Question ABout Socialism

[TripleDigitRide]

As I've stated before, I'm no expert in the arena of politics. I have a question.

I keep hearing how Socialism is such a horrible thing, but I can't figure out why everyone has tolerated programs like Social Security and Medicare for all these years. Are those not two great examples of forced Socialism?

[Guest c.a.s.]

Well, we are not a purely capitalists system. We are a mixed system, because PURELY one or the other would fail. Those programs remain there because the majority want them there, and there is not much to be done without the majority wanting them gone, which is not likely with the liberal leaning of today's youth.

[bteague2]

People tolerate them because it shuts up the minority groups, it's like giving a homeless person .35 cents so they'll shut up and leave you alone while you walk to your car. And even most conservatives have a few views that are liberal leaning, after all it's for the children.

[Guest Abominable_Hillbilly]

As I've stated before, I'm no expert in the arena of politics. I have a question.

I keep hearing how Socialism is such a horrible thing, but I can't figure out why everyone has tolerated programs like Social Security and Medicare for all these years. Are those not two great examples of forced Socialism?

You'd have to define "tolerate". I haven't raised arms against anyone, but that doesn't mean I don't completely abhor both programs.

[strickj]

Well the thing is,this country takes care of its people.The major majority wants Social Security.Whether anybody here says so or not.

Its also hard to compare us to nations of Socialist that fail.Thats because there are no other places quite like us.We are a mixture of Capitalist,and Socialisms.This system works for us.

I forget who said it,probably some Liberal ;"We are the worlds greatest experiment in progress"

We really have no one to follow,or take notes from,because like said,no one is quite like us.

The people whom hate the Social system the most are usually selfish,and could care less.I for one used to be like that,but after seeing so many folks like me fall on hard times from no fault of their own get saved by this "horrible system"it changed my mind.For no other reason then seeing,and experiencing first hand,that which can not be taught.

People tolerate them because it shuts up the minority groups, it's like giving a homeless person .35 cents so they'll shut up and leave you alone while you walk to your car.

That says allot about you

[Smith]

Socialism is not necessarily bad in respect to citizens helping one another. The problem with Socialist ideology is that it expects the government to enforce, control, and regulate benevolence. When government uses socialism it becomes a powerful system not to help but to acquire and consolidate enormous amounts of power that will never be relinquished. All examples of governmental socialism have led to disaster with the people it intended to help being trampled.

Socialism is well intentioned but naive in its understanding of human nature and government. Most people (strick is wrong on this one) who disagree with the system believe that benevolence should be left to the individuals own conscience. There was a time before when Americans helped each other when hard times came. Families and churches were also a major part in this. Socilist governments have to dissasemble both familes and churchs in this system in order to make themselves the alternative in hard times. They do this because they are so much less effective they have to eliminate their competition or no one would have ever turned to them.

All of our Socialist tendencies came out of the Great Depression and was a well intentioned idea, maybe even a sound theory, that the government should have slowly lessened the programs after the crisis but instead increased.

You can see this clearly in how the different parties give. conservatives give, by a vast majority, their time and money to charities and benevolent organizations as compared to democrats who funnel their time and money to government and politics.

[Guest Watauga]

As we become more socialistic, eventually your employer will send all your salary to the government. The government will decide how much it needs and then send you the remainder. That is, if there is any left!

[dcloudy777]

Watauga, that's not too terribly far removed from the system we have in place now. The smartest thing the Socialists ever did was payroll witholding. If all taxpayers had to write a check every month, or every quarter, or at the end of every year, the revolution would have happened decades ago. As it is, they take your money before you even see it, hold it interest-free for a year, and then "do you a favor" be giving you back a "refund" at the beginning of next year.

As for Social Security, it's a textbook example of a "pyramid" or "Ponzi" scheme. It relies solely on current contributions to repay past contributors. If I offered the same kind of deal to willing investors, I'd be charged with multiple felonies and locked up. The feds not only are allowed to perpetuate such a progam, but participation is mandatory under penalty of law. I suppose in the most literal sense of the word I "tolerate" this going on, but only because it's not worth the consequences of moving, or "living off the grid". Well, not worth it yet anyway...

DanO

[musicman]

Dang Dan... there's some brain activity behind that big smiling face of yours!!

Are the Tac-Sacs in production yet?

[saintsfanbrian]

I am not selfish I just don't think it is the governments place to take my hard earned money and give it to some one who isn't working. I think it is the place of the community and the churches to take care of the people down on their luck. And as far as this

Socilist governments have to dissasemble both familes and churchs in this system in order to make themselves the alternative in hard times. They do this because they are so much less effective they have to eliminate their competition or no one would have ever turned to them.

If you cannot see this is already happening by the advent of Gay Marriage and the "separation" of Church and State that you see all over the place then you need to open your eyes a little more.

[bteague2]

Well the thing is,this country takes care of its people.The major majority wants Social Security.Whether anybody here says so or not.

Its also hard to compare us to nations of Socialist that fail.Thats because there are no other places quite like us.We are a mixture of Capitalist,and Socialisms.This system works for us.

I forget who said it,probably some Liberal ;"We are the worlds greatest experiment in progress"

We really have no one to follow,or take notes from,because like said,no one is quite like us.

The people whom hate the Social system the most are usually selfish,and could care less.I for one used to be like that,but after seeing so many folks like me fall on hard times from no fault of their own get saved by this "horrible system"it changed my mind.For no other reason then seeing,and experiencing first hand,that which can not be taught.

That says allot about you

It does say a lot about me. I also don't want my tax money going to Africa. I have no problem helping people who are down on their luck but I want to choose who I help. I had to get a replacement SS card, go spend two hours in your local SSA waiting room, then tell me you still believe in that program.

[strickj]

go spend two hours in your local SSA waiting room, then tell me you still believe in that program.

I have.I didn't say we have a perfect system.It has many problems but the foundation is there.

I also dont understand the waiting in line referencing to not believing in the system.

Because of the wait?

Because of the employees?

Because of the minorities?

Because....

[Smith]

I have.I didn't say we have a perfect system.It has many problems but the foundation is there.

I also dont understand the waiting in line referencing to not believing in the system.

Because of the wait?

Because of the employees?

Because of the minorities?

Because....

Because it is incredibly inefficient and inept. Why the assumption of racism or/and elitism? I think that says more about you.

[bteague2]

I have.I didn't say we have a perfect system.It has many problems but the foundation is there.

I also dont understand the waiting in line referencing to not believing in the system.

Because of the wait?

Because of the employees?

Because of the minorities?

Because....

The waiting wasn't bad considering how many people were there, the employees were nothing short of amazing, it was east TN there wasn't a single minority while I was there. The people knew each other, almost every single person had a cell phone, only a handful didn't drive themselves there, there were people who were covered in tattoos, gold chains, and had diamond ear rings(males). If you can afford all of that crap you have absolutely no buisness collecting welfare. And I am not even going to start on the pregnant women holding an infant while another child ran around the lobby...

[strickj]

Because it is incredibly inefficient and inept. Why the assumption of racism or/and elitism? I think that says more about you.

Actually I said that because of your earlier statement

People tolerate them because it shuts up the minority groups

It is inefficient like all Guberment offices.

However that same inefficiency is seen in many places.

Take hospitals for instance.Or the line to the ladies room

Edit:

whoops,I mixed up ns,with bteagle,sowwy

[bteague2]

I think I'm lucky I've had nothing but good luck at hospitals, but I know that's the exception not the rule... I mean come on I've seen Sicko.

[Guest Watauga]

I have.I didn't say we have a perfect system.It has many problems but the foundation is there.

I also dont understand the waiting in line referencing to not believing in the system.

Because of the wait?

Because of the employees?

Because of the minorities?

Because....

Because its like being in a govt. welfare office. My first thought was: this is how Universal Healthcare will be. You just have to experience it to understand.

[strickj]

The waiting wasn't bad considering how many people were there, the employees were nothing short of amazing, it was east TN there wasn't a single minority while I was there. The people knew each other, almost every single person had a cell phone, only a handful didn't drive themselves there, there were people who were covered in tattoos, gold chains, and had diamond ear rings(males). If you can afford all of that crap you have absolutely no buisness collecting welfare. And I am not even going to start on the pregnant women holding an infant while another child ran around the lobby...

Well cell phones are cheaper then land lines in many cases.They are also used by many as an only phone(like myself)

Cars,well I guess no one is entailed to transportation?

I'm also not sure about the reference to tattoos.I have tattoos.What does that have to do with SS?

Diamond earrings can be had for a dollar two ninety eight at WalMart.Thats not a luxury.

Again,I'm not sure what a kid running around a lobby has to do with SS.Other then irritating you while you wait.Again that same thing happens everywhere

Edited October 21, 2008 by strickj

[bteague2]

Well cell phones are cheaper then land lines in many cases.They are also used by many as an only phone(like myself)

Cars,well I guess no one is entailed to transportation?

I'm also not sure about the reference to tattoos.I have tattoos.What does that have to do with SS?

Diamond earrings can be had for a dollar two ninety eight at WalMart.Thats not a luxury.

Again,I'm not sure what a kid running around a lobby has to do with SS.Other then irritating you while you wait.Again that same thing happens everywhere

So this is where we disagree. I think if you are collecting SS without being in your 70s, you have waved your rights to anything but the bare necessities: food, shelter, electric bill and water running/waste disposal. The kids pissed me off because people that can't take care of themselves shouldn't be having children. I know there are bad circumstances, but people that aren't responsible enough to wrap it up or keep it to themselves kill me.

Edited October 21, 2008 by bteague2
spelling

[bteague2]

And on a side note I don't think "minority groups" has racial conotations. I think there are several groups of white people included in it.

[musicman]

Yes, I was part of a "minority group" growing up. I was white, well-off, and not a thug. I definitely was a minority in my school in Miami. I was regularly stereotyped and denied lots of free money for school because of it.

[strickj]

You just have to experience it to understand.

Um,experience,yeah I have more experience then anyone here,first hand experience

The kids pissed me off because people that can't take care of themselves shouldn't be having children. I know there are bad circumstances, but people that aren't responsible enough to wrap it up or keep it to themselves kill me.

As they do I! I guess we are in agreement there

But unfortunately they have the same drives as we all do for a little stinky

[Guest Dean_JC78]

This is a pretty wide open topic. Let me start by saying that I believe Socialism to be immoral and against human nature. My only exception would in an event where every single person inside the system was there by their own choice, if even one person is not there by choice... then it is immoral.

Social Security for example is a prime example of failure. It has flat out failed in almost every single way and now it threatens the future of our Children. If a private business had a scheme like this, they would be arrested or killed at the hands of an angry mob.

Most Americans want security when they retire, to know things will be taken care of. SS offers a plan which can do just thatbut at a great cost and less efficent than other methods.

Consider the fact that there is no account with your name on it. If you drop dead tomorrow, there is no "fund" that will go to your family no matter how much you have paid into the system. Or if you were lucky enough to live well beyond the national average, you might draw far more money than you ever put in... which passes off that bill to your grandchildren.

There was a great study that was done on SS about African American Males in particular. If I recall correctly, a large percentage of AAM's die before they ever collect a single dime from SS. They are at the highest risk of death before the benifits kick in, I believe the reason was heart disease related. In any event, these men's familys got nothing. Though they paid into the fund till the day they died, they never got one cent back.

I see FDR as one of the worst POTUS in the History of the US for not only prolonging the Depression but for saddling us with the burden of his socialist programs which we still to this day can not get rid of and can not fix.

To answer the main question of the original topic, I believe too many Americans are willing to sacrifice their freedom for security. And as Ben Franklin once said, those that would do that deserve neither the freedom nor the security.

[clarky07]

"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have"

This is the real problem with socialism. if you used the gov't to get back on your feet that is great. that is how the system is supposed to work. the problem is, way too many people use the system to stay down. people work the system and live on welfare with no intentions of getting off and contributing to society. I know people who intentionally have more children they don't want because the gov't will give them more money. if we all got to keep the 30ish% that the gov't takes, we could very easily take care of the people like you that want to get back on their feet through private charities. we would not allow people to just use the system. they would have to get off their lazy rear ends and get a job, or suffer the consequences.

[wjh2657]

The United States is not a Democracy (Democracy as an absolute has failed every time it was attempted) but on Oligarchy loosely based around the framework of a representative republic. Even in the beginning there was a ruling privileged class in America as there is in every country. We do have more individual freedoms in this country, far more than in any other country, but they are held at the pleasure of the ruling groups. I think we are and always will be more free than other countries because we have so many factions competing for top dog in the ruling groups. No one group seems able to stay in power long enough to take everything away from us. A revolution would just cause a shift in the ruling groups, we are too big to operate with popular rule.

We live with two kinds of socialism in our country:

Populist socialism: take care of the working class and the less powerful groups in our society. Can be used to an excess and stifle progress and innovation.

National Socialism: take the government's money (tax dollars) to keep the industrial and financial base lucrative and operative. Leads many times to "rape and pillage" by Corporate CEOs.

There is very little competitive Capitalism left in our country. Most companies of any size are kept afloat by government subsidies and lobbied contracts (tax dollars) Most of the ranting so called Capitalists in our country are actually National Socialists and fear free market and competitive capitalism. We are living in a period right now where National Socialism is losing its effectiveness and become almost totally dependent on the government to survive.

With the government takeover of the Banks and some industries, we are rapidly becoming one of the largest socialist countries in the world. And this came from the right wing of our government, not the Populist Socialists.

The extreme right wing of any government will tend more toward National Socialist instead of Capitalism and free enterprise. The other side is that extreme swing to the left by Populist Pocialism tends toward Marxism if left unchecked. Free enterprise and free market capitalism with a concern for public welfare and education is in the middle not the right or left.

Both forms of Socialism are bad routes, and the only hope is to keep them in check. as we are stuck with a two party system, with one side National Socialist and the other side Populist Socialist, we cannot depend on either party to hold a moderate path for any length of time. By changing the hold on the reins of government between the two parties often (every four years) we may be able to keep the pendulum swing towards the middle.

I personally feel that as voters we need to restrict either party from keeping power too long. Eight years is too long for either party and allows them to damage the system.

Yes I am a Libertarian and very much a moderate conservative.

Edited October 22, 2008 by wjh2657