Millennials Pick Socialism Over Capitalism

originally posted by: Bluesma

originally posted by: Teikiatsu


People like Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot depended on the population thinking like this to achieve power.

Ooh! Oooh! Watch out! Don't innovate, don't try new things! Don't take any risks ! Because then you just might FAIL!
See- a list of people that tried new things in the past, and FAILED!

That approach to life is quite common. Thankfully, not all humans are prone to fear of unknown to that extent.
There are still others who ignore that and create and investigate, explore and discover, innovate and grow, no matter what the system is that they are in.

Exactly! Going by their logic, we should hate capitalism too. After all, look at the damage caused by Goldman Sachs, Lehman Brothers, the Savings & Loans crisis, the "robo-signers" during the foreclosure crisis, the Asian Stock crash, Bernie Madoff, the prescription drug profiteers, and countless other capitalists.

Luckily, life is more complex than that. There are strengths and weaknesses in each economic system, and I think we should utilize the strengths from each one.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: neo96

Seeing a bunch of different Presidents in action doesn't make you wise, intelligent, or aware either. The gullible will always look for things to satisfy their gullibility, because opening your mind to new or foreign paradigms is anathema to them.

Neo is talking about watching enough of the cycles repeat themselves and the same issues cropping up cycle after cycle. Back an forth and how they are able to do that because of the dumb sheep. And dumb young sheep are always a special and embarrassing sort of stupid.

originally posted by: Teikiatsu

Name them, and the metric by which you determine 'better'

I have the most knowledge and experience with the medical care in France, so I'll use that example.
High quality care (maybe best in world), affordable prices, continuing innovation and research.
Though the multipayer system provides basic care for all, the consumer chooses their practitioners and facilities.
There are both private and public facilities, that compete with each other, keeping quality up and prices down.
There are no problems with getting care, or waiting for treatments of surgeries.

The continued education (university) is free- getting in is completely dependant upon a students performance, and is highly competative. It is available to all people, regardless of their financial status. I consider this better because the rich and lazy kids cannot get in, the poor and hard working can.
They also do not have a heavy debt on them when they get out (which, as a side note, helps with the costs of medical care, as the doctors don't have that debt to pay back).


There is a more socialist structure here, which exists fine with the capitalist economy, and it has for quite a while. The country sometimes leans a bit to one side or another through time, but staying away from extremes.
Watching this, I realized a whole lot of what we are told about reality and human nature, in the US, is just plain false.
We have been lied to.

From there, yes, I am a bit more open minded to considering something entirely different.

a reply to: Bluesma

Look at various economic systems throughout history. The economy existed before capitalism and it will exist after capitalism. Back in the 16th century for example the Vatican enforced fair wage laws to ensure people got paid. During the plague nations capped the value of labor. In the USSR there was almost no money due to communism.

Honestly, if anything what we're seeing is that the most powerful economic system isn't pure capitalism but rather an economic system with private ownership of business, but public funds directing research/development in a sector. If for example there is a big need in the country for steel the government can subsidize steel production, create new facilities, and put a bunch of people to work. When it changes to needing medicine the same thing can be done. China's rise has been due almost entirely to this system.

You see it at work with health care in Europe too. The government makes contracts available to provide health care and private business compete over those jobs. The US is even using this model to advance space travel.

It's not pure capitalism but the results speak for themselves.

originally posted by: Teikiatsu

originally posted by: Bluesma

originally posted by: Teikiatsu


People like Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot depended on the population thinking like this to achieve power.

Ooh! Oooh! Watch out! Don't innovate, don't try new things! Don't take any risks ! Because then you just might FAIL!
See- a list of people that tried new things in the past, and FAILED!

I'm all for innovation and political experiments, on the State level. Not the Federal. We have specific enumerated powers that the federal government is not to exceed.

Socialism is not innovative. It is the antithesis of innovation. It is static.

That approach to life is quite common. Thankfully, not all humans are prone to fear of unknown to that extent.
There are still others who ignore that and create and investigate, explore and discover, innovate and grow, no matter what the system is that they are in.

And that's fine, on the local level. If it works, other people can adopt those ideas. But they should prove themselves without government assistance or subsidy.

Ah, you seem to have misunderstood me- I am speaking of a major, GLOBAL change. The era of computers and internet did not effect only the US- it has changed the entire world. - And the polarization of human exchange might be totally innappropriate now.

Computers and robots do the work now- labor has to be looked at in a totally different light than before.
Members of communities are not located in the same time and space. The modes of exchange are totally new.

The time has come to stop looking behind and look into unknown.

a reply to: Teikiatsu

All they have ever experienced is an oil/war economy and mindset.

a reply to: Bluesma

I'm looking into the French system. In the meantime I see a trap I fell into:

"That there are countries with more socialism than the US, that are doing BETTER than the US, in some areas. "

Emphasis mine. Of course other countries are going to do better than the US in some areas.. That's basic statistics. In the case of France helps when you have a smaller population, smaller number of lawyers, and smaller public health sector. I would still not say that France overall is doing better than the USA. You'll need to give examples of innovation and research, I have seen what research in the EU is like and I'm not impressed. I have seen examples from PEI, Merk and CNRS - They tend to be more propaganda and feel-good than actual hard science.

I'm quoting this on another social media site, Amazing

"
a reply to: amazing

August 28, 2019

Today, Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez slapped every Viet-Nam and Civil Rights protestor in the face.

Tom Brokaw can laud the sacrifices of Americans who grew up during the Great Depression and then went on to fight in World War II, but for firebrand freshman Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez the Greatest Generation are millennials.

The 29-year-old Queens-Bronx Democrat stroked the egos of both her fellow millennials and the subsequent Gen Z in her latest Instagram live video, claiming that young people are more “informed” and “willing to go to the streets” in protest than earlier generations.

More at: nypost.com...

The same people she lauds as "Badass Brave" will be the first to whine when their next TV costs 20% more, due to America fighting back against China's tariffs on America.

with AOC.

a reply to: EmmanuelGoldstein

I DO BELIEVE Neither Socialism nor Capitalism can solve our problems. They can't reduce our poverty, bcz they have created it, they can't reduce the number of homeless bcz they have stolen their homes, they cant help the poor bcz they are the rich ideologies and they cant stop wars bcz they seek life in chaos!

a reply to: EmmanuelGoldstein


I'm not a millennial, but I've lived under socialism, communism and capitalism, and frankly socialism isn't as bad as you might think. A lot of what you get wared about either isn't actually socialism, or is simply incompetent socialism.

I loved schools under socialism. My family got a private school education and we only paid state school prices in our taxes. Same with college. Without socialism i would have ended up in massive debt after college. The cost was split due to it coming out of our taxes, so the wealthy liberal elite had to cough up.

a reply to: AaarghZombies

I have been studying history more nowadays and admittedly have been forced to move more away from socialism. It seems throughout history and the world when a countries people begin to rely too much on government...when times take a downturn the people don't know what to do.

They turn on the socialistic and /or republican government and often grasp on an extreme solution due to their extreme distress. Thus, socialism evolves into either a fascist or communist dictator taking control.

Socialism in society is beneficial but is detrimental if it creates a complete dependency on anyone but yourself. Balance is needed. Hand ups, not hand outs...is what is needed. Currently, it is sad to see so many Millenials simply seeking handouts and politicians eagerly promising them they will live life freer by giving up their individual freedoms and let government handle things.