Socialism Is The Future

You seem to be working off the usual assumptions on the argument between Socialism and Capitalism. There isnt really any difference in the end

OK, in Sweden you pay half your income in tax to get amongst other things, "free" healthcare, where as in the US you pay an extra 20/30% and upwards in health insurance premiums

Between income tax and health insurance premiums, ends up being around the same amount for the same thing anyway


You go into walmart, many see that as the purest form of capitalism, buy something, but then a lower % of money you spend goes on paying local employees, a higher % of wages goes to workers in other countries as well as the profits - so buy buying cheap shit at walmart you are actually spending a greater % helping people in other conutries compared to if you had bought the same thing 50% dearer at a local mom and pop shop, a rather socialist result. Then on top of that, where does the extra money you save shopping at walmart end up going? More money to spend at KFC, or a slightly more expensive car

Its just shifting money around


Lazy bums that sit on welfare, a higher percentage of what they spend goes on the local economy


From the producer / consumer model, its far more important we are all consumers


Machines will produce everything for us, and no one will be a producer in the future, I have been hearing that for 40 years, wont happen - all that really happens is that it increases production of cheaper products, takes away local jobs for second world countries, and money save by the consumer goes on spending for even more cheap shit


With Socialism, youd have more fat cats in government with more money, capitalism its the shareholders, there aint really any difference

 

Breadlines sound like such a great idea

 

Like in Norway?

 

Yeah man, absofuckinglutely. I don't know why this is such a black and white issue for most Americans

Case in point:

Mixed economies do not have bread lines. There are very, very few countries in this world that are purely socialist. Most of the countries that are doing the best economically employ mixed economies

 

Because if they didn't, their whole argument would collapse. The argument for socialism seems based on the idea that the average person is too stupid, poor, ignorant, whatever to take care of themselves.

 

About that case in point: he also only keeps repeating the worst couple of examples like if those are the only examples of socialism.
It's like bashing on capitalism by only using the most atrocious examples where it went wrong, act like those are the only examples that matter and blame it all on the capitalist system.

Nothing comparable to breadlines ever existed under capitalism btw. Under capitalism no one ever needs food aid (and the ones who go to it are probably socialists/commies (what's the diff anyway?!) in the first place!)

 

You can do better than that

I don't think most people in favor of (some form of) socialism ignore those families like the one Tumbling grew up in at all btw. In this thread it was only one at best. And that got projected on a bunch of hypothetical people

 

I've yet to hear an argument for socialism that wasn't based on that. I mean, how can you advocate paying into a system where big government takes care of you if you're not convinced citizens are too inept to do it for themselves? It's like all those warning labels and taxes on everything from alcohol to fast food to sodas--as if people are too stupid to realize Big Macs and Cokes are full of calories. People don't eat junk food because they think it's good for them. They eat it because they like it and they live in a free society.

Socialism is like that. Oh, you don't have healthcare, you don't have this, you don't have that, give me all your money and I'll take care of all your thinking for you. It's like being in a relationship with someone who wants to control your finances. It's insulting.

 

Bernie Sanders is on video saying breadlines were a good thing back in the 80s

 

Well whats best for ourselves under capitalism is high salary, after enough cultural programming more will see the long term benefit in social service and a balancing of equity so the society as a whole might reap the full rewards of a well managed stockpile of abundant resources which of course we currently lack thanks to scarcity driving profitability as it does.

But like Pressed Rat points out money is a con game. Ideally once we get our industries in better shape and geared towards automation and utilization of more bio-based materials such as can be derived from kelp in massive quantity or mined from passing asteroids, it will hopefully find it's proper place in human history next to buggy whips.
But I think the A.I. Leadership and management bit is a good call and that Socialism can be not just a possible stepping stone to Communism as some suggest but instead the needed "cooling-off" transitional system we would need before making the shift to something similar in nature to a Resource based economy ala Fresco. (If of course we don't just totally fuck the planet up prior to such a point which I think on the bright side we're at least down to 50/50% odds of doing these days.)

 

People don't eat junk food because they're free, they eat it because its cheaper than healthy food, its addictive, they've been culturally engineered through advertising, etc. Trying not to take the post too far off topic but the American food industry is a pretty bad example to use as a shining beacon of capitalism. It represents some of the worst elements of capitalism. There is nothing free about the way the sugar industry has insidiously inserted itswlf into just about every processed food and has spent millions manipulating scientific data and demonizing fat. And what about the corn industry, which is used in everything from gasoline to ketchup and recieves enormous government subsidies every year? THAT actually sounds more like socialism

But I digress.

I actually really intended to get into the subject of healthcare with this post but I've ran out of time and have to go back to work...ill be back

 

George McGovern and Michelle Obama did that too. So has the FDA. Then you've got pressure from groups like CSPI. Demonize the sugar industry all you want, but they didn't pass any laws. It wasn't big sugar who forced fast food restaurants to switch from natural saturated animal fats to trans fats all those years ago.

 

Your 2014 and 2017 incomes below which poverty inheres are measuring two different things - the level of income below which = poverty didn't more than double in three years (sheesh)

 

I support some public commodities to an extent. Like military, jails, police, fire protection, and some forms of public land.

But I'm far from a socialist.

 

You got the life you had. You did not answer the question did your mom work? Based on the time period I would bet she did not. To be the same level of poor now she and your dad would both be working and would likely be in more debt with less benefits from the job. The middle class and the poor are both more poor then they have ever been. The natural flow of long term unchecked capatilsim is what we see now. More and more at the top while most have less. This is why socialism is needed. It keeps the capitalism and greed in check. But Americans love greed and everyone thinks of themselves as about to be rich. So they always vote as if they too will have millions. Where as in Europe I think they have a longer history of most people being in poverty while the elite rule historically. So they accepted socialism much easier.

You need to stop thinking of socialism as Russia. Coming from the 70's I get what a big deal the USSR was at the time. Yes there was massive poverty in that country but that is not what socialism is now. There is no loss of freedoms of press or speech or your ability to be rich. Which seem to be the main sticking points for Americans. They believe bread lines and censorship will be the norm. 6 eyes is talking about Venezuela like all people like him do. Yet they ignore Norway and most places in Europe where they are happy.

It's just that when you are rich there will be none of this "job creator trickle down economics stuff". Your taxes will not be low in the hopes that you kindly give it back. You will have an obligation to the system that gave you success. Your business can not make profit with out the roads for example can it? Did you build those? Did you plumb your office building? No so you owe something to the infrastructure.

Are you aware that most wealthy corporations and people pay little or zero tax? They give us nothing and that is supposed to be OK because they should be praised and honored. The middle class and poor support them.

 

Poverty in 2014 was calculated at $11,670. Poverty for 2017 for a four person household is $24,600.

I mean you quote 11,670 in 2014 and just three years later it has jumped to 24,600, which is impossible

unless you meant single people in 2014 and family of four in 2017 but why would you do that - why

 

I guess I think of people working together as a positive and not a negative. We are stronger like that. The goverment is not taking care of you your fellow man are. It's just the goverment overseeing something like the health care. But the money comes from all of us.

You seem to think of it like everyone is taking advantage of you. In my word every American is healthy and educated for very little money because our system gives them that. How does that not make us strong?

 

The Interstates are socialism - welfare is socialism - medicaid is socialism - K-12 education is socialism and on and on - it's there at the margins and penetrating the manstream in some cases