originally posted by: AlaskanDad
a reply to: Semicollegiate
While your posts indicate that socialism is the destroyer of economies, yet it is obvious that how money is spent is a big factor. If the country
borrows to pay for TARP, pay for corporate subsidies, pay to house non violent criminals - cover the cost of having the world largest prison system,
foreign aid, and the most expensive military on earth it could lead to economic collapse.
See you don't need socialism to destroy the economy, otoh socialism can be misused to the same result a destroyed economy.
So we have two ways that can destroy the country and one that helps people, of course helping people is the problem.
The way money is spent is supposed to be the ruling power of an economy. Consumers decide what is produced by voting with their purchases.
Purchasing is more than spending money, because a person can often choose to buy nothing at all. The decision to purchase or not purchase, itself, is
part of the process of the free market. The prices of things are additional information about the world that a person includes when to deciding what
All taxes discourage purchasing ( taxes make the price higher ), which reduces production and destroys jobs.
Socialism as a pure philosophy cannot assign real world prices to anything. After a while, is in the USSR, there is no way to know how much of the
economy should be spent on transportation, or research and development, or milk production, or toilet paper. The prices of things in a free market
tell everyone how scarce or plentiful anything is. Resources are then assigned to the things that people want or need the most, with the highest
profits going to the most efficient, lowest cost, producers.
Socialism in practice always uses central banking. Central banks use inflation to make current money worthless over time. That is how the
socialistic money debt is paid, through an "invisible" tax. Using inflation to pay today's dollars back to the lender in future dollars of less
buying power is called "monetizing the debt". The buying power lost to inflation is the same as paying a tax, in that the money taken in by the
average person is able to acquire less when spent.
Socialism will always ruin an economy of free people, because there is no way for central planners to know how to assign resources. See F. A. Hayek's
The Pretense of Knowledge
. Actually, there is no socialism, because socialism is simply a con job, a Ponzi Scheme. It will seem to work until
the last surplus is spent, then it ends.
Prisons, the military, foreign aid, TARP, and subsidies to are all socialistic. None of them exist in a free market.
Criminals should have pay garnishment or their normal working wages until their offence is balanced out.
Countries with militaries would find trading partners unhappy with them to say the least.
Foreign aid would be replaced by charity.
TARP is a subsidy. No subsidies are justified, or considered, or even possible with a Constitutional (non socialist) government.
Slavery was normal for thousands of years. The State has saved us from (replaced) slavery. Mainstream party politicians that use the government to
solve a problem are socialistic. Bernard Sanders is just a different flavor of slaver.
edit on 4-8-2015 by Semicollegiate because: (no reason given)