Destroy Socialism. No, Bernie isn't your savior

a reply to: FauxMulder

The next time you hear me attacked as a socialist — like tomorrow — remember this: I don’t believe government should take over the grocery store down the street, or own the means of production,” he said. “But I do believe that the middle class and the working families of this country who produce the wealth of this county deserve a decent standard of living, and that their incomes should go up, not down.

~Bernie Sanders

I think when the American citizen investigates the history of socialism and differences in it versus social democracy and democratic socialism we will see that what Bernie Sanders is proposing isn't pure 'socialism' but actually a mix if you will and that particular ideology will not be destroyed.

Democratic Socialism does not do away with free markets. There's still money, still personal private property, still have the ability to get rich, still the possibility that you fall flat on your face if you don't work hard or just survive if you choose to do the menial or under valued. There would still be taxes to care for the incapable or people who for whatever reason are temporarily limited and to pay for government and infrastructure.

A Democratic Socialist is not a Marxist Socialist or a Communist. A Democratic Socialist is still a Capitalist, just one who seeks to restrain the self-destructive excesses of capitalism and channel government's use of our tax money into creating opportunities for everyone.

Social democracy is a political ideology that supports economic and social interventions to promote social justice within the framework of a capitalist economy, and a policy regime involving welfare state provisions, collective bargaining arrangements, regulation of the economy in the general interest, measures for income redistribution, and a commitment to representative democracy. Social democracy thus aims to create the conditions for capitalism to lead to greater egalitarian, democratic and solidaristic outcomes; and is often associated with the set of socioeconomic policies that became prominent in Western and Northern Europe—particularly the Nordic model in the Nordic countries—during the latter half of the 20th century.

Social democracy originated as a political ideology that advocated a peaceful, evolutionary transition from capitalism to socialism using established political processes in contrast to the revolutionary approach to transition associated with orthodox Marxism. However, in the post-war era, contemporary social democracy separated from the socialist movement altogether and emerged as a distinct political identity that advocated reforming rather than replacing capitalism. In this period, social democrats embraced a mixed economy based on the predominance of private property, with only a minority of essential utilities and public services under public ownership. As a result, social democracy became associated with Keynesian economics, state interventionism, and the welfare state, while abandoning the prior goal of abolishing the capitalist system (private property, factor markets and wage labour) and substituting it for a qualitatively different socialist economic system.

It seems a lot of people are just hearing the "socialism" part of the phrase and immediately prepping their underground bunkers. So let's first break down what socialism is. First off, it's not communism, and this is what a lot of people equate it with. Communism is an extreme form of socialism, just like fascism and monarchism are extreme forms of conservatism. I know, lots of words, but the point is, there are extreme parts of any political party, and socialism does not automatically equal communism.

What it does equal is the idea that the people should run a country, and not big businesses, banks, and corporations. It also says that the society should be a place where all people work as equals in cooperation for the common good. More extreme versions of socialism advocate that free markets and money should not exist, that people should be working for the good of the men and women in their community.

Democratic socialism is socialism through the ballot box, that says changes in the government and society should be through fair elections. Democratic socialism also says that the basic foundations of a society should be provided for through the government, so that the people of that state can have a happy, healthy life.

It does not do away with free markets, private businesses, or your freedom. Unsurprisingly, it's already playing a huge part in our country. Some of the most obvious are things like medicare and social security, but people don't realize that the reason we have a military, national parks, prisons and the whole justice system, public transportation, disposal of your toilet waste, garbage collection, firefighters, police officers, and even the roads you drive on are because of democratic socialism.

Let's look at the flip side really quick. These programs do take money, and because the government would have to pay for them it would have to increase taxes in some way. In countries successfully implementing the programs Bernie Sanders is advocating for like universal health care and free public college tuition, taxes are higher especially on the upper class. But because of these taxes they don't have to pay for things like going to the hospital, getting an education, and they don't have premiums or student debt.

a reply to: Ridhya

It's not due to socialism. It's due to the large economic expansion that was had in the late 1800s and early 1900s. THEN it went to socialism and economic growth has slowed tremendously.

I don't want to destroy you. Just the idea that socialism is so great and is the answer to the problems in the US.

a reply to: Gumerk

When government takes to much from individuals and businesses that they cannot operate and compete in a free way, it is socialism. When government sets up "public" options and opens so-called competitor systems in the market, it is socialism.

Government systems, by definition, are socialist because they tax everyone and every business for their support. And because they are operating off of tax funds, they do not need operate under the same restrictions private businesses do. It skews the market in unanticipated ways and can even force private businesses out of the market because they cannot compete.

The US health care and education systems are public/private in this way. The public options, despite being restricted in the case of health care, still cause market distortions that echo into the larger market in unpleasant ways for the private competitors.

Bernie may not want to shut down the mom and pop, but that might still end up being the net effect of his policies and social democaracy.

a reply to: FauxMulder
...holy crap, you just dont get it. Life was sh##y in that so called paradise of expanding economy in the 1800s. CAPITALISM WAS MISERABLE!!

In the mid-19th century, around 70 percent of the Norwegian population lived in rural areas and most engaged in agriculture and fishing-related activities. Life was hard for many. As the population increased, there was not enough land or work for everyone. Changes were taking place in the cities at the same time. More and more factories were being built and many people moved from the countryside to the cities for work. Life in the city was difficult for many working-class families. Work days were long and living conditions poor. Families often had many children and it was not unusual for several families to live together in one small apartment. Many children also had to work at the factories in order for their family to survive. Many also tried their luck abroad and, between the years 1850 and 1920, more than 800,000 Norwegians emigrated to the United States.

Go from that to this:

Norge er i dag et moderne demokrati med høy velferd. De fleste i Norge har god økonomi, og befolkningen har et relativt høyt utdanningsnivå. Både menn og kvinner deltar i arbeidslivet. Samfunnet er styrt av en rekke lover og avtaler som sikrer innbyggerne utdanning, helsehjelp og økonomisk hjelp etter behov.

a reply to: Gumerk
a reply to: ketsuko

For sure, good posts. There must always be a middle ground. Socialism and freemarket/capitalism are more symbiotes than separate. I think a huge problem is that terms are more vague in the US and people who grew up in the 60s are still convinced there are Reds behind every bush...

And they don't seem to realise that military is a purely socialist program. Sure the founding fathers called for "local militias" but that doesnt work today, they wouldn't have f-22s.

a reply to: Ridhya

If you read the OP, it agrees with you.

The OP says that the country did not take off until mid-20th. Your period of misery ends at 1920 which is about right before that timeframe.

a reply to: FauxMulder

Who the hell do you think you are? Donald bloody Trump? Do you think you can say things and have no one call you on them? Have you SEEN THE TITLE OF YOUR OWN THREAD?

You explicitly HAVE said that you want socialism destroyed, its right there at the head of your thread, for everyone to see.

Also, it would be advisable, since you clearly have NOT done your research at all, to stop trying to tell Ridhya how their nation did and did not come about. They clearly have far more awareness of that history than you do.

a reply to: Ridhya

What a lot of people who love the idea of the American social state don't realize is that the ONLY system of explicit federal socialism our COTUS provides for IS national defense which would cover the military.

That was done to have a military loyal to the country, and if you watch or know much, you also realize they swear loyalty to the COTUS and Republic not any leader.

Most things our Fed does that considered socialist, it was never designed or enjoined to do.

Does that mean social programs of some sort should not exist? No, not necessarily, but they should be much smaller in scope: state or local level.

For one thing, when they collapse as most inevitably do, that would minimize the damage.

a reply to: TrueBrit

There is a reason I didn't put this thread in the mud pit. Mostly to keep people like you who bring nothing to the table to defend socialism or free markets out. How about the fact it costs 150 dollars for eggs in Venezuela right now? Yes destroy socialism. The idea. Stop trying to turn it into me wanting to destroy people. Did you even make it past the title?

a reply to: Ridhya

I'll read more of that article when I get a chance. On mobile right now. But your link is just showing up as jiberish. Can you try to fix it?

a reply to: ketsuko
OMG misery didnt end in 1920, it was referring to the EMIGRATION majority ending then. You havent been following. He said that Norway suddenly boomed from capitalism and the 1960s proved that WHICH IS EXACTLY WHEN THE OIL WAS NATIONALISED! Norway was basically third world before then. Suddenly we're thriving, highest education, happiness, health, all due to the social welfare system that nationalised oil brought.

I never understand these attacks either, Scandinavians never say "you need to adopt socialism!" We are not naive to think our small scale must work large scale, we just encourage you to try for once. We're different, we're not like Americans or like Europeans or anyone else.



a reply to: FauxMulder
It works for me, probably not mobile friendly, sorry. Summarised, Norway was #ty, then oil discovery and nationalisation, then Norway not #ty, haha

a reply to: Ridhya

We aren't attacking Scandinavia.

We're attacking the notion that the US should be just like you. It's a popular trope right now with American socialist. They like to hold you up as some kind of Utopian myth.

a reply to: Ridhya

It's not an attack on Scandinavia. Mostly talking about countries like Cuba, Venezuela, Korea, etc. The only reason I brought it up is because American leftist love to hold places like Denmark up as a socialist utopia that we should model. To Denmarks credit the PM replied to them with this:

While speaking at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government, the center-right Danish Prime Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen said he was aware "that some people in the U.S. associate the Nordic model with some sort of socialism."

"Therefore," he said, "I would like to make one thing clear. Denmark is far from a socialist planned economy. Denmark is a market economy

a reply to: FauxMulder

"Socialist planned economy" is different enough from "Social democratic corporatism" but not enough to be considered the free markets that you claim to want in the OP.

By saying that you don't mean the Nordic model but instead Cuba, Venezuela and NK you are saying that socialism isn't just one thing, pretty much refuting your own title.

a reply to: FauxMulder
Yeah, because the government doesn't plan the economy. It's not just economic, its also societal and political. Almost all services are government run. All industries have government regulations that I know of. Taxes high and services high, national trade unions, monopoly laws. Socialism.

Your examples Korea and Cuba are communist, thats different. Government actually controls all manufacturing and business. Then there's Venezuela, was doing wonders for the poor under Chavez but he had a ton of opposition.

a reply to: FauxMulder

The Dreaded Scandinavian Socialism!

Sorry mate...

I was born and raised and live in Denmark. Screws car taxes... really.

But here's what a lot of you probably don't realise about Danish socialism:

Education

- Daycare for the youngest is heavily subsidised. We pay 460 dollars a month pr. kid until they are 3 years old. Then it drops to 230 dollars a month. We only pay for 11 months... july is free of charge, even if you use it, but everyone takes 3 weeks vacation anyways so.
If we have more than 1 kid, the cheapest kid is half price.
Parents in the daycare or kindergarden vote for wether or not there should be a food agreement included. This costs 150 dollars extra a month, but then your kid gets 3 meals a day made by the daycare with organic ingredients along with seasonal dinners like easter, xmas, summer party etc.

- When they join public school at age 6 we don't pay for school, but we pay for the afterschool care where they can be till 17.00 if needed. This is 230 dollars a month and is obligatory.
Private school will ofcourse cost money no matter what. The price varies from city to city. The one nearest us costs 500 dollars a month. This includes the school, after school care and 3 daily meals prepared at the school kitchen. Again, no "bad" stuff... healthy food only.

- College is free as well. We only chip in when we need to go on field trips or travel abroad.
Did I mention college parties wiht live bands and beer?? (Danish college is age 15/16 till 18/19)

- University is still free of charge, but we pay for books and materials needed to complete the study.

- When we turn 18 we can get students subsidy which is basically a monthly alloance paid by the state to everyone who is currently studying in either college or university. If you are a university student you get about 860 dollars each month. Money you don't have to pay back... no interest.
If that is still stretching your monthly needs for living, we also have a student loan which you can get on top of the 860 dollars. You get 430 dollars. This is interest free as long as you are studying, after which it turns into a low interest loan... something like 2-3 %.

- If you are studying you are eligeble to receive a low priced small apartment or dorm room. These can be on campus but most are off campus amongst the general population. Prices ofcourse varies, but then you have your own room, free internet, toilet, bath, shared kitchen, free electricity, free water.
I personally lived in a double room when I was studyting and paid something like 285 dollars a month for that.

- Students are also eligeble for low priced bus / metro subscription, way lower than what you pay as a working man or woman. Public school kids almost pay nothing for their buscard.


Healthcare

- All dentristry done until you are 18 is free of charge. Even the most expensive fixes...

- All public healthcare is free... for everyone... forever. Again... even the most expensive treatments. Should I get cancer tomorrow, all examinations, all doctors apointments, all treatments are FREE.
The worst case patiens, fx. ones who are terminally ill, can be enlisted to receive special care at a hospice where they can receive above average care and treatment for the remainder of their life... again, free.
The biggest threat to this is the capitalists and right wing governments. They are litterally trying to destroy public healthcare.

- Dentistry after the age of 18 can be pricey. But this is where the semi-public health insurance comes in... it's a system where I pay 50 dollars every 3 months and then everytime I have to buy specific medicine or pay for dentist treament, a certain percentage is paid into an account which fills up. I can then choose when to have those money paid back out to me. This insurrance comes in different degrees. I'm in the cheapest. The more expensive ones can pretty much make some paid treatments almost free for you.

- We still have to pay for specialists like chiroprators and physiotherapy etc. Ear, nose and throat doctors are still free of charge if your GP refers you to them.

- Organ transplants are free when provided by the public system.


Public family subsidies

- Basically, once we have our first kids, the state will begin to pay us money. We get 650 dollars every 3 months for kids aged 0-2, then we get 500 dollars aged 3-6 and then we get 400 dollars aged 7-14.

- Each kid gives the same amount. So fx. if we had triplets, we'd get 1950 dollars every 3 months for the first three years of their life.

- If a parent is a single parent, we almost always get free of charge daycare, school and after school care. Along with that, we can apply for an additional amount added on top of the amounts mention just above, again per kid.
Single parents with low income can also apply for subsidy to help with the rent of fx. an apartment.

- Maternity leave. All women get to leave their job from 1 month before schedueled birth till 6 months after birth with FULL PAY. Say you make 5000 dollars a month... you keep getting those 5000 dollars while on maternity leave.
Most women choose to stay on leave after those 6 months. From that point on they get a state subsidised pay which ofcourse is a lot lower... but they get it. I think it's around 1950 dollars a month. This you can get for 14 weeks.
But most women choose to use their vacation at the end of maternity leave to stretch it out.

- Vacation. All Danes get 5 weeks vacation with full pay no matter what you get paid, as a minimum. Either by simply getting the monthly wage even though you are away, or by the boss saving up money in a pool from which you can tap into whenever you take a vacation.
Some even get a 6th week vacation through their work contract, some get additional "care days" to use fx. if your kid needs to go to the doctors.

Taxes

Oh yes... the dreaded scandinavian taxes... well you know what. These taxes pay for all of the above. And it bloody works. I honestly wouldn't be without it and I'm not saying that because I need fx. healthcare, but it's damn nice to have it if needed, and I don't mind saving someone elses life by supporting public health care with my taxes.

A quick rundown of taxes....

Let's say I earn 4000 dollars a month, that's a good upper mid wage in Denmark.

13 dollars goes into the public pension fund.
200 dollars to private pension (my own choice)
Then take 8% off in employment tax - 300 dollars
Then I use my deductables and once they are removed I pay 37% tax - 900 dollars
Take off my lunch membership - 40 dollars

Which leaves me with around 2550 dollars every month.

All expenses my GF and I share 50/50... and we get by, we aren't hungry, we have snack nights, the kids have tablets and lots of toys, tv in a 1173 ft2 apartment (109m2) with two toilets and bath, we live 20 min. by car from Copenhagen and 5 minutes walk from the woods, 20 min. by car to the beach and have 5 different playgrounds litterally 2 minutes walk from our door.

Bottom line.. I don't give a damn about car taxes being this high.
I couldn't be happier... the only thing that makes me not happy is when capitalists and liberalists meddle with these good things for everyone.

a reply to: flice

First off, thank you for taking the time to type that all out for me. Second, I only have access to ATS on mobile right now so I'll get to a proper reply when I get back to my computer.

a reply to: flice

My biggest problem is that Bernie Sanders has convinced some American people that socialism is something it is not. He often prescribes things to the Nordic model that they in fact do not use.

The Scandinavians embrace a brand of free-market capitalism that exists in conjunction with a large welfare state, known as the “Nordic Model,” which includes many policies that democratic socialists would likely abhor.

For example, democratic socialists are generally opponents of global capitalism and free trade, but the Scandinavian countries have fully embraced these things. The Economist magazine describes the Scandinavian countries as “stout free-traders who resist the temptation to intervene even to protect iconic companies.” Perhaps this is why Denmark, Norway, and Sweden rank among the most globalized countries in the entire world. These countries all also rank in the top 10 easiest countries to do business in.

Overall, it is clear that the Scandinavian countries are not in fact archetypes of successful democratic socialism. Sanders has convinced a great deal of people that socialism is something it is not, and he has used the Scandinavian countries to prove its efficacy, while ignoring the many ways they deviate, sometimes dramatically, from what Sanders himself advocates.

Also, Danish businesses enjoy a lower corporate tax rate than American companies as well as rebates on sales tax. Hopefully our tax rate will be lowered in the near future.

I'm not saying that the US has a perfect system. We have plenty of problems ourselves, and in some cases have moved away from a free market. We have a problem with business getting into bed with government creating policies that help them and hurt their competition, causing prices to rise. But with that aside here are a few things I do not like about the welfare state.

So basically almost HALF of your income goes to taxes. Not to mention all of the taxes you pay for any goods or services that you purchase. I've never been to Denmark but I have been to Norway. The first day I was there we wanted to grab a quick bite before checking the city (Bergen) out, so we stopped in McDonald's. One meal cost me 24 dollars! And that was about 10 years ago! It was however the best McDonald's I've ever had, they toast the buns over there.

I'm of the mindset that I can better decide how to save or spend my money. I like to be in charge of where my money goes rather than the government decide for me.

The main problem of your model IMO is that it will not be sustainable in the long term. Like many countries, Denmark faces the problem of an aging population. The birth rate as of 2014 is at a 27 year low. And for 2016, the gross reproduction rate in Denmark ranked 169 in the world with just 0.84 births per 1000 people. Source

35 percent of Denmark's workforce is employed by the government. So these people supply ZERO to the welfare state. Their pay comes from taxes. In the US it is around 16 percent. 35 percent is currently one of the highest in the world. Source

Of course these issues can and will be taken care of, its just a matter of how you all will go about it. I know Denmark has launched some ad campaigns geared towards people having more babies.

Let's go over a little of healthcare. I've got damn good health insurance through my employer. I pay 206 dollars a month and this covers my whole family, (wife and 3 kids). The plan doesn't change whether I have 20 kids or no kids, the price is the same. This covers health, dental, and vision. The dental does have a cap on it but unless you are getting cavities filled once a month you will never hit it. I can go to any doctor I want. There is a 20 dollar copay when you go to the doctor and 75 if you have to go to the emergency room. Prescriptions are mostly covered usually you have to pay around 5-10 dollars.

Now I realize that not everyone has a plan as good as this. There are ways to make it so that this type of plan is more freely available and hopefully those things happen soon. Like allowing companies to compete across state lines. This will allow for a great deal of competition that will drive prices down. For people that cannot pay for health insurance and I know a few, they get it from the state. You have to be under a certain income to quality for it. There are also programs like WIC, which gives some types of free food to parents who are of low income. I'm all for individual states coming up with these programs, I am however against it at the federal level. This attitude wouldn't translate over to Denmark though because the population is so small relative to the US.

There are many things to envy about Denmark's healthcare system but there are also a few drawbacks. Besides the whole tax thing, (I know it's not a drawback to you) patient choice is minimized through their universal healthcare system. Residents are assigned a General Practitioner based on where they live. Wait times can be lengthy and a study was done that shows it is a health concern.

A majority of the countries studied monitor national waiting times and have some type of national waiting time care guarantee. This implies that waiting time is an issue of concern. In a study from 2003 of waiting times in OECD countries, Siciliani and Hurst concluded that “waiting times” is a serious health policy issue in 12 of the countries included in that study (Australia, Canada, Denmark, Finland, Ireland, Italy, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom).

Waiting times were not recorded administratively in a second group of countries (Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Japan, Luxembourg, Switzerland, and the United States) but the authors wrote that they were anecdotally (informally) reported to be low [21]. Our study shows that eight years later (2011), the same countries still record waiting times.

Source

Some things about Denmark that are awesome is Government transparency. Denmark ranked #1 in transparency and number 10 in best country over all, while the US ranked #11 for transparency and #4 for best country overall.

In the same study Denmark ranked #9 for education and the US was #3 but #2 for highest cost!!
Denmark
US

Denmark, Norway, Sweden and Finland spend some of the most money on education as a percentage of their gross domestic product, according to the World Bank. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development has said that levels of education funding do not necessarily affect academic performance, but these Scandinavian nations all ranked in the top third, generally outperforming Asian nations where students are pressured to perform well. No. 18 South Korea, where children attend school each day of the week, was the third Asian nation on the list, preceded by No. 8 Japan and No. 17 Singapore

There are also concerns with there not being enough Engineers and Scientist students because students will persue something they like rather than something that will wind up paying well or something that socioty has a large need for:

But many, in both industry and politics, feel it's become a free lunch that's giving indigestion to Scandinavia's already weakest economy. Too many pursue "fulfilment" and too few the science and engineering degrees needed in well-paid growth sectors critical for the nation's future, they say. Typical is 23-year-old Ali Badreldin, who is enrolled at the Royal Danish Academy of Music to become a saxophone player. "Music was always part of my life growing up so it was a natural choice," he said. His courses are free and he gets a monthly stipend of 5,839 DKK (782 euros, $1,074) in a system where class sizes are rarely limited. The result has Denmark spending more proportionally on education than any other country in the OECD club of 34 advanced nations. Yet biotech firms like Novozymes say they cannot find enough engineers.

As far as vacation goes, it varies for us. I currently have 3 weeks of vacation but it will raise to 4 next year and it will cap at 5 weeks a couple of years after that. I also get 10 paid national holidays and at my job we can bank our overtime up to 80 hours (2 weeks) for extra time off.

You mentioned paid maternity leave. Who pays for that, is it the government or the employer? I know some employers here in the US offer that but it is a very small minority and I would like more employers offer such benefits. I would be against it however if it were the government who is paying for it.

a reply to: FauxMulder

Yes... we do face a population problem, but I wont attribute that to low birth rates but rather the unresponsible behaviour of people in the 50s and 60s along with the government trying to litterally make people make more babies for one sole reason.... growth.

This was an appalling idea and completely unsustainable. We suddenly saw a huge work force in the early 80s shooting the economy to the stars.
But we can't keep making kids that way... It would drive population rates out of proportion in no time. Imagine if everyone in the 90s and 00s also had 3-4 kids. Devastating.

Actually they are trying to fix the economy now by suggesting the exact same thing. We had "# nights" where we could send our kids in kindergarden during the nighttime so the parents could have some cosy time in the hope that birthrates would go up... I mean come on!!

In my view the best thing to do is to ride the storm out and get that huge generation of people out of the way.... maybe even punish them a bit for the exhuberant behaviour during the 80s. They really #ed us over...

Once that generation is out of the way, things will be normalised quite a bit and we should take great care in how we progress from then on.

One thing I never understood; it's perfectly clear now that the economy goes up and down. It really should be plain knowledge by now. But why the hell are states and governments so fast to go on a spending spree when things are good, instead of saving up for when things are bad.
Society really doesn't need those rollercoaster peaks and valleys. Cut off the top and fill the bottom. Balance.


Just a quick remark above hospital choice. We get to choose our own GP. If we want to switch we can do so by paying 30 dollars for the administrative effort.
In regards to hospital choice. We have free hospital choice. Of course some things some hospitals can't offer for what ever reason. They closed a lot of hospitals over the years and are working on consolidating them even further. So in 5 years time we will have regional super hospitals. A lot of us hate this because in the worst case some people will have like 60 minutes to the nearest hospital :S

If the treatment we need takes more than 2 months for the public to fullfill we are allowed to choose a private hospital which the state then pays for. A creative way from the right wing to destroy public healthcare will at the same time supporting the private sector.... exactly what Chomsky said in fact.


I know that the US might not work as such with your huge population. But this is where I think the states should be more like small states instead. A state like Colorado is pretty much 1:1 with Denmark in basically all aspects.
Imagine if they could run the same system for Coloradians and them alone. I bet it would work... but it would most likley require a detatchment from the republic.


This is also one of the reasons I believe that the EU is a fallacy... it simply can't contain such a huge diversity. One of the issues we are facing are worker migration from the eastern states who are more than willing to work for slave wages compared to those that a Danish worker would get.
It undermines welfare and create unemployed people. Of course the bosses and right wing are thrilled because slave labor drives money upwards and lines the rich, while at the same time weakens the middle and lower class.


If anything, the biggest threat to socialism is not socialism itself, but the fact that there are always idiots who want more then others, who thinks that they NEED to have 2 houses and NEED 2-3 cars. As long as people like this exist there will never be balance in a way where it helps as many people as possible.


In a perfect world, The Venus Project is king.