socialism In Action

[Edgetho]

There has only been a a very few times that I can think of where a Country consciously voted for a socialist campaigning as a socialist and winning the election for Head of State.

We can quibble about Germany, but I'm not sure that Hitler being appointed, albeit democratically, by Hindenburg qualifies.

Not even sure that the French election of socialist Hollande even qualifies. But I'll give you that one.

So let's say it's a grand total of two (2). We can argue about the details later....

I had a co-worker several years ago who was married to a Venezuelan girl who was a TOTAL Chavista. Total.

We'd go back and forth on the topic of what kind of scumbag Chavez was and what he would do to the Country.

I never did convince him. Never did.

Wish I could see him now and ask him what he thinks of socialism.

Wonder what excuses our resident dims will give for this latest socialist failure?

Guys, when it fails EVERY SINGLE TIME, don't you think there's something wrong with it?

Guess not. Not if you're a dim.

Socialism In Action: Venezuela Issues ID Cards To Curtail Food Hoarding…

But… but… but… showing an ID card is racist!

CARACAS, Venezuela (AP) — Battling food shortages, the government is rolling out a new ID system that is either a grocery loyalty card with extra muscle or the most dramatic step yet toward rationing in Venezuela, depending on who is describing it.

President Nicolas Maduro’s administration says the cards to track families’ purchases will foil people who stock up on groceries at subsidized prices and then illegally resell them for several times the amount. Critics say it’s another sign the oil-rich Venezuelan economy is headed toward Cuba-style dysfunction.

Registration begins at more than 100 government-run supermarkets across the country Tuesday, and working-class shoppers who sometimes endure hours-long lines at government-run stores to buy groceries at steeply reduced prices are welcoming the plan.

“The rich people have things all hoarded away , and they pull the strings,” said Juan Rodriguez, who waited two hours to enter the government-run Abastos Bicentenario supermarket near downtown Caracas on Monday, and then waited another three hours to check out.

Wow! Maybe, just maybe, when you're THAT stupid, maybe you deserve to be hungry.

Like people buy perishable items and hoard them, right? Maybe I should try that. I think I'll run down to Publix and buy every New York Strip I can lay my hands on.

Then when other people go to the Store to get one, they'll be out and they'll have pay me whatever I want for a New York Strip.



You gotta be a special kind of stupid to be a socialist.

You really do

 

[Fishlore]

Can you point to a single time when a single country has freely elected a purely capitalist government, one which imposed NO regulations on the economy and transferred NO tax revenue from rich tax payers to the less rich?

Of course you can't! The notion is as silly as the idea the "socialist" administration of every country in which it has been elected has "failed." You have to be pretty simple minded to think that these all-or-nothing fantasy administrations have ever existed or indeed ever will exist.

Capitalism is, at its heart, a banking system not a governing system. Socialism is, at its heart, a governing system, not an economic system. They two systems are completely compatible; indeed, every modern nation operates on a mixture of capitalist banking and socialist legislative policies.

If we use as a rough yardstick the percentage of GDP which passes through government hands as a measure of the degree of socialism, all the developed nations turn out to be rather tightly clustered. No nation comes out as less than 30% socialized and even the most socialized (Denmark) is below 50%. Why? It's not ideological theory, it is simple pragmatism. Only within the 30-50% quintile can a modern nation function socially and economically.

 

[Edgetho]

School's out, huh?

 

[depotoo]

Can you point to a single time when a single country has freely elected a purely capitalist government, one which imposed NO regulations on the economy and transferred NO tax revenue from rich tax payers to the less rich?

Of course you can't! The notion is as silly as the idea the "socialist" administration of every country in which it has been elected has "failed." You have to be pretty simple minded to think that these all-or-nothing fantasy administrations have ever existed or indeed ever will exist.
Capitalism is, at its heart, a banking system not a governing system. Socialism is, at its heart, a governing system, not an economic system. They two systems are completely compatible; indeed, every modern nation operates on a mixture of capitalist banking and socialist legislative policies.

If we use as a rough yardstick the percentage of GDP which passes through government hands as a measure of the degree of socialism, all the developed nations turn out to be rather tightly clustered. No nation comes out as less than 30% socialized and even the most socialized (Denmark) is below 50%. Why? It's not ideological theory, it is simple pragmatism. Only within the 30-50% quintile can a modern nation function socially and economically.

Is that really what you have been taught the Gop believes? And you fell for it?

 

[Mr. H.]

School's out, huh?

Your sig GIF keeps interrupting my reading.

 

[bripat9643]

Can you point to a single time when a single country has freely elected a purely capitalist government, one which imposed NO regulations on the economy and transferred NO tax revenue from rich tax payers to the less rich?

Yes, it's called the United States of America.

Of course you can't! The notion is as silly as the idea the "socialist" administration of every country in which it has been elected has "failed." You have to be pretty simple minded to think that these all-or-nothing fantasy administrations have ever existed or indeed ever will exist.

We have come close enough to it so that any differences don't matter. However, he's the bottom line: the closer a society gets to the socialist ideal, the poorer it becomes. The closer it gets to the capitalist ideal, the richer it becomes.

Capitalism is, at its heart, a banking system not a governing system. Socialism is, at its heart, a governing system, not an economic system. They two systems are completely compatible; indeed, every modern nation operates on a mixture of capitalist banking and socialist legislative policies.

In the first paragraph you claimed there's no such thing as pure capitalism or pure socialism. Then you claim socialism and capitalism are incompatible. Then you claim every "modern nation" is a mix of the two. You really are confused.

If we use as a rough yardstick the percentage of GDP which passes through government hands as a measure of the degree of socialism, all the developed nations turn out to be rather tightly clustered. No nation comes out as less than 30% socialized and even the most socialized (Denmark) is below 50%. Why? It's not ideological theory, it is simple pragmatism. Only within the 30-50% quintile can a modern nation function socially and economically.

Wrong. The U.S. and England functioned with around 5% for over 100 years. That blows your theory out of the water.

Socialism contributes nothing to the material welfare of a people - nothing. It's nothing but a blood sucking parasite on society. The more of it you have, the more anemic society becomes.