Democratic Socialism

#251
#251
NCFisher said:
There is no even mixture of socialism and capitalism. Either the means of production (and distribution, pricing, wages) are owned by 'the people' by the government on their behalf or directly by them, or it is not. Social spending is not - NOT - socialism, but the expression of a market system throwing off vast tax lucre to support and sustain even those who can't or don't wish to participate in it. Period.

Both sides get this wrong; none of the Nordic countries are socialist, "democratic" or not. Regarding the Nordics, the right applies the term in error to warn of large government, waste and excessive taxation (and therefore a reduction of liberty), the left wrongly applies it to say "See! - socialism!".

Communism is fundamentally a technocratic stateless, classless, moneyless society akin to anarchy, the state displaced by a vast, mutually cooperative corp d'esprit in which we magically resolve our disputes without killing each other and stuff springs from unicorn horns. Socialism is the theoretical transition period from capitalism to communism; the pupal stage of communism. Linking the two is hardly outlandish since socialism is the deconstruction stage of capitalism and western society, pursuant to communism.

The 'bailout of the farming industry' is not socialism, nor a bailout of the industry. It is compensating people for losses incurred as a result of government action. It is a principle of basic law, from which government is not exempt.

Too many slow people don't know WTH they're talking about when they say we're already socialist, or a mix of it and capitalism.
Click to expand...
This post nails it!
 
  • Like
Reactions: NCFisher and AM64
#253
#253
NCFisher said:
There is no even mixture of socialism and capitalism. Either the means of production (and distribution, pricing, wages) are owned by 'the people' by the government on their behalf or directly by them, or it is not. Social spending is not - NOT - socialism, but the expression of a market system throwing off vast tax lucre to support and sustain even those who can't or don't wish to participate in it. Period.

Both sides get this wrong; none of the Nordic countries are socialist, "democratic" or not. Regarding the Nordics, the right applies the term in error to warn of large government, waste and excessive taxation (and therefore a reduction of liberty), the left wrongly applies it to say "See! - socialism!".

Communism is fundamentally a technocratic stateless, classless, moneyless society akin to anarchy, the state displaced by a vast, mutually cooperative corp d'esprit in which we magically resolve our disputes without killing each other and stuff springs from unicorn horns. Socialism is the theoretical transition period from capitalism to communism; the pupal stage of communism. Linking the two is hardly outlandish since socialism is the deconstruction stage of capitalism and western society, pursuant to communism.

The 'bailout of the farming industry' is not socialism, nor a bailout of the industry. It is compensating people for losses incurred as a result of government action. It is a principle of basic law, from which government is not exempt.

Too many slow people don't know WTH they're talking about when they say we're already socialist, or a mix of it and capitalism.
Click to expand...

I always considered the real difference/transition between socialism and communism is that point where people think they are in control and when the gloves come off and the party makes it clear the people have no control. Otherwise, like you say socialism just lets the people think they can experiment and walk away, but initial "euphoria" is just a trap ... all wrapped up in a cozy cocoon before they get introduced to the hard cruel fact that communism is always totalitarianism because it simply doesn't work any other way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NCFisher
#254
#254
NCFisher said:
There is no even mixture of socialism and capitalism. Either the means of production (and distribution, pricing, wages) are owned by 'the people' by the government on their behalf or directly by them, or it is not. Social spending is not - NOT - socialism, but the expression of a market system throwing off vast tax lucre to support and sustain even those who can't or don't wish to participate in it. Period.

Both sides get this wrong; none of the Nordic countries are socialist, "democratic" or not. Regarding the Nordics, the right applies the term in error to warn of large government, waste and excessive taxation (and therefore a reduction of liberty), the left wrongly applies it to say "See! - socialism!".

Communism is fundamentally a technocratic stateless, classless, moneyless society akin to anarchy, the state displaced by a vast, mutually cooperative corp d'esprit in which we magically resolve our disputes without killing each other and stuff springs from unicorn horns. Socialism is the theoretical transition period from capitalism to communism; the pupal stage of communism. Linking the two is hardly outlandish since socialism is the deconstruction stage of capitalism and western society, pursuant to communism.

The 'bailout of the farming industry' is not socialism, nor a bailout of the industry. It is compensating people for losses incurred as a result of government action. It is a principle of basic law, from which government is not exempt.

Too many slow people don't know WTH they're talking about when they say we're already socialist, or a mix of it and capitalism.
Click to expand...
This is one of the dumbest posts that I have ever read on this forum. There is so much to unpack here that I'm not going to waste time on a lot of it, but I will address a few things about it...

(1) Social engineering absolutely is a means to redistribute wealth. That is ridiculous to suggest otherwise. The United States is a mixture of socialism and capitalism. We have not been purely capitalist since the 1800's. This is so ignorant, I'm not wasting time on it.

(2) Trump's $12 billion bailout of the farming industry is definitely an example of socialism... and you pretty much defined it as such yourself.

You are so pretentious and verbose. You constantly contradict yourself with your verbiage.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Septic
#256
#256
Trump's farming bailout is welfare but it's not socialism unless he took control of the farms. Bernie's health plan is socialism 'cause he's doing away with Anthem, Aetna and all the other private insurance firms and replacing them with gov't plans.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and SpaceCoastVol
#257
#257
Sea Ray said:
Trump's farming bailout is welfare but it's not socialism unless he took control of the farms. Bernie's health plan is socialism 'cause he's doing away with Anthem, Aetna and all the other private insurance firms and replacing them with gov't plans.
Click to expand...
The government isn't taking control of the means of production, so it's not purely socialism but it was a socialistic policy to subsidize the farming industry, as a way to offset the impact of a trade war.

...but hey, that clown was even arguing against it being a bailout. That guy probably argues with Siri. He is so damn pretentious.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad and Mick
#258
#258
VolnJC said:
This is a really good read
Op-Ed: Bernie Sanders is the front-runner because of how we raised our kids
Click to expand...

Interesting and in some cases right on the money. However, there's some weirdness in there

All of this focus on older voters and their retirement funds is a nice sentiment but it's misplaced. Older Americans aren't just doing okay. A 2017 study of age-based wealth in the U.S. shows that a typical household headed by an adult 65 and older has 47 times the net worth of a household headed by younger Americans. Yep, Papa and Granny are loaded.

Now, helping older people who happen to be poor or on the margins of poverty is something different. But the cultural assumption many of us have about elderly folks needing more financial help in America is pretty much the opposite of the truth.

Throw in the Affordable Care Act, which literally and foolishly leaned on younger and healthier Americans to foot the bill for covering older and sicker people, and you see a pattern here.
Click to expand...

That's the difference in accumulated wealth. If you've done it right you start with nothing and end with something, so why make it sound like it's something sinister? You buy a house when you are young and generally have a lot of debt and little equity. If all goes well, that transfers into all equity ... just the way it works - sweat equity. Retirement plans (even including SS) are pretty much the same; they are simply an accumulated nest egg to draw on when the earnings from employment stop ... with our nanny state the young better be damn glad it works this way or they'd be on the hook for a lot more.


Obamacare is a dim original - no reason Bernie should be getting benefit of a poison pill that the dims unloaded on us. But maybe voting age kids can really be that stupid. Insurance has always been a pool concept where those who initially need it less pay the way for those more in need. Otherwise, if everyone had to pay an insurance premium equaling benefits and insurance overhead, why would you have insurance to begin with; it's the basic reason that people who have been uninsured pay a penalty to join when they need it ... they never contributed to the pool.

This is a generational argument that's gone on for some time. Not really any different from the same thing we early boomers saw when we were young; I don't know, perhaps our critical thinking skills were just sharper than the current crop. Seems to me that the argument is more about how dims have exploited youth to broaden their base rather than anything a lot of parents did or didn't teach kids. I do know that a lot of wild eyed beliefs that our two sons came home from school with were certainly contrary to what we taught them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad, Rickyvol77 and VolnJC
#259
#259
BowlBrother85 said:
The government isn't taking control of the means of production, so it's not purely socialism but it was a socialistic policy to subsidize the farming industry, as a way to offset the impact of a trade war.

...but hey, that clown was even arguing against it being a bailout. That guy probably argues with Siri. He is so damn pretentious.
Click to expand...
What about gov't confiscation of wealth? Is a wealth tax socialism? I think that's one of Bernie's most egregious proposals
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#260
#260
Sea Ray said:
What about gov't confiscation of wealth? Is a wealth tax socialism? I think that's one of Bernie's most egregious proposals
Click to expand...

The left has a problem and a solution both with wisdom and wealth. Their partisans can't seem to grasp that both are accumulated values, and that their younger base particularly don't have much of either. Their solution is to weaponize both inexperience and envy, and turn the gullible against those who have worked, learned, and earned.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceCoastVol, McDad, 1972 Grad and 5 others
#261
#261
AM64 said:
The left has a problem and a solution both with wisdom and wealth. Their partisans can't seem to grasp that both are accumulated values, and that their younger base particularly don't have much of either. Their solution is to weaponize both inexperience and envy, and turn the gullible against those who have worked, learned, and earned.
Click to expand...
Well, that's what spoiled brats do.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad and AM64
#262
#262
AM64 said:
The left has a problem and a solution both with wisdom and wealth. Their partisans can't seem to grasp that both are accumulated values, and that their younger base particularly don't have much of either. Their solution is to weaponize both inexperience and envy, and turn the gullible against those who have worked, learned, and earned.
Click to expand...
It's not clear if you understand that 9 of the 10 poorest states in the country are bright red states. The fact is, the vast majority of the food stamps that Trump is cutting, and other government assistance programs for the indigent that he wants to cut, will be most detrimental to states like West Virginia and Mississippi. It seems like you have a false notion of what the Republican party base is comprised of.
 
#263
#263
BowlBrother85 said:
It's not clear if you understand that 9 of the 10 poorest states in the country are bright red states. The fact is, the vast majority of the food stamps that Trump is cutting, and other government assistance programs for the indigent that he wants to cut, will be most detrimental to states like West Virginia and Mississippi. It seems like you have a false notion of what the Republican party base is comprised of.
Click to expand...

Now can you actually demonstrate that those welfare recipients in MS and WV are republicans, or are you just going to spout numbers like they actually mean something?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
#264
#264
Sea Ray said:
Trump's farming bailout is welfare but it's not socialism unless he took control of the farms. Bernie's health plan is socialism 'cause he's doing away with Anthem, Aetna and all the other private insurance firms and replacing them with gov't plans.
Click to expand...
I disagree. Farm subsidies are de facto socialism. We can argue whether or not they are necessary, but when the government subsidizes private enterprise it is socialism.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Septic, MercyPercy, volfanhill and 3 others
#268
#268
Sea Ray said:
Trump's farming bailout is welfare but it's not socialism unless he took control of the farms. Bernie's health plan is socialism 'cause he's doing away with Anthem, Aetna and all the other private insurance firms and replacing them with gov't plans.
Click to expand...

He's not controlling health care, though. All he is doing is eliminating the middle man as an unnecessary expense.
 
#269
#269
BowlBrother85 said:
It's not clear if you understand that 9 of the 10 poorest states in the country are bright red states. The fact is, the vast majority of the food stamps that Trump is cutting, and other government assistance programs for the indigent that he wants to cut, will be most detrimental to states like West Virginia and Mississippi. It seems like you have a false notion of what the Republican party base is comprised of.
Click to expand...
I'm glad it is (supposedly) cut. Hint: it really isn't.

You made a leap of logic in your post. Just because there are poor receiving assistance in Red States, doesn't mean that all those receiving assistance are Republican voters.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77 and AM64
#270
#270
AM64 said:
Now can you actually demonstrate that those welfare recipients in MS and WV are republicans, or are you just going to spout numbers like they actually mean something?
Click to expand...
The polls in those states, indicate that they are. Trump's largest core constituency is comprised of white men over 40, who do not have a college degree and live in a household which earns less than $50,000 annually.

The Republican Party is the party of Jethro and Lulu, who attend Trump rallies and rail against the evils of socialism.... but an hour later pay for their groceries with food stamps on the way back to their public housing residence.
 
#272
#272
lawgator1 said:
He's not controlling health care, though. All he is doing is eliminating the middle man as an unnecessary expense.
Click to expand...

And replacing one middleman with the government as a middleman. The government as middleman will not be cheaper, more effective, or a positive in any conceivable way. How can you clowns rail against military spending and support government running something else?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77, SpaceCoastVol, 1972 Grad and 2 others
#273
#273
lawgator1 said:
He's not controlling health care, though. All he is doing is eliminating the middle man as an unnecessary expense.
Click to expand...

When the government , any government , eliminates private business to replace it with government run programs ... that’s socialism at its heart and it’s a bad thing .
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sea Ray, Rickyvol77, SpaceCoastVol and 2 others
#274
#274
lawgator1 said:
He's not controlling health care, though. All he is doing is eliminating the middle man as an unnecessary expense.
Click to expand...

He who pays is in control so yeah the .gov will be controlling healthcare under Bernie's plan.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#275
#275
0nelilreb said:
When the government , any government , eliminates private business to replace it with government run programs ... that’s socialism at its heart and it’s a bad thing .
Click to expand...
Isn't government control Marxism?

Maybe Fascism???

I get my isms confused.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NCFisher and AM64
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top