You can't get a little pregnant - and you can't vote in just a little Socialism

[CrazyTrader55]

It's great to espouse the wonders of being rich in this country, unless you are in the majority who are not rich.

As time has passed, it has become harder for people making an average wage to afford anything in this country, and America is not getting poorer, the rich are just getting richer.

I'm not rich, buddy. I'm not for unfettered capitalism either. I'm for common sense, middle ground, that rewards honest hard working middle class people - NOT illegal aliens, and NOT the super wealthy.

 

[odanny]

I'm not rich, buddy. I'm not for unfettered capitalism either. I'm for common sense, middle ground, that rewards honest hard working middle class people - NOT illegal aliens, and NOT the super wealthy.

We are all for that, we just disagree how to get there.

The rightwing media has done a good job of convincing people that illegal immigrants are somehow getting government checks and free housing. Be grateful they will work for low wages, cause that is their future. I've already seen it in Colorado and elsewhere, entire towns relying on these folks in the service industry.

 

[pknopp]

We have long had socialist programs here.

 

[CrazyTrader55]

We are all for that, we just disagree how to get there.

The rightwing media has done a good job of convincing people that illegal immigrants are somehow getting government checks and free housing. Be grateful they will work for low wages, cause that is their future. I've already seen it in Colorado and elsewhere, entire towns relying on these folks in the service industry.

The media has convinced me of nothing.
My own common sense and some knowledge of basic economics has convinced me that the border has been purposefully flung open for years, and it's not going to end well.

 

[Skylar]

No it isn't. see above excellent post by Dblack

So the state collectivizing funds from the people, using those funds for the creation of public works of roads and highways for the benefit of the people isn't controlling the means of distribution?

 

[odanny]

I have yet to hear of a roadwork project where I live that was not funded by at least half from the federal government.

What "protected groups" (from public opinion) can still greatly benefit from this so-called "socialism"?

Police, firefighter, and government retirees. And now we go full circle why my broke-ass town cannot afford roadwork, it is because 80% of property taxes go towards paying for their pensions, which increase in value over time. I'm not sure if these crazy increases in pension payout year over year (police and FF can retire after 20 years, so the life of the pension is long) have been reigned in yet.

So this whole argument gets turned upside down by professions that are overhwhelmingly conservative where I live.

Yea, they hate them some socialism too.

 

[rightwinger]

Uh ... I don't necessarily agree with the OP, we can and do have some socialism polluting our system. But the stuff you cite here is NOT socialism. Look up a definition some time. It might help. Here, maybe this will help:



If the police (or teachers, or firemen) were trying to take control of the means of production, distribution and exchange, you might have something. But they aren't, and you don't.

If you want to take a strict view of Govt controlling the means of production, prices and wages, the US has not has Socialism since WWII. There is zero socialism today.

But if you want to take the view of Government providing free services to the people….you have to include Schools, Roads, Police, Fire and many other services to people

 

[Obiwan]

I'd say our current system is obscenely tiled in favor of the ultra rich, we have hordes of homeless and sky high prices, people drowning in debt from loanshark school loans and medical debt, and the number of billionaires keeps growing year over year, and wealth continues to be concentrated in the hands of the few.

Save us Kamala!

I'm sure she will. If you own a home, please remit a check for 40% of any increase in it's value to the IRS (and if the housing market tanks, as expected, NO REUNDS BECAUSE THE CRACKHEADS HAVE ALREADY SPENT IT)!!!

 

[Obiwan]

If you want to take a strict view of Govt controlling the means of production, prices and wages, the US has not has Socialism since WWII. There is zero socialism today.

But if you want to take the view of Government providing free services to the people….you have to include Schools, Roads, Police, Fire and many other services to people

Somebody (including the working class) pays for the free shit. After you pay your taxes, the IRS welcomes additional donations, where you can do your part!!!

 

[Mac1958]

All societies have “a little bit of socialism”

Public schools, roads, police protection, fire …..

Now you're just complicating things for them.

 

[rightwinger]

Somebody (including the working class) pays for the free shit. After you pay your taxes, the IRS welcomes additional donations, where you can do your part!!!

You figured that out?
That is what socialist countries do too.

If you rent an Apartment for $800 a month and send four kids to public school, your kids get the same education as the single kid whose parents pay $10,000 a year in school taxes

That is socialism

 

[dblack]

If you want to take a strict view of Govt controlling the means of production, prices and wages, the US has not has Socialism since WWII. There is zero socialism today.

But if you want to take the view of Government providing free services to the people….you have to include Schools, Roads, Police, Fire and many other services to people

A lot of people just lump socialism in with intrusive, overbearing government - which socialism certainly is. But there's more to it than that.

 

[Skylar]

A lot of people just lump socialism in with intrusive, overbearing government - which socialism certainly is. But there's more to it than that.

Then by the simple description of socialism, the entire premise of the OP is invalid.

 

[dblack]

Then by the simple description of socialism, the entire premise of the OP is invalid.

I don't think so. We can parse alternate definitions all day long, bot socialism is fundamentally incompatible with free markets. Putting government in charge of our economic decisions is the entire point of socialism. Trying to mix the two is problematic at best, given that they're pushing toward diametrically opposed goals.

The over the top screeching about Democrats in the OP is just the usual partisan fear mongering, but the struggle between those who want socialism and those who want economic freedom is very real, and very destructive.

 

[Skylar]

I don't think so. We can parse alternate definitions all day long, bot socialism is fundamentally incompatible with free markets. Putting government in charge of our economic decisions is the entire point. Trying to mix the two is problematic at best, given that they're pushing toward diametrically opposed goals.

The over the top screeching about Democrats in the OP is just the usual partisan fear mongering, but the struggle between those who want socialism and those who want economic freedom is very real, and very destructive.

So which policy proposed by Harris or Biden is socialism, meeting all the tenets of the definition you've offered us?

Specifically.

 

[berg80]

And just like you can't get a little pregnant --- you can't vote in just a little Socialism.

We already have aspects of socialist principles we live with every day. Social Security, Medicare, police and fire depts. Our system isn't solely based on capitalism. If it was we wouldn't be the strong nation we are.

 

[dblack]

So which policy proposed by Harris or Biden is socialism, meeting all the tenets of the definition you've offered us?

Specifically.

No - I'm not playing that game with you. If you want to deny that Democrats are pushing for more government control of our economic decisions, more power for the government and less freedom in markets, go for it. Will anyone believe you?

 

[Skylar]

No - I'm not playing that game with you. If you want to deny that Democrats are pushing for more government control of our economic decisions, more power for the government and less freedom in markets, go for it. Will anyone believe you?

How is applying the definitions you've offered us to Biden or Harris' proposed policies a 'game'?

Either those definitions of socialism are met by Biden or Harris' policies, or they're not.

If you can't give us specific examples of such policies that meet those definition, then we have our answer.

Not. Invalidating the entire premise of the thread. "Well, actually" is a double edged sword, my friend.

 

[dblack]

How is applying the definitions you've offered us to Biden or Harris' proposed policies a 'game'?

How is it you got to such a fucking idiot troll? Be specific. Provide examples. Show your work.

 

[Skylar]

How is it you got to such a fucking idiot troll? Be specific. Provide examples. Show your work.

So not.

Well that was easy.

Either we use the strict definitions in their simplest sense, as dblack suggests. In which case the premise of the thread is invalid, as neither Biden nor Harris as proposed anything that meets those strict definitions.

Or we use more general definitions of socialism. In which case the premise of the thread is invalid, as there are plenty of instances where we already meet those definitions. Demonstrating you can in fact have a little bit of socialism.

Pick one, friend.