Collective wealth leads to collective well-being

[beagle9]

Many people agree with the OP

How many people has capitalism killed in the last five years?

CAPITALISM KILLS OVER 20 MILLION A YEAR : LateStageCapitalism

WhaaaaAAAAAAT !!!!!!!!!!! You didn't blow it out the water by adding the abortion figures ????? Shame, shame. Is latestage capitalism anything like late stage abortion ??? Democrats ought to love it then.

 

[Norman]

Many people agree with the OP

How many people has capitalism killed in the last five years?

CAPITALISM KILLS OVER 20 MILLION A YEAR : LateStageCapitalism

WhaaaaAAAAAAT !!!!!!!!!!! You didn't blow it out the water by adding the abortion figures ????? Shame, shame. Is latestage capitalism anything like late stage abortion ??? Democrats ought to love it then.

I am not aware of anyone dying in the US for lacking clean water. That must be one of the crapholes the idiot wants to transform US into.

 

[georgephillip]

WhaaaaAAAAAAT !!!!!!!!!!! You didn't blow it out the water by adding the abortion figures ????? Shame, shame. Is latestage capitalism anything like late stage abortion ??? Democrats ought to love it then.

I'm wondering if communists had a higher tolerance for abortion than their capitalistic descendants?

The Rapid And Mostly Unnoticed Decline Of Abortion In Russia

"Abortion in Russia is legal as an elective procedure up to the 12th week of pregnancy, and in special circumstances at later stages.[1]

"In 1920,the Russian Soviet Republic became the first country in the world to allow abortion in all circumstances, but over the course of the 20th century, the legality of abortion changed more than once, with a ban being enacted again from 1936 to 1955.

"Russia had the highest number of abortions per woman of child-bearing age in the world according to UN data as of 2010.[2]

"In terms of the total number, in 2009 China reported that it had over 13 million abortions,[3] out of a population of 1.3 billion, compared to the 1.2 million abortions in Russia,[4] out of a population of 143 million people."

Abortion in Russia - Wikipedia

Not to worry though.
Late-stage capitalists are still number one when it comes to dropping for-profit bombs on ambulatory children half-a-world away

 

[LuckyDuck]

This is my first attempt at creating a thread and I wasn't sure if this belongs in Politics or not but since the topic hits on several political issues of today I think it's probably fitting. To be transparent and to make this known I am not advocating for communism or even socialism with this opinion, it's just some personal thoughts.

What i'm talking about is using capitalism, free trade, free markets and our collective wealth as a nation to create collective well-being by investing in our society. That investment (taxes) would yield benefits like "free" medical care, dental care, education, maternity/paternity leaves, pre-k, among other benefits and programs provided for all citizens while also reducing the uncertainty millions of American feel everyday around these topics, the risk that millions of Americans take everyday for these topics, the lack of mobility and the the anxiety and stress that millions of Americans are under because of these issues. Reduced stress, reduced fear, reduced individual risk, reduced inequity in turn yields increased happiness, increased hope, increased societal investment, and increased collective well-being. There is a lot of detail that would go into taxation and what constitutes as "free" but that's something i'm open to discussing as this evolves.

People will often view higher taxes as a burden, and will also view higher taxes that would go towards increased government provided programs as socialist, however, if all citizens and companies truly contribute towards these programs and social programs by using the wealth we all create then it should be viewed as an investment, not a burden in my opinion. You are investing in the collective well-being of all people, including yourself, and if we are all contributing, if we are all putting our money into the effort, if we are all sacrificing a greater percentage of our personal gain for the greater collective good then what you end up with is a shared system that in essence purchases quality of life. No system is perfect, but closing the gap, creating a society that views success as something to share and not hoard, and putting the good of the many above the individual is in my opinion something to work towards.

Your suggestion is called...….Socialism.

 

[Cellblock2429]

This is my first attempt at creating a thread and I wasn't sure if this belongs in Politics or not but since the topic hits on several political issues of today I think it's probably fitting. To be transparent and to make this known I am not advocating for communism or even socialism with this opinion, it's just some personal thoughts.

What i'm talking about is using capitalism, free trade, free markets and our collective wealth as a nation to create collective well-being by investing in our society. That investment (taxes) would yield benefits like "free" medical care, dental care, education, maternity/paternity leaves, pre-k, among other benefits and programs provided for all citizens while also reducing the uncertainty millions of American feel everyday around these topics, the risk that millions of Americans take everyday for these topics, the lack of mobility and the the anxiety and stress that millions of Americans are under because of these issues. Reduced stress, reduced fear, reduced individual risk, reduced inequity in turn yields increased happiness, increased hope, increased societal investment, and increased collective well-being. There is a lot of detail that would go into taxation and what constitutes as "free" but that's something i'm open to discussing as this evolves.

People will often view higher taxes as a burden, and will also view higher taxes that would go towards increased government provided programs as socialist, however, if all citizens and companies truly contribute towards these programs and social programs by using the wealth we all create then it should be viewed as an investment, not a burden in my opinion. You are investing in the collective well-being of all people, including yourself, and if we are all contributing, if we are all putting our money into the effort, if we are all sacrificing a greater percentage of our personal gain for the greater collective good then what you end up with is a shared system that in essence purchases quality of life. No system is perfect, but closing the gap, creating a society that views success as something to share and not hoard, and putting the good of the many above the individual is in my opinion something to work towards.

/——-/ Call it what you may, but Socialism has failed every where it’s been tried.

 

[georgephillip]

I am not aware of anyone dying in the US for lacking clean water. That must be one of the crapholes the idiot wants to transform US into

Contaminated water killed 13 in US in 2013-14, CDC says - CNN

"In 2013-14, a total of 42 drinking-water-associated outbreaks caused by infectious pathogens, chemicals or toxins were reported to the CDC from 19 states.

"The reports do not include lead contamination.

"These outbreaks led to at least 1,006 cases of illness, 124 hospitalizations and 13 deaths across Alaska, Arizona, Florida, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Maryland, Michigan, Montana, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia and Wisconsin."

 

[beagle9]

I am not aware of anyone dying in the US for lacking clean water. That must be one of the crapholes the idiot wants to transform US into

Contaminated water killed 13 in US in 2013-14, CDC says - CNN

"In 2013-14, a total of 42 drinking-water-associated outbreaks caused by infectious pathogens, chemicals or toxins were reported to the CDC from 19 states.

"The reports do not include lead contamination.

"These outbreaks led to at least 1,006 cases of illness, 124 hospitalizations and 13 deaths across Alaska, Arizona, Florida, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Maryland, Michigan, Montana, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia and Wisconsin."

A civilized modernized nation comes at a price. If want to go back to the 1600s, then let's do it, but compare the evils and goods of each of the periods per concentrated numbers. Regardless the genie has been removed from the bottle, and we can't get her back into the bottle. The competition of nations just as we had in the cold war, and in the arms races is driving us foward. Now when we choose to get out, then we are accused of being protectionist. The undermining of our nation by those within, is purdy much keeping us from escaping our dreadful demise if we keep heading down the paths we keep heading down.

 

[Uncensored2008]

The culture change i'm talking about is inwardly the moving away from individualism and towards instead a culture of thinking about the good of the many. It's also outwardly transitioning away from American exceptionalism and into a humble American nationalism. As for 57 genders and drag queens that's not the aspects of culture that i'm talking about really.

So basically like an insect hive where we drones mindlessly work for the good of the collective.

America IS exceptional, because we are a land of INDIVIDUAL liberty, where every person is a value unto themselves and do not have to submit to the king, priest, or oligarch. The hell on earth you seek is already there for you in North Korea, Cuba, Venezuela. Liberty is unique to America.

{
"To the glory of mankind, there was, for the first and only time in history, a COUNTRY OF MONEY--and I have no higher, more reverent tribute to pay to America, for this means: a country of reason, justice, freedom, production, achievement. For the first time, man's mind and money were set free, and there were no fortunes-by-conquest, but only fortunes-by-work, and instead of swordsmen and slaves, there appeared the real maker of wealth, the greatest worker, the highest type of human being--the self-made man--the American industrialist.

"If you ask me to name the proudest distinction of Americans, I would choose--because it contains all the others--the fact that they were the people who created the phrase 'to MAKE money.' No other language or nation had ever used these words before; men had always thought of wealth as a static quantity--to be seized, begged, inherited, shared, looted, or obtained as a favor. Americans were the first to understand that wealth has to be created. The words 'to make money' hold the essence of human morality.

"Yet these were the words for which Americans were denounced by the rotted cultures of the looters' continents. Now the looters' credo has brought you to regard your proudest achievements as a hallmark of shame, your prosperity as guilt, your greatest men, the industrialists, as blackguards, and your magnificent factories as the product and property of muscular labor, the labor of whip-driven slaves, like the pyramids of Egypt. The rotter who simpers that he sees no difference between the power of the dollar and the power of the whip, ought to learn the difference on his own hide-as, I think, he will.

"Until and unless you discover that money is the root of all good, you ask for your own destruction. When money ceases to be the tool by which men deal with one another, then men become the tools of men. Blood, whips and guns--or dollars. Take your choice--there is no other--and your time is running out."

} - Ayn Rand

 

[Uncensored2008]

When there is a gun to your head, it isn't investment.


America has the most advance health care system in the world, you're dedicated to changing that...

I am dedicated to seeing a culture change which will then allow other changes.

So, do you think the culture of 57 genders and drag queens converting 4 year olds is superior to the culture of a strong family ties from the 50's ? The Marxists declared war on our culture, so you're not pleased with the results?

The culture change i'm talking about is inwardly the moving away from individualism and towards instead a culture of thinking about the good of the many. It's also outwardly transitioning away from American exceptionalism and into a humble American nationalism. As for 57 genders and drag queens that's not the aspects of culture that i'm talking about really.

Well Comrade, 4 billion years of evolution crafted that drive for survival and self reliance, so good luck changing it.

I'm not a communist. Self reliance doesn't have to be selfish.

You promote communism and the drive to survive is the definition of selfishness. Without selfishness, the human species would have long ago perished from this earth.

 

[Uncensored2008]

I could have done a better job explaining my position on individualism but i'll try now to explain it more. I'm not saying that a person can't be themselves or even remove individualism as a whole. I agree that "self" is important and that individual expression and opinions matter and should matter. What I am mainly focusing on is the aspects of individualism that yields itself to value the success of the individual above all else. That there can only be one winner. That being on top of the mountain alone is a better view and better accomplishment than being there with others. Basically it's the motivation for success that I am emphasizing and how that either helps the collective many or just the individual. Does that make sense?

So for example in the United States we push kids at a young age want to be the best, to want to defeat that other person. The victory is most important, the status that comes with that victory is what matters. Our current culture rewards that mindset and even encourages it in nearly all aspects of life here. Success is determined based off of the money you have, the salary you get, the car you drive, the title at work that you have, the amount wins and trophies that you have. For me, personally, I don't find that to be a rewarding view of life or how we as a culture and society should view success or be teaching as success. Do your best, but also be supportive, be cooperative, show solidarity. Are you happy? Does that new material possession make you happier or would a better relationship with your neighbors actually be more rewarding and make you happier in the long term? When it comes to work and your job, do you want to be the best or do you want to simply like what you do? Liking what you do will bring more long term happiness and quality of life for you than trying to get to the top in my opinion, and in turn if society as a whole thought like that then perhaps it would create a more unified country, a happier country, and less stressed country.

This transitions into things like healthcare and education in my opinion. A society that that favors the winners and looks down on those that couldn't compete as well will have programs that and systems that will reflect that mindset. You get what you pay for basically. A society that views success as a team win will create systems that emphasize that because if a teammate struggles it can affect the team as a whole. You can either coach that teammate and help them get better or you can cut that person and give up on them. If the team is invested in the success of the team then everybody typically has the same goal and vision. If the country viewed healthcare for everybody as a way to invest in Americans then perhaps more people would be willing to want to try a little harder and be part of the team. But when you have millions of people who look at that as weakness. They look at this topic as "why do I need to help that person, they just need to work harder on their own" then sure, it won't work, because that person is about "i" not "we" in my opinion.

Ask yourself why we as a country will pull together for the common good in the case of emergencies or national crises, but yet all the days before and after that common good is labeled as something bad? We can come together to fight a war but not to help Americans with healthcare? It's odd to me.

So children should be taught to strive for mediocrity? Never strive to improve but wallow in failure?

Yeah, great plan, and the explanation why the Communism you promote ALWAYS leads to misery, poverty, and deprivation.

 

[Pogo]

I am not aware of anyone dying in the US for lacking clean water. That must be one of the crapholes the idiot wants to transform US into

Contaminated water killed 13 in US in 2013-14, CDC says - CNN

"In 2013-14, a total of 42 drinking-water-associated outbreaks caused by infectious pathogens, chemicals or toxins were reported to the CDC from 19 states.

"The reports do not include lead contamination.

"These outbreaks led to at least 1,006 cases of illness, 124 hospitalizations and 13 deaths across Alaska, Arizona, Florida, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Maryland, Michigan, Montana, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia and Wisconsin."

A civilized modernized nation comes at a price. If want to go back to the 1600s, then let's do it, but compare the evils and goods of each of the periods per concentrated numbers. Regardless the genie has been removed from the bottle, and we can't get her back into the bottle. The competition of nations just as we had in the cold war, and in the arms races is driving us foward. Now when we choose to get out, then we are accused of being protectionist. The undermining of our nation by those within, is purdy much keeping us from escaping our dreadful demise if we keep heading down the paths we keep heading down.

I guess "the 1600s" is my cue.

Grace Is Stoked - pursuing the thought of collective well being as culture change....

And I was waiting for an earlier poster to elaborate on his citation of "utopian society attempts" but he never came back so....

For reasons not necessary to go into I got a strong glimpse into a culture not often seen or well understood, an anabaptist religious group called the Hutterites. They're mostly populated in the Dakotas and Montana, and the nearby Canadian provinces of Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta. They have been practicing a type of what could be called Christian communism for approximately five hundred years. I spent the better part of a summer at maybe a dozen of these colonies in various locales, eating with them, spending the night, even invited to stay on and live there.

They live in self-sufficient self-sustaining communities, called a "colony", which in practical terms generally ranges from 75 to 150 people. No one has any personal property beyond basically the clothes on their backs (which they make). The entire colony is owned collectively, including everybody's house. When our truck would arrive bringing fabric material we were immediately swarmed by women and children, the women to see what fabrics were coming in and the children simply because there was work to be done. To a Hutterite the idea of watching someone else work while not taking part is unthinkable. When there's work, everyone's in it. They take meals communally in a common dining hall. They make their purchases and sell their wares (generally dairy farming in the plains, cattle ranching in Montana) as a collective, run as a business. The work that everyone does is intrinsically understood to be in the interest of the collective (colony) rather than for the self (individual). This puts them sometimes at odds with their local "English*" neighbors who cannot expand their own businesses anywhere near as fast or efficiently.

This lifestyle is all based "Community of Goods" from the Book of Acts in the Old Testament:

>> And all that believed were together, and had all things common; And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need. And they, continuing daily, with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart, Praising God, and having favor with all people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved. (Acts 2:44-47)

And the multitude of them that were believed were of one heart and of one soul; neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common. And with great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus; and great grace was upon them all. Neither was there any among them that lacked; for as many as were possessors of land or houses sold them, and brought the piece of the things that were sold, And laid them at the apostles feet; and distribution was made unto every man according as he had needed. (Acts 4:32-35) <<​

When the colony inevitably grows beyond its practical limits (I understand they are the most prolific ethnic group in the United States), they acquire some land and start building a daughter colony. All the buildings and facilities are finished, and the LAST thing they do is decide, by random lots, which half of the old colony will populate it. And literally the next morning, those chosen go off to do that. They don't know who's moving until the night before, that's how focused on the collective is the mindset.

How does all of this affect their collective well being?

The first trait that immediately presents in their presence is a brimming self-confidence. Their tone of voice is almost as straightforward as one would hear an adult lecturing a child, it's that self-assured. The children strike the eye as singularly vibrant and alive, possibly (my theory) because they have never seen television. The sense of well-being is profound. From time to time some of the young Hutterites (mostly boys) become curious and venture out into the "English" world to see what it's like in the land of every-man-for-himself. Almost invariably, once they've seen the comparison, they come back. With the continual focus on the collective rather than the individual, with the absence of commodity fetishism and individual "status" greed, traits of depression and neuroses are virtually nonexistent. None of them have ever fought in any country's war and in their entire history they've experienced a total of something like one (1) murder and two suicides (or the other way around, I forget which). In a period of five hundred years.

So as far as collective wealth leading to collective well-being, that's what I've witnessed, and it was most impressive.




(*"English" -- they speak a low German dialect from their origins in Tyrol in the 16th century. As devout absolute pacifists who steadfastly refuse to fight in any war or wear any uniform they have been periodically persecuted and/or driven out of wherever they were, from central Europe to Eastern Europe to Russia to Ukraine, continuously fleeing governments who wanted to coerce them into their military. In the late 19th century, faced with the same pressure again, they sent scouts to the US, established some land in the Dakotas and moved there en masse. Before long the US was also trying to coerce them into the Great War (WWI), and some were imprisoned and tortured to death at Leavenworth, so they migrated yet again this time to Canada, the provinces mentioned above. After the war they reached an agreement with the US government that allowed their pacifism as a religious freedom and some of them returned (though more stayed in Canada).

 

[BrokeLoser]

When there is a gun to your head, it isn't investment.


America has the most advance health care system in the world, you're dedicated to changing that...

I am dedicated to seeing a culture change which will then allow other changes.

So, do you think the culture of 57 genders and drag queens converting 4 year olds is superior to the culture of a strong family ties from the 50's ? The Marxists declared war on our culture, so you're not pleased with the results?

The culture change i'm talking about is inwardly the moving away from individualism and towards instead a culture of thinking about the good of the many. It's also outwardly transitioning away from American exceptionalism and into a humble American nationalism. As for 57 genders and drag queens that's not the aspects of culture that i'm talking about really.

Well Comrade, 4 billion years of evolution crafted that drive for survival and self reliance, so good luck changing it.

I'm not a communist. Self reliance doesn't have to be selfish.

You socialists need different figureheads....You have this guy telling us he deserves to be a cosigner on our checking accounts.

You need this guy telling me I should share my cash with him.

Hopefully you can connect the dots.

 

[DOTR]

What I am mainly focusing on is the aspects of individualism that yields itself to value the success of the individual above all else. That there can only be one winner.

The 1st sentence there is what I just addressed... To fix poverty, you DO most of the time have to change the "individualism" of the afflicted... If you've EVER TRIED to help by coaching GED or working Head Start as I have, you'd understand that.. There needs to be a buy-in from the AFFLICTED individual to work towards better "work preparedness" so that they contribute MORE to society than they take.

The 2nd sentence is a very bad misconception.. Rich people haven't EVER stole anything from me.. Not Bill Gates, not Serena Williams, not my Supermarket chain.. WHO exactly is STEALING from you? Money is NOT LIMITED.. When the economy GROWS, more people benefit. It is NOT a fixed pie for 300 million people to fight over...

The largest employer in the country is SMALL BUSINESS.. That's your hair shop, your gym, your tire store or gas station.. Are THEY stealing from you??? They do what they can to pay fair wages according to the SKILLS of the workforce.. There are some waitresses making MORE than "average" American salaries for instance..

This concept that "there is only one winner" is some kind of bad indoctrination disease that you've gotten from somewhere. Businesses START every day to serve the public.,. And they only start because SOMEONE took the RISK to do that. You don't LIKE RISK... There's that word again.. And some have to fail.. But the WINNERS all have a history of being losers.. But most eventually hit on a good or service that makes them LOTS of money.

I agree about point #1. It's why i've emphasized culture change being vital to these ideas to potentially work.

Your second point is confusing though. I have not mentioned yet in this entire topic anything about rich people stealing, so i'm not sure how that relates to my second sentence which was entered on the attitude that many people have which is that winning is the top priority. As for the "one winner" comment the best example I can give is with sports, and in turn what is taught to millions of children (for this example ages up until puberty) through sports, and that is that there can only be one winner. You play to win. Win at all costs in may cases. If you don't win you lost. If you don't score you are slumping or not trying hard enough. Kids are taught these as values growing up and they contribute to idea that everything is a competition and that you can only succeed if you play to win. They grow up and then apply that same value to business in many ways and in turn teach it to their kids once they become adults.

I use this example because youth sports to me is a great example of how culture can change (in my personal opinion for the better) by making it less about individual achievement but more about collective enjoyment of sport. Same would go for life and business in my opinion after that. A person that is raised to fight and win, to beat the other person, to beat the other business, to see compromise and collaboration as weakness, to see someone less successful and associate their personal value as an American or even as a person to that to me that person is an example of a culture that is hostile to progress and togetherness.

Keep in mind I am not saying that there aren't lazy people or moochers on this planet and in this country, there are, but for many people raised in America if you aren't winning by a certain age or if you see not shot at winning then you have no shot at happiness or success and so what's the point? they give up. It's like how many people here view success and happiness as driving a Mercedes and getting that big title they've worked 20 years for, and that's normal in this country, would you agree? Whereas there are other people, admittedly me, that sees a Mercedes and a big title and it does nothing for me. On a personal note success and happiness to me is my little house, a great husband and cycling partner, my cuddly dog, morning coffee, cool co-workers, and weekly game night with friends. I work at my church and do interior design on the side and my husband has a small business as a carpenter. There are many people in this country that would look at us and wonder why we aren't trying to do more, to move up in our jobs, to grow our business, to get a bigger house, to have two cars instead of sharing our one because as a kid that's what you are taught in most households. Culture starts like that, and that's where it would need to start for the future in my opinion.

When a kid is raised to see something like healthcare as something that affects every American equally and that we are all part of the system and that our health isn't dependent on how much we win in life then you will see changes happen. Participating in our healthcare system through income taxes and sales taxes and so one will be viewed as an investment in our country's future as Americans and not as something that is to be thought of as having money taken from me to pay for slackers. We would be raised to believe that we are all in this together. Yes, I know that sounds naive on the surface, but culture takes time, and we got to our current system because of that too so it's not impossible.

In other words you use the educational system and youth sports to attack and destroy the culture funding both and you do it by turning their kids into your acolytes.
Could even Stalin have come up with a more devious plan?

No that's not what I am saying or implying. This is not a communistic plot. Capitalism does not require a person to be cruel, to be all about winning, to value title, money, and success above all things. When it comes to youth sports it should be about togetherness, sportsmanship, and most of all, fun. Just like sports, life and work should also share many of those traits. You don't rid yourself of ambition or even competitiveness, i'm not saying that, but having that success or even the fun be at the expense of someone else is a toxic aspect of culture in my opinion and it's a part of American culture in many way. You can train to win, you can study to do well, you can work hard to reach a goal, those are things that absolutely are human traits and create good things from, but it can't just be about you and the goal shouldn't be to never look behind you to help someone else move forward.

Im glad you enjoy puttering around your church and carpentry and all. But the necessary corollary is "and you pay for my healthcare so I can cuddle my dog and live the good old simple life". Nope. Pay for your own.

You rightly target culture though at least. Politics is the tool to hide the war on our culture and nation.

 

[georgephillip]

The competition of nations just as we had in the cold war, and in the arms races is driving us foward. Now when we choose to get out, then we are accused of being protectionist.

I believe that competition over scarce resources is taking place between economic classes rather than between nations.

There is a zero-sum game aspect to neoliberal capitalism that makes a few people filthy rich by impoverishing millions of Muslims across the Middle East, for example.

Most of us lucky enough to be born in the US have little idea how much our lifestyles depend on looting the rest of this planet for scarce resources.

Warren Isn’t A Snake, She’s Just Misreading Hegel - CounterPunch.org

"American society is primarily a punitive and judgmental one.

"We bomb any country we disagree with, forgetting that the point of these wars is not cultural differences or human rights, but class rule..."

"Political figures are a product of class relations, not the other way around.

"Elizabeth Warren severely miscalculated the severity of class warfare. She believed both sides could come to the table.

"But let’s wake up.

"The rich are rapidly destroying all life, not just human life.

"They will let millions die in war, famine or drought to get resources to sell to stupid middle-class Americans.

"They will leave millions without a home, work millions more to the bone, jail, poison, and humiliate every single person on earth just to make some money."

Imho, "choosing" between Trump or Biden won't change anything.

 

[beagle9]

The competition of nations just as we had in the cold war, and in the arms races is driving us foward. Now when we choose to get out, then we are accused of being protectionist.

I believe that competition over scarce resources is taking place between economic classes rather than between nations.

There is a zero-sum game aspect to neoliberal capitalism that makes a few people filthy rich by impoverishing millions of Muslims across the Middle East, for example.

Most of us lucky enough to be born in the US have little idea how much our lifestyles depend on looting the rest of this planet for scarce resources.

Warren Isn’t A Snake, She’s Just Misreading Hegel - CounterPunch.org

"American society is primarily a punitive and judgmental one.

"We bomb any country we disagree with, forgetting that the point of these wars is not cultural differences or human rights, but class rule..."

"Political figures are a product of class relations, not the other way around.

"Elizabeth Warren severely miscalculated the severity of class warfare. She believed both sides could come to the table.

"But let’s wake up.

"The rich are rapidly destroying all life, not just human life.

"They will let millions die in war, famine or drought to get resources to sell to stupid middle-class Americans.

"They will leave millions without a home, work millions more to the bone, jail, poison, and humiliate every single person on earth just to make some money."

Imho, "choosing" between Trump or Biden won't change anything.

Must get back to self reliance as a country, and then focus on trade with others outside our country. Being placed into the situation we have been placed in should warrant our own citizen's arrest for betraying this country for greed and corruption.

Right now, those who have caused this or allowed this dependency on China should be tracked down, and served a summons to court for the betrayal of this country for personal estate gains.

 

[georgephillip]

Right now, those who have caused this or allowed this dependency on China should be tracked down, and served a summons to court for the betrayal of this country for personal estate gains.

If there's a silver lining to the current Covid-19 disruptions, perhaps they will spark conversations about who's gained and who has lost over the past forty years in the US?

"MARCH 13, 2020
Coronavirus Reveals the Cracks in Globalization"

"The coronavirus will eventually pass, but the same cannot be said for the Panglossian phenomenon known as 'globalization.'

"Stripped of the romantic notion of a global village, the ugly process we’ve experienced over the past 40 years has been a case of governmental institutions being eclipsed by multinational corporations, acting to maximize profit in support of shareholders.

"To billions of us, it has resembled a looting process, of our social wealth, and political meaning."

 

[Grace Is Stoked]

I could have done a better job explaining my position on individualism but i'll try now to explain it more. I'm not saying that a person can't be themselves or even remove individualism as a whole. I agree that "self" is important and that individual expression and opinions matter and should matter. What I am mainly focusing on is the aspects of individualism that yields itself to value the success of the individual above all else. That there can only be one winner. That being on top of the mountain alone is a better view and better accomplishment than being there with others. Basically it's the motivation for success that I am emphasizing and how that either helps the collective many or just the individual. Does that make sense?

So for example in the United States we push kids at a young age want to be the best, to want to defeat that other person. The victory is most important, the status that comes with that victory is what matters. Our current culture rewards that mindset and even encourages it in nearly all aspects of life here. Success is determined based off of the money you have, the salary you get, the car you drive, the title at work that you have, the amount wins and trophies that you have. For me, personally, I don't find that to be a rewarding view of life or how we as a culture and society should view success or be teaching as success. Do your best, but also be supportive, be cooperative, show solidarity. Are you happy? Does that new material possession make you happier or would a better relationship with your neighbors actually be more rewarding and make you happier in the long term? When it comes to work and your job, do you want to be the best or do you want to simply like what you do? Liking what you do will bring more long term happiness and quality of life for you than trying to get to the top in my opinion, and in turn if society as a whole thought like that then perhaps it would create a more unified country, a happier country, and less stressed country.

This transitions into things like healthcare and education in my opinion. A society that that favors the winners and looks down on those that couldn't compete as well will have programs that and systems that will reflect that mindset. You get what you pay for basically. A society that views success as a team win will create systems that emphasize that because if a teammate struggles it can affect the team as a whole. You can either coach that teammate and help them get better or you can cut that person and give up on them. If the team is invested in the success of the team then everybody typically has the same goal and vision. If the country viewed healthcare for everybody as a way to invest in Americans then perhaps more people would be willing to want to try a little harder and be part of the team. But when you have millions of people who look at that as weakness. They look at this topic as "why do I need to help that person, they just need to work harder on their own" then sure, it won't work, because that person is about "i" not "we" in my opinion.

Ask yourself why we as a country will pull together for the common good in the case of emergencies or national crises, but yet all the days before and after that common good is labeled as something bad? We can come together to fight a war but not to help Americans with healthcare? It's odd to me.

So children should be taught to strive for mediocrity? Never strive to improve but wallow in failure?

Yeah, great plan, and the explanation why the Communism you promote ALWAYS leads to misery, poverty, and deprivation.

No I don't think children should be taught to strive for mediocrity or not to strive to improve and wallow in failure. I'm also not promoting communism and have stated several times now that I am a capitalist it's just I'd like to see our collective capitalistic wealth be used in a more compassion way and in ways that benefit all that invest in the success of our society and our country in order to improve our collective well being. As for children in my personal opinion a small child doesn't need to be taught to be cutthroat or to be all about winning and all about themselves. If children were taught to simply have fun and to take joy in the happiness of others then perhaps as they become teenagers and then adults that same mindset would still exist as they become leaders of this country's future.

 

[Grace Is Stoked]

Many people agree with the OP

I'm not advocating for a communist or totalitarian or socialist country.

 

[Grace Is Stoked]

he poor pay less overall and the rich pay more overall and so eventually creating a smaller gap between the two in my opinion but still allowing for a relatively high standard of living for all.

We're already there... The top 5% of wage earners pay about 65% of ALL income tax.. The bottom 50% of wage earners pay next to nothing.. How much MORE "progressive" can you get???

Who Pays Income Taxes?

The new data shows that the top 1 percent of earners (with incomes over $515,371) paid nearly 39 percent of all income taxes, up slightly from the previous tax year’s 37 percent share. The amount of taxes paid in this percentile is nearly twice as much their adjusted gross income (AGI) load.

The top 10 percent of earners bore responsibility for 70 percent of all income taxes paid – up slightly from 2016 – while half of all tax filers paid 97 percent of all income tax revenue. Indicating the degree of progressivity in the code, the bottom 50 percent of earners took home 11 percent of total nationwide income while owing 3 percent of all income taxes.

Now -- if you're saying your saying the MIDDLE class need to contribute more (and even at 25% most of them WOULD be) -- you're probably right.. Because there's 30 times MORE of them than the 1% at the top and that makes a BIGGER difference than hiking taxes on the 1%....



In the chart above,

Yes I am saying that the middle class would need to contribute more. Upwards to 25% or so. Like I said above in my previous post, all people who earn an income would pay a flat tax rate along with an addition step/progressive tax % in addition to that based on the income bracket.

Well they'd pretty HAVE TO with all the free stuff you want to guarantee.. In even MODERATELY socialist countries the taxes on middle class, their middle class is carrying the BULK of the taxes.. Because of all the free stuff and benefits... Norway Sweden top rate is in the 50 to 60% range.. But the BIG DIFF is this.....

This chart shows WHERE that highest tax rate kicks in as a MULTIPLE of the "average income"... Folks in those moderate socialist countries get hit with the WORST BRACKET for being just 50% more than the average..

THAT better bring some REALLY REALLY REALLY good services to the middle class in return... Or there would be revolts.. Doesn't even cover their high VAT taxes..

But STILL -- you're not changing "the income gap"... Which is what you set out to do... You've just created monstrous, unfriendly, uncompassionate, one size fits all "programs" for healthcare for everyone.. But the POOR still are poor...

The only other country that I have experience living in and being part of it's culture is Norway. I can't adapt Norway's welfare state to the US exactly because of different variables but there are ways to utilize our collective wealth as a nation and create social programs that can benefit all citizens. It does work in Norway and people are generally very happy with the services for what they pay in taxation but again, the culture is different and the mindset is different which is another point I am trying to make here. We have the collective wealth generated in this country's capitalistic system to create social programs that are "free", but the American mindset is not one of doing what's best for all it's doing what's best for me, and that is the biggest barrier to any collective investment project in my opinion.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

This is my first attempt at creating a thread and I wasn't sure if this belongs in Politics or not but since the topic hits on several political issues of today I think it's probably fitting. To be transparent and to make this known I am not advocating for communism or even socialism with this opinion, it's just some personal thoughts.

What i'm talking about is using capitalism, free trade, free markets and our collective wealth as a nation to create collective well-being by investing in our society. That investment (taxes) would yield benefits like "free" medical care, dental care, education, maternity/paternity leaves, pre-k, among other benefits and programs provided for all citizens while also reducing the uncertainty millions of American feel everyday around these topics, the risk that millions of Americans take everyday for these topics, the lack of mobility and the the anxiety and stress that millions of Americans are under because of these issues. Reduced stress, reduced fear, reduced individual risk, reduced inequity in turn yields increased happiness, increased hope, increased societal investment, and increased collective well-being. There is a lot of detail that would go into taxation and what constitutes as "free" but that's something i'm open to discussing as this evolves.

People will often view higher taxes as a burden, and will also view higher taxes that would go towards increased government provided programs as socialist, however, if all citizens and companies truly contribute towards these programs and social programs by using the wealth we all create then it should be viewed as an investment, not a burden in my opinion. You are investing in the collective well-being of all people, including yourself, and if we are all contributing, if we are all putting our money into the effort, if we are all sacrificing a greater percentage of our personal gain for the greater collective good then what you end up with is a shared system that in essence purchases quality of life. No system is perfect, but closing the gap, creating a society that views success as something to share and not hoard, and putting the good of the many above the individual is in my opinion something to work towards.

It's a fine start for discussion

Cue naysayers -- there ought to be clowns. Don't bother.... they're here.

Your framework reminds me of this chestnut:

>> Joe gets up at 6:00 am to prepare his morning coffee. He fills his pot full of good, clean drinking water because some liberal fought for minimum water quality standards. He takes his daily medication with his first swallow of coffee. His medications are safe to take because some liberal fought to insure their safety and efficacy. All but $10.00 of his medications are paid for by his employer's medical plan because some liberal union workers fought their employers for paid medical insurance. Now Joe gets it too.
He prepares his morning breakfast, bacon and eggs this day. Joe's bacon is safe to eat because some liberal fought for laws to regulate the meat packing industry. Joe takes his morning shower, reaching for his shampoo; his bottle is properly labeled with every ingredient and the amount of its contents because some liberal fought for his right to know the amount and identity of the substances he was putting on his body.

Joe dresses, walks outside and takes a deep breath. The air he breathes is clean because some tree hugging liberal fought for laws to stop industries from polluting our air. He walks to the subway station for his government subsidized ride to work; it saves him considerable money in parking and transportation fees. You see, some liberal fought for affordable public transportation, which gives everyone the opportunity to be a contributor to society. Joe begins his work day. He has a good job with excellent pay, medical benefits, retirement, paid holidays and vacation because some liberal union members fought and died for these working standards. Joe's employer upholds these standards because Joe's employer doesn't want his employees to call the union. If Joe is hurt on the job or becomes unemployed hell get a worker compensation or unemployment check because some Liberal didn't think he should lose his home because of his temporary misfortune.

It's noon time, Joe needs to make a Bank Deposit so he can pay some bills. Joe's deposit is federally insured by the FSLIC because some liberal wanted to protect Joe's money from unscrupulous bankers who ruined the banking system before the depression. Joe has to pay his Fannie Mae-underwritten mortgage and his below-market federal student loan because some stupid liberal decided that Joe and the government would be better off if he was educated and earned more money over his lifetime.

Joe is home from work, and he plans to visit his father this evening at his farm home in the country. He gets in his car for the drive to his dad's; his car is among the safest in the world be cause some wacko liberal (Ralph Nader!) fought for car safety standards. He arrives at his boyhood home. He was the third generation to live in the house financed by Farmer's Home Administration because bankers didn't want to make rural loans. The house didn't have electricity until some big government liberal stuck his nose where it didn't belong and demanded rural electrification. He is happy to see his dad who is now retired. His dad lives on Social Security and his union pension because some liberal made sure he could take care of himself so Joe wouldn't have to.

After his visit with dad he gets back in his car for the ride home. He turns on a radio talk show. The host keeps saying that liberals are bad and conservatives are good. He doesn't tell Joe that his beloved Republicans have fought against every protection and benefit that Joe enjoys throughout his day. Joe agrees. "We don't need those big government liberals ruining our lives", he says. "After all, I'm a self-made man who believes everyone should take care of themselves, just like I have". <<​

I'm not sure where is the collective workers' paradise in which Joe lives. But, in my town, the utilities the provide my water and my electricity, the supermarket where I buy my food, the bank where I got my mortgage, and the company the made my car are all privately owned.

he's using leftists talking points without a link