The Problem with Socialism

[Centinel]

But still, the power resides with the People, which by definition is what a democracy is.

Okay, and the people established the supreme law of the land that severely limits the legislative power of congress. So, until the people change the constitution, their ability to enact "their will" is legally limited.

 

[Norman]

If their powers are limited they were limited by the will of the people.

They are limited by the text of the law. As long as the people don't amend the law, those legal limitations continue to exist.

But still, the power resides with the People, which by definition is what a democracy is.

Yes, if the definitions are taken out of your arse. Democracy is a system where majority decides what everyone else should do. USA is not a democracy, but a republic, where people have rights that can't be voted away.

That is, if people actually followed the constitution. Right now it seems everything is up for grabs.

 

[bripat9643]

Learn how pro football works. It's damn near communism.

Your ignorance is off the charts and your arrogance isn't going to make up for it. I doubt the team owners would agree that the millions they take in is the result of government ownership.

But thanks for doing such a good job of revealing just how uninformed one must be to hold hose views. Meanwhile, everything you enjoy in life, including the machine you use to bless us with your pearls of wisdom, is the result of capitalism.

One more guy who mistakes co-operation with government coercion... This is very common among socialists, they don't even understand their own theory. Coercion is pretty much the opposite of co-operation.

I don't see many football players holding guns to each other's heads for them to perform. Football is fully voluntary co-operation, except for maybe the enormous amounts of taxes the players and leagues pay.

The teams do hold up municipalities up for ransom to pay for their stadiums.

 

[Stephanie]

These goofs act like a Private citizen or Business can't pay for and put in their own roads. they think the Guberment came by their homes and laid their driveways for them in the middle of the night I guess. and when they need shoveled they must send the bill to the GUBERMENT. I wonder how that's worked for them?

good gawd these people don't vote I hope.

 

[LeftofLeft]

If their powers are limited they were limited by the will of the people.

They are limited by the text of the law. As long as the people don't amend the law, those legal limitations continue to exist.

But still, the power resides with the People, which by definition is what a democracy is.

So long as there is no true 1 percent power resides with the People.

 

[bripat9643]

There's little doubt that (a) the term "socialism" is no longer avoided like the plague, and that (b) support for and defense of the term has increased significantly, especially with the rise of Barack Obama and Bernie Sanders. Public opinion has clearly changed.

But public opinion is usually formed within a comparative format. This idea vs. that idea. And those who are against socialism (or, more accurately, Euro-democratic socialism) have done an amazingly lousy job of presenting their case.

Just screaming SOCIALISM! and calling everyone a Marxist or a communist just isn't enough any more. You have to clearly and effectively and respectfully offer an attractive alternative. These folks clearly haven't recognized that yet.
.

EXACTLY the wrong advice.

Screaming socialism is what works. Screaming Marxism at universities is exactly what has caused the issue, or do you really believe that there are more facts supporting socialism today, than in the past (the case looks worse and worse as each year goes by). There really is no intellectual battle, everyone with even an ounce of intellectual integrity knows socialism is a lie and a power grab.

There is no point in arguing against someone with facts when the only thing they understand is rhetoric. Most of the Marxist indoctrinated people physically can't even think logically, about anything.

Do you think the tactic of just screaming SOCIALISM! is working?

Do you see our society moving right?
.

The tactic used by the right has not been that of smear, but reason. It has failed. War is not won by good arguments, but guns.

Now, the left has used only smear and corruption, that has actually worked. It's almost ironic that the left understand human behavior better than the right when it comes to actual practice.

From my perspective - and yeah, I could definitely be off here - the Left has enjoyed so much social/cultural success for two reasons:

First, it has been consistent and methodical in its approach for literally decades, generations now. Example: Look at how the power of PC and Identity Politics slowly but steadily increased at the core of our society, until now a person's skin color or sexuality are forefront in who they are and how they are to be treated. That didn't happen overnight.

Second, the Right simply did not see this building until it was too late for them. Now they're trying to wrestle the society back all at one time and they don't know how to do it (neither would I). So the approach I'm talking about would be more patient and deliberative. I don't think they can make this change all at one time, it won't happen overnight.

We'll see, but right now the momentum certainly looks like it belongs to the Left.
.

Of course. The victories against bigotry and discrimination won by the left in this country couldn't possibly be organic in nature. They aren't to be looked at as being positive. They aren't founded on principles of fairness and the rule of law.

No.....they are the result of a devious plan to poison society in a tireless search for cultural decline! Those lefties are just better at staying on point than the righties. Yeah....that's it! All else.......is exactly equal. If the right can wake up and start trying harder to get their message out....they'll be able to "wrestle" the country back.

Weeeeeeeeee!

Most of the so-called rights the left has won since the civil rights movement are variations of the right to be a tick on the ass of society, or the right to make your neighbor do what he doesn't want to do. Those aren't positives. They are actually attacks on genuine rights. They arepart of a devious plan to poison society in a tireless search for cultural decline

 

[bripat9643]

The problem is never in history has it ever worked and for some reason idiots keep trying it

What would you consider Europe?

Going down the shitter...have you been paying attention to Greece, Spain, etc? Socialism starts out great...then the inevitable happens...they run out of other people's money. Same song, same verse every time

Irrelevant.

The trope that socialism does not work is incorrect. There are socialist nations that can and do exist - some of them doing decently well. None of them approach the success that the US has achieved but blankly stating that socialism always fails is not going to move the conversation forward or - the real problem - show why free markets are so much better. It only severs to entrench people in their belief of socialism.

The idea that no other country "approach the success that the US has achieved" is now fully passé. In every measure from life expectancy to murder rates to social mobility, the USA is not leading or even second. One also remembers thant our historical succes was built on race slavery and wars of genocide against native peoples. Hardly inspiring.

Our success was not built on slavery. Everything built on slavery was destroyed during the Civil War. The South was utterly destroyed during that war. All the nations in Europe that you admire so much also had slavery. There's no way to argue against the obvious success of the United States so douche bags like you attribute it all to slavery.

The USA is no longer first in a lot of areas because morons like you have been gaining the upper hand. Since Obama became president, the USA's position on the Heritage Index of Economic Freedom has slipped from 4th to 12th. Our standard of living has suffered as a result. Obama and Clinton also opened the floodgates to legal and illegal immigration, and that doesn't help our numbers either. We've been importing the third world, and as a result our economy is coming to resemble the third world.

 

[bripat9643]

"When you think of it, it doesn't take a lot of brains to be a socialist. All it requires is the desire to have something that doesn't belong to you and the absence of character to justify the use of force to get it on your behalf." -- Lawrence W. Reed, FEE President.

Socialism == taking other people's shit.

Taking other people's shit is wrong, or so I taught my children.

So we should end public education and let poor go without?

So we should end Medicaid and let the poor go without?

When and how does this country become a better place after we've done that?

After we end public education and Medicaid, Caring liberals like yourself will have plenty of money to contribute to charity schools and charity hospitals.

 

[bripat9643]

Let more socialism or less socialism be up to the will of the People. That is how democracy is supposed to work.

That's what's wrong with democracy. My rights shouldn't be up to a majority vote, and the right to own property is one of them.

 

[bripat9643]

• Q. What does ti take to be a socialist
• A. Christian Ethics

• Force is power, banks, insurance companies, cartels and wall street have both;
• Brokers take the assets of others to their benefit; vis a vis fiduciaries
• Theft is wrong, taxes paid to Caesar are not.

Using force to take another's property is antithetical to Christian ethics.

Abandoning materialism is central to Christianity.

That's fine and should be Voluntary. not FORCED on the people by Masters in the Government.

A government run by voluntary donations? LOL, goodbye massive military.

No, the military only consumes about 3% of our GDP. I think people would be more than willing to contribute that much of their income to a national defense.

 

[bripat9643]

• Q. What does ti take to be a socialist
• A. Christian Ethics

• Force is power, banks, insurance companies, cartels and wall street have both;
• Brokers take the assets of others to their benefit; vis a vis fiduciaries
• Theft is wrong, taxes paid to Caesar are not.

Using force to take another's property is antithetical to Christian ethics.

Abandoning materialism is central to Christianity.

That's fine and should be Voluntary. not FORCED on the people by Masters in the Government.

Of course, and Christianity is not being forced on people in the U.S. by the government.
Sharing is imposed by the person on whom Christianity is based. Yet, such a large amount of the population claims to be Christian that if it were true, government run public assistance would not be necessary. Unfortunately, assistance is necessary. There is no present system in place to do that except, lamentably, through government.

Liberals claim it's necessary, but they never offer any proof. Of course, you need a lot more when the government seduces teenage girls into getting pregnant by offering to pay all their bills when they do.

 

[NYcarbineer]

But still, the power resides with the People, which by definition is what a democracy is.

Okay, and the people established the supreme law of the land that severely limits the legislative power of congress. So, until the people change the constitution, their ability to enact "their will" is legally limited.

What limits are you even talking about?

 

[bripat9643]

The problem is when socialism or capitalism gets to its extremes. Socialism as been around for about 10,000 years and it is simply the working together of society. Of course, you probably hate your police officer down the road or tax payer paved streets.

Capitalism also has a nasty history...So we abolish and do away with it?

Hate the police officer? Ferguson and Baltimore taught US about hating the Police. As per roads, if there is no factory, there is no need for roads. If there are no farms, there is no need for roads. If there are no shops, there are no need for roads. Do the factory, farm, and shop need the road? Absolutely. But, let's be smart about which is more important? Or, would we simply have many roads and bridges to nowhere? And that is where socialism extremities creep in. Bridges to nowhere so cronies and bureaucrats can get paid.

In the nineteenth century the factory owners built the roads to their factories.

 

[NYcarbineer]

These goofs act like a Private citizen or Business can't pay for and put in their own roads. they think the Guberment came by their homes and laid their driveways for them in the middle of the night I guess. and when they need shoveled they must send the bill to the GUBERMENT. I wonder how that's worked for them?

good gawd these people don't vote I hope.

Citizens do put in their own roads. They VOTE to have highway departments.

 

[bripat9643]

These goofs act like a Private citizen or Business can't pay for and put in their own roads. they think the Guberment came by their homes and laid their driveways for them in the middle of the night I guess. and when they need shoveled they must send the bill to the GUBERMENT. I wonder how that's worked for them?

good gawd these people don't vote I hope.

Citizens do put in their own roads. They VOTE to have highway departments.

Apparently her point went right over your head.

 

[Fenton Lum]

Reservations have been under the total control of the federal government therefore the social society produced = utter failure.

Reservations have been under the total control of the government of a capitalist society that deemed them disposable in the rabid search for linear profit margin growth to infinity. I don't believe you're "Indian". I do believe we all have a pretty fair shot at becoming the new"Indian" if we fail to challenge the same beast that slaghtered them. Good day to you sir.

Indian reservations were held under total government control, aka, socialism. How has that worked?

They were? That will be news to the Native Americans.

You're getting very boring. Why do you go out of your way to appear foolish? Is it intentional (ie you're being facetious) or is it the real you?

Here, I'll help!

5 Ways The Government Keeps Native Americans In Poverty
Guest commentary curated by Forbes Opinion.
Opinions expressed by Forbes Contributors are their own.

By Shawn Regan

Imagine if the government were responsible for looking after your best interests. All of your assets must be managed by bureaucrats on your behalf. A special bureau is even set up to oversee your affairs. Every important decision you make requires approval, and every approval comes with a mountain of regulations.

How well would this work? Just ask Native Americans.

The federal government is responsible for managing Indian affairs for the benefit of all Indians. But by all accounts the government has failed to live up to this responsibility. As a result, Native American reservations are among the poorest communities in the United States. Here’s how the government keeps Native Americans in poverty.

Indian lands are owned and managed by the federal government.

[...]

5 Ways The Government Keeps Native Americans In Poverty

Agree, the system crushes their spirit

As it was designed to do intentionally.

 

[Norman]

These goofs act like a Private citizen or Business can't pay for and put in their own roads. they think the Guberment came by their homes and laid their driveways for them in the middle of the night I guess. and when they need shoveled they must send the bill to the GUBERMENT. I wonder how that's worked for them?

good gawd these people don't vote I hope.

Citizens do put in their own roads. They VOTE to have highway departments.

How is this level of cognitive deficiency even possible? It's like he is immune to words and reason! Perplexing.

 

[NYcarbineer]

These goofs act like a Private citizen or Business can't pay for and put in their own roads. they think the Guberment came by their homes and laid their driveways for them in the middle of the night I guess. and when they need shoveled they must send the bill to the GUBERMENT. I wonder how that's worked for them?

good gawd these people don't vote I hope.

Citizens do put in their own roads. They VOTE to have highway departments.

Apparently her point went right over your head.

She doesn't have a point.

 

[Fenton Lum]

The only problem with socialism as it applies to the american economic system is that we don't want those little people to get the idea that they should get in on it too.

Privatized gains versus socialized losses for the Wall Street bankster class
Internalized profits versus externalized risk and expense for the “job creator” class
Socialism for the aristocracy versus laissez faire capitalism for the masses

This is the current american paradigm.

You and some others need to learn the difference between capitalism and crony capitalism. It's mostly the left that tries to give capitalism a bad name by messing with it.

The difference between you and I is that you seem to view "the left" and "the right" as different in this thing.

"Privatized gains versus socialized losses for the Wall Street bankster class"

"both" wer/are involved in that.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The problem is when socialism or capitalism gets to its extremes. Socialism as been around for about 10,000 years and it is simply the working together of society. Of course, you probably hate your police officer down the road or tax payer paved streets.

Capitalism also has a nasty history...So we abolish and do away with it?

Hate the police officer? Ferguson and Baltimore taught US about hating the Police. As per roads, if there is no factory, there is no need for roads. If there are no farms, there is no need for roads. If there are no shops, there are no need for roads. Do the factory, farm, and shop need the road? Absolutely. But, let's be smart about which is more important? Or, would we simply have many roads and bridges to nowhere? And that is where socialism extremities creep in. Bridges to nowhere so cronies and bureaucrats can get paid.

In the nineteenth century the factory owners built the roads to their factories.

Classic conservatism. Let's go back to the 19th century.