Why Socialism is a Good Thing: An Example

page: 3
13
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 09:17 AM
link   
reply to post by NoRulesAllowed
 


Good example of socialism. In the ideal socialism model, using your example, the government should have stepped in and prevented the corp from going overseas.







posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 09:23 AM
link   
reply to post by NoRulesAllowed
 


This has to be the worst example of trying to argue a good reason for socialism--ever. There are so many incorrect suppositions in this "example" that it doesn't even hold logical weight. If this is the best you've got, there is no need for me to bullet-list and counter all of the wrong in your post, because you're too far lost already to understand.
edit on 9-1-2014 by SlapMonkey because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 09:48 AM
link   
reply to post by NoRulesAllowed
 


I would suggest that you read "Atlas Shrugged". I am no fan of Ayn Rand, but she did get it right with this book. You can see many correlations in today’s reality and the book which was written in the ‘50’s. I also recommend “1984 and “Brave New World”.

All of those books will help you see how many holes there are in your idea.

I do like how you’ve attempted to simplify your idea as I am a big fan of the KISS principle myself. But when it comes to governments, everything is anything but simple these days.



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 10:05 AM
link   
reply to post by brianporter
 


Outside Mogadishu and only specific districts there, Somalia is an example of a different Government system but it sure isn't Capitalism. I'm going by true definitions here, not internet adapted concepts..but the real deal of what these systems are by design and how they really function ..when working.

Somalia is what Anarchy looks like in 90% of the nation. In 10%, within heavily controlled and fortified sectors of..kinda sorta peace? One faction or another rules by gunpoint. So, in a way, it could also be termed the ultimate form of a heavily armed society losing all form of central government or norms in society for conduct. He who kills first, sets the rules..and he who kills the most chooses who gets to set them.

I don't see anything Capitalistic about the pure criminal enterprises now forming much of Somalia's "GDP", if one could call it that. That's a land neither Socialism or Capitalism can help until Murderism stops being the overall goal of the masses.



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 10:09 AM
link   
Is everyone familiar with the story of The Little Red Hen?




In the tale, the little red hen finds a grain of wheat, and asks for help from the other farmyard animals (most adaptions feature a pig and a duck) to plant it, but none of them volunteer.

At each later stage (harvest, threshing, milling the wheat into flour, and baking the flour into bread), the hen again asks for help from the other animals, but again she gets no assistance.

Finally, the hen has completed her task, and asks who will help her eat the bread. This time, all the previous non-participants eagerly volunteer. She declines their help, stating that no one aided her in the preparation work. Thus, the hen eats it with her chicks leaving none for anyone else.

The moral of this story is that those who show no willingness to contribute to a product do not deserve to enjoy the product: "if any would not work, neither should he eat."[1]


I like the Reagan era version only slightly modified. In this version, the hen and her chicks work very hard to turn the wheat into bread, and at every stage, they ask the other animals to help them work to produce the bread, but none of them will. However, once the bread is made and the hen and her chicks sit down to eat, there is a major uproar because the other animals cry out that it's "unfair" of them not to share what they now have through their own hard work. So, the other animals appeal to the farmer who thinks about it, takes the bread from the hen and her chicks, breaks off the larger piece for the barnyard, and give the rest back to the hen. Then, he breaks the larger piece into equal pieces for the barnyard animals. In the end, their pieces are smaller than the piece left for the hen, so they are still resentful of the hen and her chicks for being greedy and rich because they have more. However, by the time the hen and her chicks divide up what they have, it's not nearly enough to make up for all the hard work they did to make it plus the added bad feelings of the other animals.

So, the next time the hen sees some wheat, she eats it.

This is why socialism does not work.



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 11:31 AM
link   

ChuckNasty
reply to post by NoRulesAllowed
 


Good example of socialism. In the ideal socialism model, using your example, the government should have stepped in and prevented the corp from going overseas.





Nailed it!

Stupid government lets everybody import crap and close local factories

I think a cool dictator would be the best to run a country

Imagine he would have no red tape and no lobbyists to get in his way

Need a new hospital? Build it now! Forget having to wait years for approval and funding

As long as he loved his country and the people in it


But it wouldn't last long before a coalition of the willing would take down the axis of evil




posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 11:41 AM
link   
reply to post by BrianG
 


Sounds cool until he does something you don't like. Then what? Too bad, he's the dictator.

So basically, one man rides roughshod over people no matter what he does because he can.

Need that hospital built? OK, build it! What about those people who spent years living in the buildings that need to be demolished to make way for the hospital? Too bad, they just get kicked to the curb. Who cares if they owned those buildings or not. We need that hospital and it has been decreed by the benevolent dictator that we will build it. For the greater good, right? They'll just move elsewhere. (China does this, btw.)

Need a new power source? No problem! The dictator will just decree that scientists will create it, and he'll shut down all existing evil power plants to get it done. And when the scientists don't have that new power source instantly ready to come on line and people are suffering without electricity ... well, it's the fault of the scientists. Clearly, they did not do their jobs.

Ooo, this dictator business is fun!

Oh, and we could all swear lifelong allegiance to the dictator ... including the military. And since he is protecting us all now, we have no need for our guns. He is defending us like the benevolent father he is ...





posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 11:48 AM
link   

ketsuko
reply to post by BrianG
 


Sounds cool until he does something you don't like. Then what? Too bad, he's the dictator.

So basically, one man rides roughshod over people no matter what he does because he can.

Need that hospital built? OK, build it! What about those people who spent years living in the buildings that need to be demolished to make way for the hospital? Too bad, they just get kicked to the curb. Who cares if they owned those buildings or not. We need that hospital and it has been decreed by the benevolent dictator that we will build it. For the greater good, right? They'll just move elsewhere. (China does this, btw.)

Need a new power source? No problem! The dictator will just decree that scientists will create it, and he'll shut down all existing evil power plants to get it done. And when the scientists don't have that new power source instantly ready to come on line and people are suffering without electricity ... well, it's the fault of the scientists. Clearly, they did not do their jobs.

Ooo, this dictator business is fun!

Oh, and we could all swear lifelong allegiance to the dictator ... including the military. And since he is protecting us all now, we have no need for our guns. He is defending us like the benevolent father he is ...





Life would be easier for the average Joe

Spoken with many people who have fled Iraq and they all said it was much better under Saddam

Yeah a terrible asshole but no fear of getting kidnapped for ransom etc

But like I said the dictator needs to love his people and be a nice guy



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 11:49 AM
link   
You can love your people and be a nice guy and still do awful things in the name of the greater good.



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 12:27 PM
link   

Krazysh0t
So explain to me why the Government needed to save MericaCorp to begin with? It is their own fault that they are failing. What should have happened is that the corporation failed allowing for newer, small businesses to be opened up by the unemployed of MericaVille. The government didn't need to step in at all since the dumb actions of the corporation caught up with them and put them in dire straights. It's their fault for being in that situation and no one needs to bail them out.

Corporate subsidies keep businesses that really need to go under afloat. If these corporations would go under, then many newer, small businesses can fill the void without the resources to outsource overseas and would hire locally. The problem is self-correcting and with government involvement, all you are doing is having the government pay the paychecks of the workers while the corporation continues to pocket the profits from shipping jobs overseas. Meanwhile, the national debt rises each year due to the subsidies. I mean, why go through all the trouble of giving MericaCorp money anyways? Why can't the government just employ the unemployed workers. That is essentially what they are doing anyways.
edit on 7-1-2014 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)


But fascism works better when you regulate large corporations; so it behooves the power and control hungry politicians to make sure large corps stay in business.

It's a lot easier to get regulations enacted in an industry where 5 corporations run 90% of all the business in the industry rather than 1,000 small businesses making up 75% of an industry. Big business and big government is a symbiotic relationship.



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 12:32 PM
link   
Many excellent points have already been made as to why socialism fails when some try to force an entire population to participate. Socialism might work in smaller groups, but when millions are involved, human nature prevails and socialism fails. My family and I already lived in such a system and it was one we needed to escape for many good reasons.

I read an article recently about France going down the toilet due to the abuse and overburdening that socialism is causing.

The Fall of France




“Do you see that man in the corner? I’m going to kill him. He’s ruined my life!”

This angry outburst came from a lawyer friend who is leaving France to move to Britain to escape the 70 percent tax he pays. He says he is working like a dog for nothing – to hand out money to the profligate state. The man he was pointing to, in a swanky Japanese restaurant in the Sixth Arrondissement, is Pierre Moscovici, the much-loathed minister of finance. Moscovici was looking very happy with himself. Does he realize Rome is burning?

Granted, there is much to be grateful for in France. An economy that boasts successful infrastructure such as its high-speed rail service, the TGV, and Airbus, as well as international businesses like the luxury goods conglomerate LMVH, all of which define French excellence. It has the best agricultural industry in Europe. Its tourism industry is one of the best in the world.

But the past two years have seen a steady, noticeable decline in France. There is a grayness that the heavy hand of socialism casts. It is increasingly difficult to start a small business when you cannot fire useless employees and hire fresh new talent. Like the Huguenots, young graduates see no future and plan their escape to London.
edit on 9-1-2014 by 2manyquestions because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 02:30 PM
link   

Wrabbit2000
reply to post by Krazysh0t
 

Well, we already hold the highest corporate tax rate on Earth...So we have the overtaxing side down. I'm not sure we're lacking loopholes to drive rushhour traffic through, either?

Must be all the wrong loopholes which is likely...since they aren't writing them to benefit anyone but individual business and political ambition.


Not true. UAE has 55% according to that table. USA is 40%. But there are also a bunch of business credits and deductions that you don't see there.



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 02:36 PM
link   
reply to post by SilentKillah
 


Oh! My bad... I had a feeling I was missing one as I just knew we'd been #2, and not world leader the year before. Alas.. There is one nation on Earth that taxes business more than we do. I'd hardly call that a positive, but at least we're not #1 outright in yet another category no sane person wants to be #1 in.

In terms of tax credits? Indeed.. We do have them ...as do most nations in the world and on that list. Some have large and more generous ones ..some have none at all, I'd bet. We aren't the easiest in that way by far (or business would be coming TO us, not running from us).

Hopefully we can break from the exclusive tax approach before we do manage to run all business capable of leaving, out of our tax jurisdiction/national territory. The bad thing is...a simple cut won't mean anything for those who have left...and the jobs this economic policy have run out of our nation are probably lost for generations to come, as whole new business realities are coming to fill the void our short sighted policies have created.



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 03:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


Oh no... I definitely didn't mean to imply that #2 was any better in any way, form, or fashion. I only meant to point out the overlook.

IMO, I say to heck with the businesses that want to leave. Let them go... just tax those specific businesses heavily on imports to the US and give those proceeds to up and coming businesses that want to build their companies of similar product here.

Not really give... that's a bad word for what I'm trying to say, but rather offer some type of incentive to those smaller companies that want to grow larger using the heavily taxed imported items from the other company that left. Force the company that left to have to hike their prices to sell here so high that they can't sell. At the same time, that up and coming company can sell at the lower prices that the leaving company once enjoyed or lower while still employing our people.

What I'm saying may not be projected right... it may sound flawed, but it seems better in my head than what I typed on here. Then again... I'm not a business man... I just work for the IRS... lol.



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 03:20 PM
link   

Oannes
Does socialism basically mean that everyone gets a slice of the pie? That would explain why capitalists are so afraid of it. "Can't have everyone living well on equal footing now can we ?"


HAHA! EXACTLY !!

no, for serious... any system based on slavery is bad. Monetary systems is even worse, if you on the wrong end of the stick



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 04:04 PM
link   
reply to post by NoRulesAllowed
 


Good discussion. The bailout portion seems to me a cahoots form of capitalism rather than socialism. I think we have a lot of beneficial forms of both capitalism and socialism working in our country and a lot of lopsided forms. I think part of what allows capitalism to work in this country is the realization that some types of socialist doings actually benefit the society and strengthen capitalism. After reading through the posts, I kept remembering a discussion in Life of Brian that always makes me laugh and think about this type of combination.

Reg: Yeah, all right Stan, don't delay with the point. And
what have they (the Romans) ever given us in return?
Revolutionary I: The aqueduct?
Reg: What?
Revolutionary I: The aqueduct.
Reg: Oh. Yeah, yeah, they did give us that, ah, that's true,
yeah.
Revolutionary II: And the sanitation.
Loretta: Oh, yeah, the sanitation, Reg. Remember what the
city used to be like.
Reg: Yeah, all right, I'll grant you the aqueduct and
sanitation, the two things the Romans have done.
Matthias: And the roads.
Reg: Oh, yeah, obviously the roads. I mean the roads go
without saying, don't they? But apart from the sanitation,
the
aqueduct, and the roads...
Revolutionary III: Irrigation.
Revolutionary I: Medicine.
Revolutionary IV: Education.
Reg: Yeah, yeah, all right, fair enough.
Revolutionary V: And the wine.
All revolutionaries except Reg: Oh, yeah! Right!
Rogers: Yeah! Yeah, that's something we'd really miss Reg,
if the Romans left. Huh.
Revolutionary VI: Public bathes.
Loretta: And it's safe to walk in the streets at night now,
Reg.
Rogers: Yeah, they certainly know how to keep order. Let's
face it; they're the only ones who could in a place like
this.
All revolutionaries except Reg: Hahaha...all right...
Reg: All right, but apart from the sanitation, the medicine,
education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, the
fresh-water
system and public health, what have the Romans ever done for
us?
Revolutionary I: Brought peace?
Reg: Oh, peace! Shut up!



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 06:28 PM
link   

Oannes
Does socialism basically mean that everyone gets a slice of the pie? That would explain why capitalists are so afraid of it. "Can't have everyone living well on equal footing now can we ?"


No...we can't. Not when person A spent 8 years in school and paid for it to get the knowledge and experience to get a good job and person B sat on their ass and didn't. Fair is rarely the same as equal. Everyone deserves equal pay for equal work, but your socialism as preached by your president wants equal pay for unequal work...or lack thereof. Socialism takes from those who bust their asses and gives it to those who don't. If you don't want to bust your ass...touch crap. Go freeze in the cold. If you don't want to work for your family...go die in a hole.

I have no patience for anyone not busting their ass. I'm 49 years old. I am up at 3 AM every day, work on my own little business, go to my full time job and get home at 5 PM to spend time with my family until I go to sleep before 9 PM. I'll be damned if I will willing give one dollar I earned for my family to some low-life that got up at 11 AM and watched TV until midnight.



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 07:07 PM
link   
reply to post by WeAreAWAKE
 


Exactly, it's folks like these who make socialism such a bad thing.

College educated freeloaders who get SNAP and eat roasted rabbit with tarragon?!

I'm sorry, but go out and get a job ... or two. And stop making me live the SNAP challenge as a matter of course to feed my family on a weekly basis.

And that is no lie, btw. By the time you break down our weekly grocery budget we are spending roughly $1.50 to $1.90 per person, per meal to feed the three of us. And we have tax liability! Our taxes are paying for these idiots roasted freakin' rabbit.




posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 07:25 PM
link   
reply to post by NoRulesAllowed
 


What form of socialism?

Libertarian Socialism (legitimate socialism)with powerful worker unions and co-ops.

Direct Democratic Parlimentary Socialism(legitimate socialism) with powerful worker unions and co-ops.

or

Marxist Socialism.(state controlled/managed socialism and capitalism...not legitimate)no unions,no co-ops.
edit on 9-1-2014 by John_Rodger_Cornman because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 07:26 PM
link   

ketsuko


Because socialism needs to compel everyone to be part of the system in order for it to do what it needs to. Look at the public school system. It is nearly 100% socialized. Everyone is compelled by taxation to take part in it whether or not they will ever use it. Every child is compelled into it unless their parents have the means to spend money over and beyond to get them out of the system, even with homeschooling.

And every year, we dump more money into the system. Can you honestly say the results are worth it?

Part of the problem, and I say this is as someone who was on the inside, is that students are not considered into the equation much. They are thought of as products or outcomes. Teachers are the lowest human denominator in the process.


The school system must be working. Technology advances every year. The products I want to buy are getting made and supplied on the shelves where I shop without fail. What part of your life, economically speaking, would a better school system serve? I think the end result would be revolution and a journey into the very policies that you are fighting against. You should thank your lucky stars the school system underachieves or we would be socialists already. Smart people with no jobs would tolerate the current system for just so long.

edit on 9-1-2014 by sligtlyskeptical because: (no reason given)





new topics
 
13
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join