and continues to have streaks, as do many nations.
Would America have survived the Great Depression without the government helping people via forms of socialism?

Doubtful.
WW2 was a fast cure as will be WW3

When people are hungry for ten years, a war may not be fast enough. Is that the Republican cure for Depressions, world Wars? Won't be long until Hitler is given credit for curing the Great Depression.

War is not a cure for anything. I would avoid war as much as possible. War is result of other people, being a threat or danger.

Depressions and recessions are cured by removing whatever bad policy caused them. The economy will naturally recover on it's own.

It's like cancer. Once you cut the cancer out of the body, you don't need to go force the body to heal. It will do that naturally once the cancer is removed.

In the 1920s, there was a deep recession, deeper than even the 2008 recession. The government simply cut spending, and cut taxes, and the economy recovered into what was the roaring 20s.

Back to the post several ago..... yes American has had streaks of socialism... and it is exactly those areas that have all the problems.

 

[regent]

If Venezuela has become part of America we should ask them to create their own nation. As for socialism, America has always had streaks of it and continues to have streaks, as do many nations.
Would America have survived the Great Depression without the government helping people via forms of socialism?

Doubtful.
WW2 was a fast cure as will be WW3

When people are hungry for ten years, a war may not be fast enough. Is that the Republican cure for Depressions, world Wars? Won't be long until Hitler is given credit for curing the Great Depression.

War is not a cure for anything. I would avoid war as much as possible. War is result of other people, being a threat or danger.

Depressions and recessions are cured by removing whatever bad policy caused them. The economy will naturally recover on it's own.

It's like cancer. Once you cut the cancer out of the body, you don't need to go force the body to heal. It will do that naturally once the cancer is removed.

In the 1920s, there was a deep recession, deeper than even the 2008 recession. The government simply cut spending, and cut taxes, and the economy recovered into what was the roaring 20s.

Back to the post several ago..... yes American has had streaks of socialism... and it is exactly those areas that have all the problems.

We have socialism today unless Social Security is no longer considered socialism by conservatives.