Socialism?

[Dixie-Girl]

I really would love some opinions on this. Not trying to stoke any fires, just really want your thoughts. Please don't make this a left or right bashing thread.

On economic issues, I'm a conservative and am pretty nervous about some of the ideas that I'm hearing from the Democratic party. Not all, but some.

Nationalized health care, in addition to some of the economic ideas being thrown out there really sound alot like Socialism to me. Raising taxes on small businesses and a majority of Americans so that we can have more government programs for the poor is the biggest example. Taxing families and companies in order to put that money towards erasing or minimizing our "carbon footprint" is another. Am I wrong here?

Do you believe that these ideas amount to Socialism? Do you believe that there is a movement afoot to put this country on a path to Socialism?

Thanks!

[BlindMessiah]

I'm personally against socialism, and I think it goes against our founding ideas, but it's sad that there are any arguments for it. Think about it, people support socialism because some people aren't being taken care of by society. In our capitalistic society, we have enough wealth for everyone to live a great life if we actually helped each other out of the goodness of our heart. So while I'm against big government and socialist programs, I think we as individuals have a moral obligation, to of ourselves, help society without turning to goverments and politicians to save the needy. It is our time to take up the call to save humanity and this earth. If everyone were to go out of their way to help two people, the world would be perfected in weeks.

[Rosewin]

America as most countries has what is called a mixed economy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mixed_economy

[InHuman]

I like our health care (altho not our lack of doctors and nurses) but I don't like people abusing the welfare/employment insurance programs and whatnot. I don't like politicians stealing our money with their 150+ grand sallary's.

[Dixie-Girl]

America as most countries has what is called a mixed economy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mixed_economy

That's true, but what happends when one element slowly overtakes the other?

[Neognosis]

Nationalized health care, in addition to some of the economic ideas being thrown out there really sound alot like Socialism to me.

So what? Capitalism can not work without socialism, and socialism can not work without Capitalism. We already know that if capitalism is left without any socialist checks, it consumes itself and the society in which it exists.

Raising taxes on small businesses and a majority of Americans so that we can have more government programs for the poor is the biggest example.

Who's talking about doing this? Democrats are talking about raising taxes on the wealthiest of our society, not on small businesses and the majority of americans.

Taxing families and companies in order to put that money towards erasing or minimizing our "carbon footprint" is another. Am I wrong here?

This is an example of capitalism needing socialism in order to survive. Unfortunately, people need an economic incentive to change behavior. People won't voluntarily stop driving large, inefficient vehicles without a financial incentive, etc. etc.

If we want to protect the environment and reduce our energy consumption, we need financial incentive to do so. So if the majority of the society decide that preserving the ecosystem is important enough to financially penalize those who choose not to conserve, I'm ok with that. If we decide that because we all live here, we all should chip in to clean the joint up, I'm ok with that too. We are all members of the wealthiest society in the history of mankind, we can afford it.

Do you believe that there is a movement afoot to put this country on a path to Socialism?

No. But we learned the hard way that capitalism self destructs without some socialist measures.

[Dixie-Girl]

I get where you're coming from, but about this:

Who's talking about doing this? Democrats are talking about raising taxes on the wealthiest of our society, not on small businesses and the majority of americans.

Everything I've seen, read and heard has me convinced that Americans with wages as low as $39,000 will see a tax increase. Also, taxing small business will only cause more price increases which will adversely affect the poor more than anyone. Small business owners (my father is one) are already strangled by taxes (Fed and State) and struggling to make ends meet. They will see their taxes increase because despite their high expenses, their incomes are usually in higher brackets.

Edited August 28, 2008 by Dixie-Girl

[Neognosis]

Everything I've seen, read and heard has me convinced that Americans with wages as low as $39,000 will see a tax increase.

Then you should better vet your sources. Nobody is saying they are going to tax small businesses. That's a scare tactic used by the opposition, and it's working on you.

[BlindMessiah]

Neognosis, capitalism doesn't need socialism to survive. Capitalism which is abused by humans needs socialism to survive. Socialism is a government program. Governments fix the problems that man creates. In an ideal society, socialism wouldn't be needed. So I don't think the blame is on capitalism, as capitalism is an economic expression of man, man is the problem.

[Neognosis]

There is no ideal society.

History has shown that capitalism consumes the socitey in which it resides.

People will always abuse capitalism, people will always be people, at least in the forseeable future. If people were not greedy, and if capitalism did not operate under the false tenant that greed is good, we would not need socialism. But it does, and people do, and so some socialist measures are necessary in the real world.

But socialism also cannot sustain itself without some capitalism either, as history has also shown us.

[BlindMessiah]

There is no ideal society.

History has shown that capitalism consumes the socitey in which it resides.

People will always abuse capitalism, people will always be people, at least in the forseeable future. If people were not greedy, and if capitalism did not operate under the false tenant that greed is good, we would not need socialism. But it does, and people do, and so some socialist measures are necessary in the real world.

But socialism also cannot sustain itself without some capitalism either, as history has also shown us.

Unless you attack a problem at its root, it won't improve. Rather than seeking for the government to save us, we should seek to save ourselves. Anyone can thrive in a capitalist society, that is a fact. For some it is near impossible to do so, for other it is near impossible not to, but anyone can. If all of us were to pursue success and use that to help the less fortunate, we can fix society. As I said in my first post, if every single person on this planet were to go out of their way to help two others, the world would be perfect in a week or two.

[Cleomenes]

Then you should better vet your sources. Nobody is saying they are going to tax small businesses. That's a scare tactic used by the opposition, and it's working on you.

Unless you include a doubling of the capital-gains tax, in which case anyone with any kind of investments will be paying double the taxes on those investment earnings than they are now.

[Neognosis]

Rather than seeking for the government to save us, we should seek to save ourselves.

In this society, we are the government. Besides, we aren't looking for the gov to save us.

As I said in my first post, if every single person on this planet were to go out of their way to help two others, the world would be perfect in a week or two.

That's ridiculous. Jews and Muslmis will still be warring over territory, there will still be tension over oil prices, fundamentalists will still seek to impose their views on others.

That's sort of naive.

While you're off helping two people, the businesses that exist under this imaginary totally capitalist society will be dumping mercury into the water to save on dumping costs (no fines for polluting, we don't want to financially force people to act properly....) and poisoning your kids. But they'll stop because they want to be good people, right? The FDA will be disbanded, as it's a socialist concept to have the gov't approve or disapprove things you should be free to purchase whenever you want. Sure, the market will determine what drugs are safe, but only after a few thousand people have been poisoned.

I'm not saying that I want large socialist programs, I'm jsut saying that capitalism destroys the society around it without any socialist mesures, and vice versa.

But people like to panic and get all scared by the S word.

[Mr Honeybadger]

Where in the Constitution does it say that government ( tax payers ) is responsible for paying for everyone's health care ?

[Neognosis]

Where in the Constitution does it say that government ( tax payers ) is responsible for paying for everyone's health care ?

Where does it say that the gov't can levy an income tax?

Where does it say that the gov't CAN'T adopt universal health care? Where in the constitution does it say that the gov't is responsible for building and maintaining roads?

That's a poor argument, as in 2008 we do a lot of things that they didn't consider to include or exclude in the constitution.

[BlindMessiah]

That's ridiculous. Jews and Muslmis will still be warring over territory, there will still be tension over oil prices, fundamentalists will still seek to impose their views on others.

You're missing the point. If we were helping each other, Jews and Muslims wouldn't be killing each other. That's my point. I understand this isn't going to happen, so of course it would seem naive. The point is, if everyone actually cared, it would only take a few weeks to fix the world. As for oil prices, we don't need oil. The technology exists to remove oil completely and turn to other energies. The powers that be don't want this however. As for pollution and your point on the FDA, in this hypothetical situation, people would forget about greed and take some pay cuts to not pollute and to further test their products to a point where you don't need an FDA. It would be a society built on trust, rather than conspiracies and lies. I didn't say this world would happen, I said if every single human acted on this notion today, it would. Think about the domino affect that would occur if every person were to not harm anyone for a week, and were to help two people. This won't happen today, but it can start. It can start with you and it can start with me.

[Neognosis]

You're missing the point. If we were helping each other, Jews and Muslims wouldn't be killing each other. That's my point

I get your point. It's just a little bit too pie in the sky, lollipop and gumdrop unrealistic for me to let it slide.

You can't fix the world in a few weeks, even if people were helping other people. You're basically requiring a complete 180 on human nature. YOu might as well say nothing.

Think about the domino affect that would occur if every person were to not harm anyone for a week, and were to help two people.

You would need a lot more than helping two people to bring about the fantastical changes you are talking about.

[BlindMessiah]

I get your point. It's just a little bit too pie in the sky, lollipop and gumdrop unrealistic for me to let it slide.

You can't fix the world in a few weeks, even if people were helping other people. You're basically requiring a complete 180 on human nature. YOu might as well say nothing.

Obviously. It will take hundreds of years for this to become a reality even if people were to act now. However, it's easy to belittle and idea by comparing it to candy. I don't really understand your comment on me saying nothing. Could you elaborate?

You would need a lot more than helping two people to bring about the fantastical changes you are talking about.

Not true. Think about it mathematically. There are six billion people on this planet. If everyone helped two, twelve billion would get helped. Now think how much easier your life would be if every day no one worked against you, and two people helped you out. The world would start to see huge changes in weeks. First of all there would be no war. There would be no starvation. There would be no homeless. That could happen in a few weeks. We have the resources, we have the intelligence, all we need is the will and the discipline to act.

[Dixie-Girl]

Where does it say that the gov't can levy an income tax?

Where does it say that the gov't CAN'T adopt universal health care? Where in the constitution does it say that the gov't is responsible for building and maintaining roads?

That's a poor argument, as in 2008 we do a lot of things that they didn't consider to include or exclude in the constitution.

Government run healthcare in Canada, France and Britian is failing. Why would it work here. If you've ever tried to get medical services in a VA Hospital or Clinic, you know what the future of American healthcare will be like under Obama. "Take a number please..."

[BlindMessiah]

Government run healthcare in Canada, France and Britian is failing. Why would it work here. If you've ever tried to get medical services in a VA Hospital or Clinic, you know what the future of American healthcare will be like under Obama. "Take a number please..."

I think that has probably been exaggerated by Republicans. I have a friend who lives in Toronto and says he loves their health care system.

Edited August 28, 2008 by BlindMessiah

[Dixie-Girl]

If all of us were to pursue success and use that to help the less fortunate, we can fix society.

Yes but who is less fortunte? A person who has a disability and can't work...of course. A person who is physically healthy but is used to being on the government dole? Hardly. That's where we go from a valid responsability to care for the less fortunate to socialism.

Didn't Hurrican Katrina teach us anything? The dark side of that city had a bright light upon it. We saw how the City of New Orleans had set up a welfare state and the people left behind were totally dependant....many still are to this day.

[BlindMessiah]

Yes but who is less fortunte? A person who has a disability and can't work...of course. A person who is physically healthy but is used to being on the government dole? Hardly. That's where we go from a valid responsability to care for the less fortunate to socialism.

*ahem* If everyone pursued success and helped the less fortunate, the physically healthy person you named would be doing so.

[Dixie-Girl]

I think has probably been exaggerated by Republicans.

On the VA Clinic and hospital thing I'm speaking from personal experience. My husband is a disabled vet. I promise you, I'm being kind. A hospital stay for us was a nightmare.

My husband's family in Canada spend hundreds of dollars traveling back to the US when they need surgery or really anything other than cough syrup. In a government run system, when you need urgent surgery, you're placed on a waiting list...it can be many months long.

[BlindMessiah]

On the VA Clinic and hospital thing I'm speaking from personal experience. My husband is a disabled vet. I promise you, I'm being kind. A hospital stay for us was a nightmare.

My husband's family in Canada spend hundreds of dollars traveling back to the US when they need surgery or really anything other than cough syrup. In a government run system, when you need urgent surgery, you're placed on a waiting list...it can be many months long.

I edited the post you replied to...

[Dixie-Girl]

*ahem* If everyone pursued success and helped the less fortunate, the physically healthy person you named would be doing so.

"IF" they did. I'm talking about people who walk into my office every day wanting a mortgage to buy a home and they're getting $3,000 in social security disability because they have asthma and 5 kids.