Socialism Is The Future

Discussion in 'Socialism' started by unfocusedanakin, Jul 15, 2017.

  1. unfocusedanakin

    unfocusedanakin The Archaic Revival Lifetime Supporter

    Capitalism is very popular now but it is collapsing. The wealth gap only grows and the "middle class" is fading. I believe men like Trump are the swan song of the 1%. More and more people grow tired of it. We the proletariat are going to turn on them.

    Democratic Socialism has already come to Europe but in America it's a dirty word. It automatically means the USSR and poverty for all. But in 50 years it's going to the opposite. People will fear capitalism and it's poverty. Any person who rises too high will be feared and taxed highly. There will still be an upper class of rich people but there will be so many laws and eyes on them it will not be like current times at all. Some would say there will not even be an incentive to be that wealthy.

    My prediction is that all "politicians" will actuly be computer software written by men because men are biases and software can only follow it's code. All your needs will be taken care of. You will not really need a job because machines do most things but you will need health care for example.

    The down side of this is I see a lot of the free choice one has with careers now being taken away. You must do what is best for the group not yourself which probably means that computer will give you an assessment and tell you what you will do with your life.
  2. Ged

    Ged Tits and Thigh Man.

    It's interesting to look at the dystopian visions presented in film and literature and the reality of what has come to be in the World today and where we are going in the future.

    I don't necessarily see Socialism as a bad thing if it ensures supply of essential necessities to people as long as civil liberties are not curtailed.

    Marx designed Socialism for a fully industrialized country like England, not feudal peasant Russia, and the World is at that optimum position now.
  3. Pressed_Rat

    Pressed_Rat Do you even lift, bruh?

    Socialism is enslavement.

    Capitalism and socialism are two sides to the same coin, kind of like Democrat and Republican.

    Proponents of socialism never talk about the fact that the financial system and everything to do with money is a RUSE by the few to control the many.
  4. tumbling.dice

    tumbling.dice Visitor

    I don't understand the beef against capitalism. I've never had any problem living in a capitalist country and it's not like I was born wealthy either. I just did some fact checking and I'm solidly middle-class, as I expected, but I didn't start out that way. I left home at 19, penniless, and joined the army then went to college and partied most of the time; my grades were horrid and I eventually quit. I didn't apply myself at all but somehow ended up in the middle class. Could it have been the values I was raised with?

    After my dad died I went through his belonging and discovered old pay stubs and bills and such; he was a packrat. In 1974 he was making less than $3,000 a year, and that was at the largest employer in the county; there were plenty of people living on less. That would be between $14,000 and $15,000 today. My mother didn't work and they had three kids which they sent to a private school. Now I understand why my mom sewed clothes for us all, all the hand-me-downs and such that we kids got, the huge garden, my dad hunting for some of our meat, us kids picking polk, blackberries and persimmons, and why we couldn't afford anything 'fun'. One of my dad's many regrets was that he never got to take us all on a vacation.

    I think part of the problem today is that people are kind of lazy, feel entitled to things they didn't earn, don't understand how to budget, and see things their friends have and gotta have it too. Everybody today has to have the latest iphone, big screen TV, $40,000 truck, Playstation, a boat, house in the suburbs, $150 Air Jordans and on and on. This shit either didn't exist when I was a kid or only the upper crust could afford it. This shit also isn't necessary.

    I'd rather be in a capitalist country, it's worked for me so far.
  5. NoxiousGas

    NoxiousGas Old Fart

    what we need is to develop replicators like in Star Trek, then their would be no need for any fucked economic/political system.
    You want a burrito or a new sofa, just ask the computer to materialize one.
    1 person likes this.
  6. Piney

    Piney Lifetime Supporter Lifetime Supporter

    Americans seem unwilling to look Venezuela in the eye and it is telling when media coverage, in absence of anything else, is driven by Pro baseball players lamenting the situation back home in Venezuela.
  7. autophobe2e

    autophobe2e Senior Member

    I find they talk of little else.
    1 person likes this.
  8. unfocusedanakin

    unfocusedanakin The Archaic Revival Lifetime Supporter

    If you were alive in 1974 you were benefiting from the kind of socialism I am talking about. Your middle class lifestyle was possible because of expectations on the rich. Expectations which were removed by Regan and have since become a staple of Republicanism.
  9. unfocusedanakin

    unfocusedanakin The Archaic Revival Lifetime Supporter

    I don't think you can take off your red tinted glasses long enough to really get this. You see too much as your enemy.
    1 person likes this.
  10. tumbling.dice

    tumbling.dice Visitor

    What are you talking about specifically? Middle Class? We were poor. There was no 'wealth redistribution' going on in our house. We didn't get food stamps or welfare or ObamaCare. My dad was bringing home about $5,000 less than the median income for 1974. That's around $25,000 in today's money. He was also paying between between 18%-19% in federal taxes. Today, adjusted for inflation, he would have paid about 15%.

    Why do people who want socialism ignore families like mine who were resilient and resourceful and counted their blessings? There were a lot of us. I say were; I'm far from old, but I've noticed a general decline in personal motivation, responsibility, frugality, and citizenship in general.
  11. Adamskiffle

    Adamskiffle Members

    Most political and economic models start to generate problems when taken to an main issue with socialism from a UK person's perspective is that it's not properly means tested (+ means testing in-itself can generate problems in relation how you means test & also whether or not it even makes economic sense to mt) which leads to 10% of people on benefits etc get way too much & 10% don't get enough + whenever you closely invite the government into your life you are effectively giving them permission to fuck with you. Private businesses & charities often do a much better job of helping people than the government do.
    1 person likes this.
  12. tumbling.dice

    tumbling.dice Visitor

    I just did a little calculating with the help of Google, and in Sweden (socialists love to mention Sweden as a success story) I would have to pay half my earnings in taxes. And then I would have to trust Donald Trump and a Republican congress to spend my money wisely. No thanks, I'll just keep as much of my money as I can.
    1 person likes this.
  13. MeAgain

    MeAgain Dazed and Confused Staff Member Super Moderator

    Socialist programs in the U.S.

    Social Security
    Supplemental Security Income
    Temporary Assistance for the Needy
    Veteran's Health Administration
    Vetern's Benefits
    ADMS block Grants (substance abuse)
    Public Education
    Public Housing
    The CCC
    The WPA
    The military
    Public libraries
    College grants, loans, and scholarships
    Public roads and infrastructure (except tolls)
    The FDA
    The EPA
    The FCC
    Public parks
    Head Start
    The G.I. Bill
    Unemployment Insurance
    Mortgage deductions
    U.S. Mail
    Public landfills
    Farm subsidies
    The CIA
    The FBI
    Public Museums
    Public jails and prisons
    Business subsidies
    Elected officials' pay and benefits
    Public sewer and water systems
    The court system
    Hoover dam
    Public zoos
    The IRS
    Public transportation
    Snow removal
    The CDC
    Public street lighting
    The Energy Department
    Border protection
    Peace Corp
    The DOJ

    I probably missed a few.
  14. unfocusedanakin

    unfocusedanakin The Archaic Revival Lifetime Supporter

    The taxes on the wealthy were much higher. That made your middle class life style possible. As poor as you think you were you would be poorer by current standards. I bet "poor" meant dad worked but mom took care of the house right? You could still afford to have a home maker.
  15. unfocusedanakin

    unfocusedanakin The Archaic Revival Lifetime Supporter

    You would also not pay for many of the things you pay for now. It sounds like a lot but it's cheaper overall. And I have never heard 50% more like 35 or 40.
  16. jpdonleavy

    jpdonleavy Members

    So, it's to be pretty intense and heavy-handed fascism. I shouldn't wonder if we aren't going to bring back laws against witchcraft and sorcery in this future utopia.

    Why not opt for a low key mixed economy (which the US already has the edge of and which Canada has a lot of.

    The great thing about Canada is that it's not sinister - you don't get that dark, broody feeling you get in many areas of the states - and it has enough socialism to keep most people alive though not totally support them in their individual idiocies
  17. jpdonleavy

    jpdonleavy Members

    You get a lot more deductions in Sweden - you used to be able to deduct ALL interest. In the UK deductions are called stoppages (as though they block your colon) or 'excess' in the case of car insurance (e.g.). A lot of things are topsy turvy in the UK

    You wha'
    well, thisisit innit
  18. tumbling.dice

    tumbling.dice Visitor

    Man I just told you we weren't middle class, and I still don't understand what benefits you are talking about. It's not like the rich were tilling our garden or sewing our clothes or anything. So taxes on the wealthy were higher, so what? Taxes on everybody were higher, what did we get out of it? Be specific please.
  19. MeAgain

    MeAgain Dazed and Confused Staff Member Super Moderator

    Household income 1974.

    A $3,000 a year income in 1974 is equal to a $14,896.76 income in 2017.

    Median income in 1974 was $9,900; in 2014 it was $53,013. Poverty in 2014 was calculated at $11,670. Poverty for 2017 for a four person household is $24,600.

    Keep in mind that the value of income varies depending on the state and area one lives in. So a $3,000 a year income in New York City is worth much less than a $3,000 income in the hills of West Virginia.
    Also the definition of poverty has changed over the years.
  20. Asmodean

    Asmodean Slo motion rider

    I agree. Besides, a specific economic or political model serves a particular kind of situation. It's not like the political and economic situation in a society/nation is stagnant. So holding on to an extreme form of one model would be plain stupid.

    Also... it still has to be run by people. And people can be corrupt. Every system can and will be abused by some.

    Most populations all over the planet would benefit from a mixture of capitalism and socialism. Democracy doesn't hurt either (except decision making lol ;)) so i would say a socialist democracy with capitalist tendencies.

    I disagree. It seems obvious and most common but it doesn't have to be so necessarily. Government needs to be properly checked and controlled by the people. The 'close invitation' should be made consciously by the individual/household of course, and not come from the gubberment or be mandatory :p

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice