The Republicans really wonder about capitalism.

Discussion in 'Economy' started by Brutus, May 4, 2011.

  1. Brutus
    Offline

    Brutus Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2011
    Messages:
    1,432
    Thanks Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +64
    Why doesn't everyone agree with Milton Friedman that the battle between capitalism and liberal socialism is over. How did the USA ever get a socialist president in the face of all the evidence?

    Look at

    1)Cuba/ Florida
    2)USA/USSR
    3)East Germany/West Germany
    4)Red China/Modern China
    5)Red China/Hong Kong
    6) North Korea/South Korea
    7) Israel before and after 1999
    8) Ivory Coast/Ghana
    9) Modern India/ Socialist India
    10)Chile pre and post Friedman
    11) Ireland pre and post tax cuts
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  2. Kevin_Kennedy
    Offline

    Kevin_Kennedy Defend Liberty

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2008
    Messages:
    17,590
    Thanks Received:
    1,581
    Trophy Points:
    205
    Location:
    Ohio
    Ratings:
    +2,027
    Why doesn't everyone agree that anybody who refers to Obama as a socialist doesn't understand the term?
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
  3. Bern80
    Offline

    Bern80 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    8,094
    Thanks Received:
    720
    Trophy Points:
    138
    Ratings:
    +726
    Government ownership of the means of production you mean? Who was it again that took over controlling ownership of GM? Who was it who bailed out the financial sector with a million strings attached? I think we understand the term.
     
  4. Kevin_Kennedy
    Offline

    Kevin_Kennedy Defend Liberty

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2008
    Messages:
    17,590
    Thanks Received:
    1,581
    Trophy Points:
    205
    Location:
    Ohio
    Ratings:
    +2,027
    I don't think the socialists mean public ownership of the means of production of a handful of companies. I'm almost positive they mean every company. If Obama is anything it's a fascist or a corporatist, not a socialist. They're certainly related ideologies, but not the same thing.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  5. editec
    Offline

    editec Mr. Forgot-it-All

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    41,427
    Thanks Received:
    5,598
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +5,617
    Socialism?

    Here in American the brand of socialism we have is really CLASSISM.

    The WEALTHY enjoy the benefits of socialism, the rest of us struggle with their version of CLASS DRIVEN, cronny-capitalism.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  6. JBeukema
    Offline

    JBeukema BANNED

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2009
    Messages:
    25,613
    Thanks Received:
    1,703
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    everywhere and nowhere
    Ratings:
    +1,705
    'Socialism'? You mean more unions? Like in the 50s? Higher marginal tax rates? Like the 50s? Higher real income? Like the 50s?
     
  7. doctor100
    Offline

    doctor100 Rookie

    Joined:
    May 5, 2011
    Messages:
    21
    Thanks Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Ratings:
    +2
    I'm pretty sure everyone in this thread is an idiot.

    i mean, socialism? control of wages, production, and distribution by the government? (which is VERY VERY different from communism mind you)

    Yeah, Obama did each of those things; controlled wages never before controlled, controlled production, controlled distribution(like medical insurance).

    But unions are not socialism, never were, never will be. Those are corporatist.

    As for the "wealthy enjoying the benefits of socialism"? nooo, that would capitalism, socialism normally helps the lower class, that's redistribution of wealth from the rich to the poor-involuntarily. Let's not forget corporate taxes shall we?
    [I wanted to put an image here, but I couldn't]

    Socailism was an attempt to control banks and financial institutions, control company policies (through ownership by the government) to benefit the "people", reduce the gains that the very wealthy had, use the government to buy what was needed by communities and employ people as well . . .all of that does too fit Obama.

    which isn't to say that "socialist Obama" is a bad thing. I mean, compare median lifestyle during "absolute capitalism/robber baron" to those in "absolute socialism/communist russia" and you will see marked similarities. Our system did not become the best until it started controlling markets; whether that be late 1800 tarriffs, which interfere in the free market, or if that be post WWII, and the new society and the new deal etc.

    Sacrificing either sector of society for the exclusive benefit of the other will always lead to poor median living conditions. Whether it be caused by lack of incentive, or if it be caused by oppression.

    And poor median living conditions (lots of poor workers) leads to less innovation, which means less dishwashers and microwaves and TV's which means a worse standard of living for everyone.

    but striking the balance is an art.

    IMO
     
  8. Brutus
    Offline

    Brutus Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2011
    Messages:
    1,432
    Thanks Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +64
    this is true, BO voted to the left of Bernie Sanders( an open socialist) so you might more accurately call him a communist. I guess that's why the CPUSA loves BO?? What do you think?
     
  9. Brutus
    Offline

    Brutus Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2011
    Messages:
    1,432
    Thanks Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +64
    yes Kevin thought he was smart when he's really a lightweight:

    Norman Thomas quotes:

    The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of 'liberalism' they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened.
     
  10. Brutus
    Offline

    Brutus Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2011
    Messages:
    1,432
    Thanks Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +64
    so then why be so liberal and afraid to give us your best example of socialism for the wealthy??? What does your fear tell you about liberalism?
     

Share This Page