Why Socialism is a Good Thing: An Example

page: 6
12
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 11 2014 @ 04:32 PM
link   

amfirst1
reply to post by NoRulesAllowed
 







too bad 99,9% of the people will not believe what he is saying until it's too late




posted on Jan, 12 2014 @ 12:09 AM
link   
reply to post by ChuckNasty
 



Capitalistic intervention


But you said that we were living in socialism.



posted on Jan, 12 2014 @ 01:14 AM
link   
reply to post by ENrgLee
 


That statement you mistook as 'we are living in socialism' was in response to everything socialist is evil.

I live in a Democratic country that has heavy socialistic programs.

Socialism is like Bacon. It makes everything better, but not without consequences. Too much bacon will lead to an early death. Too much socialism will be the death of a country. We cannot live without Bacon, just like we can't live without socialism.



posted on Jan, 12 2014 @ 03:40 AM
link   

robhines


I don't think you have any real idea either, sorry. Socialism is about workers owning the means of production. That isn't being powerless at all, but to the capitalists it means the end of their control, and this is why you have so much propaganda from almost all parts of the world.
...


Are you kidding me?... I even gave socialist websites which clearly contradict the claim that "the workers own the means of production"... The workers DO NOT OWN the means of production despite CLAIMS to the contrary... That alone tells me you don't know a thing about socialism.


...When socialists talk about the abolition of private property, they are referring to the socialization of the means of production—the resources and equipment that create wealth. Working people do not own this type of property...

www.pslweb.org...

...

The problem with socialists and leftists is that they are completely ignorant of the economic/form of government (socialism) they adore and revere...

edit on 12-1-2014 by ElectricUniverse because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 12 2014 @ 03:49 AM
link   

ChuckNasty
reply to post by ENrgLee
 


That statement you mistook as 'we are living in socialism' was in response to everything socialist is evil.

I live in a Democratic country that has heavy socialistic programs.

Socialism is like Bacon. It makes everything better, but not without consequences. Too much bacon will lead to an early death. Too much socialism will be the death of a country. We cannot live without Bacon, just like we can't live without socialism.


Could you tell us what country do you live at?

I am asking because there is a big misunderstanding amongst some people who claim certain programs are socialistic when they are not.



posted on Jan, 12 2014 @ 05:21 AM
link   

ElectricUniverse

robhines


I don't think you have any real idea either, sorry. Socialism is about workers owning the means of production. That isn't being powerless at all, but to the capitalists it means the end of their control, and this is why you have so much propaganda from almost all parts of the world.
...


Are you kidding me?... I even gave socialist websites which clearly contradict the claim that "the workers own the means of production"... The workers DO NOT OWN the means of production despite CLAIMS to the contrary... That alone tells me you don't know a thing about socialism.


...When socialists talk about the abolition of private property, they are referring to the socialization of the means of production—the resources and equipment that create wealth. Working people do not own this type of property...

www.pslweb.org...

...

The problem with socialists and leftists is that they are completely ignorant of the economic/form of government (socialism) they adore and revere...

edit on 12-1-2014 by ElectricUniverse because: (no reason given)


No, I should ask are you kidding me. Or maybe, are you trying to kid everyone reading your post there. You're either doing this deliberately, or you're so stuck in your own biased view that you can't even read a webpage about socialism properly. You left out the end bit of that quote, maybe if you'd added it your argument would've made a lot less sense, like it should do.

The quote is talking about the current situation. Not what socialism is supposed to be. Working people do not own this type of property now. They're talking about what's going on in the present.

So let's repost that quote in full, from the part titled "Myth #1: Socialists want to take away your property"


This myth confuses private property with personal property. When socialists talk about the abolition of private property, they are referring to the socialization of the means of production—the resources and equipment that create wealth. Working people do not own this type of property—which is why we have to work to survive.


Now let's quote the rest of that part :


Right now, the wealth of the 1,000 billionaires is equal to that of the 3.5 billion poorest people on the planet. In order to provide everyone with more, that wealth must be commonly owned, and not the property of those few capitalists.

Socialists have no interest in taking away one’s home, car or individual items intended for personal use. In reality, as the foreclosure crisis has shown, under capitalism the banks own most of this property as well—and will take it away as they please.



I have no idea why you think a socialist website would try to completely reverse what socialism is actually supposed to be. Again : socialism is supposed to be about the workers owning the means of production. This is what the original goal of socialism was, and still is. You can argue, twist, and spin things for the rest of your life, right up until your last breath, but you can't change the fact that this is what the essence of socialism is actually supposed to be.

One more attempt to try and help you, from the same site, titled "What is socialism?" :


Based on the experiences of the 1848 revolutions, Marx and Engels came to the conclusion that the only way to end exploitation of the poor and oppressed is for the working class to take control of the means of production through a working class revolution. Only smashing the capitalist state and replacing it with a new workers’ state can lay the foundation for socialism.


www.pslweb.org...



posted on Jan, 12 2014 @ 09:38 AM
link   
Here is my layman understanding of socialism, and what is bad about it...

People/public form a pact, then establish a party which make a government.
People surrender their property to the government/party, everything, except personal belonging.
Government create departments etc as normal government.
Department create units, which will create factory, farms, hospitals etc etc
People work there and gain credits/money to get new things they want.
People make choice, Ipod or food or whatever they want.
Everyone work to get paid, other basic social stuff is free.

Get it everyone ? Socialism is akin to living in zoo as animals,
you get fed and houses (gov dependency),
you pose for visitor (work),
everything is taken care if - sick, education, transport etc etc (common social).
Get that clear.

Comparing to capitalist and for that someone (crony capitalist??? wth who cares about manicures)

You wake up in a jungle, you hunt, either in pack (company) or alone (pa & ma shop)
you kill elephant, you fed yourself, you kill nothing, you starve (reasons why you have beggars)
you look and make your own house, (reasons why you have "homeless")
if sick, you have to get Obamacare or pay the doc for drugs/sessions.

I hope that is clear. Some may argue about its communism/socialist vs capitalist or crony/extrme/public/corporatism, the minute difference. Stop that politic/economic term manicures.
We are talking about socialism vs capitalism, lets lets just stick to socialism vs capitalism, since thats what everyone talking.

Here I list the bad side of socialism, this is what socialist really dont want to answer.
- No progress, if you make handphone, it will still be bulky like the 80s, but EVERYONE will have a handphone, bulky tho.
- Power abuse, the one who is in charge, tend to turn to dictator like, they want to be in charge.
- Loss of power to individual, this is expected, members are really open for abuse to the party leaders.
- Distribution channel disrupted/incapable to fill demand, lets sat theres drought/, not enough crops yield, you work in binoculars factory, they pay you with binoculars! go figure how to eat, the binoculars are high class military grade and sold for USD30 (real value is hundreds), its a true story by the way,

As you can see, its never about corporation having problem, that is non existant in a communist/socialist country. There is no problem about money either, but there are problem in other areas you dont realise. Thats why I go nuts reading everyone post, yes, there are a few who DO grasp the concept.

If you have a different socialism variant which have separate corporate entity other than the government, let it be known - its capitalist, do not rebrand it as socialist stuff, because you will have problem explaining later.
There are only 2 entity, people and goverment,
government own factory/firms/corporations
people works there, if they dont like what the goverment do,
they revolt (reasons why you have Labor Party).

However, I still vouch for communist/socialist. Its really long shot.
By the way, if the entire world is based on communism/socialism, theres a BIG chance the alien will land, openly, they have similar government.
edit on 12-1-2014 by NullVoid because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 12 2014 @ 12:17 PM
link   
reply to post by NullVoid
 


Now you nailed it. You perfectly described in socialism. That's why it will never work and almost always turns into another form of rule, usually tyranny.

You can't argue that the poor have ALWAYS fared better in truly free economies with little or no government interference. The poor have ALWAYS fared worse in socialistic or communist states.

Facsism can take over a failing socialist state to help the troubled poor, but facism goes nowhere fast.

I think "Freedom to Choose" by Milton Friedman should be required reading for everyone in this thread :-)



posted on Jan, 12 2014 @ 02:39 PM
link   
reply to post by raymundoko
 


It CAN work with democratic selection of leaders. Comparing to democratic + capitalist, democratic + socialist is more preferable in the long term. Common capitalist (democratic + capitalist) like practiced worldwide, will favor the "entrepreneur"/corporate/1% what ever you call them, its the norm and expected. Easy said - leaders are bought instead of elected. A simple check, you go run for president, yep, thats right, and bingo, first thing coming to mind - where do I get the funds to get started and you will start looking at big corporate. Sign a few documents allowing them to do what they want, you get millions to boot.

Comparing to socialist democratic, you need plenty of saliva and microphone and talk your way up, people will support you with everything (sacrifice), they will fight for the cause with you as leader, the world call this - "revolution", but as a species, this is the correct way.

Its very tempting to be rich, I guess its human nature, but for human race to progress, that is not the way.
Simply look at bees to see how we are so much different, no tyranny at all (think you being the queen !).

To be evil without feeling guilty is pretty easy - become a billionaire. See the philanthropist millionaires ? That is to remove the "guilty" feeling. Probably that what make us human - greed ? Money is not the root of evil, greed is.



posted on Jan, 12 2014 @ 04:19 PM
link   
reply to post by ChuckNasty
 


Once again your talking about crony capitalism or corportism. Under socialism it's much easier to have crony capitalism. Government will give the contracts to their family members. That's why socialist dictators are all billionaires and so r their friends and family members. If u r not in the circle u are screwed.

Capitalism is about the free market, supply and demand. When government gets involved to help out their lobbyists or themselves the supply and demand goes out of wack therefore, u no longer have proper capitalism.



posted on Jan, 12 2014 @ 05:19 PM
link   
Again, I slap my forehead. Looks like people really hate communism/socialism that much that they did not bother to understand how it work in the first place.

Oh well, what can I say, its not a popular choice

I wonder if they know the root word for communist.
edit on 12-1-2014 by NullVoid because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 13 2014 @ 01:52 PM
link   
Humanism is the ONLY system
that will allow us to survive, as
a species.



posted on Jan, 13 2014 @ 02:06 PM
link   

NullVoid
reply to post by raymundoko
 


It CAN work with democratic selection of leaders. Comparing to democratic + capitalist, democratic + socialist is more preferable in the long term. Common capitalist (democratic + capitalist) like practiced worldwide, will favor the "entrepreneur"/corporate/1% what ever you call them, its the norm and expected. Easy said - leaders are bought instead of elected. A simple check, you go run for president, yep, thats right, and bingo, first thing coming to mind - where do I get the funds to get started and you will start looking at big corporate. Sign a few documents allowing them to do what they want, you get millions to boot.

Comparing to socialist democratic, you need plenty of saliva and microphone and talk your way up, people will support you with everything (sacrifice), they will fight for the cause with you as leader, the world call this - "revolution", but as a species, this is the correct way.




Meh. Under democratic socialism, those who promise the most handouts are the ones who get elected, so politicians are buying votes too, just along different lines.

Democracy + true free market capitalism is the best system that gives the most to the most people with the most freedom. You might have to work but at least it will not eventually implode like democratic socialism.
edit on 13-1-2014 by NavyDoc because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 13 2014 @ 07:52 PM
link   
reply to post by robhines
 


Wow, really?... Since WHEN the ABOLITION of private property means the workers own and control the means of production?...

Under socialism the state decides where you should live, and they can take away the home that was built by your grandfather, or father by hand if they deem it "too big for your small family and a bigger family, normally a die hard socialist will get YOUR property...

And again, socialists, and leftists in general have been working hard on trying to change the meaning of socialism, when not too long ago it was widely known that under socialism:


Full Definition of SOCIALISM


1

: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods


2

a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property

b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state

3

: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done

www.merriam-webster.com...

BTW, before you even start that "collective control of the means of production means all the workers control it, you must be out of touch with reality. In fact "collective control means a group of people claiming to represent the people are the ones owning and controlling the means of production...

It has been happening in every form of socialist government around the world.



posted on Jan, 13 2014 @ 07:55 PM
link   

NullVoid
Again, I slap my forehead. Looks like people really hate communism/socialism that much that they did not bother to understand how it work in the first place.

Oh well, what can I say, its not a popular choice

I wonder if they know the root word for communist.
edit on 12-1-2014 by NullVoid because: (no reason given)


I actually lived and experienced communism, and was spoon fed the teachings of Marx, Hengels, Che Guevara, etc., which I know better than any socialist/communist wannabe who lives in a capitalist/corporatist nation.



The theory of the Communists may be summed up in the single sentence: Abolition of private property.[/size=4]4


KARL MARX, The Communist Manifesto


Read more at www.notable-quotes.com...

And under socialism it is not different.


...
But it may be asked how Individualism, which is now more or less dependent on the existence of private property for its development, will benefit by the abolition of such private property.[/size=4]
...

Link

If there is abolition of private property under socialism and communism, how can the workers own and control the mens of production?.... It makes no sense...

but you go ahead and keep lying and twisting the truth of socialism and or communism....

edit on 13-1-2014 by ElectricUniverse because: add comments.



posted on Jan, 13 2014 @ 08:11 PM
link   
reply to post by NoRulesAllowed
 


Yes, they are at the top, but socialism will give them more control. The bigger the government the smaller your freedoms.



posted on Jan, 13 2014 @ 08:16 PM
link   
reply to post by ElectricUniverse
 


Exactly, all those people who never lived under communism and are lucky to live in America will never understand. My parents lived under communism and they have some horror stories. My family members would be wisp in the middle of the night and shot dead for the smallest reasons.

Socialism is just one step away from communism and fascism. I rather live in a not so perfect capitalist system knowing that I have a socialist buffer before communism.
edit on 13-1-2014 by amfirst1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 13 2014 @ 08:20 PM
link   
reply to post by NavyDoc
 




Democracy + true free market capitalism is the best system that gives the most to the most people with the most freedom. You might have to work but at least it will not eventually implode like democratic socialism.

You couldn't be more wrong. True free market capitalism leads to the same thing that is ruining America right now and that is corporatism. Capitalism only works when it is heavily regulated.



posted on Jan, 13 2014 @ 09:33 PM
link   
What makes me go nuts is this:

People talking about capitalism problem and pose it as socialism problem, then call it a bad ideology.

Socialism DO have disadvantages and advantages.
NO, killing people is NOT its disadvantage.
(people kill people not matter what the ideology used)
NO, becoming a billionaire through crony is not its disadvantage.
(you CANNOT become a billionaire, its not equal)
NO, there is no "family owned corporation" that take "contracts"
(all corporations owned by government, no Bush family)
NO, in utopian socialism, money is NOT needed at all.
(the utopian way, almost impossible with current ideology)
in short - there is no money making ability for leaders, not much

For the real grim aspect of socialism, research and imagine a bit more.
For the less adventure, think you becoming a queen bee, no money, lots of workers, what would you do to "satisfy" your greed.


Once upon a time, we hunt mammoth "together" in a small "community", "leaders choose the target" and "everyone work on it", meat is "shared equally", later somebody "choose" not to go, want to have the easy way, so, trade his "own self made" necklace for the meat, that day, socialism start to weaken and capitalism is born. Later, he bribe the leader with bracelets, but he now, he can choose what target he want that day.
Give me control of a nations bracelets! supply, and I care not who makes it’s laws its so true, so honest. Welcome capitalism!
edit on 13-1-2014 by NullVoid because: remove link



posted on Jan, 13 2014 @ 10:21 PM
link   
reply to post by NullVoid
 


But people want his bracelets... He should be allowed to sell them for food if there is a market.





new topics
top topics
 
12
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join