Can Someone Explain how we can Impliment Socialism and Still Enjoy the Benefits of Capitalism?

[Seymour Flops]

After more than one hundred and fifty years of capitalism, there is plenty of money available in the United States for Socialism to work - if money were the only reason it would not. But even if that were true, the money will have to run out and then socialism cannot work.

The False Appeal Of Socialism

Even in its new, fashionable, incarnation, socialism cannot fulfill people’s economic needs or their yearning for freedom.

www.hoover.org

Many Americans—particularly but not exclusively the young—remain intrigued by socialism. Indeed, a 2019 survey found that socialism is as popular as capitalism among young American adults. Well-known political figures such as Senator Bernie Sanders and Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez describe themselves as “democratic socialists” and advocate tens of trillions of dollars in new spending programs along with a massive expansion of state power over citizens’ lives. In academic circles, too, the debate surrounding the merits of socialism continues.

Yet, the clothes, the cars, the homes, the books (if any still read them), the devices and the services on those devices, and even their favorite social media influencers are the products of capitalism, brought to them by people in search of profit.

Imagine a version of Youtube in which government committees, rather than popularity driven monetization, paid producers to keep posting content. It would die on the vine or broadcast unwatched content into the ether, unless government decided to somehow mandate consumuing the videos.

"govtube.org" would probably manage to be even less popular than Air America was.

So when whatever socialist world you envision comes about, how will goods and services continue to be produced? Please be specific and step-by-step, not just "by the people's producers!" or some such nonsense.

How will production be motivated, and how will government determine what to produce?

 

[justoffal]

After more than one hundred and fifty years of capitalism, there is plenty of money available in the United States for Socialism to work - if money were the only reason it would not. But even if that were true, the money will have to run out and then socialism cannot work.

The False Appeal Of Socialism

Even in its new, fashionable, incarnation, socialism cannot fulfill people’s economic needs or their yearning for freedom.

www.hoover.org

Many Americans—particularly but not exclusively the young—remain intrigued by socialism. Indeed, a 2019 survey found that socialism is as popular as capitalism among young American adults. Well-known political figures such as Senator Bernie Sanders and Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez describe themselves as “democratic socialists” and advocate tens of trillions of dollars in new spending programs along with a massive expansion of state power over citizens’ lives. In academic circles, too, the debate surrounding the merits of socialism continues.

Yet, the clothes, the cars, the homes, the books (if any still read them), the devices and the services on those devices, and even their favorite social media influencers are the products of capitalism, brought to them by people in search of profit.

Imagine a version of Youtube in which government committees, rather than popularity driven monetization, paid producers to keep posting content. It would die on the vine or broadcast unwatched content into the ether, unless government decided to somehow mandate consumuing the videos.

"govtube.org" would probably manage to be even less popular than Air America was.

So when whatever socialist world you envision comes about, how will goods and services continue to be produced? Please be specific and step-by-step, not just "by the people's producers!" or some such nonsense.

How will production be motivated, and how will government determine what to produce?

Can't do it ...end of story

 

[shockedcanadian]

After more than one hundred and fifty years of capitalism, there is plenty of money available in the United States for Socialism to work - if money were the only reason it would not. But even if that were true, the money will have to run out and then socialism cannot work.

The False Appeal Of Socialism

Even in its new, fashionable, incarnation, socialism cannot fulfill people’s economic needs or their yearning for freedom.

www.hoover.org

Many Americans—particularly but not exclusively the young—remain intrigued by socialism. Indeed, a 2019 survey found that socialism is as popular as capitalism among young American adults. Well-known political figures such as Senator Bernie Sanders and Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez describe themselves as “democratic socialists” and advocate tens of trillions of dollars in new spending programs along with a massive expansion of state power over citizens’ lives. In academic circles, too, the debate surrounding the merits of socialism continues.

Yet, the clothes, the cars, the homes, the books (if any still read them), the devices and the services on those devices, and even their favorite social media influencers are the products of capitalism, brought to them by people in search of profit.

Imagine a version of Youtube in which government committees, rather than popularity driven monetization, paid producers to keep posting content. It would die on the vine or broadcast unwatched content into the ether, unless government decided to somehow mandate consumuing the videos.

"govtube.org" would probably manage to be even less popular than Air America was.

So when whatever socialist world you envision comes about, how will goods and services continue to be produced? Please be specific and step-by-step, not just "by the people's producers!" or some such nonsense.

How will production be motivated, and how will government determine what to produce?

The system is now corporatism.

China is going to win because of this.

It may not be tomorrow, it may not be in two years time, but they will win nonetheless.

Greed always leads to the fall of civilizations.

 

[DGS49]

See my thread in clean debates.

Social Security, Medicare, welfare, unemployment comp, SNAP, etc, etc, etc. We have many government programs, Federal and State that are "socialized," that is, they take from the many and give to the few.

Actual Socialism, where the government owns all property and the means of production (farms, factories, refineries, etc) ain't happening here, but we do have socialistic programs. If we didn't, there would be civil war.

 

[Votto]

 

[Crepitus]

After more than one hundred and fifty years of capitalism, there is plenty of money available in the United States for Socialism to work - if money were the only reason it would not. But even if that were true, the money will have to run out and then socialism cannot work.

The False Appeal Of Socialism

Even in its new, fashionable, incarnation, socialism cannot fulfill people’s economic needs or their yearning for freedom.

www.hoover.org

Many Americans—particularly but not exclusively the young—remain intrigued by socialism. Indeed, a 2019 survey found that socialism is as popular as capitalism among young American adults. Well-known political figures such as Senator Bernie Sanders and Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez describe themselves as “democratic socialists” and advocate tens of trillions of dollars in new spending programs along with a massive expansion of state power over citizens’ lives. In academic circles, too, the debate surrounding the merits of socialism continues.

Yet, the clothes, the cars, the homes, the books (if any still read them), the devices and the services on those devices, and even their favorite social media influencers are the products of capitalism, brought to them by people in search of profit.

Imagine a version of Youtube in which government committees, rather than popularity driven monetization, paid producers to keep posting content. It would die on the vine or broadcast unwatched content into the ether, unless government decided to somehow mandate consumuing the videos.

"govtube.org" would probably manage to be even less popular than Air America was.

So when whatever socialist world you envision comes about, how will goods and services continue to be produced? Please be specific and step-by-step, not just "by the people's producers!" or some such nonsense.

How will production be motivated, and how will government determine what to produce?

Can Someone Explain how we can Impliment Socialism and Still Enjoy the Benefits of Capitalism?​

Well it's easy. You just get yourself a central government that takes care of things like building and maintaining roads, handles police and fire services, administers social safety nets, that kinda stuff.

 

[Seymour Flops]

See my thread in clean debates.

I will.

Social Security, Medicare, welfare, unemployment comp, SNAP, etc, etc, etc. We have many government programs, Federal and State that are "socialized," that is, they take from the many and give to the few.

Yes, and they are sustainable at the moment.

However, at the moment we have someone who at least gives lip service to holding those programs to a reasonable level. That is almost sure to change.

If we get Democrats in power again, they will expand those wealth transfer programs in two ways: Make the money available to more and more people with higher incomes, as they did with the ACA Exchange "Temporary" subsidies for people making six-figures plus, and by re-opening the border and flooding us with more people to live off of those programs.

If that continues, even if interrupted by the occasional election of people who want to slow it down, it will eventually be taking from the few to give to the many, with lots of overlap between takers and givees.

That will not be sustainable.

Actual Socialism, where the government owns all property and the means of production (farms, factories, refineries, etc) ain't happening here,

Correct. Instead we have an American brand of socialism in which government co-opts the profits from those means of production through taxes, and controls them through regulations. That will work only as long as the taxes and regulations do not slow the profits so much that there is nothing left to tax.

At that point, we would go to a purely tax and borrow government, which would soon collapse under the weight of its own insolvency, and lack of confidence in the dollar.

but we do have socialistic programs. If we didn't, there would be civil war.

I disagree, but I'll check your clean debates thread to see if that topic is addressed there.

 

[justoffal]

The system is now corporatism.

China is going to win because of this.

It may not be tomorrow, it may not be in two years time, but they will win nonetheless.

Greed always leads to the fall of civilizations.

There is no price the corporations won't pay for future profit up to and Including the demise of the American people. You are quite correct.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Can Someone Explain how we can Impliment Socialism and Still Enjoy the Benefits of Capitalism?​

Well it's easy. You just get yourself a central government that takes care of things like building and maintaining roads, handles police and fire services, administers social safety nets, that kinda stuff.

Government did those things long before Socialism.

Thanks for playing.

 

[Lockback]

Can't do it ...end of story

Yep.
THE END.

 

[Seymour Flops]

See my thread in clean debates.

Sorry, cannot find it.

Can you link it?

Thanks.

 

[cnm]

Can Someone Explain how we can Impliment Socialism and Still Enjoy the Benefits of Capitalism?

I don't think it's possible to explain any economic situation to you.

 

[cnm]

See?

Spoiler

Can Someone Explain how we can Impliment Socialism and Still Enjoy the Benefits of Capitalism?​

Well it's easy. You just get yourself a central government that takes care of things like building and maintaining roads, handles police and fire services, administers social safety nets, that kinda stuff.

Government did those things long before Socialism.

Thanks for playing.

It can't get better...


Oh. Just checking. You do know socialism is where the means of production, distribution and exchange are held in common cause, usually through the agency of the state?

 

[sparky]

Anyone who thinks government can engineer utopia probably flunked history class........~S~

 

[cnm]

I love the all or nothing knee jerk defensiveness when it is quite obvious government can engineer better outcomes for its citizens.

 

[Harry Dresden]

yea the way California was in the 70's and maybe 80's....everything was working great .....little bit of both

 

[Hafar1014]

The system is now corporatism.

China is going to win because of this.

It may not be tomorrow, it may not be in two years time, but they will win nonetheless.

Greed always leads to the fall of civilizations.

China is in decline

 

[Seymour Flops]

See?

It can't get better...


Oh. Just checking. You do know socialism is where the means of production, distribution and exchange are held in common cause, usually through the agency of the state?

I know that is one definition.

I know that there are many Democrats and lawmakers who caucus with Democrats openly calling themselves socialists.

Do all of them advocate as system where the means of production, distribution and exchange are held in common cause, usually through the agency of the state?

 

[Winston]

So when whatever socialist world you envision comes about, how will goods and services continue to be produced? Please be specific and step-by-step, not just "by the people's producers!" or some such nonsense.

How will production be motivated, and how will government determine what to produce?

Look, not every market is a good fit for capitalism. Health Care first and foremost. We should not be delivering health care through a capitalist system. In many ways we don't. The government controls how many MRI machines or other expensive equipment is allowed in a certain operating area. Almost all developed countries have learned that health care should not be delivered via a capitalist system. We continue down that path and, by far, pay more for health care than any other country on a per Capita basis. We don't get spectacular results.

Want to know how it would work in health care? Medicare for all seems the easiest but it could come with choices, and experimental studies. I mean the VA is almost pure Socialism. In their case, the government really does own the means of production. Democratic Socialism would be private doctors, public and private hospitals, "competing" for customers, and receiving payment from a single payer. Sure, you can get "private" supplemental insurance, even Indemnity plans, catastrophic illness plans, cancer policies, do they still have them? You can do those things on Medicare now.

And yes, you can get a private doctor, one of those yearly payment doctors. One payment, perhaps paid monthly, unlimited access, including surgical procedures. All these things happen under Medicare, all of them are available in London or Ontario.

But damn, want to see Socialism in action? Do you know what an Electric Co-op is? I mean they provide power to over 42 million homes and businesses. And you know where they are most prevalent? High poverty areas. If it were up to the for-profit power companies, and they were the only player in town, millions of Americans living in high poverty areas would have NO POWER TODAY. And don't get me wrong, there really still are places where there is no power, no running water. But there would be many more if not for Electric Co-ops.

Going to have cranberry sauce with your turkey? Maybe even part of the stuffing. They all come through a co-op. Lots of orange juice too. And don't get me started on flour. Just Google North Dakota Mill and Grain Elevator. Socialism at work, and staying in North Dakota, where the whole fracking thing kind of started, lowest cost of capital because the state owns a flippin bank. SOCIALISM.

I guess the one that really gets me, and I don't know, maybe they don't exist anymore, or don't work, and are just eyesores. Water towers. I mean I remember what it was like. I mean the power could go out, but you still had running water. You lived in town, I mean never mind it was just a few hundred people. And even the smallest town, they had their name proudly emblazoned on that water tower. The people owned the damn thing, SOCIALISM.

But to be brutal, the one sector that should be socialized, without a doubt, the energy sector. Mostly, I am talking about oil, coal, and natural gas. It took millions of years for nature to produce that stuff. Just because some company, even a "wild cat" comes in, and drills. Well they don't get to keep everything, I mean that oil, or natural gas, or even coal, it belongs to all of us. Want an example? ALASKA. But take it a step further.

The United Arab Emirates. Health Care, they got you. Power bill, damn it is hot in the summer and that AC turns. Nope, government got that. I mean pretty sure everyone gets a stipend for food, we could call it what, "guaranteed income"? And do you have any idea of the vehicles in Dubai's police fleet? Bugatti Veyron? Shyt.

And I know they got oil. But we do too! I mean more than a little bit. But we also have so much more, and that "we" cannot be over-emphasized. In the end, that is what the wealthy few want, the power of the "we", and all the damn productivity.

 

[Winston]

I know that is one definition.

I know that there are many Democrats and lawmakers who caucus with Democrats openly calling themselves socialists.

Do all of them advocate as system where the means of production, distribution and exchange are held in common cause, usually through the agency of the state?

Democratic Socialism is a hybrid system. It does not have to involve total government control of a market. Yes, in some cases, the government should own the means of production, like in the case of North Dakota Mills. But what is wrong with the government competing with the private market? In almost every case, the market itself controls price and demand.