Socialism is NOT a bad thing

Hey there,
Seems pretty pointless to try to debate the socialism vrs capitalism issue. I find it ironic that every system other than the American one is so heavily poo-pooed despite the fact that many socialist influenced countries seem to be presently doing better in almost every aspect.

I got a real kick out of the Fox reporter who vehemently tried to convince the Canadian guest that Canada is behind the times and should adopt a first amendment stance like them. It was in response to the Ann Coulter protest and speech cancellation at a Canadian University. As if America has it all figured out and Canada is in the stone age when it comes to free speech and civil rights.



How many people do you all think actually know that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was penned by a Canadian. I think Canada is ahead in many social issues and challenges. While our propensity to accrue and create capital is still developing.

Canada basically is a capitalistic state that has a few more socialist tendencies than the States. The folks that speak out about this and about that I feel have a bit of a distorted few of how socialistic Canada is, as do some Canucks have a distorted few of the States.

Both systems have advantages and benefits and both are inherently flawed as well. In the end it boils down to how they are interpreted and enacted and what kind of humane and seemingly "fair" balance is struck.

[edit on 28-3-2010 by sparrowstail]

[edit on 28-3-2010 by sparrowstail]

This argument is almost always overly debated.

Here is my opinion:

Merit, will and ability and nothing more should dictate what any human being should or could have.

Socialism is the party of the under-achiever, regardless of the feel-good-for-your-fellow-human hypocrisy that they espouse. Indeed, the false 'humanitarian' angle is a cover story to mask a lack of personal accomplishment.Their is no socialist anywhere, period, that wouldn't swap that system for a job making 100k per year...bet on it.

Originally posted by Clark Savage Jr.
This argument is almost always overly debated.

Here is my opinion:

Merit, will and ability and nothing more should dictate what any human being should or could have.

Socialism is the party of the under-achiever, regardless of the feel-good-for-your-fellow-human hypocrisy that they espouse. Indeed, the false 'humanitarian' angle is a cover story to mask a lack of personal accomplishment.Their is no socialist anywhere, period, that wouldn't swap that system for a job making 100k per year...bet on it.

You are right in fact I think this is why Cain killed Abel. He was under producing.

reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux


Yeah Americas the most socialist country in the world.

Don't make me laugh. I will not argue that we obviously have a large government and it is not completely capitalist but we are not social democracy. Why don't you study the economic structure of Canada, UK, France, Sweden, Australia and Netherlands; then tell me how socialist we are. The Nordic countries have decentralized governments. We have a Social liberal economy.

Social liberalism is the belief that liberalism should include social justice. It differs from classical liberalism in asserting that a liberal state should provide jobs, health care, and education while simultaneously expanding civil rights. Under social liberalism, the good of the community is viewed as harmonious with the freedom of the individual. Social liberal policies have been widely adopted in much of the capitalist world, particularly following the Second World War. Social liberal ideas and parties tend to be considered centrist or centre-left.

It affirms the following principles: human rights, free and fair elections and multiparty democracy, social justice, tolerance, social market economy, free trade, environmental sustainability and a strong sense of international solidarity.

en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by ShadeWolf

Communism is a flawed system, as the people have no power. Democratic socialism, on the other hand, is one of the best political systems in the world. Deregulation of key institutions by the government in a capitalist state like the US resulted in massive economic disasters, including price gouging, monopolies and the current banking fiasco. In a country where government regulation is still enforced, economic tribulations have far less effect, as the government can stabilize financial institutions by tightening up laws.

You are SOOOO wrong. First off, Communism should be the FINAL stage of the socialism. They are NOT distinct things. The Marxist "revolution" foresaw that after the socialist government has seized all private capital and means of production, and redistribute it through equal pay and free public services in all social areas, the NEXT stage would be a phase where the own proletariat would take the control of this government. Like a merging.
Second, we just know that this NEVER happened and NEVER WILL. The socialist governments seized all private capital and industry and the money was distributed ONLY among the military, oligarchies and the own politics. This happened in the former Soviet Union, in the pre-opening China, in Cuba, in North Korea, North Vietnam and NOW it's happening in Venezuela. The socialism was a BOGUS set up by russian freemasonry in order to create an antagonist system to confront capitalist system and in certain time after both system crashed, the freemasonry would install a model capable to control the economics in whole world, not only in the European East.
And btw in EVERY SINGLE nation where the socialism was applied, the people live in massive misery and poverty. I don't know if a simple health care bill is enough to label Obama "socialist", IMO the americans are over-reacting and all this hype has a clear ethnic bias against him. Regardless Obama is socialist or is just desperate to fix things there, this Marxist system was just another freemasonry tool to control masses.


[edit on 28-3-2010 by ucalien]

reply to post by Misoir

That's exactly why you can't talk socialism with an American. PERIOD

You said you are an American, so now you are saying you aren't an American? Not trying to start anything with you, just trying to figure this out. By this quote it sounds like you don't consider yourself an American.

Americans don't care and whatever you tell them they have their own warped ideas.

Hrmm, 10+ trillion to the war on Poverty, 36 trillion in unfunded Medicare obligations, Social Security is bankrupt, those aren't ideas those are facts.

They don't care and people should stop discussing socialism on ATS because you will always get attacked because foreigners don't want anything to do with these types of threads because they get overwhelmed by obnoxious Americans. We already know exactly what you people think, we don't need to be told on our own threads 'how we are so wrong'.

This last part proves my point about what I said earlier.

reply to post by Light of Night


I am an American, not for much longer, but my whole life I have been and still am. I am saying every other American than just a few. There are not many Americans who are socialist or will actually agree that socialism is okay. I am not saying every American but the overwhelming majority.

Edit to add: I never said Americans aren't charitable because we are the most charitable in the world. We just don't give universal rights to people other than what's in the bill of rights.

[edit on 3/28/10 by Misoir]

State run health care is a complete disaster. Just look north to the Canadian cluster ph*ck. Danny Williams went to the US for his heart repair since he couldn't get it done quickly enough. The wait times are atrocious and finding sa doctor is near impossible. User pay system is NOT available here.

Socialism sucks @$$ big time my little friend.

reply to post by rusethorcain

They do not want to, and simply refuse to, pay for this mans fishing lessons.

This is another problem, why should I have to pay for a persons fishing lessons if the person doesn't want fishing lessons. I'd much rather choose who to pay who gets fishing lessons, and in fact with the money that I save I could afford to give the person that I choose TWO fishing lessons.

You can't make people do what you want to them to do. It's that simple. Otherwise the people that don't want fishing lessons are going to continue to waste my money being taught how to fish while the instructor catches fish for them.

Well The simple fact is that capitlism knows no boundaries and only has alliance to the profit margin. An american capitalist would invest in the country where the highest rate of return in their dolar.

To bad about US jobs as they cannot compete with the third world labour or the chinese factories. The same thiong happens in the UK. Whilst these people spout patriotism and compete between themselves to have the biggest flags do look and see where their invest their cash.


[edit on 28-3-2010 by Tiger5]

Originally posted by sparrowstail
Seems pretty pointless to try to debate the socialism vrs capitalism issue.

LOL, yeah, you got that right, especially when you're dealing with a bunch of hypocrites.

Take for example this situation: I was hanging with a couple people during lunch a couple weeks ago and they were complaining about how greedy big business was, how horrible it was that they were taking advantage of poor people, how the rich were making a buck off all the poor people. After we finished lunch we stopped at a convenience store and one of these guys, the biggest complainer about greed, bought a PowerBall lotto ticket. Well, I just about split my gut laughing at this fool. Just 30 minutes ago the dude was up on his soap box complaining about the poor being taken advantage of by those that want to be rich. I asked him if he would become upset with himself if he won. "Heck no, I'd love to win that much money." I then reminded him who buys lotto tickets and who HE would be taking advantage of if he won. Stupid silly two-faced lying hypocrite, ha. I don't think he likes me now after pointing out the hole in his brain.

reply to post by sparrowstail


America is the one in the stone age. And with our new healthcare that is really just crap! We have now entered the 20th century, Yay!

Lets check out some human rights shall we...
Death penalty.... still used
Torture... people support it
Unnecessary Wars... always

Personal rights...
Gay marriage... nope
Racism... yep
Sexism... yep
Evolution... nope
Stem cell research... finally
Abortion... yep, but people don't support it

Right to information...
Unbiased media... nope
Lots of government secrets... yep
Wiretapping... yep
Spying on citizens... yep

Economic rights...
Universal health care... nope
Long term unemployment benefits... nope
Labor unions... barely
Corporate control... yep
Living wage laws... nope

Do we really need to see more? We still have about a century to catch up on. The US has no place to tell Canada that they aren't treating their people fairly because they have one of the highest levels of privacy and human rights.

reply to post by Misoir



Erm Well if you put it that way you are correct. I am not being sarcastic. Well come monday you had better buckle up because I have a feeling people well get a bit heated. Well put however.

reply to post by Tiger5

To bad about US jobs as they cannot compete with the third world labour or the chinese factories. The same thiong happens in the UK. Whilst these people spout patriotism and compete between themselves to have the biggest flags do look and see where their invest their cash.

Yep to bad our government signed the NAFTA agreement. You can think the government for all of our manufacturing getting shipped out the country.

The fact is business exists to make a profit. Doesn't matter who owns the business Government or Private individuals. Things costs money to make if you are not at the bare minimum breaking even then your business goes under. It's that simple.

Why do you think the government keeps raising taxes? Because they keep spending more and they need more money. I'll say what I have always said right now, if the government was as efficient as running enterprise as a private for profit business then I would have no problem with the government running everything, but the fact is they aren't.

reply to post by Misoir


Now your back pedaling and there is no such thing as a partial capitalist. A capitalist advocates a laissez faire system of a free and unregulated market with massive competition and a currency backed by some form of intrinsic wealth, whereby all can agree upon its value. That's pretty much it and you're either in or your out, but your not a little capitalist and a little bit something else. Under a capitalist system there would not be any gigantic state.

Based upon the Wikipedia article you posted in your previous post, which listed as characteristics of a social democracy:

A mixed economy consisting of both private enterprise and publicly owned or subsidized programs of education, universal health care, child care and related social services for all citizens.

An extensive system of social security with the stated goal of counteracting the effects of poverty and insuring the citizens against loss.

Government bodies that regulate private enterprise in the interest of workers and consumers by insuring labor rights, consumer protection and fair market competition.

Environmentalism and environmental protection laws; for example funding of alternative energy resources and laws designed to combat global warming.

A value added/progressive taxation system to fund government expenditures.

A secular and socially progressive policy.

Immigration and multiculturalism

Youth rights and lowering the voting age.

"Fair" trade over free trade.

A foreign policy supporting the promotion of democracy, the protection of human rights and where possible effective multilateralism.

Advocacy of social justice, human rights, social rights, civil rights and civil liberties.

I just retyped verbatim what you quoted from Wikipedia and I did so to make clear that every characteristic they presented of a social democracy describes The United States of America in its current incarnation. You can fluster and bluster and point to other countries all you want, what Wikipedia defines as social democracy describes the political structure of the United States today.

reply to post by Misoir


You are grossly Uninformed. All I have to say is when you get to the UK I hope you don't mind the government tracking your every move, and wiretapping you and everything else.

Yes we do have living wage laws. It's called Minimum Wage. :shk:

Originally posted by Light of Night
reply to post by Misoir

 

You are grossly Uninformed. All I have to say is when you get to the UK I hope you don't mind the government tracking your every move, and wiretapping you and everything else.

Yes we do have living wage laws. It's called Minimum Wage. :shk:

I meant to put YK for Yukon. I'm moving to Yukon, Canada. Atleast Canada has one of the best human rights records in the world.

And if you consider our minimum wage laws as living wage laws I can't help but If we had living wage laws we would have a minimum wage of about $10 and hour or $25,000 a year.

[edit on 3/28/10 by Misoir]

Originally posted by Light of Night
reply to post by Misoir

 

You are grossly Uninformed. All I have to say is when you get to the UK I hope you don't mind the government tracking your every move, and wiretapping you and everything else.

Yes we do have living wage laws. It's called Minimum Wage. :shk:

This is called the Patriot Act.
If you are a true "patriot" you should have absolutely nothing to hide and so should not mind the government having access to your underwear drawer.
With that not only my phone calls can be monitored without a warrant but my computer information and books I take out of the library. The "SUNPASS" we are all encouraged to use is a good way to track your every move in your auto mobile. You can get a ticket for arriving at your next exist ahead of the speed limit and from a camera attached to a stop sign. Midnight, nobody for miles, and you run the light or the sign, you can get a ticket.
Not to mention the computer chip with all my driving history and who know what all else on those FL drivers licenses. Make no mistake big brother has been watching you for quite a while now here in the good old US of A. This is to help us forsee a terrorist attack.
This is the result of 9/11 and some say one of the true purposes or at least fringe benefits for the Dick Cheney set... of that hugely debated attack.

Originally posted by rusethorcain


This is called the Patriot Act.
If you are a true "patriot" you should have absolutely nothing to hide and so should not mind the government having access to your underwear drawer.
With that not only my phone calls can be monitored without a warrant but my computer information and books I take out of the library. The "SUNPASS" we are all encouraged to use is a good way to track your every move in your auto mobile. You can get a ticket for arriving at your next exist ahead of the speed limit and from a camera attached to a stop sign. Midnight, nobody for miles, and you run the light or the sign, you can get a ticket.
Not to mention the computer chip with all my driving history and who know what all else on those FL drivers licenses. Make no mistake big brother has been watching you for quite a while now here in the good old US of A. This is to help us forsee a terrorist attack.
This is the result of 9/11 and some say one of the true purposes or at least fringe benefits for the Dick Cheney set... of that hugely debated attack.

Good post. and given that post, I find it strange that so many Americans persist in rolling out the line that the UK is a Big Brother Surveillance society. For a conspiracy site, there's a truck load of incredibly naive people here that seem to think that, whatever happens in the UK isn't happening in the US at the very least.

And, no matter how many times it's pointed out, the idea that the British are spied on via CCTV still persists like a stubborn weed. Yes, if you juggle numbers such as cameras per population in a particular area unit, then in a massively more population dense place such as the UK it's going to be skewed as looking camera-heavy. However, it's still not a Big Brother state as the vast majority of these cameras are owned by businesses and private property owners - not the state.

Originally posted by Misoir
They don't care and people should stop discussing socialism on ATS because you will always get attacked...

...these types of threads because they get overwhelmed by obnoxious Americans.

It is so laughable that every time one of these threads pops up, someone, without fail, will accuse the "Americans" of attacking them. The majority of the posts, which are in disagreement with the OP, are merely presenting their opinion of why we don't agree.

The "attacks" are always toward the Americans, because we don't just, immediately, fall to our knees and kiss your butts, for telling us how wrong our system is. Like I said, earlier in this thread, I'm happy that Canadians, Brits, French, etc. are happy with their systems. Now, just leave us to be happy with ours, if we so chose, or to correct it under our terms, if we so chose.

Just like the Canadians, Brits, French, etc., we don't like others telling us what to do, either. Most of us will gladly engage anyone in conversation, but once the lambasting begins, don't be surprised when we defend ourselves.

[edit on 28-3-2010 by WTFover]