What is bad about socialism?

Those who work without receiving what those who don't work are getting have little incentive to work. Result is less work done and less in general for everybody.


It doesn't matter whether he "likes" it or not. It's the law. There are plenty of laws that some people "don't like", and they still end up grudgingly complying with them.

Murders "don't like" laws that require them not to murder, but there's no chance of laws against murder being repealed.


Bullshit. They'll be plenty of new Peters to choose from.

Taxation has been around for all of human history, and the money hasn't run out yet. So when will that happen? In 10 years, 100 years, 1000 years?


No one said they were, except for idiots who just use the word "socialist" to mean anything they don't like. Lmao.
Get back to me when you respond to my post in its full context. I generally don't respond to those who chop up posts--extremely difficult for others to follow and tedious and boring to read--and who destroy the context and respond to what was never said or intended as if it was.
 
Get back to me when you respond to my post in its full context. I generally don't respond to those who chop up posts--extremely difficult for others to follow and tedious and boring to read--and who destroy the context and respond to what was never said or intended as if it was.
The point is that, lots of people "may not like" paying taxes, but it's a reality of life which has been around for all of human history. You can go as far back as ancient Rome in the Bible, and people were still expressing the same gripes. But taxation has managed to continue for thousands of years, and they haven't "run out of money", and it won't be going away any time soon. Taxation is protected under the US Constitution. The American Framers were not against taxation, but merely taxation without representation.

And so on.

I would argue that most normal people are going to have an incentive to work unless they have no other choice, since most people would not desire to live off of the bare minimum which the welfare state allows. The exception might be people such as alcoholics and drug addicts, and even if the state didn't offer them aid, nothing would stop them from choosing to be homeless.

All taxation is going to involve some form of redistribution, even in a country with a taxation program such as America's which isn't "socialist" to begin with.
 
Last edited:
Over 100 million dead and counting. Socialism is great for getting rid of opposition.

Those who work without receiving what those who don't work are getting have little incentive to work. Result is less work done and less in general for everybody.


It doesn't matter whether he "likes" it or not. It's the law. There are plenty of laws that some people "don't like", and they still end up grudgingly complying with them.

Murders "don't like" laws that require them not to murder, but there's no chance of laws against murder being repealed.


Bullshit. They'll be plenty of new Peters to choose from.

Taxation has been around for all of human history, and the money hasn't run out yet. So when will that happen? In 10 years, 100 years, 1000 years?


No one said they were, except for idiots who just use the word "socialist" to mean anything they don't like. Lmao.

Get back to me when you respond to my post in its full context. I generally don't respond to those who chop up posts--extremely difficult for others to follow and tedious and boring to read--and who destroy the context and respond to what was never said or intended as if it was.

Lets see, hmm. How about a relatively MODERN approach to SOCIALISM, and how it worked out.

Good idea, if I must say so myself, so let us look into Jim.......superstar.....Jones and his SOCIALISTIC CULT!


That is correct folks; just like virtually ALL SOCIALISTIC endeavors, people died.

And so I ask all LOONEY LEFTISTS---------------->tell us 1 country that is SOCIALIST that succeeded. And don't even go with the NORDIC COUNTRY'S, because we have proof that they are not, and even they say, they are not! So tell us----------> we have multiple country's who are capitalists, and highly successful. How many SOCIALIST country's YOU got-)
 
Lets see, hmm. How about a relatively MODERN approach to SOCIALISM, and how it worked out.

Good idea, if I must say so myself, so let us look into Jim.......superstar.....Jones and his SOCIALISTIC CULT!


That is correct folks; just like virtually ALL SOCIALISTIC endeavors, people died.

And so I ask all LOONEY LEFTISTS---------------->tell us 1 country that is SOCIALIST that succeeded. And don't even go with the NORDIC COUNTRY'S, because we have proof that they are not, and even they say, they are not! So tell us----------> we have multiple country's who are capitalists, and highly successful. How many SOCIALIST country's YOU got-)
The reality is that all developed countries have a combination of private property and socialized systems. So you could say they are a combination of capitalism and socialism.

So why you're arbitrarily defining some countries as "capitalist", when, in reality, they have socialized systems, is beyond me.
 
The reality is that all developed countries have a combination of private property and socialized systems. So you could say they are a combination of capitalism and socialism.

So why you're arbitrarily defining some countries as "capitalist", when, in reality, they have socialized systems, is beyond me.

Because they are run by democracies, not socialist politburo's.
 
And? You say that like it's a bad thing or something. It isn't.


Never happened.
Yep, people are just lining up to pay for idiots like you, so far there is 1 person in that line (and he's related to you)....dumbass.
 
Yep, people are just lining up to pay for idiots like you, so far there is 1 person in that line (and he's related to you)....dumbass.
People are going to pay into a system to some degree or another whether they like it or not. Doesn't even require a socialist economy, because taxation has been around since the days of ancient Rome, and isn't going anywhere. So people who point out the patently obvious are simply at odds with reality, and typically have no gripe about taxation if it funds something they want.

You'll gripe and go back to doing what you normally do. That's all that will happen.
 
Last edited:
Nope. Every intelligent person knows it isn't. Theft is illegal. Taxation is not theft, and is perfectly legal and protected by the US Constitution.


It isn't stealing. Stealing is the illegal confiscation of property. Taxation is not illegal, and taxes belong to the state, not the individuals they were collected from.

You remind me of people who say that killing in war is "murder", when, by definition, it isn't. Murder is the illegal killing of innocent people. Killing in war is perfectly legal.
Wrong all intelligent people know taxation s theft

It is taking from others without permission. Whether legal or not

It is stealing. Taxation is legal but still stealing

you fail at your analogy which is a false equivelance and you are PROVEN wrong
 
Wrong all intelligent people know taxation s theft

It is taking from others without permission. Whether legal or not

It is stealing. Taxation is legal but still stealing

you fail at your analogy which is a false equivelance and you are PROVEN wrong
Nope, stealing is defined under the law, and taxation has never been considered stealing under the very laws which define what stealing is to begin with. Permission isn't necessary.

If you read a book on occasion, you would know this.
 
Nope, stealing is defined under the law, and taxation has never been considered stealing under the very laws which define what stealing is to begin with. Permission isn't necessary.

If you read a book on occasion, you would know this.
Stealing was defined by reality BEFORE the law.


Permission IS NECESSARY

I have read more than you and you are woefully ignorant
 
The reality is that all developed countries have a combination of private property and socialized systems. So you could say they are a combination of capitalism and socialism.

So why you're arbitrarily defining some countries as "capitalist", when, in reality, they have socialized systems, is beyond me.
You claim it is beyond you when you personally proved your self wrong

You provided the definiition in the OP and it has nothiung to do with tazxes or some welfare none of which is socialism

Passing out some welfare and providing some basic government services is not siezing the means of production or distribution

Therefore yes those nations are capitalists you back pedaling uneducated two faced imbecile
 
Since the term "socialism" gets thrown around a lot by people who don't know the meaning of it, here's a definition:

Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy.

Now we can discuss what is bad about it.
This is something only socialists care about as the number of failures keep piling up on them, [i.e. arguing it in theory is far easier than defending it in practice] they see success as corruption...I would cite Cuba as a prime demonstrable example...when it was a thriving island paradise it was corrupt to them and now socialism [at least as defined above] has turned it into a patch of dirt that they [socialists] find far more acceptable...now that's the honest discussion we should be having, not the one where we first have to pretend it is a viable form of governance.
 
Last edited:
Since the term "socialism" gets thrown around a lot by people who don't know the meaning of it, here's a definition:

Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy.

Now we can discuss what is bad about it.
The ONLY way for the government to own the means of production is through TYRANNY, enslavement .

Socialism has failed in every jurisdiction where it has been tried.

SOCIALISM = VIOLENT PARASITISM
 
People are going to pay into a system to some degree or another whether they like it or not. Doesn't even require a socialist economy, because taxation has been around since the days of ancient Rome, and isn't going anywhere. So people who point out the patently obvious are simply at odds with reality, and typically have no gripe about taxation if it funds something they want.

You'll gripe and go back to doing what you normally do. That's all that will happen.
Yep, people looking for handouts have been around since ancient Rome also.

I will go back to doing what I normally do, work and earn an income. Meanwhile, you'll go back to what you normally do, look for handouts.
 
15th post
Yep, people looking for handouts have been around since ancient Rome also.
You say that like there's something wrong with it. There isn't.

I will go back to doing what I normally do, work and earn an income. Meanwhile, you'll go back to what you normally do, look for handouts.
Your ability to earn an income is contingent on the public goods, laws, and services that you use to earn an income, such as public roadways.

So one could argue that "you" don't really earn that income. Your ability to do so is provided to you, at least in part, by the state, and the rights and freedoms that it provides.
 
Stealing was defined by reality BEFORE the law.
Nope.

It's really not that complicated.

Taxation isn't stealing. Killing in warfare isn't murder.

Permission IS NECESSARY
Nope, not at all.

The state will take whatever it needs to, and you can't do a thing about it.
 
The ONLY way for the government to own the means of production is through TYRANNY, enslavement .

Socialism has failed in every jurisdiction where it has been tried.

SOCIALISM = VIOLENT PARASITISM
"Parasitism" is just another word which means whatever individuals want it to mean. The reality is that everyone in developed countries is dependent on public establishments to some extent or another, and there's nothing wrong with that.
 
Back
Top Bottom