What's your stance on socialism?

WeedZ · Feb 26, 2020

morvoran said:
The fact that they already pay more taxes than everybody else. For the corporations that don't pay taxes, the reason they don't is due to deductible donations that they willingly give up to help others rather than have the money stolen from them.

If we tax the rich to a point they cannot make profits, this will tend to force them to move their companies and money to other countries. This will affect everybody in the long run through higher taxes for the middle/poor classes, less jobs, and less choices in the market place which will destroy the economy. I don't know about you, but I dread the idea of eating my pets just to feed myself and my family.

Most, if not all, of us have gained from Trumps policies. Have you not been paying attention to how great the economy has been?

Well, I don't know about you, but since I am self employed, I guess I can say my wages didn't increase (even though I have been making more sales the past couple of years which could be assumed to be an increase in wages). Maybe you should go speak with your boss (if you have one) and ask for a raise.
The truth is that the top tier's earnings have only increased 12% where the earnings of the middle/lower classes have jumped up 20% since Trump has taken office. I'm not sure how good you are at math, but maybe this will help you: 20% > 12%

Yeah, um, since I'm a republican, I don't have leaders to tell me what to do, so I don't have mantras. I go by facts that are out in the open if you just open your eyes to see them. I don't just focus on the minor details of "oh, the rich have more money than me, they should pay more. What bad could come from that?" I actually think of the broader picture of what the negative effects will be as well.

This whole thing about social services are socialism is a tired, overly used talking point of communist that only want to take control.
Our social services do resemble a lax version of socialism, but they are more of a "pay your fair share" system rather then spreading the wealth. We all need to have fire dept, police, roads, educations, etc, so these are services that benefit everybody. We do not need to steal money from the richest just because someone refuses to work.

Take a look at Cuba and Venezuela and get back to me on this.

I don't want socialized healthcare. Why are my taxes going to increase to pay for something that I don't want or need? How can you justify stealing money from anybody to pay for your own wants? That's very selfish of you, comrade.

Because we need that rich dude to provide the goods and/or services we need/want at reasonable prices and to pay the outrageous tax rate our dumbocrat politicians keep jacking up more and more. If that rich dude is gone, who is going to pay for these silly socialist programs that the Socialist Demonrats want to force upon us?

Unless you are a quadriplegic, which I doubt since you are able to type a lot of nonsense on this site, there are other ways to make money other than sucking of the teets of SI. You can start a hobby making crafts and sell them online or to your community. You can save up to buy stuff at garage sales or bulk online orders, and sell them for a profit. That's how I got started with my business.
Trust me, once you become self-sufficient, your outlook on life and society will become a lot better and you won't post silly stuff about how people should feel sorry for yourself and take care of you through taxes.

I'm on mobile so I'm not going to quote you a dozen times. I'll just reply to each paragraph.

1. Its estimated that 100 billion of tax revenue is lost each year due to tax dodging by the wealthy.

2. You have this false belief that the filthy rich must remain filthy rich in order for the mysterious economy creature to stay alive. This is one of the nonsense lies they sell you to protect their wealth. As far as taxing them to a point of not making a profit. I dont think you understand 10 mill + in revenue. You could tax them 90% and they would still clear more in a year than all of us in this thread combined, and a few million more on top.

3 and 4. Trump's policies make no difference to any private company, in terms of what to pay their employees. The name of the capitalist game is 'bottom line'. You maximize income and eliminate expenses. Labor budget is an expense. The people that run the companies got the benefit.

Unless you work on a farm or for the government, in which case, sorry for the rough last few years.

"The truth is that the top tier's earnings have only increased 12% where the earnings of the middle/lower classes have jumped up 20% since Trump has taken office. I'm not sure how good you are at math, but maybe this will help you: 20% > 12%"

Come on. You're smarter than that. Apparently your math isnt that great. 12% of 10,000,000 to 1,000,000,000 is 1,200,000 to 120,000,000.

20% of 30,000 to 120,000 is 6,000 to 24,000.

In this case 12% is 41,667 times greater than 20%.

5. You do the mantra stuff all the time, like every political post of yours is "witchhunt" "do-nothing-dems" "fake news" "orange man bad" etc. All repeated verbatim from fox and friends and right wing memes. If you catch yourself reciting a slogan or phrase as many do, that's a good time to self evaluate if what you're saying is actually true, or if you're just part of the herd. Dude, you even say "dumbocrat" in this post.

As far as relying on facts, in this thread alone you have been proven factually wrong three different times. But rather than acknowledge it. You sidestep with "well the other team is still wrong. Here's another reason why which is also factually untrue".

You dont care about facts, you care about your team winning always. Dems are always wrong in your view no matter the topic, and the reasons why you'll look up later. Instead of looking at facts now, coming to an informed conclusion and maybe lean a bit either way depending on the issue at hand. Informed and reasonable people arent so polarized.

I'm not really feeling the effort to go through the rest. I can just sum it up as greed, selfishness and lack of social responsibility. Which are traits that most people would be ashamed of showing to others.

Also, poor people unable to work and needing medication, to feed their children, proper housing.. these arent the enemies.

leon315 · Feb 26, 2020

ONCE UPON A TIME, there was a Chinese revolutionist, politician, military command said:

''It doesn't matter whether a cat is black or white, as long as it catches mice''

Deng Xiaoping.

translate: It doesn’t matter if they are democratic or despotic, so long as they safeguard a country's interests.

btw what has scandinavian to do with Socialism?

notimp · Feb 26, 2020

Thats the key question.

No one is asking for socialism to be implemented anywhere.

You are all just following an ultra right wing playbook again, that has finally caught up to 'epistemes beat memes'.

You just say - someone is demanding socialicm.

People are too stupid to check anyhow.

Now you've got yourself a great discussion on them socials on 'is socialism ok'?
("Yes/No/Maybe Please tell, pleaaase.")

What a Sanders is campaigning for are systems, that have been in place in Canada an Europe for years. They arent socialist. They are democratic socialist (http://worldpopulationreview.com/countries/democratic-socialist-countries/).

History of that is - socialism lost everywhere in western europe, and to get votes at the time the conservatives aligned with social democrats, which were a party less left wing than socialists. What they then implemented was 'social market economy' and thats now basically what Sanders is demanding.

On healthcare:
Now - everyone that hasnt a vested interest in certain economical sectors wants the US healthcare system to be reformed. Simply because - for what it costs, its output is abysmal, on average (not for rich people). Which makes this a sector, where you could go in as a state, force restructuring, do half of the stuff wrong, and still have a more efficient outcome, than today. You could even try to foster economic competition within restructuring that sector, and have an actual economic boost, just form people cutting the fat out of it - which is also, why people always like to link it to further social reforms, like f.e. climate change - where you'd know that you'd loose jobs, currently, on average - but that it is a good investment for the future (not only for tha earth, but also for industry).

The only reasons why you wouldnt want to restructure health care, arent 'I like more joice', but because of vested interest, and because of the 'competitive spirit' that forces americans to fight even for the crappiest of low wage jobs - to get, or maintain their health insurance. That alone also is an economical driver, and one that is larger than 'just the health sector'.

So at heart, this is a discussion about -

- a social democratic system
Where there are security nets, that help people over illnesses, and job loss, without them having to go to basically NGOs - but that have less economic upwards dynamics at the 'shitty jobs' level ('We in america always believed in a can do attitude). While those competition around 'shitty jobs' also ensures, that new companies can get off the ground a little quicker.

- a neoliberal market economy
Where all life hands you, has to be solved by you somehow, you handle the risk, but at the same time, you getting sick can mean - that you loose your carrierpath at random.

In general yes - the second one is seen as an economic advantage for the US economy, but not for its people. So even the democratic elite, would like the system to remain, where its at currently.

Therefore the discussion currently has devolved into -

- calling Sanders proposals to change certain social systems "socialism" - which they arent. To have you somehow associate 'soviet union' with 'better health care'

- and saying words, that sound like what most of you would want (Buttigieg (im not googling that name again to find out how its written.

) proposing "healthcare for everyone, that wants it" (and qualifies within certain parametes, that then can be tweaked, and... (= democratic elites will love it).

So thats the decision you are making, essentially. Make america a little less competitive, but fairer? No slippery slope, no russia, no socialism, no central planning, no...

How health care systems in western europe work, f.e. is, that there are cost brackets defined for every procedure, and even treatments. That are roughly the same for everyone. Companies can compete within those cost brackets. And yes, if you are a lets say farmer - you get a cost brackets that are a little larger than everyone elses (for what you are paying in) because, your livelyhood is basically your body.

Also you (everyone) only get one visit to a medical specialist (not a general practitioner) per field (so if you have two separate problems, thats not a problem) per quater year, otherwise you are paying for the visit out of pocket. (Thats in there so you dont jump doctors, because one doesnt tell you what you'd like to hear. If further treatments/visits are prescribed by that specialists, those then also are covered.) Clinics always are free.

Thats the extent to which those systems are 'state planned' in western europe.

For the state to be able to do that - in many countries in europe, medical insurance companies are run by the state. (Most of the important ones actually). Thats there, so that the state can dictate those 'price brackets' mentioned. If you feel the need to get much better care (which usually where I'm from is just pampering a little less waiting time sometimes, and enya music in the doctors office), you can pay for addon insurance products - that basically pays you fast track on some physicians, and access to some very high in demand individuals.

To get around that problem, as a state you also finance medical universities. So you always have very smart people, at the highest level also attending to the public at large.

Are you still afraid, that this is socialism? Is that too much state planning for you?

I hope that clears up some of the question.

morvoran · Feb 26, 2020

WeedZ said:
1. Its estimated that 100 billion of tax revenue is lost each year due to tax dodging by the wealthy.

They don't dodge taxes. They utilize the tax laws to their benefit. As you say, their main interest is the bottom dollar. Why would they screw themselves by letting the government steal from them when they don't have to and instead put their money where it would be more beneficial as in private charities?

WeedZ said:
2. You have this false belief that the filthy rich must remain filthy rich in order for the mysterious economy creature to stay alive. This is one of the nonsense lies they sell you to protect their wealth. As far as taxing them to a point of not making a profit. I dont think you understand 10 mill + in revenue. You could tax them 90% and they would still clear more in a year than all of us in this thread combined, and a few million more on top.

No, I have a belief that nobody should have their money stolen from them if they earned it regardless of how much they have.
How about you give me access to your bank account and I'll give 70% of it to a homeless person, so you can see how it feels.

WeedZ said:
3 and 4. Trump's policies make no difference to any private company, in terms of what to pay their employees. The name of the capitalist game is 'bottom line'. You maximize income and eliminate expenses. Labor budget is an expense. The people that run the companies got the benefit.

WeedZ said:
Unless you work on a farm or for the government, in which case, sorry for the rough last few years.

You don't seem to have a grasp on what the president has been doing the past 3 years and what his policies are.

WeedZ said:
"The truth is that the top tier's earnings have only increased 12% where the earnings of the middle/lower classes have jumped up 20% since Trump has taken office. I'm not sure how good you are at math, but maybe this will help you: 20% > 12%"

Come on. You're smarter than that. Apparently your math isnt that great. 12% of 10,000,000 to 1,000,000,000 is 1,200,000 to 120,000,000.

20% of 30,000 to 120,000 is 6,000 to 24,000.

In this case 12% is 41,667 times greater than 20%.

You're missing the point. The fact that I was trying to point out to you is that the 90% of wage earners are growing at a faster rate than the top 10% to counter your lie about the top 10% getting a greater wage increase.

WeedZ said:
5. You do the mantra stuff all the time, like every political post of yours is "witchhunt" "do-nothing-dems" "fake news" "orange man bad" etc. All repeated verbatim from fox and friends and right wing memes. If you catch yourself reciting a slogan or phrase as many do, that's a good time to self evaluate if what you're saying is actually true, or if you're just part of the herd. Dude, you even say "dumbocrat" in this post.

What do my "quotes" and "mantra stuff" have to do with the topic of socialism? You mad bro? (sorry for assuming your gender) Would you prefer that I go and bash a leftist's head with a bike lock or run my car through a Bernie supporter's tent? I bet you'd like me running two teenagers off the road for having Biden flags on their bikes. Maybe I should start a call to boycott a democrat leaning business to get it closed because I hate who they stand for? Are those activities more WeedZ approved? Since you took this thread too far off topic, you should close it for outliving its usefulness.

WeedZ said:
As far as relying on facts, in this thread alone you have been proven factually wrong three different times. But rather than acknowledge it. You sidestep with "well the other team is still wrong. Here's another reason why which is also factually untrue".

What have I been proven factually wrong about? The fact that dictionaries contain facts and are more factual than wikipedia? Come on, not you too!!!!

WeedZ said:
You dont care about facts, you care about your team winning always. Dems are always wrong in your view no matter the topic, and the reasons why you'll look up later. Instead of looking at facts now, coming to an informed conclusion and maybe lean a bit either way depending on the issue at hand. Informed and reasonable people arent so polarized.

I care about all the above. Also, I would be a shitty republican if I didn't want them to win and believed everything the Dums said. Plus, I left the democratic party because I saw their evilness and lust for power. It's a shame that more don't see it, but I guess they got you people shackled with their false promises and lies.

WeedZ said:
I'm not really feeling the effort to go through the rest. I can just sum it up as greed, selfishness and lack of social responsibility. Which are traits that most people would be ashamed of showing to others.

Then why don't the demonrats hide in the shadows instead of just blatantly spewing their hate, greed, selfishness, and evil ways in public? Did you not watch any of their impeachment sham?

WeedZ said:
Also, poor people unable to work and needing medication, to feed their children, proper housing.. these arent the enemies.

No, they are just fodder for the demonrat agenda. The dumbocrat politicians want them to stay poor, hungry, and sick. Otherwise, who would they falsely promise "free stuff" to win their votes?

notimp · Feb 27, 2020

morvoran said:
They don't dodge taxes. They utilize the tax laws to their benefit. As you say, their main interest is the bottom dollar. Why would they screw themselves by letting the government steal from them when they don't have to and instead put their money where it would be more beneficial as in private charities?

When you drive to work. The cars on the road are the product of capitalism. The roads are build by the state.
(Roads are so costly, that necessary investments would outspend any company to pay for them. They only 'pay for themselves' - in most areas, in timespans that outstretch the average livespan of a company. When corporations built consortiums to do large infrastructure spending in the past (think railway systems), they always ended as monopolies, that would optimize return of investment, drive most infrastructure into the ground, and then file for bankruptcy.)

When you work at wall street, the trading is organized by capitalism, the regulation is done by the state.
(This one is easy - if you let trading be regulated by short term investment interests you get private monopolies acting like criminal enterprises in no time).

When you have children, basic and higher education in large parts is organized by the state.
(If you leave it to private investors, they sell you Trump Steaks, and Trump university, and religious education - and pocket the difference.)

When you reach retirement age, your income is payed by the state, not by private companies.
(Also easy to explain - because what does a private company do with old folks?)

When you eat your breakfast in the morning, the products on your plate are the result of capitalism, but everything that makes them arrive, keeps the cost down, makes sure you dont just eat corn syrup all day, and also limits price speculation (availability) - is "the government stealing from you".

If you don't pay government - society crumbles.

Now - reasons why rich people dont pay governments.

The fairytale (capitalism founding myth..

) goes, that the state is horrible, when it comes to 'allocation' of funds. Meaning. No one entity can be proficient enough, to invest in all needs and potentials "better" - than everyone around, trying "to make it" (make a good living) collectively.

That is where your 'companies are better' simplification comes from.

(Also a state has a hard time going bancrupt. So every company dealing with a state has an incetive to screw it over, basically. There really is no downside for them. So structurally you are better off with companies screwing over each other - to at least drive competition.)

So billionairs always will argue - leave the money to them, they know better where to invest.

The issue being, that 'trickle down economics' never worked. And most 'investment' done by the rich lately was done either in Mexico, or in China, (or as Japan in the US to try to bribe politics to keep your market open to Japan) - and most investment money was carried off to virtual casino economies called "tha stock market" - where everyone makes, and looses money based on bets, that are 100times higher than the amounts of bets needed to insure other investment activities.

Intelligent investment capital doesnt go into the real economy in the US anymore. Instead it burns down rainforests in Brasil, because "more people on earth wanting food", is a pretty safe bet.

You need regulation on some level, and if you don't pay taxes - you dont get it.

Americans have been brainwashed with the believe, that everything will endlessly get better for no reason other than "you just have to believe" for the longest time, and that anyone that doesnt just set free economic forces hinders progress. In essence, thats a lie. (You may believe it nationally - if you are really stupid, you can't believe it any more as soon as you look at international relations.)

US is very happy currently - because it has become the worlds secend biggest tax haven, with the worlds biggest tax haven being one of its croney (helper) states. They did so, by controlling the worlds economic flows (knowing what they are (NSA)), and bullying former tax havens like Switzerland. While at the same time retracting from the international order they themselves had established in the past.

You did that - to get the big capital stocks, back into your jurisdiction. Now you look at it and fold your hands over your tummy and say to everyone "look, it gets bigger" - the stock market has such a boon, while millennials in the US still get no chance to participate in it at all?

Where is the economic development, that will bring the US properly paid jobs again? (Aside from shale oil fracking.)

If your education level only ever reaches 'companies good' - 'state stealing', what the heck are you doing trying to win over people in a political forum?

Purple_Shyguy · Feb 27, 2020

Great in theory.
Bad in practice.

Just like feminism and multiculturalism.

0x3000027E · Feb 27, 2020

notimp said:
payed by the state

Correction, paid by the taxpayer, redistributed by the state. I know, a small detail, but an important one.

notimp · Feb 27, 2020

I give you that.

Point maybe is, that you have to pry that money away from people that think mainly about self interest.

Point also is, that you better do that for their retirement - because otherwise you end up with (some) people putting everything on red in casino economies.

A stable economy/currency also doesnt just come for free.

You need a mediator. At some level. (And that it is controlled by something we cal democracy isnt the worst thing..

)

What's your stance on socialism?

Your stance on socialism?

Inequality is the cause of all problems! REDISTRIBUTE EVERYTHING!!!!!

I really love that Scandinavian way of doing things...

I like some of the ideas but not the whole package...

I'm kind of neutral on this. I get the picture but my political compass is elsewhere

Never! I'd rather give Trump four more years

Other, namely...

Possibly an Enlightened Being

POWERLIFTER

Well-Known Member

President-Elect

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads

Popular threads in this forum