Socialism is GOOD for EVERYONE!

[alupka]

There's a rich a guy and a poor guy.

The government takes $1,000 from the rich guy and gives it to the poor guy.

Then we ask the question: Does socialism work?

The rich guy says, “Hell no, I just lost a 1,000 bucks!”

The poor guy says, “Hell yeah, I just made a 1,000 bucks!”

A month later the government takes $1,200 from the rich guy and gives it to the poor guy.

Then we ask the question: Does socialism work?

The rich guy says, “Hell no, I just lost 1200 bucks!”

The poor guy says, “Hell yeah, I just made 1200 bucks!”

Now the rich man, feeling gypped and sensing the obvious pattern, packs up his small technology firm and moves it to China. When he gets there, he realizes that he can save 70% off his labor costs, build a state of the art production studio and never pay property taxes (ever), get an instant business tax cut of 98%, and relish in the fact that Uncle Sam no longer has the legal authority to swipe benjamins from his checking account to give to the poor guy.

Then we ask the question: Does socialism work?

The rich guy says, “Hell yeah, ever since the government pushed me out of the States, my profits have increased 10 fold in 2 months!”

The poor guy says, *

So it's clear that socialism does work for EVERYONE. We have the poor man on record attesting to the free money he made. And we have the rich man on record praising the government for helping him transform his small business into a global enterprise. And nobody disputes the record...it's a record of fact.

So I think that pretty much settles it. Socialism helps the poor. AND socialism helps the rich. So it doesn't matter if you're rich or poor, socialism offers a little something to everyone. That's a win-win for everybody. Anyone who doesn't agree, clearly hasn't considered these facts.

So now we're seeing a rapid shift in American political thought. We're starting to see more and more politicians not only embracing this proven political theory of taking more from the rich and giving it to the poor, but even promising to codify it into federal law. Wow. I've never been more proud to be an American! It looks like America is finally moving in the right direction.

*note from the editor: for some reason the poor man was not available for comment regarding the last question. When we called his phone, it was disconnected, and when we drove by his house we found that it had already been foreclosed on. We checked the local park benches and liquor stores, but without any luck. Therefore, our editorial decision was to conclude our study based on the calculated average of his previously recorded comments.

===============


Because I know some of you are reading this for the first time, and I know you're not actually going to read all the replies before you post your opinion, I will quote myself here to save you the time.

The original post was about redistributing wealth. Barack Obama's position on this is VERY clear. So there's no question what his position is (unless you think he's lying about it). The question is whether it will actually work. Concerning that, you can agree or disagree.

What are we calling socialism? Fine, call it whatever you want. Let's call it "economic justice." Does that change the outcome any?

Are roads and military socialism? No, they're essential government services that should be funded by a fair tax revenue system.

And we DON'T need to agree on what the word socialism means. It means a million things to a million different people. We only need to agree or disagree if Obama's plan to redistribute the wealth of individuals who earned it is going to be good or bad for the country. If you don't like the word socialism, then fine, choose another word. I don't really care what you call Obama's plan. It's not going to change the fact that it's not going to work.

Yes, that's another core concept of socialism. And a good point. But it still doesn't invalidate the original premise of the post, which is...Obama's economic plan is silly. Again, if you don't want to refer to his plan to redistribute the wealth, and build national health care, day care, etc. as socialism then call it whatever you want. I really don't care what you call it.

In case some of you didn't get it when you read the original post, I wasn't talking about political theories any more than I was really agreeing that income redistribution works!

It's called satire.

So for those of you who don't get it, I was simply and specifically making the point that Obama's economic plan is stupid. That's the issue here.

Interesting post but...there's nothing in any part of your post that explains how Obama's plan to redistribute wealth is going to benefit average Americans in the long-term.

Rather than debating the nuances of political theories from a freshman poli-sci class, can anyone explain to me, specifically and in practical terms, how Obama's policy of income redistribution is actually going to help working class people in the long-run?

Despite what anyone believes, I'm actually an independent voter and I would love for someone to make a reasonable and rational defense for his economic policies.

That was the reason I posted this in the first place.

Thank You.

 

[Diuretic]

Since that piece of comedy has nothing to do with socialism it's safe to say any point trying to be made is irrelevant.

 

[alupka]

Since that piece of comedy has nothing to do with socialism it's safe to say any point trying to be made is irrelevant.

I thought about calling it "Economic Justice" but it just didn't have the same ring to it.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

If you think Socialism works I suggest you look into the collapse of the Soviet Union.

 

[alupka]

If you think Socialism works I suggest you look into the collapse of the Soviet Union.

That's right. Largely due to the fact that the Russian government was controlling and redistributing the wealth of individuals.

Marcus Wolf, who spent his life defending socialism (and building the Russian intelligence infrastructure from the ground up) outlines this nicely in his auto-biography: Man Without a Face. In the end, you literally had to wait in line to get your share of toilet paper. But hey, that's just documented historical fact, so it's probably not very important to democrats.

 

[jillian]

Since that piece of comedy has nothing to do with socialism it's safe to say any point trying to be made is irrelevant.

you noticed that too?

 

[alupka]

you noticed that too?

I see. Redistribution of wealth is one of the core tenets of socialism, and one of the primary reasons for the collapse of the Soviet Union.

So a post about the redistribution of wealth has nothing to do with socialism.

Hmm...that's interesting logic.

 

[editec]

Wealth is most assuredly being redistributed, no doubt about that.

It's being distributed from the American economy to the Chinese .

Want that to end tomorrow?

Protect our nation from importants with importation tariffs just as China ALREADY does.

 

[mightypeon]

Interestingly, the Chinese are more pagmatic about Capitalism and Socialism then just about anybody else. They do exactly what seems usefull for them.

I think its the late joke of the 20th century, Chinese and Russian Pseudocommunists end up beeing better Capitalists than the Americans.

 

[Dr Grump]

I see. Redistribution of wealth is one of the core tenets of socialism, and one of the primary reasons for the collapse of the Soviet Union.

So a post about the redistribution of wealth has nothing to do with socialism.

Hmm...that's interesting logic.

The Soviet Union wasn't a socialist state. Hell, it wasn't even a communist state. It was a totalitarian regime. And if you think it did redistribute the wealth are you telling me that Stalin had a dacha on the Black Sea, then so did the dude who swept Red Square? Don't think so...

 

[jillian]

I see. Redistribution of wealth is one of the core tenets of socialism, and one of the primary reasons for the collapse of the Soviet Union.

So a post about the redistribution of wealth has nothing to do with socialism.

Hmm...that's interesting logic.

actually, our tax system has always taxed wealthy people at slightly higher rates than people who earn less.

and i'd say you need to go a far way to pretend that a regressive tax system is somehow socialist.

that's pretend stuff...

 

[RetiredGySgt]

If you think Socialism works I suggest you look into the collapse of the Soviet Union.

I suggest you learn critical reading skills.

 

[Gunny]

Since that piece of comedy has nothing to do with socialism it's safe to say any point trying to be made is irrelevant.

Of course it doesn't. One thing about consistent about you socialist-types, when the ugly truth of socialism is put in front of you in stark reality, y'all go into denial mode so fast you make the Flash look like an arthritic old man.

 

[Diuretic]

If you think Socialism works I suggest you look into the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Around about 1922 I think it was, when things went haywire in terms of socialism in the Soviet Union.

 

[Dr Grump]

Of course it doesn't. One thing about consistent about you socialist-types, when the ugly truth of socialism is put in front of you in stark reality, y'all go into denial mode so fast you make the Flash look like an arthritic old man.

On thing consistent about you conservative types, you keep on getting your political terms mixed up and attribute words to an idealogy that don't match. Once again, the USSR wasn't a socialist state. Now Sweden. There's a socialist state. And France. Hell, even NZ to a degree...

 

[jillian]

On thing consistent about you conservative types, you keep on getting your political terms mixed up and attribute words to an idealogy that don't match. Once again, the USSR wasn't a socialist state. Now Sweden. There's a socialist state. And France. Hell, even NZ to a degree...

it's called fearmongering.

 

[Diuretic]

Of course it doesn't. One thing about consistent about you socialist-types, when the ugly truth of socialism is put in front of you in stark reality, y'all go into denial mode so fast you make the Flash look like an arthritic old man.

Not at all. There are many better educated than me in the theory and history but the ugly truth is that the moment Lenin put party in the place of primacy whatever was happening in the Soviet Union wasn't socialism. Where it has been properly instituted and I have to say in a perhaps more diluted form than Marx and Engels envisaged, it has worked. Scandinavia for example. Britain after WWII with the Attlee government, for example.

The truth is that socialism will happen but it will be gradually, not through a series of acts of violence but gradually as capitalism begins to fail again but more importantly as humanity around the world realises that the environment can't sustain capitalism and that a less rapacious form of making life comfortable for humans and other animals is not only desirable but necessary.

 

[Chris]

Behold the sad result of socialism and universal healthcare...

 

[alupka]

Wealth is most assuredly being redistributed, no doubt about that.

It's being distributed from the American economy to the Chinese .

Want that to end tomorrow?

Protect our nation from importants with importation tariffs just as China ALREADY does.

You got my vote.

 

[alupka]

Interestingly, the Chinese are more pagmatic about Capitalism and Socialism then just about anybody else. They do exactly what seems usefull for them.

I think its the late joke of the 20th century, Chinese and Russian Pseudocommunists end up beeing better Capitalists than the Americans.

That's right. Excellent point. They have some socialist programs that are working ok. There's also a heck of a lot of free market stuff going on around here.

Advantages of a single party system I guess. They can just do anything they want, without having to try and defend their positions from political opposition.