Why socialism is evil

[hipeter924]

Imagine there's an elderly widow down the street from you. She has neither the strength to mow her lawn nor enough money to hire someone to do it. Here's my question to you, and I'm almost afraid for the answer: Would you support a government mandate that forces one of your neighbors to mow the lady's lawn each week? If he failed to follow the government orders, would you approve of some kind of punishment ranging from house arrest and fines to imprisonment? I'm hoping that the average American would condemn such a government mandate because it would be a form of slavery, the forcible use of one person to serve the purposes of another.

Would there be the same condemnation if instead of the government forcing your neighbor to physically mow the widow's lawn, the government forced him to give the lady $40 of his weekly earnings? That way the widow could hire someone to mow her lawn. I'd say that there is little difference between the mandates. While the mandate's mechanism differs, it is nonetheless the forcible use of one person to serve the purposes of another.

Probably most Americans would have a clearer conscience if all the neighbors were forced to put money in a government pot and a government agency would send the widow a weekly sum of $40 to hire someone to mow her lawn. This mechanism makes the particular victim invisible, but it still boils down to one person being forcibly used to serve the purposes of another. Putting the money into a government pot makes palatable acts that would otherwise be deemed morally offensive.

Full Article here: Why socialism is evil

Walter E. Williams, Ph.D., is the John M. Olin Distinguished Professor of Economics at George Mason University in Fairfax, Va.

 

[psikeyhackr]

Because it is a potential threat to the people who consider themselves to be winners at capitalism.

But Adam Smith talked about enlightened self interest.

So why aren't all of the Capitalists and Libertarians advocating mandatory accounting in the schools?

Fifth graders can learn accounting as well as collegians

Double-entry accounting is 700 YEARS OLD. How hard can it be with today's computers?

psik

 

[hortysir]

if a frog had wings......

 

[boedicca]

PS doesn't realize that some people will actually voluntarily help their neighbors.

My brother and nephew did the yard work for the elderly woman who lived across the street from them for a few years. Nobody forced them. It was actually my nephew's idea - my brother taught him decent values.

Big Government bleeds such decency out of a people.

 

[uscitizen]

Why socialism is evil?

Because parents should have to pay for their own chhildrens education instead of everyone having to pay for it?

Personal responsibility you know.

 

[loosecannon]

Imagine there's an elderly widow down the street from you. She has neither the strength to mow her lawn nor enough money to hire someone to do it. Here's my question to you, and I'm almost afraid for the answer: Would you support a government mandate that forces one of your neighbors to mow the lady's lawn each week? If he failed to follow the government orders, would you approve of some kind of punishment ranging from house arrest and fines to imprisonment? I'm hoping that the average American would condemn such a government mandate because it would be a form of slavery, the forcible use of one person to serve the purposes of another.

Would there be the same condemnation if instead of the government forcing your neighbor to physically mow the widow's lawn, the government forced him to give the lady $40 of his weekly earnings? That way the widow could hire someone to mow her lawn. I'd say that there is little difference between the mandates. While the mandate's mechanism differs, it is nonetheless the forcible use of one person to serve the purposes of another.

Probably most Americans would have a clearer conscience if all the neighbors were forced to put money in a government pot and a government agency would send the widow a weekly sum of $40 to hire someone to mow her lawn. This mechanism makes the particular victim invisible, but it still boils down to one person being forcibly used to serve the purposes of another. Putting the money into a government pot makes palatable acts that would otherwise be deemed morally offensive.

Full Article here: Why socialism is evil

Walter E. Williams, Ph.D., is the John M. Olin Distinguished Professor of Economics at George Mason University in Fairfax, Va.

Utter hogwash, not worthy of consideration.

Socialism is surely imperfect. But what existing alternative is half as good? None.

If you want to invent something better, GREAT!

If you just wanna kill socialism to make way for more rapacious cannibal capitalism, go to hell, Satan.

 

[JBeukema]

Did the retard OP just compare food and shelter to landscaping?

 

[hipeter924]

Imagine there's an elderly widow down the street from you. She has neither the strength to mow her lawn nor enough money to hire someone to do it. Here's my question to you, and I'm almost afraid for the answer: Would you support a government mandate that forces one of your neighbors to mow the lady's lawn each week? If he failed to follow the government orders, would you approve of some kind of punishment ranging from house arrest and fines to imprisonment? I'm hoping that the average American would condemn such a government mandate because it would be a form of slavery, the forcible use of one person to serve the purposes of another.

Would there be the same condemnation if instead of the government forcing your neighbor to physically mow the widow's lawn, the government forced him to give the lady $40 of his weekly earnings? That way the widow could hire someone to mow her lawn. I'd say that there is little difference between the mandates. While the mandate's mechanism differs, it is nonetheless the forcible use of one person to serve the purposes of another.

Probably most Americans would have a clearer conscience if all the neighbors were forced to put money in a government pot and a government agency would send the widow a weekly sum of $40 to hire someone to mow her lawn. This mechanism makes the particular victim invisible, but it still boils down to one person being forcibly used to serve the purposes of another. Putting the money into a government pot makes palatable acts that would otherwise be deemed morally offensive.

Full Article here: Why socialism is evil

Walter E. Williams, Ph.D., is the John M. Olin Distinguished Professor of Economics at George Mason University in Fairfax, Va.

Utter hogwash, not worthy of consideration.

Socialism is surely imperfect. But what existing alternative is half as good? None.

If you want to invent something better, GREAT!

If you just wanna kill socialism to make way for more rapacious cannibal capitalism, go to hell, Satan.

Where's your Ph.D? Because I merely agreed with it, rather than said it myself.

Religion here: [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yD_6-e48Sto[/ame]

PS: I am quite happy without socialism and a state capitalist model instead, as it means good health care, low unemployment, unions willing to negotiate and co-operate, and lower taxes.

I am just waiting a few years for the HDI to be above Denmark and Australia:

1. 
   Norway 0.938 (
   
   )
2. 
   Australia 0.937 (
   
   )
3. 
   New Zealand 0.907 (
   
   17)
4. 
   United States 0.902 (
   
   9)

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

 

[midcan5]

That the person who would write such nonsense is a PhD proves once more that real education requires thought, living, experience, not just the passing of artificial requirements that proclaim - or is that pretend - knowledge. Even a simple dictionary definition contains more information than our presumed educated fool. Socialism | Define Socialism at Dictionary.com

Socialism like capitalism, like Christianity, like communism, are simply abstractions. They are words today that only gain meaning in context and use, outside of those areas they are meaningless. They possess meaning for the charlatans, as they are easy negatives, applied to whomever is the out-group at the moment. Rather than think, name call is the fool's tool.

Another aspect to the constant need to criticize an idea is WHY? Why do some always need to pick on abstractions as if the sky were falling? What personal need drives this constant war against something that is no threat. 'Socialism' has replaced the devil, sin, and witches in the 21th century and is as real as they were.

"Moreover, if we give the matter a moment's thought, we can see that the 20th century morality tale of 'socialism vs. freedom' or 'communism vs. capitalism' is misleading. Capitalism is not a political system; it is a form of economic life, compatible in practice with right wing dictatorships (Chile under Pinochet), left-wing dictatorships (contemporary China), social-democratic monarchies (Sweden), and plutocratic republics (the United States), whether capitalist economies thrive best under conditions of freedom is perhaps more of an open question than we like to think." Tony Judt 'Ill fares the Land'

[ame=http://www.amazon.com/Socialism-Very-Short-Introduction-Introductions/dp/0192804316/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8]Amazon.com: Socialism: A Very Short Introduction (Very Short Introductions) (9780192804310): Michael Newman: Books[/ame]

 

[Bern80]

Utter hogwash, not worthy of consideration.

Socialism is surely imperfect. But what existing alternative is half as good? None.

If you want to invent something better, GREAT!

If you just wanna kill socialism to make way for more rapacious cannibal capitalism, go to hell, Satan.

When people reply back that something is not even worth discussing, that's generally how you know what was said was spot on.

Whether something is a good system or not depends on the outcome you are looking for. If you are looking for a system that ensures everyone is just okay, that everyone is forced to share in the misery so to speak, I guess socialism or some form of it is the system for you.

Most of the rest of us are not wusses who would rather not be babysat than take responsibility for our outcomes, however. Most of us would like those outcomes to be whatever we want them to be. I guess that would be a system someone like you is not interested in.

 

[loosecannon]

Utter hogwash, not worthy of consideration.

Socialism is surely imperfect. But what existing alternative is half as good? None.

If you want to invent something better, GREAT!

If you just wanna kill socialism to make way for more rapacious cannibal capitalism, go to hell, Satan.

When people reply back that something is not even worth discussing, that's generally how you know what was said was spot on.

yeah maybe, if you are a moron.

Whether something is a good system or not depends on the outcome you are looking for. If you are looking for a system that ensures everyone is just okay, that everyone is forced to share in the misery so to speak, I guess socialism or some form of it is the system for you.

Most of the rest of us are not wusses who would rather be babysat than take responsibility for our outcomes, however. Most of us would like those outcomes to be whatever we want them to be. I guess that would be a system someone like you is not interested in.

again, now you have proven yourself a moron.

I got some news for you, moron, society babysat you from cradle to grave. Everything that you are is a product of society and nature, your own efforts contributed less than 1%. Probably far less than 1%. Like .0000000000000001%.

And when society in America decides to stop babysitting you, and they will, you will be just one more evicted former GM employee whose pension, SS, assets and life's work got flushed down the drain by the very system you worship, the one that you rode in on.

What you don't realize is that the very system that made America great is now cannibalizing our nation. And you too will be subject to that same decline.

It is simply too bad that people as ignorant as you are allowed to vote. Because with you in the ballot box this once great nation has no hope.

 

[Bern80]

Utter hogwash, not worthy of consideration.

Socialism is surely imperfect. But what existing alternative is half as good? None.

If you want to invent something better, GREAT!

If you just wanna kill socialism to make way for more rapacious cannibal capitalism, go to hell, Satan.

When people reply back that something is not even worth discussing, that's generally how you know what was said was spot on.

yeah maybe, if you are a moron.

Whether something is a good system or not depends on the outcome you are looking for. If you are looking for a system that ensures everyone is just okay, that everyone is forced to share in the misery so to speak, I guess socialism or some form of it is the system for you.

Most of the rest of us are not wusses who would rather be babysat than take responsibility for our outcomes, however. Most of us would like those outcomes to be whatever we want them to be. I guess that would be a system someone like you is not interested in.

again, now you have proven yourself a moron.

I got some news for you, moron, society babysat you from cradle to grave. Everything that you are is a product of society and nature, your own efforts contributed less than 1%. Probably far less than 1%. Like .0000000000000001%.

And when society in America decides to stop babysitting you, and they will, you will be just one more evicted former GM employee whose pension, SS, assets and life's work got flushed down the drain by the very system you worship, the one that you rode in on.

What you don't realize is that the very system that made America great is now cannibalizing our nation. And you too will be subject to that same decline.

It is simply too bad that people as ignorant as you are allowed to vote. Because with you in the ballot box this once great nation has no hope.

WHAT?! You mean I can maintain a standard of living by not generating any income, doing absolutely nothing? Why didn't anyone tell me this?

 

[editec]

WELFARE is NOT socialism, folks.

Words have meanings.

Learn them or continue to prove your ignorance.

Socialism doesn't work well because central planning of a nation's industries does not have the advantage of being flexible to changing conditions, PLUS when central plans go wrong they go VERY WRONG.

THAT is what's wrong with a socialist economic system.

 

[goldcatt]

I love the way propagandists throw absolute emotionally charged terms like "evil" around. Gets that warm, fuzzy, knee jerk, no thought involved response they're looking for every time. Just like Pavlov's dogs.

 

[hipeter924]

I love the way propagandists throw absolute emotionally charged terms like "evil" around. Gets that warm, fuzzy, knee jerk, no thought involved response they're looking for every time. Just like Pavlov's dogs.

It depends how far you go, the way I see socialism is an impingement of individual rights, but regardless of the title it makes a good point, that Americans are using and exploiting each other rather than honestly doing things out of charity and good will, in a way that is evil. But on the point of proving socialism is evil, it didn't get close, it did a good job I thought of proving that forcing someone to help someone else against their will is immoral to an extent.

 

[goldcatt]

I love the way propagandists throw absolute emotionally charged terms like "evil" around. Gets that warm, fuzzy, knee jerk, no thought involved response they're looking for every time. Just like Pavlov's dogs.

It depends how far you go, the way I see socialism is an impingement of individual rights, but regardless of the title it makes a good point, that Americans are using and exploiting each other rather than honestly doing things out of charity and good will, in a way that is evil. But on the point of proving socialism is evil, it didn't get close, it did a good job I thought of proving that forcing someone to help someone else against their will is immoral to an extent.

The problem is it doesn't describe "socialism". Words do have meanings, even if those meanings are inconvenient to the agenda being pushed. The title tells anyone with the capacity for critical thought that it's nothing but emotionally driven ideological propaganda, which is borne out repeatedly in the body of the article.

Sorry, that dog won't hunt. Pile it Higher and Deeper all you want, but the piece is nothing but an elaborate bumper sticker meant to induce an emotional response. It was obviously successful in its purpose, but from a rational point of view it's crap because from Word One it's built on a false premise.

 

[hipeter924]

I love the way propagandists throw absolute emotionally charged terms like "evil" around. Gets that warm, fuzzy, knee jerk, no thought involved response they're looking for every time. Just like Pavlov's dogs.

It depends how far you go, the way I see socialism is an impingement of individual rights, but regardless of the title it makes a good point, that Americans are using and exploiting each other rather than honestly doing things out of charity and good will, in a way that is evil. But on the point of proving socialism is evil, it didn't get close, it did a good job I thought of proving that forcing someone to help someone else against their will is immoral to an extent.

The problem is it doesn't describe "socialism". Words do have meanings, even if those meanings are inconvenient to the agenda being pushed. The title tells anyone with the capacity for critical thought that it's nothing but emotionally driven ideological propaganda, which is borne out repeatedly in the body of the article.

Sorry, that dog won't hunt. Pile it Higher and Deeper all you want, but the piece is nothing but an elaborate bumper sticker meant to induce an emotional response. It was obviously successful in its purpose, but from a rational point of view it's crap because from Word One it's built on a false premise.

I find plenty of articles like that all the time, it doesn't mean they aren't worth reading, otherwise I wouldn't read articles on the net at all. In fact I lived basically without television for a year, you would be surprised how more informed you become as a result of not watching Fox, CNN, or local media. If I was looking for a totally informed article with a true premise then I wouldn't be searching on the net but in an academic book.

 

[Mr. Sauerkraut]

hi
we have here in germany mercedes benz and a health care system for everyone. What do you think we are: Socialists ore Capitalists?

 

[hipeter924]

hi
we have here in germany mercedes benz and a health care system for everyone. What do you think we are: Socialists ore Capitalists?

State Capitalist and Social Democratic, so a bit of both.

 

[Ernie S.]

Imagine there's an elderly widow down the street from you. She has neither the strength to mow her lawn nor enough money to hire someone to do it. Here's my question to you, and I'm almost afraid for the answer: Would you support a government mandate that forces one of your neighbors to mow the lady's lawn each week? If he failed to follow the government orders, would you approve of some kind of punishment ranging from house arrest and fines to imprisonment? I'm hoping that the average American would condemn such a government mandate because it would be a form of slavery, the forcible use of one person to serve the purposes of another.

Would there be the same condemnation if instead of the government forcing your neighbor to physically mow the widow's lawn, the government forced him to give the lady $40 of his weekly earnings? That way the widow could hire someone to mow her lawn. I'd say that there is little difference between the mandates. While the mandate's mechanism differs, it is nonetheless the forcible use of one person to serve the purposes of another.

Probably most Americans would have a clearer conscience if all the neighbors were forced to put money in a government pot and a government agency would send the widow a weekly sum of $40 to hire someone to mow her lawn. This mechanism makes the particular victim invisible, but it still boils down to one person being forcibly used to serve the purposes of another. Putting the money into a government pot makes palatable acts that would otherwise be deemed morally offensive.

Full Article here: Why socialism is evil

Walter E. Williams, Ph.D., is the John M. Olin Distinguished Professor of Economics at George Mason University in Fairfax, Va.

Utter hogwash, not worthy of consideration.

Socialism is surely imperfect. But what existing alternative is half as good? None.

If you want to invent something better, GREAT!

If you just wanna kill socialism to make way for more rapacious cannibal capitalism, go to hell, Satan.

We don't have to invent something better. Please read the US Constitution and Bill of Rights.

Look at socialism vs capitalism in practice. When Katrina hit NOLA, people sat on their asses waiting for government to feed them and repair damage. Years later, they're still crying for more money.
After Wilma hit here in South Florida, my neighbors ran extensions to homes without generators, cooked up and shared food from freezers, got out their chain saws and cut trees off and in one case from within damaged homes. By the time FEMA showed up, all the debris was piled in a vacant lot, every home on the street had at least minimal electricity and most likely everyone had gained a bit of weight. The one outsider who looted from damaged homes was caught and detained for police and people who's homes were so damaged to be unlivable were found sofas or tents.