Why I'm not a socialist (don't gloat, conservatives)

[Billy_Kinetta]

Even socialists know they need capitalism to survive.

Not true. The difference between socialism and capitalism is in the ownership of the means of production. Having a system based on social ownership is not at all dependent on private ownership.

Yes, based on private ownership of the means of production and their operation for profit.

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" provides no incentive toward individual effort, since any such profit is largely absorbed by the state for redistribution, and thereby reducing itself the very profit it seeks.

Why do you think people would not want to improve their conditions only because it would improve the conditions for everyone?

If I were working under such a system, and the salary for four of the eight hours I worked went to pay for others not working, I would not work.

I'd get the EBT card and eat lobster. Wouldn't you?

No. I would be catching lobster.

Not in Kansas.

 

[Tehon]

Not true. The difference between socialism and capitalism is in the ownership of the means of production. Having a system based on social ownership is not at all dependent on private ownership.

Yes, based on private ownership of the means of production and their operation for profit.

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" provides no incentive toward individual effort, since any such profit is largely absorbed by the state for redistribution, and thereby reducing itself the very profit it seeks.

Why do you think people would not want to improve their conditions only because it would improve the conditions for everyone?

If I were working under such a system, and the salary for four of the eight hours I worked went to pay for others not working, I would not work.

I'd get the EBT card and eat lobster. Wouldn't you?

No. I would be catching lobster.

Not in Kansas.

I'm not in Kansas. If I'm providing the good folks in Kansas with lobster I'm guessing that there will be people there that aren't lazy like you to provide something to my part of the country that will improve our condition here as well.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Yes, based on private ownership of the means of production and their operation for profit.

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" provides no incentive toward individual effort, since any such profit is largely absorbed by the state for redistribution, and thereby reducing itself the very profit it seeks.

Why do you think people would not want to improve their conditions only because it would improve the conditions for everyone?

If I were working under such a system, and the salary for four of the eight hours I worked went to pay for others not working, I would not work.

I'd get the EBT card and eat lobster. Wouldn't you?

No. I would be catching lobster.

Not in Kansas.

I'm not in Kansas. If I'm providing the good folks in Kansas with lobster I'm guessing that there will be people there that aren't lazy like you to provide something to my part of the country that will improve our condition here as well.

Altruism produced at the barrel of a gun is totalitarianism.

I'm "retired", and do it well. I also "work", and do it well.

Do I owe you something?

 

[rightwinger]

Every country is some mix of socialism and capitalism

We are no different

Our schools are socialist, so are roads, police, fire protection, legal system and thousands of other government functions

They are functions of elected governments. No constitution - state, federal or otherwise - grants governments power to reach into an individual's pocket to provide another individual a living.

If I am wrong in this, provide examples, and don't try the "general welfare" clause either. Such wacky interpretations were long ago dismantled.

Of course it does
Our Constitution allows government to raise revenue through taxes. It also authorizes elected representatives to decide how that revenue is spent

 

[rightwinger]

Why do you think people would not want to improve their conditions only because it would improve the conditions for everyone?

If I were working under such a system, and the salary for four of the eight hours I worked went to pay for others not working, I would not work.

I'd get the EBT card and eat lobster. Wouldn't you?

No. I would be catching lobster.

Not in Kansas.

I'm not in Kansas. If I'm providing the good folks in Kansas with lobster I'm guessing that there will be people there that aren't lazy like you to provide something to my part of the country that will improve our condition here as well.

Altruism produced at the barrel of a gun is totalitarianism.

I'm "retired", and do it well. I also "work", and do it well.

Do I owe you something?

Altruism is helping people who need help

A function of government

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Every country is some mix of socialism and capitalism

We are no different

Our schools are socialist, so are roads, police, fire protection, legal system and thousands of other government functions

They are functions of elected governments. No constitution - state, federal or otherwise - grants governments power to reach into an individual's pocket to provide another individual a living.

If I am wrong in this, provide examples, and don't try the "general welfare" clause either. Such wacky interpretations were long ago dismantled.

Of course it does
Our Constitution allows government to raise revenue through taxes.

Only for purposes mandated it by the Constitution. If you wish to add to those, there is a process.

 

[danielpalos]

In many ways I'm still a leftist, and think like a leftist. I don't think that ever fully leaves someone.

But I must admit...I really don't believe in a sharing economy. The reason is not because I've become a full fledged capitalist, or think the free market solves everything. Look, capitalism will decline on a long enough timeline, and we'll be in trouble.

It's just...I don't want to share! Think about, leftists. You want to share with people who despise you. Who want nothing to do with you. Who will gladly cheat and steal and do everything to get more than their share. Why would you possibly try changing them?

I think socialism works only in one situation. Small countries where basically everyone is a socialist to some degree. It works because the high level of trust and uniformity means there are no grifters, everyone contributes and gets back something in return.

Socialism doesn't work at a large scale, like nations, the global economy, or big business. There are too many competitors, too many people ready to take advantage. In this case, I would rather fight for my piece, however small it may be.

And let me add that you conservatives shouldn't gloat because, well, capitalism really isn't conservative. It's capitalism which changes the world more than anything.

It is about learning how to merely use capitalism, for all of its worth in modern economic times.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

If I were working under such a system, and the salary for four of the eight hours I worked went to pay for others not working, I would not work.

I'd get the EBT card and eat lobster. Wouldn't you?

No. I would be catching lobster.

Not in Kansas.

I'm not in Kansas. If I'm providing the good folks in Kansas with lobster I'm guessing that there will be people there that aren't lazy like you to provide something to my part of the country that will improve our condition here as well.

Altruism produced at the barrel of a gun is totalitarianism.

I'm "retired", and do it well. I also "work", and do it well.

Do I owe you something?

Altruism is helping people who need help

A function of government

Please post the article and paragraph of ANY constitution national or state that mandates "altruism as a function of government".

 

[Marion Morrison]

Commie Pinkos! Where's Joe McCarthy when you need him?

 

[danielpalos]

No. I would be catching lobster.

Not in Kansas.

I'm not in Kansas. If I'm providing the good folks in Kansas with lobster I'm guessing that there will be people there that aren't lazy like you to provide something to my part of the country that will improve our condition here as well.

Altruism produced at the barrel of a gun is totalitarianism.

I'm "retired", and do it well. I also "work", and do it well.

Do I owe you something?

Altruism is helping people who need help

A function of government

Please post the article and paragraph of ANY constitution national or state that mandates "altruism as a function of government".

Providing for the general welfare is a form of altruism, according to the right wing.

The left knows, it means to invest in our economy on a not-for-profit basis.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Not in Kansas.

I'm not in Kansas. If I'm providing the good folks in Kansas with lobster I'm guessing that there will be people there that aren't lazy like you to provide something to my part of the country that will improve our condition here as well.

Altruism produced at the barrel of a gun is totalitarianism.

I'm "retired", and do it well. I also "work", and do it well.

Do I owe you something?

Altruism is helping people who need help

A function of government

Please post the article and paragraph of ANY constitution national or state that mandates "altruism as a function of government".

Providing for the general welfare is a form of altruism, according to the right wing.

The left knows, it means to invest in our economy on a not-for-profit basis.

Are you stating that such is the purpose and meaning of the general welfare clause?

 

[Tehon]

Why do you think people would not want to improve their conditions only because it would improve the conditions for everyone?

If I were working under such a system, and the salary for four of the eight hours I worked went to pay for others not working, I would not work.

I'd get the EBT card and eat lobster. Wouldn't you?

No. I would be catching lobster.

Not in Kansas.

I'm not in Kansas. If I'm providing the good folks in Kansas with lobster I'm guessing that there will be people there that aren't lazy like you to provide something to my part of the country that will improve our condition here as well.

Altruism produced at the barrel of a gun is totalitarianism.

I'm "retired", and do it well. I also "work", and do it well.

Do I owe you something?

No one is pointing a gun at you brother. I didn't ask you to do anything for your ebt card and I volunteered to get your lobster for you. Does that sound like I think you owe me something?

 

[SeaGal]

I think socialism works only in one situation. Small countries where basically everyone is a socialist to some degree. It works because the high level of trust and uniformity means there are no grifters, everyone contributes and gets back something in return.

Socialism doesn't work at a large scale, like nations, the global economy, or big business. There are too many competitors, too many people ready to take advantage. In this case, I would rather fight for my piece, however small it may be.

True...socialism only 'works' in small, autonomous societies...and then only briefly. Why? Human nature - 'There are too many competitors, too many people ready to take advantage'. We are created equal only in the eyes of the law. We are born unique...the only economic system that accommodates uniqueness is capitalism, under a democratic republic form of government. The greatest flaw of capitalism is the generosity in providing for those unwilling to provide for themselves (as opposed to unable). One of the greatest appeals of socialism is the requirement of the mentally and physically able to contribute...if they want to eat.

However benign socialism appears, it remains the modern gateway economy to communism...due to human nature.

The safest world is one in which there are many prosperous nation states freely involved in trade and industry - each with a vested interest in preserving their prosperity.

 

[rightwinger]

Every country is some mix of socialism and capitalism

We are no different

Our schools are socialist, so are roads, police, fire protection, legal system and thousands of other government functions

They are functions of elected governments. No constitution - state, federal or otherwise - grants governments power to reach into an individual's pocket to provide another individual a living.

If I am wrong in this, provide examples, and don't try the "general welfare" clause either. Such wacky interpretations were long ago dismantled.

Of course it does
Our Constitution allows government to raise revenue through taxes.

Only for purposes mandated it by the Constitution. If you wish to add to those, there is a process.

Very true

And if you think Congress is using revenue for unconstitutional purposes, our Constitution allows you to take them to court

Why don't you?

 

[rightwinger]

No. I would be catching lobster.

Not in Kansas.

I'm not in Kansas. If I'm providing the good folks in Kansas with lobster I'm guessing that there will be people there that aren't lazy like you to provide something to my part of the country that will improve our condition here as well.

Altruism produced at the barrel of a gun is totalitarianism.

I'm "retired", and do it well. I also "work", and do it well.

Do I owe you something?

Altruism is helping people who need help

A function of government

Please post the article and paragraph of ANY constitution national or state that mandates "altruism as a function of government".

We the People......

Very important words. It is the people who organized the government. The government exists for ...We the People

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Don't worry we are already a socialist country , and we continually give to the plutocrats, our taxes and IRA's , etc support them. We pay salaries to politicians who do as they say, we are even going to lower the top tax bracket, do away with inheritance tax for billionaires, AMT, Medicaid, Medicare, food stamps, school programs for children, meals on wheels, allow pollution and deregulation of labor. They need our money, its their Iife source , so that makes us peons (those who make median income and under) their life source.

Your IRA supports plutocrats? Tell me more!

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Every country is some mix of socialism and capitalism

We are no different

Our schools are socialist, so are roads, police, fire protection, legal system and thousands of other government functions

They are functions of elected governments. No constitution - state, federal or otherwise - grants governments power to reach into an individual's pocket to provide another individual a living.

If I am wrong in this, provide examples, and don't try the "general welfare" clause either. Such wacky interpretations were long ago dismantled.

Of course it does
Our Constitution allows government to raise revenue through taxes.

Only for purposes mandated it by the Constitution. If you wish to add to those, there is a process.

Very true

And if you think Congress is using revenue for unconstitutional purposes, our Constitution allows you to take them to court

Why don't you?

Because the courts are compromised.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Not in Kansas.

I'm not in Kansas. If I'm providing the good folks in Kansas with lobster I'm guessing that there will be people there that aren't lazy like you to provide something to my part of the country that will improve our condition here as well.

Altruism produced at the barrel of a gun is totalitarianism.

I'm "retired", and do it well. I also "work", and do it well.

Do I owe you something?

Altruism is helping people who need help

A function of government

Please post the article and paragraph of ANY constitution national or state that mandates "altruism as a function of government".

We the People......

Very important words. It is the people who organized the government. The government exists for ...We the People

Try again. In no way do those words set up the federal government nor give it a mandate to function as a charity organization with the authority to levy taxes for that purpose.

 

[rightwinger]

Every country is some mix of socialism and capitalism

We are no different

Our schools are socialist, so are roads, police, fire protection, legal system and thousands of other government functions

They are functions of elected governments. No constitution - state, federal or otherwise - grants governments power to reach into an individual's pocket to provide another individual a living.

If I am wrong in this, provide examples, and don't try the "general welfare" clause either. Such wacky interpretations were long ago dismantled.

Of course it does
Our Constitution allows government to raise revenue through taxes.

Only for purposes mandated it by the Constitution. If you wish to add to those, there is a process.

Very true

And if you think Congress is using revenue for unconstitutional purposes, our Constitution allows you to take them to court

Why don't you?

Because the courts are compromised.

For the last 80 years?

 

[rightwinger]

I'm not in Kansas. If I'm providing the good folks in Kansas with lobster I'm guessing that there will be people there that aren't lazy like you to provide something to my part of the country that will improve our condition here as well.

Altruism produced at the barrel of a gun is totalitarianism.

I'm "retired", and do it well. I also "work", and do it well.

Do I owe you something?

Altruism is helping people who need help

A function of government

Please post the article and paragraph of ANY constitution national or state that mandates "altruism as a function of government".

We the People......

Very important words. It is the people who organized the government. The government exists for ...We the People

Try again. In no way do those words set up the federal government nor give it a mandate to function as a charity organization with the authority to levy taxes for that purpose.

You need to read your Constitution

We the People set up the government. They are us
They do as they are bid by We the People

We the People have repeatedly voted for social programs and those programs have held up in court

You lose