Socialism Fails Everytime ...

#527
#527
hog88 said:
Yes and farm subsidies can rightfully be argued a failure.
Click to expand...

I won't argue with that. The point remains that rightists yowling against socialism turn a deaf ear and blind eye to the fact the USA, under whatever administration or dominant party, practices socialism on a large scale. And many, many, many rightists along with their hated leftists enjoy the benefit thereof. And rightists would yowl even louder if suddenly denied of these benefits of socialism.
 
#528
#528
WoodsmanVol said:
I won't argue with that. The point remains that rightists yowling against socialism turn a deaf ear and blind eye to the fact the USA, under whatever administration or dominant party, practices socialism on a large scale. And many, many, many rightists along with their hated leftists enjoy the benefit thereof. And rightists would yowl even louder if suddenly denied of these benefits of socialism.
Click to expand...

Yes, we do and we'd be better off if we reduced the amount of socialism we practice.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64, 85SugarVol, Vol since 77 and 3 others
#530
#530
hog88 said:
Yes, we do and we'd be better off if we reduced the amount of socialism we practice.
Click to expand...

I won't argue with that, either. We will have to, however, modify how we practice capitalism as well. Too much attached to it stifles advancement of little people. The greed, the blockages, such as usually money tools to hinder or force surrender of inventions, ideas etc to bigwigs. Who then siphon everything for themselves.
 
#531
#531
ClearwaterVol said:
It's presence in the Constitution doesn't change the analysis on its socialistic nature.
Click to expand...
It’s a false argument to say anything the government spends tax revenue on is socialism or socialistic. If anything, it’s a dog whistle tactic used by the left to tweak the noses of the right.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vol8188
#532
#532
MG1968 said:
It’s a false argument to say anything the government spends tax revenue on is socialism or socialistic. If anything, it’s a dog whistle tactic used by the left to tweak the noses of the right.
Click to expand...

If it ain't being handled by the private sector then it is a socialistic program. We have lots.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WoodsmanVol
#533
#533
PEPPERJAX said:
OE came back with a different username.
Click to expand...

???? That BASTARD. He was a cool dude. Spammed 100k posts lol. I remember he came back and saw his posts for a day or 2 then? Slice would probably know whats up with OE...Slice is bout as OG as it gets on VN...and he is a Zoner.

Edit ..frfr is saying "for REAL, for real??" As in " no sheit??"
 
  • Like
Reactions: PEPPERJAX
#534
#534
ClearwaterVol said:
If it ain't being handled by the private sector then it is a socialistic program. We have lots.
Click to expand...

Being handled by the private sector doesn’t automatically make something non socialistic. When the government picks winners and losers amongst private industry through eminent domain and tax subsidies then it’s no different than them just owning the means of production.?
 
#535
#535
sonofUT62 said:
Being handled by the private sector doesn’t automatically make something non socialistic. When the government picks winners and losers amongst private industry through eminent domain and tax subsidies then it’s no different than them just owning the means of production.?
Click to expand...

I agree and my statement was one direction only. The converse was not necessarily true.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sonofUT62
#536
#536
marcusluvsvols said:
???? That BASTARD. He was a cool dude. Spammed 100k posts lol. I remember he came back and saw his posts for a day or 2 then? Slice would probably know whats up with OE...Slice is bout as OG as it gets on VN...and he is a Zoner.

Edit ..frfr is saying "for REAL, for real??" As in " no sheit??"
Click to expand...
My street slang died years ago.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols
#537
#537
Not sure farm subsidies are a great example of socialism, although I can certainly understand the perspective. And as a matter of principle, I'm against them. One of the problems with farm subsidies is that they cause land/rent prices to rise because that is the big uncontrolled variable for production. Jack the subsidies up enough and land around Deer Creek, Mississippi will cost $5,000/acre to rent to grow cotton/soybeans/corn on.

The problem with farm subsidies is...everyone in the world, with very few exceptions does them. When I was still in the cotton business, China's cost of production was the equivalent of just over $1/lb, well over US cost of production. But for China, it was a jobs program because the bulk, if not all, of their cotton was/is hand-picked. The peasants needed something to do.

Another problem is a lot of commodities, including cotton, trade in US Dollars. For some countries, that is a valuable source of hard currency. So some governments subsidize their production with their local currency to garner dollars.

I do not know if this is still true, but Japan was almost impossible to ship rice to. At one time, it could be delivered from Arkansas for a fraction of what the Japanese spent producing their own rice. Whether it was true or not, I understood it to be because of them going hungry at the end of and after WWII and they have no intention of depending on someone else for their staple food supply.

And is describing farm subsidies as socialism kind of like saying nuclear weaponry is socialist because producers of those products are even more dependent on government funding (100%)? Whereas there is at least a market component to farm income. And, following along with the agriculture subsidies theme, the reason we have nukes is because other people have them.

Do not misunderstand me. I squirm at farm subsidies. Just not sure it is a good example of socialism. Not going to argue about it as I see the point. Just pointing out some aspects not put forth in the above discussion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tbh, AM64, EasternVol and 1 other person
#539
#539
WoodsmanVol said:
OK, got that. Now, to go back to the original topic of my first post, whatever the reason for the subsidies, it's still socialist. Along with the other examples I provided.
Click to expand...
Not disagreeing. Just clarifying that the end goal is different than what you stated.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BreatheUT
#540
#540
MG1968 said:
It’s a false argument to say anything the government spends tax revenue on is socialism or socialistic. If anything, it’s a dog whistle tactic used by the left to tweak the noses of the right.
Click to expand...
How wouldn't it be? Tax revenue is generated by society as a whole. It may be spent on an individual or private subject, but it still relies on socialist programs to generate those taxes.
 
#541
#541
LouderVol said:
How wouldn't it be? Tax revenue is generated by society as a whole. It may be spent on an individual or private subject, but it still relies on socialist programs to generate those taxes.
Click to expand...
How are tax revenues dependent upon socialist programs?
 
#542
#542
GroverCleveland said:
How are tax revenues dependent upon socialist programs?
Click to expand...
there are legitimate functions of government and funding them requires revenue. We can argue semantics. We can argue the merits of income vs. consumption taxes. But to say that EVERYTHING the government spends money on is socialism is a weak, dogmatic argument.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and Vol since 77
#543
#543
MG1968 said:
there are legitimate functions of government and funding them requires revenue. We can argue semantics. We can argue the merits of income vs. consumption taxes. But to say that EVERYTHING the government spends money on is socialism is a weak, dogmatic argument.
Click to expand...
Were you responding to me?
 
#548
#548
ClearwaterVol said:
Yeah, we have no where near the best healthcare in the world.

Canadians fly to Canada for treatment.

I know several families that are from Columbia, but are US citizens and make yearly visits home and schedule all appointments and treatments on their vacation. They claim the quality is the same, but less inexpensive than paying for health insurance in the US.
Click to expand...

The data says the quality is better.
 
#549
#549
WoodsmanVol said:
Socialism includes the enormous subsidies to keep farmers afloat. It includes tax dollars used for public infrastructure, Social Security, fire protection, maintenance of the military, public transportation, police departments, public parks, public schools, postal service, and of course medicare and medicaid. A HUGE, and I mean HUGE amount of these socialist perks benefit rightist voters who live mainly in rural areas. Remove any or all these perks and watch what happens when you do. The folks screaming the loudest against socialism will be the most violent pizzed off if they're denied the benefits.

Once again, Quark's assessment of hoomans is dead on, and that includes loudmouthed socialism despising rightists:

Let me tell you something about Hew-mons, Nephew. They're a wonderful, friendly people, as long as their bellies are full and their holosuites privileges are working available. But take away their creature comforts, deprive them of their food, sleep, sonic showers social caste and social strata perks make those perks unavailable, put their lives in jeopardy over an extended period of time and those same friendly, intelligent, wonderful people... will become as nasty and as violent as the most bloodthirsty Klingon and murderous criminal. You don't believe me? Look at those faces their resurrectionist behavior, attitudes, and hate-mongering. Look in their eyes. See what is preexistence and smolders just beneath them.
View attachment 537613
Click to expand...

I’ve been on record opposing public parks/land for a long time now. It’s absolutely insane that the federal government owns the majority of the western states

Given UPS (capitalism) provides a much better service anyway, we should eliminate the USPS
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols
#550
#550
Vol8188 said:
I’ve been on record opposing public parks/land for a long time now. It’s absolutely insane that the federal government owns the majority of the western states
Given UPS (capitalism) provides a much better service anyway, we should eliminate the USPS
Click to expand...

I'm a FEDEX man myself, but I still see what you're saying here. Now, about the USA owning all that western land, I beg to differ. Capitalism was set to practically eliminate the Great Smokey Mountains, via lumber harvesting and coal mining. That's just an example. We who enjoy our National and State Forests and Parks, have both Roosevelt Presidents to thank. Both socialism and capitalism have their positives along with their negatives. I insist the real issue with both systems is elitists, who are allowed to abuse the system. In a sense, a pure socialist system CAN'T exist because the greed and other shortcomings of humans guarantees it will be detoured into capitalism. And that's the real reason socialism systems collapse on themselves
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: luthervol
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top