Would you be better off under Socialism, if so how?

Tell that to the citizens of Venezuela.... Under Chavez they went from Democracy to Socialism.

Wrong.
Democracy and socialism are not about the same subject.
With a method for political representation, you can have democracy where everyone can vote on each law, a representative democracy where everyone can vote for some to vote on laws for them, an oligarchy where an elite group rule, a tyranny where there is a single dictator, etc.
Then regardless of how you have arranged a political system of representation, the difference in economic systems from capitalism, socialism, and communism has nothing to do with political systems. Any political system can be capitalist Any political system can be socialist. And any political system can be communist.

The problem with Venezuela is they actually were still controlled by the left over aristocracy and wealthy elite.
They did not know what system they had or could have, and they were sold out by whomever told them the best lies.
Chavez was definitely democratically elected and did nothing at all undemocratic.
The main thing he did was to nationalize the oil industry, and then the US illegally imposed economic sanctions, which prevented them from being able to repair aging oil apparatus. Venezuela have very think tar sand oil, so needs special steam heating to keep oil flowing.
So political or economic systems have nothing to do with it.
It is all the illegal US economic embargo.
 
You can allow many such programs under a capitalist system. For example Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid etc are socialist style programs. The problem is such programs may eventually become so expensive they can’t be sustained.


……The United States—like every other country with an advanced economy, such as the U.K., Germany, France, and Japan—is already a partly socialist country, with a mixed economy and many government programs that serve the public good.

By this defintion, Social Security is a "socialist" program: it's a government-run pension system that cuts out private money managers. Medicare - a single-payer, government-run health insurance program for those over 65 - is too. Medicare-For-All would simply extend this to the rest of the population.

The minimum wage, maximum hour, and child labor laws that go back over a century are likewise "socialist" programs, in that the government intervenes in the capitalist market to require employers to meet minimum standards that might not be met in a pure, unregulated “free” market. Agricultural and energy subsidies are likewise socialist programs. I could go on and on.

Stripped of the Red-baiting and name-calling, the real debate isn’t between capitalism vs. socialism, but about the appropriate balance between the two.

Wrong.
Capitalism can only be profit motivated and based.
Under pure capitalism it would be illegal to tax people for use for social programs that help the poor, disabled, or have public schools.
Those are all socialism.
It is only socialism that is universal and can allow anything, because all socialism demands of any capitalist venture is regulations to prevent abuse.
Like laws against child labor or unsafe work conditions.
Socialism allows capitalism, but capitalism can not allow socialism.
Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, etc. are proof the US is not capitalist.
 
No it's not. That country eventually sunk to that system because of sanctions by the us and others. They had no where to go and charlatan dictators took power.


~~~~~~
Wrong!!
**********​
**********​
**********​
 
Last edited:
~~~~~~
Wrong!!
**********​
**********​
**********​
If you say so.
 
USSR.....
Yeah. If you ever talk about this with people who were in their 'active' years in the mid-60s through mid-80s, they will have mostly a positive vision of the Soviet Union. It was a peak of Soviet economic system. Though, afterwards everyone had to pay for that.
 
I'm curious as to the thought process involved in embracing Socialism so I ask, Would you be better off under Socialism, if so how?

I promise I won't flame
No, because I would have to suffer everyone's misery.

Those who love Socialism, or the idea of Socialism, go pick one out f those countries to live in -


......then let us folks know how you're getting on.
 
Last edited:
I'm curious as to the thought process involved in embracing Socialism so I ask, Would you be better off under Socialism, if so how?

I promise I won't flame
Two problems:

1) There are no socialists here to answer you.

2) You haven't defined what you mean by socialism.
 
Why are you guys always so afraid to define the word?

Are you ignorant, or do you know that an accurate description would make a mockery of your words?
Here, let me start you off...

I feel I would do better under Socialism because....
 
I'm curious as to the thought process involved in embracing Socialism so I ask, Would you be better off under Socialism, if so how?

I promise I won't flame
Does England, and France, and Germany, and Ireland, and Scotland and Australia and Canada etc embrace socialism?

I'm just wondering what countries today are under socialism, before I answer?
 
Does England, and France, and Germany, and Ireland, and Scotland and Australia and Canada etc embrace socialism?

I'm just wondering what countries today are under socialism, before I answer?
Great questions. They don't like providing answers for clarification, though.

By their standards, they must "think" that every country on the planet is socialist.
 
Great questions. They don't like providing answers for clarification, though.

By their standards, they must "think" that every country on the planet is socialist.
All major countries have forms of socialism in it…


Does England, and France, and Germany, and Ireland, and Scotland and Australia and Canada etc embrace socialism?

I'm just wondering what countries today are under socialism, before I answer?
 
Yeah. If you ever talk about this with people who were in their 'active' years in the mid-60s through mid-80s, they will have mostly a positive vision of the Soviet Union. It was a peak of Soviet economic system. Though, afterwards everyone had to pay for that.
..they had mucho troubles in the 30s....[and before that ] ..they were far behind the US/etc in farming/farming equipment/human rights/governmental/etc ..then the war came and a double whammy--the Germans went in, and then the Germans went out..so they had had it very rough for decades ....but, obviously, the system was a failure
 
Why are you guys always so afraid to define the word?

Are you ignorant, or do you know that an accurate description would make a mockery of your words?
Your angle is trolling.
Why?
What good does it to, besides giving yourself a false sense of superiority?
Have you ever noticed you answer every post with a non answer that attempts to make you look smarter?
We should call you "Mr. Superior"
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top