What is bad about socialism?

I have much experience in the world, the whole world. You clearly know nothing about Socialism or Capitalism whereas I have lived in nations of both political spheres. We haven't even touched upon Communism but I am sure your knowledge on that subject is just as foolish. I can hardly wait to see how you are going to respond .... but I can guess.

:blowpop:
you have never left your moms basement
 
Make up your damn mind. Either a Socialist government makes people work or nobody works because they get everything. You guys are all over the damn map. No, if the government owns the factory, and I am not listening to that cockamamie bullshit about owning the people, they don't mean they run out and force people to work at that factory. They don't set prices, the markets do. Does North Dakota determine the price of flour? Does Alaska determine the price of oil? They don't tell the factory how much to produce.

Now, in a Communist country, yes, the government tells the factory what to produce. That is why Communism is called "Command Economy". But socialism is still a "Demand Economy".
Wrong boy I never said any such thing

Yes it precisely means they force people to work in factories and any where else needed,
THAT IS PRECISELY what socialism is you ******* idiot

My point on owning the people are spot on accurate true and you know it

Socialism is a command ecnomy DUMBASS
 
Regarding "What's wrong with socialism"...

A lot of it's been said already...

  • Forced Collectivism
  • Punishes Individualism
  • Destroys incentive
  • Fosters stagnation
  • Punishes initiative
  • Rewards laziness
  • Fosters dependency
  • Costs too much
  • Not sustainable in the long run
Nothing on this list is true.
 
It is no defense of "socialism" to point out that almost all the criticisms of it here can also be made of "capitalism". At any rate, these archaic economic processes from the past are entirely outmoded for our times and require dynamic, new approaches.The hyper-materialism that currently afflicts us has to be transcended.
 
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.
Over 100 million dead and counting. Socialism is great for getting rid of opposition.
 
Oh give me a break.


All states are funded through taxation, and the US Constitution has a provision for the general welfare of the population. "Welfare state" is just another word which means whatever you want it to. It's just a "dirty word".
Since the Fed shifted from promoting the general welfare to providing for it there has been an increase in programs that have no Constitutional mandate.

All entitlement programs at the Federal level should be canceled. If your State wants to provide these programs let them tax the shit out of you.
 
Why socialism often doesn’t work as intended:

🔧 1. Lack of Incentives

In theory: Everyone works for the common good, and wealth is shared.

In reality: When outcomes (wages, jobs, services) are guaranteed regardless of effort, many people lose motivation to innovate or work hard.

Result: Productivity drops, and the system often has to rely on coercion or moral pressure to function.

🧠 People respond more to incentives than ideology.

📉 2.
Inefficient Resource Allocation

In market economies, prices guide supply and demand.

In socialism, centralized planning replaces market signals. Without price signals, it’s hard to know what to produce, how much, and where to send it.

This often leads to shortages (essentials like food, housing) or surpluses (things no one wants).

The free market may be messy, but central planning is often blind.

🧍‍♂️🧍‍♀️ 3. Bureaucratic Bloat and Corruption

Large government control invites large bureaucracies.

Over time, these bureaucracies tend to become inefficient, self-serving, and prone to corruption.

Those in power often enjoy privileges ordinary citizens don’t, despite the system’s supposed equality.

👑 “All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.” – Orwell

🛑 4. Suppression of Innovation and Entrepreneurship

When profit is demonized or eliminated, people are less likely to take risks or start businesses.

Without competition, products and services stagnate.

Some socialist regimes have punished or restricted “excess success,” killing the drive to improve.

🚀 Innovation needs the freedom to fail and the opportunity to win big.

🧠 5. Human Nature and Utopian Assumptions

Socialism assumes people will act altruistically for the collective good.

But people are often self-interested, tribal, and competitive.

Systems that ignore this tend to either collapse or become authoritarian trying to enforce ideal behavior.

🏴‍☠️ 6. Historical Track Record

Nations like the Soviet Union, Maoist China, Venezuela, and Cuba tried socialist models. Most suffered:
  • Economic collapse
  • Food shortages
  • Mass emigration
  • Political repression
  • Social democracies like Sweden and Norway are often mislabeled “socialist,” but they are market economies with strong safety nets, not command economies.
✅ When elements of socialism work:

Universal healthcare, education, and welfare can be effective in wealthy, capitalist countries with strong institutions.

But even there, they are funded by capitalist productivity, not state ownership of the economy.
Excellent points and summary !
Wish I could give more than one rep.
This is a keeper.
 
Last edited:
15th post
yes it is theft and all the informed intelligent people know that
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.

In order to give the means of production to the workers you have so steal it from the owners
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.
 
Someone has to generate the CAPITAL that the socialists want to redistribute.
And? You say that like it's a bad thing or something. It isn't.

As for a welfare state, we have one now that has grown exponentially since the democrats were co-opted by Marxists in the 1960’s.
Never happened.
 
What's bad about it is those who receive without working for what they get have little incentive to work.

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.

Socialism operates basically on the theory that Peter won't mind supporting Paul. And it can count on enthusiastic support from Paul.
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.

But the problem is that sooner or later Peter will run out of money.
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?

Just because there are some socialist policies adopted by some countries does not make those countries socialist. Most European countries are free market capitalist with a few socialist programs. Without the ability to acquire, keep and use property, to increase one's fortune, to change one's stars so to speak, no economy will thrive for long.
No one said they were, except for idiots who just use the word "socialist" to mean anything they don't like. Lmao.
 
He must have gone to college.
I take it you never did. That's believable.

Though I take it you don't mind referencing many college-educated economists who espouse economic theories which are against socialism, now do you.
 
Back
Top Bottom