CDZ What Socialist Policies in the U.S. Have Ever Worked?

[22lcidw]

This is a sincere question as I can honestly think of none.


1. U.S. Postal Service. Bankrupt while Fed Ex and UPS make billions.

2. Public Education System. One of the worst in the Western world.

3. Amtrak. Bankrupt.

4. Medicare. Bankrupt.

5. Social Security. Bankrupt.

All of these institutions are generally woefully inefficient and poorly run. So why should we want a Democrat Party agenda that only proposes more of the same?

Only right wingers believe they can do a better job; but only help the richest get richer while the Poor get more debt.

You have done a pretty good job of that on your own. You don't give yourselves enough credit for that. People get away from you and restart the cycle over again, only with more people educated in your way of thinking.

I resort to the fewest fallacies and must be the truest witness bearer as a result. Nothing wrong with being moral with a McCarthy era phrase in our pledge.

But what if you are McCarthy on the other side of the fence? Forcing your ways of constitutional interpretation on everyone else. You certainly do not promote freedom. Social justice agendas blurring the loss of unalienable rights is a great circus act.

 

[WelfareQueen]

FOR THE RECORD. THE OP MAKES ZERO REFERENCE TO MONEY. CDZ RULES. RESPOND TO OP.

THANK YOU.

 

[WelfareQueen]

This is a sincere question as I can honestly think of none.


1. U.S. Postal Service. Bankrupt while Fed Ex and UPS make billions.

2. Public Education System. One of the worst in the Western world.

3. Amtrak. Bankrupt.

4. Medicare. Bankrupt.

5. Social Security. Bankrupt.

All of these institutions are generally woefully inefficient and poorly run. So why should we want a Democrat Party agenda that only proposes more of the same?

Why is the postal service in trouble? Because it is forced to pay retirees yet to be born. 75 years of retiree benefits makes sense how?

Standardized testing shows how elastic teaching philosophies can be. A template is drawn and curriculum is shaped to fit. Teach the test, without regard for the widest education possible, teachers are basically prompters for students on Jeopardy.

Amtrack is broke because the United States, unlike every other G7 nation, has no intercontinental high speed rail network. The United States is running the equivalent stagecoach as rail service in a space station world. Do you realize how much less pollution from travel alone would result?

Medicare and Social Security were relatively safer than everything listed above. Right up until their funding source, the payroll tax, was just suspended. Suspended. That means employers will have to make up the shortfall in the end.

How will that serve to jump start the economy? How can a ballon payment on payroll taxes serve the "super v"?

You make many good points which go to the heart of the structural issues and problems of many of these programs.

Government programs are a lot like Frankenstein. Once the monster is created and cut loose it is almost impossible to modify or stop. The business world must adapt all the time or fail. Think Sears.

Government seems to do a poor job of adapting to real world circumstances.

 

[Crepitus]

The mistake you are making is in assuming those things were supposed to be money making endeavors. They were never expected to turn a profit.

Did find this on line, and it strikes me as funny.

One of the best examples of “socialism” in the United States - and an ironic one - is the National Football League.

1. The worst teams get the first shot at the best new players in each year’s draft
2. The salary cap structure makes it difficult to keep a dominant team together for more than a few years, and generally prevents dynasties from forming - the New England Patriots have stayed so good for so long by constantly cycling through new talent rather than by signing a lot of expensive superstars
3. In the provision that is the closest to actual socialism, the league’s TV revenues are equally shared among all of the teams, giving every team a lucrative guaranteed income stream regardless of specific quality of team play

So the Government starts programs with the intent of losing trillions? Is that what you're saying? Is that how you would define Socialism?

By your reply can I assume the Dems are proposing the Green New Deal to lose trillions as well?

The Department of Defense is supposed to turn a profit? Who knew?

Too stupid to even comment on.

Why? It logically follows your earlier statements.

Are government programs supposed to turn a profit or not?

Make up your alleged mind.

The topic was not all Government programs. Read the OP and follow CDZ rules.

Lol, got those goalposts where you want them now?

You never refuted the OP. Inherently socialist government programs are failures. This is the clean debate zone. The OP is what is being discussed.

If you choose to discuss another topic find another thread.

But I did. These program's measure of success isn't how much money it makes. It was never meant to make money..

Your "point" is not valid.

Amtrak was absolutely promised to make money. Ditto the Postal Service which was supposed to be self-supporting.

But I did not emphasize the financial aspect you did. My point being many of these socialist programs (and the New Deal programs of social security and later Medicare are most assuredly socialist programs) have turned into giant failed ponzi schemes.

My question is simply why would we take the Democrat Position and do more of the same with the Green New Deal and Medicare for all?

My question is simple and logical. Why can't anyone answer it without deflecting or avoiding. I assume you are a proud progressive. This should be easy for you to answer.

In my opinion the track record for many Government run programs is very poor. I have provided numerous examples. Logically why should add trillions of dollars of new programs with such a poor track record?

New programs can't, by definition, have a poor track record.

The USPS is in the Constitution. That someone came by later and said they could make it self-supporting is their problem.

Ah....I stipulated the existing programs with poor track records. Christ, can none of you Libs defend this stuff?

Its truly getting embarrassing. Maybe stop deflecting and parsing words (both done poorly), and maybe address the questions in the OP? It's a thought.

Look, maybe you like massive income distribution. Maybe you don't care Government mostly fucks up everything it touches. Just state why you think multi trillion dollar Government take over of large swaths of the economy is a good idea.

You're arguing from a nonexistent point. It doesn't matter how many times you repeat or rephrase it it still isn't a valid point. Just stop. You lost. It's over.

The OP never mentions money. You did. Keep repeating the same lie does not make it so.

Since you can only deflect and cannot defend socialist programs like the Green New Deal or Medicare For All you lose. Buh Bye...

The word "bankrupt" appears in your OP 4 times, liar. Why do you feel the need to lie? Did you think I wouldn't bother to check? Did you think you could get away with it? Or is it just a pathological need like it is for so many other tRumplings including agent orange himself?

 

[Crepitus]

FOR THE RECORD. THE OP MAKES ZERO REFERENCE TO MONEY. CDZ RULES. RESPOND TO OP.

THANK YOU.

Thats a lie.

Are these your words?
1. U.S. Postal Service. Bankrupt while Fed Ex and UPS make billions.

2. Public Education System. One of the worst in the Western world.

3. Amtrak. Bankrupt.

4. Medicare. Bankrupt.

Your OP is all about money.

Now stop lying, acknowledge you've lost, and move on.

 

[WelfareQueen]

FOR THE RECORD. THE OP MAKES ZERO REFERENCE TO MONEY. CDZ RULES. RESPOND TO OP.

THANK YOU.

Thats a lie.

Are these your words?
1. U.S. Postal Service. Bankrupt while Fed Ex and UPS make billions.

2. Public Education System. One of the worst in the Western world.

3. Amtrak. Bankrupt.

4. Medicare. Bankrupt.

Your OP is all about money.

Now stop lying, acknowledge you've lost, and move on.

Cant address the points. Too bad. The Green New Deal and Medicare For All are new Government disasters in the making and you cannot say a single thing to defend them. The point of mentioning those programs are bankrupt in the OP was to highlight how poorly run they are. Which is obvious.

You lose. Buh Bye.

 

[Crepitus]

FOR THE RECORD. THE OP MAKES ZERO REFERENCE TO MONEY. CDZ RULES. RESPOND TO OP.

THANK YOU.

Thats a lie.

Are these your words?
1. U.S. Postal Service. Bankrupt while Fed Ex and UPS make billions.

2. Public Education System. One of the worst in the Western world.

3. Amtrak. Bankrupt.

4. Medicare. Bankrupt.

Your OP is all about money.

Now stop lying, acknowledge you've lost, and move on.

Cant address the points. Too bad. The Green New Deal and Medicare For All are new Government disasters in the making and you cannot say a single thing to defend them. The point of mentioning those programs are bankrupt was to highlight how poorly run they are. Which is obvious.

You lose. Buh Bye.

Points? That these programs will not make a profit? They weren't meant to. Point addressed.

Have a nice day.

 

[WelfareQueen]

FOR THE RECORD. THE OP MAKES ZERO REFERENCE TO MONEY. CDZ RULES. RESPOND TO OP.

THANK YOU.

Thats a lie.

Are these your words?
1. U.S. Postal Service. Bankrupt while Fed Ex and UPS make billions.

2. Public Education System. One of the worst in the Western world.

3. Amtrak. Bankrupt.

4. Medicare. Bankrupt.

Your OP is all about money.

Now stop lying, acknowledge you've lost, and move on.

Cant address the points. Too bad. The Green New Deal and Medicare For All are new Government disasters in the making and you cannot say a single thing to defend them. The point of mentioning those programs are bankrupt was to highlight how poorly run they are. Which is obvious.

You lose. Buh Bye.

Points? That these programs will not make a profit? They weren't meant to. Point addressed.

Have a nice day.

Why are you so obsessed with money? You keep repeating yourself. Government socialist programs are virtually always poorly run and incredibly inefficient. How will new programs like the Green New Deal or Medicare For All be any different?

I assume you support those programs. Why cant you defend your beliefs. It's truly very sad.

 

[danielpalos]

This is a sincere question as I can honestly think of none.


1. U.S. Postal Service. Bankrupt while Fed Ex and UPS make billions.

2. Public Education System. One of the worst in the Western world.

3. Amtrak. Bankrupt.

4. Medicare. Bankrupt.

5. Social Security. Bankrupt.

All of these institutions are generally woefully inefficient and poorly run. So why should we want a Democrat Party agenda that only proposes more of the same?

Only right wingers believe they can do a better job; but only help the richest get richer while the Poor get more debt.

You have done a pretty good job of that on your own. You don't give yourselves enough credit for that. People get away from you and restart the cycle over again, only with more people educated in your way of thinking.

I resort to the fewest fallacies and must be the truest witness bearer as a result. Nothing wrong with being moral with a McCarthy era phrase in our pledge.

But what if you are McCarthy on the other side of the fence? Forcing your ways of constitutional interpretation on everyone else. You certainly do not promote freedom. Social justice agendas blurring the loss of unalienable rights is a great circus act.

Who am I arguing with? I am not the one practicing the abomination of hypocrisy by resorting to the fewest fallacies.

 

[danielpalos]

FOR THE RECORD. THE OP MAKES ZERO REFERENCE TO MONEY. CDZ RULES. RESPOND TO OP.

THANK YOU.

Thats a lie.

Are these your words?
1. U.S. Postal Service. Bankrupt while Fed Ex and UPS make billions.

2. Public Education System. One of the worst in the Western world.

3. Amtrak. Bankrupt.

4. Medicare. Bankrupt.

Your OP is all about money.

Now stop lying, acknowledge you've lost, and move on.

Cant address the points. Too bad. The Green New Deal and Medicare For All are new Government disasters in the making and you cannot say a single thing to defend them. The point of mentioning those programs are bankrupt was to highlight how poorly run they are. Which is obvious.

You lose. Buh Bye.

Points? That these programs will not make a profit? They weren't meant to. Point addressed.

Have a nice day.

Why are you so obsessed with money? You keep repeating yourself. Government socialist programs are virtually always poorly run and incredibly inefficient. How will new programs like the Green New Deal or Medicare For All be any different?

I assume you support those programs. Why cant you defend your beliefs. It's truly very sad.

Capitalists have no solution, only boom and bust.

 

[candycorn]

FOR THE RECORD. THE OP MAKES ZERO REFERENCE TO MONEY. CDZ RULES. RESPOND TO OP.

THANK YOU.

Thats a lie.

Are these your words?
1. U.S. Postal Service. Bankrupt while Fed Ex and UPS make billions.

2. Public Education System. One of the worst in the Western world.

3. Amtrak. Bankrupt.

4. Medicare. Bankrupt.

Your OP is all about money.

Now stop lying, acknowledge you've lost, and move on.

Cant address the points. Too bad. The Green New Deal and Medicare For All are new Government disasters in the making and you cannot say a single thing to defend them. The point of mentioning those programs are bankrupt was to highlight how poorly run they are. Which is obvious.

You lose. Buh Bye.

Points? That these programs will not make a profit? They weren't meant to. Point addressed.

Have a nice day.

Why are you so obsessed with money? You keep repeating yourself. Government socialist programs are virtually always poorly run and incredibly inefficient. How will new programs like the Green New Deal or Medicare For All be any different?

I assume you support those programs. Why cant you defend your beliefs. It's truly very sad.

You’ve been field dressed like a dozen times on this thread.

 

[WelfareQueen]

FOR THE RECORD. THE OP MAKES ZERO REFERENCE TO MONEY. CDZ RULES. RESPOND TO OP.

THANK YOU.

Thats a lie.

Are these your words?
1. U.S. Postal Service. Bankrupt while Fed Ex and UPS make billions.

2. Public Education System. One of the worst in the Western world.

3. Amtrak. Bankrupt.

4. Medicare. Bankrupt.

Your OP is all about money.

Now stop lying, acknowledge you've lost, and move on.

Cant address the points. Too bad. The Green New Deal and Medicare For All are new Government disasters in the making and you cannot say a single thing to defend them. The point of mentioning those programs are bankrupt was to highlight how poorly run they are. Which is obvious.

You lose. Buh Bye.

Points? That these programs will not make a profit? They weren't meant to. Point addressed.

Have a nice day.

Why are you so obsessed with money? You keep repeating yourself. Government socialist programs are virtually always poorly run and incredibly inefficient. How will new programs like the Green New Deal or Medicare For All be any different?

I assume you support those programs. Why cant you defend your beliefs. It's truly very sad.

You’ve been field dressed like a dozen times on this thread.

You can't defend the Green New Deal or Medicare For All either. You got nothing. Duly noted,

 

[danielpalos]

Capitalism "died in 1929" and socialism has been working hard ever since.

 

[Nosmo King]

This is a sincere question as I can honestly think of none.


1. U.S. Postal Service. Bankrupt while Fed Ex and UPS make billions.

2. Public Education System. One of the worst in the Western world.

3. Amtrak. Bankrupt.

4. Medicare. Bankrupt.

5. Social Security. Bankrupt.

All of these institutions are generally woefully inefficient and poorly run. So why should we want a Democrat Party agenda that only proposes more of the same?

Why is the postal service in trouble? Because it is forced to pay retirees yet to be born. 75 years of retiree benefits makes sense how?

Standardized testing shows how elastic teaching philosophies can be. A template is drawn and curriculum is shaped to fit. Teach the test, without regard for the widest education possible, teachers are basically prompters for students on Jeopardy.

Amtrack is broke because the United States, unlike every other G7 nation, has no intercontinental high speed rail network. The United States is running the equivalent stagecoach as rail service in a space station world. Do you realize how much less pollution from travel alone would result?

Medicare and Social Security were relatively safer than everything listed above. Right up until their funding source, the payroll tax, was just suspended. Suspended. That means employers will have to make up the shortfall in the end.

How will that serve to jump start the economy? How can a ballon payment on payroll taxes serve the "super v"?

You make many good points which go to the heart of the structural issues and problems of many of these programs.

Government programs are a lot like Frankenstein. Once the monster is created and cut loose it is almost impossible to modify or stop. The business world must adapt all the time or fail. Think Sears.

Government seems to do a poor job of adapting to real world circumstances.

Government is different from business. Business is profit driven, government is service driven. Business is conducted to benefit a relative few while government is driven to serve all.

So running these two disparate concerns has to be done so each fulfills its mission.

 

[WelfareQueen]

This is a sincere question as I can honestly think of none.


1. U.S. Postal Service. Bankrupt while Fed Ex and UPS make billions.

2. Public Education System. One of the worst in the Western world.

3. Amtrak. Bankrupt.

4. Medicare. Bankrupt.

5. Social Security. Bankrupt.

All of these institutions are generally woefully inefficient and poorly run. So why should we want a Democrat Party agenda that only proposes more of the same?

Why is the postal service in trouble? Because it is forced to pay retirees yet to be born. 75 years of retiree benefits makes sense how?

Standardized testing shows how elastic teaching philosophies can be. A template is drawn and curriculum is shaped to fit. Teach the test, without regard for the widest education possible, teachers are basically prompters for students on Jeopardy.

Amtrack is broke because the United States, unlike every other G7 nation, has no intercontinental high speed rail network. The United States is running the equivalent stagecoach as rail service in a space station world. Do you realize how much less pollution from travel alone would result?

Medicare and Social Security were relatively safer than everything listed above. Right up until their funding source, the payroll tax, was just suspended. Suspended. That means employers will have to make up the shortfall in the end.

How will that serve to jump start the economy? How can a ballon payment on payroll taxes serve the "super v"?

You make many good points which go to the heart of the structural issues and problems of many of these programs.

Government programs are a lot like Frankenstein. Once the monster is created and cut loose it is almost impossible to modify or stop. The business world must adapt all the time or fail. Think Sears.

Government seems to do a poor job of adapting to real world circumstances.

Government is different from business. Business is profit driven, government is service driven. Business is conducted to benefit a relative few while government is driven to serve all.

So running these two disparate concerns has to be done so each fulfills its mission.

I agree. But both should be run as efficiently as possible. I worked in two different County Emergency Services Departments. The paper pushers that administer those programs exist primarily to get larger budgets and more money on an annual basis. The emphasis is never on efficiency or service unless there are budget cuts.

Like the private sector I think Government can and should do both. Be efficient, cost effective, and provide good service. If businesses can do it certainly Government can as well.

 

[Nosmo King]

This is a sincere question as I can honestly think of none.


1. U.S. Postal Service. Bankrupt while Fed Ex and UPS make billions.

2. Public Education System. One of the worst in the Western world.

3. Amtrak. Bankrupt.

4. Medicare. Bankrupt.

5. Social Security. Bankrupt.

All of these institutions are generally woefully inefficient and poorly run. So why should we want a Democrat Party agenda that only proposes more of the same?

Why is the postal service in trouble? Because it is forced to pay retirees yet to be born. 75 years of retiree benefits makes sense how?

Standardized testing shows how elastic teaching philosophies can be. A template is drawn and curriculum is shaped to fit. Teach the test, without regard for the widest education possible, teachers are basically prompters for students on Jeopardy.

Amtrack is broke because the United States, unlike every other G7 nation, has no intercontinental high speed rail network. The United States is running the equivalent stagecoach as rail service in a space station world. Do you realize how much less pollution from travel alone would result?

Medicare and Social Security were relatively safer than everything listed above. Right up until their funding source, the payroll tax, was just suspended. Suspended. That means employers will have to make up the shortfall in the end.

How will that serve to jump start the economy? How can a ballon payment on payroll taxes serve the "super v"?

You make many good points which go to the heart of the structural issues and problems of many of these programs.

Government programs are a lot like Frankenstein. Once the monster is created and cut loose it is almost impossible to modify or stop. The business world must adapt all the time or fail. Think Sears.

Government seems to do a poor job of adapting to real world circumstances.

Government is different from business. Business is profit driven, government is service driven. Business is conducted to benefit a relative few while government is driven to serve all.

So running these two disparate concerns has to be done so each fulfills its mission.

I agree. But both should be run as efficiently as possible. I worked in two different County Emergency Services Departments. The paper pushers that administer those programs exist primarily to get larger budgets and more money on an annual basis. The emphasis is never on efficiency or service unless there are budget cuts.

Like the private sector I think Government can and should do both. Be efficient, cost effective, and provide good service. If businesses can do it certainly Government can as well.

Everybody wants more efficiency from government programs. I retired form a metropolitan housing authority as Housing Inspector. I was on the front line of a government funded and regulated program.

It was my job, and my personal moral duty, to assure section eight rental properties were decent, safe and sanitary.

The demand for affordable rental units is as high here in the upper Ohio River valley is as high as any other market of our size. Federal money was paid to private landlords to supplement the tenant's rent. The income of the tenant is weighed with the size, location and condition, and the cost of rent in a particular unit.

There are regulations, but not nearly as cautious and complex as regulations concerning hazardous and toxic wastes. My career years were as an environmental field engineer.

In the case of housing work, federal budget cuts or static spending cut into the efficiency of the housing authority. You can only 'work with less' a few years before service cutbacks have to happen.

Everyone wants efficiency. But the business model would suggest that those not working efficiently be cut.

But the government model should be programs sufficiently funded are more efficient.

You can't expect a crew of masons could lay walls of brick while you play Jenna with the very walls they're building. Asking government to provide a service while consistently cutting funding simply results in the inefficiency everyone hates.

 

[danielpalos]

...yet, right wingers have no problem with the socialist public policies of our alleged wars on crime, drugs, and terror which are only "black holes that pull money out of our economic universe".

 

[San Souci]

The mistake you are making is in assuming those things were supposed to be money making endeavors. They were never expected to turn a profit.

Did find this on line, and it strikes me as funny.

One of the best examples of “socialism” in the United States - and an ironic one - is the National Football League.

1. The worst teams get the first shot at the best new players in each year’s draft
2. The salary cap structure makes it difficult to keep a dominant team together for more than a few years, and generally prevents dynasties from forming - the New England Patriots have stayed so good for so long by constantly cycling through new talent rather than by signing a lot of expensive superstars
3. In the provision that is the closest to actual socialism, the league’s TV revenues are equally shared among all of the teams, giving every team a lucrative guaranteed income stream regardless of specific quality of team play

Profits make the world go round.

 

[candycorn]

FOR THE RECORD. THE OP MAKES ZERO REFERENCE TO MONEY. CDZ RULES. RESPOND TO OP.

THANK YOU.

Thats a lie.

Are these your words?
1. U.S. Postal Service. Bankrupt while Fed Ex and UPS make billions.

2. Public Education System. One of the worst in the Western world.

3. Amtrak. Bankrupt.

4. Medicare. Bankrupt.

Your OP is all about money.

Now stop lying, acknowledge you've lost, and move on.

Cant address the points. Too bad. The Green New Deal and Medicare For All are new Government disasters in the making and you cannot say a single thing to defend them. The point of mentioning those programs are bankrupt was to highlight how poorly run they are. Which is obvious.

You lose. Buh Bye.

Points? That these programs will not make a profit? They weren't meant to. Point addressed.

Have a nice day.

Why are you so obsessed with money? You keep repeating yourself. Government socialist programs are virtually always poorly run and incredibly inefficient. How will new programs like the Green New Deal or Medicare For All be any different?

I assume you support those programs. Why cant you defend your beliefs. It's truly very sad.

You’ve been field dressed like a dozen times on this thread.

You can't defend the Green New Deal or Medicare For All either. You got nothing. Duly noted,

Lame comeback. I never mentioned the programs at all. If they were to be enacted, it would be with the understanding that they are not there as a profit center. You don't seem to understand that.

 

[danielpalos]

The mistake you are making is in assuming those things were supposed to be money making endeavors. They were never expected to turn a profit.

Did find this on line, and it strikes me as funny.

One of the best examples of “socialism” in the United States - and an ironic one - is the National Football League.

1. The worst teams get the first shot at the best new players in each year’s draft
2. The salary cap structure makes it difficult to keep a dominant team together for more than a few years, and generally prevents dynasties from forming - the New England Patriots have stayed so good for so long by constantly cycling through new talent rather than by signing a lot of expensive superstars
3. In the provision that is the closest to actual socialism, the league’s TV revenues are equally shared among all of the teams, giving every team a lucrative guaranteed income stream regardless of specific quality of team play

Profits make the world go round.

Let's ask landlords what the optimum minimum wage should be.