A History of Socialism in America

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
a reply to: Krazysh0t

That's what I'm saying, you'd still have to pay a minimum tax because there are certain things you can't avoid.

Well, the people not wanting to pay the taxes for "things they don't need" shouldn't be trying to steal and commit fraud. These people are the ones who complain right now about EBT/food stamp abuse anyway ...

Naturally, in a perfect world things would work that way, but we both know there are plenty of fronters in that mix as well. People who are just saying they don't need them but wouldn't hesitate to take advantage of them after opting out of paying for them.

I think how it would work is you would automatically be enrolled in "full membership tax rate" at 18, and at that time you can decide what to remove from your taxes. Sort of like choosing the coverage on your auto insurance. You set how much you are willing to pay by removing your eligibility to certain services.

Yea that would probably be the more efficient way to do it. That way it requires pro-activity to opt out instead of pro-activity to make sure you are paying for the things (because lazy people exist who wouldn't opt into things just because they are lazy).

Caught cheating or defrauding the system? You get forever banned from ever being able to use that service, even if you do start paying the tax for it.

I'm not sure I agree with forever bans though. Why not just a super steep fine, plus making them pay back taxes for the length of time they defrauded the system?

a reply to: nonspecific

Actually, that's even better. Because then those assholes who put those dirty smoke generators on their exhausts on their truck would be penalized for that nonsense as well.

Socialism only works in a system where the government is not corrupt.

How many here are going to say that their government is not corrupt?

originally posted by: DBCowboy
Socialism only works in a system where the government is not corrupt.

How many here are going to say that their government is not corrupt?

So the government wasn't corrupt in the 50's and 60's?

originally posted by: DBCowboy
Socialism only works in a system where the government is not corrupt.

How many here are going to say that their government is not corrupt?

So are you saying that capitalism does work even with a corrupt govenment then?

If not then your debasing socialism on this basis is void.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: DBCowboy
Socialism only works in a system where the government is not corrupt.

How many here are going to say that their government is not corrupt?

So the government wasn't corrupt in the 50's and 60's?

Sure it was. What was our debt then? What is it now? We are deeper in debt which they use to justify higher taxes. They misspend the money, causing more debt which they use to justify higher taxes.

You live in a fantasy world if you think socialism would work, anywhere.

You, yourself, said you don't want to pay higher taxes. What differentiates YOUR greed to anyone else?

originally posted by: nonspecific

originally posted by: DBCowboy
Socialism only works in a system where the government is not corrupt.

How many here are going to say that their government is not corrupt?

So are you saying that capitalism does work even with a corrupt govenment then?

If not then your debasing socialism on this basis is void.

No system is perfect. But the system that provides the fewest restrictions, the most freedoms is capitalism.

I think it was your Churchill that said, "America's form of government is the worst form of government there is. Until you compare it to every other form of government."

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: DBCowboy
Socialism only works in a system where the government is not corrupt.

How many here are going to say that their government is not corrupt?

So the government wasn't corrupt in the 50's and 60's?

Sure it was. What was our debt then? What is it now? We are deeper in debt which they use to justify higher taxes. They misspend the money, causing more debt which they use to justify higher taxes.

Then your argument that Socialism only works in a non-corrupt society is incorrect.

You live in a fantasy world if you think socialism would work, anywhere.

No, I live in a reality where historical precedent has shown that socialism has not only worked in the past, but continues to work now.

You, yourself, said you don't want to pay higher taxes. What differentiates YOUR greed to anyone else?

I don't want to do a great many things, but I do them anyways. Just because I don't want to do something doesn't mean that I'm not willing to do it.

This is why I try to keep my personal opinions on these matters out of the discussion, people such as yourself try to catch me in arguing traps by trying to quote mine conflicting quotes that I've said.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

If socialism is the ideal government, then show me an ideal government that has it. It's that simple. And then once you've found that ideal government, move there.

Eventually, socialistic countries run out of other people's money.

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: nonspecific

originally posted by: DBCowboy
Socialism only works in a system where the government is not corrupt.

How many here are going to say that their government is not corrupt?

So are you saying that capitalism does work even with a corrupt govenment then?

If not then your debasing socialism on this basis is void.

No system is perfect. But the system that provides the fewest restrictions, the most freedoms is capitalism.

I think it was your Churchill that said, "America's form of government is the worst form of government there is. Until you compare it to every other form of government."

That did not really answer my question.

Does your Churchill qoute not in fact bolster Krazyshot's argument about socialism in the US?

He has been dead a while now, I am pretty sure his opinion would be different if he were to base it on the US government of today.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Krazysh0t

If socialism is the ideal government, then show me an ideal government that has it. It's that simple. And then once you've found that ideal government, move there.

Eventually, socialistic countries run out of other people's money.

Why do you think it has to be one or the other?

What is wrong with a mix of the two ideologies are are you so ingrained against socialism that you refuse to accept that it has a benificial place in a positive form of government?

a reply to: nonspecific

I think he'd weep if he saw our government today.

I'm not willing to cede my earnings, my freedoms, my liberties to the state.

It's that simple, really. I don't have the trust and faith in government that you have.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Krazysh0t

If socialism is the ideal government, then show me an ideal government that has it. It's that simple. And then once you've found that ideal government, move there.

Eventually, socialistic countries run out of other people's money.

There is no government that is ideal. There are always rooms for improvement, plus I'm not planning on leaving this country when I can just work to improve this one. The, "if you like such and such country better argument you should move there!" argument doesn't work on me. It is a rather silly and simplistic dismissal of someone's grievances.

Though I find it funny that you don't ever defend your points. You jump from one anti-Socialist talking point to the next without ever defending my rebuttals to them or answering questions I ask about them. If you want to convince me of the failings of Socialism, you'll have to do a bit better than random talking points that I've heard a million times already. You aren't bringing anything new to the discussion, just making me believe you don't care about conflicting information and only want to hear yourself talk.

originally posted by: nonspecific

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Krazysh0t

If socialism is the ideal government, then show me an ideal government that has it. It's that simple. And then once you've found that ideal government, move there.

Eventually, socialistic countries run out of other people's money.

Why do you think it has to be one or the other?

What is wrong with a mix of the two ideologies are are you so ingrained against socialism that you refuse to accept that it has a benificial place in a positive form of government?

When you give a corrupt government the authority that a socialist government would have, you open yourself up to abuses and would be entirely self-inflicted. Many are hoping for it.

They'll be the ones squealing the loudest when they get it.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: nonspecific

I think he'd weep if he saw our government today.

I'm not willing to cede my earnings, my freedoms, my liberties to the state.

It's that simple, really. I don't have the trust and faith in government that you have.

What does anyones faith in govenment have to do with a history of socialism in the US?

Or socialism as a whole?

Or capitalism come to that?

I am unsure what your point is right now other than you do not like paying taxes which again has nothing to do with the OP.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Then sell me on socialism.

Explain to me how having less money and having fewer freedoms is going to benefit me.

Explain to me how having a larger government means more freedoms. Can you? Can you give an example?

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: nonspecific

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Krazysh0t

If socialism is the ideal government, then show me an ideal government that has it. It's that simple. And then once you've found that ideal government, move there.

Eventually, socialistic countries run out of other people's money.

Why do you think it has to be one or the other?

What is wrong with a mix of the two ideologies are are you so ingrained against socialism that you refuse to accept that it has a benificial place in a positive form of government?

When you give a corrupt government the authority that a socialist government would have, you open yourself up to abuses and would be entirely self-inflicted. Many are hoping for it.

They'll be the ones squealing the loudest when they get it.

You are doing it again and talking about a "Socialist govenment"

I asked you why you had to be so black and white and what was wrong with a mix of the 2 ideologies and you just gave another black and white answer.

I really do not see this progressing here.

no system works that well with a corrupt gov't....
matter of fact, let's look at the social security system, when it was created and WHY. the roaring 20s was a time of unchecked capitalism/corporatism. while mom and dad were relying on their local banks to hold their savings, the one's owning those banks were leveraging their savings and playing the stock markets.... or loaning the money out to those who were. ah, yes good times indeed, much like the time running up to the latest housing bust was good times for some. but well, like all good bubbles, it had to pop. the markets crashed, the farmers who had to rely on those markets when it came to borrowing for seed and selling their produce, well, they crashed along with them, mom and dad who was relying on that savings account to keep their nest egg safe well, they lost everything, and well, then we had those who roared the most during that time, they crashed and burned, leaping from tall skyscrapers. in the end, only the few, the ones that were the 1% and well are still the 1% made out and profited.
but well, if the gov't hadn't had done something, little jimmy, little joey who were expected to fight our war would have been expected to give every cent they earned to replace the money mom and dad had lost when the banks closed their doors and well, paid them cents on the dollar when they reopened.
in other words, it was the unchecked capitalism/corporatism/GREED, that led to the the current flavor of socialism to begin with! and well, I remember when that safety net consisted of the gov't handing out peanut butter, used clothing, ect....and not paychecks. heck, in the mid 70's, it was welfare recipients, exchanging their benefits for paychecks that ran the danged social service system, instead of the high paid educated ...well, now you need a four year degree to get a job there, and because you have that degree, you expect, and probably need a higher wage. it wasn't till the late 70's early 80's that the welfare system started growing and expanding... which, well, was the time of trickle down economics, manufacturing getting sent overseas, and such by the way.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Then sell me on socialism.

I'm not going to do that. I presented an op rife with links and historical precedent of my opinion. You chose to ignore all of that in order to debate me with substanceless rhetoric.

Explain to me how having less money and having fewer freedoms is going to benefit me.

You should start by attempting to not view things from a negative angle like that. If you want to seriously learn about something, it helps to abandon all preconceived notions about it, and this is one of them. I mean this sentence alone tells me you aren't open to actually changing your mind if I present a solid argument. You just want to hear what I have to say so you can reject it with a new round of rhetoric.

Explain to me how having a larger government means more freedoms. Can you? Can you give an example?

I've given an example throughout this thread. In fact it is the thread's entire purpose yet you keep ignoring that.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
Socialism only works in a system where the government is not corrupt.

How many here are going to say that their government is not corrupt?

Show me an incorruptible man...