Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

discuss

Yes.

/endthread

During the space race in the 60's NASA spent millions developing a pen that worked in 0 g. The Russians on a tighter budget innovatively used a pencil. Clearly, market forces since the Burgas have led to investment in ways to make more money and knowledge is one of the main ways. The commodities of the 21st Century are Food, Power, Workforce and Scientific knowledge, far more so than raw materials in many ways although these are the ultimate limiting factor, which is why climate change is such a problem for market expansion based on a growing population. Any ****ing idiot knows all that.

Can you be more f*cking specific in your posts?


Innovation comes with creativity, and creativity comes after all of Maslow's hierarchy of needs have been met.

It has nothing to do with economic models in itself. It's about the overall state of the people. Socialist Scandinavian countries have healthy levels of entrepreneurship while dirt poor "capitalist" countries like Yemen don't.

It's hard to be innovative when you're struggling to live safely, feed yourself, etc.

Originally posted by HentaiLover
Can you be more f*cking specific in your posts?


Innovation comes with creativity, and creativity comes after all of Maslow's hierarchy of needs have been met.

It has nothing to do with economic models in itself. It's about the overall state of the people. Socialist Scandinavian countries have healthy levels of entrepreneurship while dirt poor "capitalist" countries like Yemen don't.

It's hard to be innovative when you're struggling to live safely, feed yourself, etc. Scandanavian Countries follow the Nordic Model, which whilst having things like welfare states are economically capitalist Kurk, you must know that with your Meth business.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
Scandanavian Countries follow the Nordic Model, which whilst having things like welfare states are economically capitalist Kurk, you must know that with your Meth business. But comrade Bernie Sanders tells me otherwise about Sweden?

It's safe to say that those countries have a relatively strong degree of government intervention in the economy to manage national debt.

Originally posted by HentaiLover
But comrade Bernie Sanders tells me otherwise about Sweden?

It's safe to say that those countries have a relatively strong degree of government intervention in the economy to manage national debt. Kurk or Fly, or whoever you are, look up the Nordic Model.

Socialism: where everything is free except you.

Doesn't sound like it'd be too good for innovation.

Were there any useful innovations to come out of purely socialist countries? Purely socialist. So do not mention nordic countries.

Besides that killer sauce Venezuela made for their rabbit nuggets,what else was there?

Originally posted by HentaiLover
But comrade Bernie Sanders tells me otherwise about Sweden?
Technically he's not wrong. Sweden is one of the most innovative countries in the world.

https://i.imgur.com/Ikwdp46l.png

The problem isn't our lack of innovation, it's our lack of opportunities to make profit off of that innovation.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
Kurk or Fly, or whoever you are, look up the Nordic Model.

Funny that this guy got banned for the same thing you are doing right now but don't get banned for.

Funny how KMC Socialism works.

Originally posted by Flyattractor
Funny that this guy got banned for the same thing you are doing right now but don't get banned for.

Funny how KMC Socialism works. The difference is Kurk was recently doing this stuff. Like doxxing and posting naked black men with big cocks.

It took Whirly like 12 years to be accepted.

So KMC is Racist then? What has KMC Got against Big Black Cocks?


OR should that be Does KMC want to be up against....?

Originally posted by Flyattractor
So KMC is Racist then? What has KMC Got against Big Black Cocks?


OR should that be Does KMC want to be up against....? Maybe. The black cock thing got ignored though.

Post a big white cock to test how racist this site is

Originally posted by One Big Mob
Maybe. The black cock thing got ignored though.

Post a big white cock to test how racist this site is

Can't I just quote Putinbot?

It pretty much amounts to the same thing....well maybe not "Big" in the Physical sense.....

Originally posted by Astner
Technically he's not wrong. Sweden is one of the most innovative countries in the world.

https://i.imgur.com/Ikwdp46l.png

The problem isn't our lack of innovation, it's our lack of opportunities to make profit off of that innovation.

Nice, thanks for posting. This is how you disrupt factually incorrect narratives.

I don't think it necessarily does. Truly creative and innovative people are going to be creative and innovative regardless. Hell China is full blown communist and they're like 20 on that list, which isn't too bad. They have a growing film industry and some great artists.

Well since socialism always ends in starvation and genocide, yes it does

I would say it depends on the person, not the system. One could also ask, does socialism kill greed?

No. Socialism is practically Greed Incarnate.

Originally posted by Mindship
I would say it depends on the person, not the system. One could also ask, does socialism kill greed?

Socialism tends to kill everything sooner or later.

Originally posted by ESB -1138
Well since socialism always ends in starvation and genocide, yes it does

To be fair to socialism...starving might indeed motivate someone to be innovative.

I'm sure they have come up with all sorts of fascinating ways to cook rabbits.

To all the silly American's crying about socialism:

We have socialism/practices in the US as well...

And that is a LARGE Part of the Problems that are taking Place in the U.S.

We need to GET RID OF THIS FASCIST BULL SHIT!

Republicans kill innovation, because if it's not in the Bible, than they say it's immoral and should be banned.

Originally posted by roughrider
Republicans kill innovation, because if it's not in the Bible, than they say it's immoral and should be banned.

Draconian patent/copyright laws stifle innovation more then anything.

You can have Disney protect it's profit margin, or free up Mickey for new and innovative uses of the ip, but you can't have protectionism and innovation.

Originally posted by Robtard
To all the silly American's crying about socialism:

We have socialism/practices in the US as well...


I wish we could rename socialism and capitalism so everyone would forget all their preconceived biases about these systems. The truth of the matter is that these systems totally work in conjunction with each other, covering the other's blind spots. We need to look at them as a sets of tools, with each one having a specific situation where it works best.

Hearing otherwise reasonable people, both on KMC and in real life, lose their minds reciting this ridiculous idea that "there can only be one!" feels bad man.

Originally posted by StyleTime


I wish we could rename socialism and capitalism so everyone would forget all their preconceived biases about these systems. The truth of the matter is that these systems totally work in conjunction with each other, covering the other's weak spots. We need to look at them as a sets of tools, with each one having a specific situation where it works best.

Hearing otherwise reasonable people, both on KMC and in real life, lose their minds reciting this ridiculous idea that "there can only be one!" feels bad man.
There is a name for it, it's called a mixed economy.

Originally posted by darthgoober
There is a name for it, it's called a mixed economy.

Nice. I guess people read my posts even if no one responds to them.

Yes, I just took credit for your education in an extremely arrogant way and I feel kind of bad about doing that. But only a little.

But, yes, I feel like some of the best posts I make here, no one reads or cares about so it makes me butthurt.

I disagree DDM you make the 2nd best posts on here.

Originally posted by DarthSkywalker0
I disagree DDM you make the 2nd best posts on here.


haermm

In all seriousness, I understand how annoying it is when you spend the time to research and write a post, and no one reads it and/or calls its plagiarism.

Originally posted by darthgoober
There is a name for it, it's called a mixed economy.

Bingo. I love it when people think they have some sort of "gotcha" by pointing out we have some social programs here. And then act like it's silly to be concerned over people who want shit like not just healthcare, but universal basic income, free college, and guaranteed federal jobs. They also seem to want anyone from Mexico who wants to come here to be able to do so.

People can say not all of those things I just named are necessarily socialist policies, but when you have someone who is saying she is a democratic socialist pushing shit like that...it's silly to call people worried "silly".

Originally posted by darthgoober
There is a name for it, it's called a mixed economy.
Definitely. People aren't acknowledging it though.
Originally posted by Surtur
Bingo. I love it when people think they have some sort of "gotcha" by pointing out we have some social programs here. And then act like it's silly to be concerned over people who want shit like not just healthcare, but universal basic income, free college, and guaranteed federal jobs. They also seem to want anyone from Mexico who wants to come here to be able to do so.

People can say not all of those things I just named are necessarily socialist policies, but when you have someone who is saying she is a democratic socialist pushing shit like that...it's silly to call people worried "silly".
Right, but that isn't what happened here. What happened here is multiple posters making caricatures of and mocking socialism, despite contrary statistics no less.

And in the real world, let's be serious here. Most naysayers are reacting to the term "socialism" alone. They aren't simply voicing concerns over a specific policy. They are legit afraid of the word.

That's why I want to do a full blown, Jean Grey mindwipe. Then, hopefully, we can just discuss this stuff without the baggage, or at least with much less of the baggage.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Nice. I guess people read my posts even if no one responds to them.

Yes, I just took credit for your education in an extremely arrogant way and I feel kind of bad about doing that. But only a little.

But, yes, I feel like some of the best posts I make here, no one reads or cares about so it makes me butthurt.

I read that same post you made before. I think I read all your posts if I'm active in the thread.

Originally posted by StyleTime


Right, but that isn't what happened here. What happened here is multiple posters making caricatures of and mocking socialism, despite contrary statistics no less.

And in the real world, let's be serious here. Most naysayers are reacting to the term "socialism" alone. They aren't simply voicing concerns over a specific policy. They are legit afraid of the word.

Bingo

Most people who react like that to socialism doesn't seem to be the type capable of analyzing policies tbh.

Originally posted by Emperordmb
Yes.

/endthread

Originally posted by StyleTime


I wish we could rename socialism and capitalism so everyone would forget all their preconceived biases about these systems. The truth of the matter is that these systems totally work in conjunction with each other, covering the other's blind spots. We need to look at them as a sets of tools, with each one having a specific situation where it works best.

Hearing otherwise reasonable people, both on KMC and in real life, lose their minds reciting this ridiculous idea that "there can only be one!" feels bad man.

Any system that relies on the patronage of an elite class, or on the intelligence of the mob, is doomed to be a bad system.

Originally posted by cdtm
Any system that relies on the patronage of an elite class, or on the intelligence of the mob, is doomed to be a bad system.


These types of absolutist statements are almost always wrong.

Human beings always find things to get charged up about. Powah comes in many flavors.

Originally posted by StyleTime
Definitely. People aren't acknowledging it though.

Right, but that isn't what happened here. What happened here is multiple posters making caricatures of and mocking socialism, despite contrary statistics no less.

And in the real world, let's be serious here. Most naysayers are reacting to the term "socialism" alone. They aren't simply voicing concerns over a specific policy. They are legit afraid of the word.

That's why I want to do a full blown, Jean Grey mindwipe. Then, hopefully, we can just discuss this stuff without the baggage, or at least with much less of the baggage.

I've seen zero evidence most nay sayers just fear the word. Proof please. I see people panic over the dipshit policies spewed by these folk. If you have some sort of documented evidence, show it. If this is just personal opinion...it has been noted.

Socialism should be mocked. People who think "we gots social programs!" is a gotcha should also be mocked. Reminds me of the same geniuses who bring up Denmark when playing up how awesome socialism is. Bernie tried that and got slapped down.

Originally posted by Surtur
Socialism should be mocked. People who think "we gots social programs!" is a gotcha should also be mocked.

But...you leave no middle ground, then. The middle ground is "some socialism."


Unless you're going to say all police and fire departments should be privatized? In which case, I somewhat agree. Just depends.


What about water sanitization and treatment? What about electricity? Should it be owned and operated by the government?

Originally posted by dadudemon
But...you leave no middle ground, then. The middle ground is "some socialism."


Unless you're going to say all police and fire departments should be privatized? In which case, I somewhat agree. Just depends.


What about water sanitization and treatment? What about electricity? Should it be owned and operated by the government?

It's certainly accurate to say we're capitalist country with generous social programs. What I'm saying is it is silly to use that as a sort of "gotcha" the way it tends to get used. People are aware we have these social programs. We even have one called "Social Security" lol. It's not a gotcha and it doesn't counter people who are worried about the policies the democratic socialists are pushing. It's just like going "but Denmark!" or something.

I will admit yes there are people who talk about where pure socialism can lead(plus making fun of Venezuela is just plain funny), but I think it's disingenuous for people to act like there is not significant concern specifically over the policies people like Alexandria Ocasio Cortez want. The specific policies she wants to push *do* get discussed.

Originally posted by StyleTime
Definitely. People aren't acknowledging it though.



And in the real world, let's be serious here. Most naysayers are reacting to the term "socialism" alone. They aren't simply voicing concerns over a specific policy. They are legit afraid of the word.



The Cold War played a large part in it. For decades, anything policy relating to Russia & Communism was demonized as 'other' and 'non-American.' Cuba wrests free of American control in 1959 and declares itself a socialist state just 90 miles from Florida, increasing paranoia. Vietnam played a part too, becoming an armed fight. I wonder how shocked Americans were when Nixon opened up China to the west in 1973, despite them being Communist (to this day, though perhaps now in name only.) It hasn't stopped the hardliners at all.

Originally posted by roughrider
The Cold War played a large part in it. For decades, anything policy relating to Russia & Communism was demonized as 'other' and 'non-American.' Cuba wrests free of American control in 1959 and declares itself a socialist state just 90 miles from Florida, increasing paranoia. Vietnam played a part too, becoming an armed fight. I wonder how shocked Americans were when Nixon opened up China to the west in 1973, despite them being Communist (to this day, though perhaps now in name only.) It hasn't stopped the hardliners at all.

And hell history is repeating itself lol. Once again we have utter hysteria over Russia. And it just boggles the mind when you consider the same people getting so god damn hysterical over Russia are some of the same people who laughed and laughed at Mitt Romney over his comments warning about Russia. And hell it's not like Russia only started trying to influence our elections once Trump decided to run.

Originally posted by Astner
Technically he's not wrong. Sweden is one of the most innovative countries in the world.

https://i.imgur.com/Ikwdp46l.png

The problem isn't our lack of innovation, it's our lack of opportunities to make profit off of that innovation.


/end thread, showing innovation isn't driven by individuals profiting but by corporations and businesses profiting which many countries with a socialist style welfare state understand.

The innovations of Sweden are irrelevant since they aren't a socialist country.

Originally posted by Surtur
And hell history is repeating itself lol. Once again we have utter hysteria over Russia. And it just boggles the mind when you consider the same people getting so god damn hysterical over Russia are some of the same people who laughed and laughed at Mitt Romney over his comments warning about Russia. And hell it's not like Russia only started trying to influence our elections once Trump decided to run. Lol you didn't even understand their posts.

Originally posted by Adam Grimes
Lol you didn't even understand their posts.

Incorrect, but you tried.

Originally posted by Adam Grimes
Lol you didn't even understand their posts. He will claim you are wrong while not understanding your post either Adam.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
He will claim you are wrong while not understanding your post either Adam.

You're gonna have to troll better. I realize the hysteria around Russia being pointed out triggers you but facts are facts.

Originally posted by Surtur
I've seen zero evidence most nay sayers just fear the word. Proof please. I see people panic over the dipshit policies spewed by these folk. If you have some sort of documented evidence, show it. If this is just personal opinion...it has been noted.
Well, the argument goes as such: It's well established that young Americans view socialism far more favorably than older Americans. Some polls showing 55% of "millenials" have a favorable view of socialism in addition to their favorable of capitalism. (This is documented pretty much everywhere from both conservative and liberal outlets, but here's some links)
https://news.gallup.com/poll/191354/americans-views-socialism-capitalism-little-changed.aspx
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/commentary/ct-perspec-wilhelm-millennials-support-socialism-bernie-sanders-0709-story.html
https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/28/politics/democratic-socialism-millennial-politics/index.html
http://insider.foxnews.com/2018/07/02/socialism-and-millennials-ocasio-cortez-win-forgets-cold-war-goldberg-says

Young Americans are also significantly more educated than older Americans, indicating a larger likelihood of more nuanced understandings of these topics.
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/05/16/todays-young-workers-are-more-likely-than-ever-to-have-a-bachelors-degree/

America literally went through ages like the The Red /Scare, where fear was the primary tool in demonizing any non-capitalist ideas. Legitimate viewpoints were forced the margins and supporters punished to varying degrees. It's quite safe to say the fear of socialism is embedded in our cultural makeup. Without proper education and alternative information outlets provided by today's technology, this lingering fear colors a large chunk of society's idea of "socialism." Many conservative outlets still invoke the fear rhetoric of the past. It's in decline since the younger generation has more resources available to combat the one narrative propaganda of the past, but it's still there.
Originally posted by Surtur
It's certainly accurate to say we're capitalist country with generous social programs. What I'm saying is it is silly to use that as a sort of "gotcha" the way it tends to get used. People are aware we have these social programs. We even have one called "Social Security" lol. It's not a gotcha and it doesn't counter people who are worried about the policies the democratic socialists are pushing. It's just like going "but Denmark!" or something.

I will admit yes there are people who talk about where pure socialism can lead(plus making fun of Venezuela is just plain funny), but I think it's disingenuous for people to act like there is not significant concern specifically over the policies people like Alexandria Ocasio Cortez want. The specific policies she wants to push *do* get discussed.
Well, I'd say it feels like a "gotcha" because it's a good point. Unless you went exclusively to private schools, travel in private aircraft, employ a private security force, live completely off the grid somewhere, etc, socialism touches your life. It's quite deeply embedded in our current system.

Sure, we can discuss how to tweak policies, and I'd welcome that. As I said before though, that isn't what happened. Everyone just said "lolsocialism" while ignoring Astner's chart, which flies in the face of that. There was no reasoned discussion. Just jokes.
Originally posted by Surtur
The innovations of Sweden are irrelevant since they aren't a socialist country.
Then we aren't capitalist. You will be hardpressed to find a pure economy in the developed world.

The Nordic model is definitely what the world is looking to as a socialist ideal at the moment. They are consistently rated the happiest places on Earth, so they are definitely doing something right. They are showing capitalism and socialism can totally coexist just fine, which is all I and the others have been saying.

We don't need anymore of this right vs left idenity bullshit, quite frankly.

Originally posted by StyleTime
Well, the argument goes as such: It's well established that young Americans view socialism far more favorably than older Americans. Some polls showing 55% of "millenials" have a favorable view of socialism in addition to their favorable of capitalism. (This is documented pretty much everywhere from both conservative and liberal outlets, but here's some links)
https://news.gallup.com/poll/191354/americans-views-socialism-capitalism-little-changed.aspx
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/commentary/ct-perspec-wilhelm-millennials-support-socialism-bernie-sanders-0709-story.html
https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/28/politics/democratic-socialism-millennial-politics/index.html
http://insider.foxnews.com/2018/07/02/socialism-and-millennials-ocasio-cortez-win-forgets-cold-war-goldberg-says

Young Americans are also significantly more educated than older Americans, indicating a larger likelihood of more nuanced understandings of these topics.
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/05/16/todays-young-workers-are-more-likely-than-ever-to-have-a-bachelors-degree/


As these young Americans age, they will become more conserative. We've known this trend for ages:



https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/nov/03/do-we-become-more-conservative-with-age-young-old-politics

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/07/09/the-politics-of-american-generations-how-age-affects-attitudes-and-voting-behavior/

Originally posted by dadudemon
As these young Americans age, they will become more conserative. We've known this trend for ages:



https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/nov/03/do-we-become-more-conservative-with-age-young-old-politics

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/07/09/the-politics-of-american-generations-how-age-affects-attitudes-and-voting-behavior/

The trend is known, yet I found these articles interesting, anyhow. Personally, I don't think I fit the trend. I'm over 30, and I've realized that I was much more conservative in my youth, and have only grown more liberal/progressive as I've gotten older, especially on social issues.

Originally posted by Surtur
Incorrect, but you tried.
Originally posted by Putinbot1
He will claim you are wrong while not understanding your post either Adam.
Bingo

Originally posted by StyleTime
Well, the argument goes as such: It's well established that young Americans view socialism far more favorably than older Americans. Some polls showing 55% of "millenials" have a favorable view of socialism in addition to their favorable of capitalism. (This is documented pretty much everywhere from both conservative and liberal outlets, but here's some links)
https://news.gallup.com/poll/191354/americans-views-socialism-capitalism-little-changed.aspx
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/commentary/ct-perspec-wilhelm-millennials-support-socialism-bernie-sanders-0709-story.html
https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/28/politics/democratic-socialism-millennial-politics/index.html
http://insider.foxnews.com/2018/07/02/socialism-and-millennials-ocasio-cortez-win-forgets-cold-war-goldberg-says

Young Americans are also significantly more educated than older Americans, indicating a larger likelihood of more nuanced understandings of these topics.
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/05/16/todays-young-workers-are-more-likely-than-ever-to-have-a-bachelors-degree/Very good post old pal.

America literally went through ages like the The Red /Scare, where fear was the primary tool in demonizing any non-capitalist ideas. Legitimate viewpoints were forced the margins and supporters punished to varying degrees. It's quite safe to say the fear of socialism is embedded in our cultural makeup. Without proper education and alternative information outlets provided by today's technology, this lingering fear colors a large chunk of society's idea of "socialism." Many conservative outlets still invoke the fear rhetoric of the past. It's in decline since the younger generation has more resources available to combat the one narrative propaganda of the past, but it's still there.

Well, I'd say it feels like a "gotcha" because it's a good point. Unless you went exclusively to private schools, travel in private aircraft, employ a private security force, live completely off the grid somewhere, etc, socialism touches your life. It's quite deeply embedded in our current system.

Sure, we can discuss how to tweak policies, and I'd welcome that. As I said before though, that isn't what happened. Everyone just said "lolsocialism" while ignoring Astner's chart, which flies in the face of that. There was no reasoned discussion. Just jokes.

Then we aren't capitalist. You will be hardpressed to find a pure economy in the developed world.

The Nordic model is definitely what the world is looking to as a socialist ideal at the moment. They are consistently rated the happiest places on Earth, so they are definitely doing something right. They are showing capitalism and socialism can totally coexist just fine, which is all I and the others have been saying.

We don't need anymore of this right vs left idenity bullshit, quite frankly.

Originally posted by StyleTime
Well, the argument goes as such: It's well established that young Americans view socialism far more favorably than older Americans. Some polls showing 55% of "millenials" have a favorable view of socialism in addition to their favorable of capitalism. (This is documented pretty much everywhere from both conservative and liberal outlets, but here's some links)
https://news.gallup.com/poll/191354/americans-views-socialism-capitalism-little-changed.aspx
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/commentary/ct-perspec-wilhelm-millennials-support-socialism-bernie-sanders-0709-story.html
https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/28/politics/democratic-socialism-millennial-politics/index.html
http://insider.foxnews.com/2018/07/02/socialism-and-millennials-ocasio-cortez-win-forgets-cold-war-goldberg-says

Young Americans are also significantly more educated than older Americans, indicating a larger likelihood of more nuanced understandings of these topics.
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/05/16/todays-young-workers-are-more-likely-than-ever-to-have-a-bachelors-degree/

America literally went through ages like the The Red /Scare, where fear was the primary tool in demonizing any non-capitalist ideas. Legitimate viewpoints were forced the margins and supporters punished to varying degrees. It's quite safe to say the fear of socialism is embedded in our cultural makeup. Without proper education and alternative information outlets provided by today's technology, this lingering fear colors a large chunk of society's idea of "socialism." Many conservative outlets still invoke the fear rhetoric of the past. It's in decline since the younger generation has more resources available to combat the one narrative propaganda of the past, but it's still there.

Okay so literally nothing you said here constituted evidence that people are just scared of the word socialism right now. On to the next stuff:



It's not a good point because nobody says we don't have social programs. At least I haven't seen anyone who says that.



His chart was ignored because places like Sweden are not socialist countries.



Again: Sweden is not a socialist country. What you just typed out doesn't negate that. So it is flat out incorrect to try to use Sweden as an example that socialism doesn't kill innovation. If you want to say it means we aren't pure capitalist okay...we aren't lol.



The nordic models aren't examples of socialist success stories though. That is how some try to paint it. You also didn't really back up the claims that people these days are just scared over the word socialism. The scares of the past do not mean it's going on in the present. Most I see complaining about socialism don't just complain in general, they complain about the specific policies democratic socialists wanna put forth.

The fact of the matter is it's quite silly to hold up a place with a mixed economy as some kind of "this shows socialism doesn't kill innovation". Especially when some of these nordic countries do not consider themselves socialist countries. Pure socialism *does* kill innovation, and generous social programs are not at all possible without capitalism.

Capitalism and socialism can co-exist as long as people don't go overboard. What democratic socialists like AOC want definitely goes overboard.

TLDR: Yes, pure socialism kills innovation. Capitalist countries with generous social programs(or mixed economies, whatever you wanna label it) do not kill innovation.

Originally posted by Eternal Idol
The trend is known, yet I found these articles interesting, anyhow. Personally, I don't think I fit the trend. I'm over 30, and I've realized that I was much more conservative in my youth, and have only grown more liberal/progressive as I've gotten older, especially on social issues.

Me too. I was fairly libertarian in my early 20's. I'm much more liberal now than I was back then.

As far as the current discussion goes, while I don't favor a full-blown socialist revolution in this nation, I would like universal health care (doesn't have to be single payer, there are other options to reach that goal), strong, well funded safety nets for those in need, and affordable high quality public colleges that don't riddle young people with absurd levels of debt. Also strong worker rights and bargaining power.

Which country would you guys say has the best healthcare system right now?

I can't remember. I looked into it some years ago. It was one that wasn't full single payer, though. It had a hybrid system of some sort. Like a guaranteed baseline level of care for serious illnesses, and then you could purchase additional coverage if you wanted.

Originally posted by Eternal Idol
The trend is known, yet I found these articles interesting, anyhow. Personally, I don't think I fit the trend. I'm over 30, and I've realized that I was much more conservative in my youth, and have only grown more liberal/progressive as I've gotten older, especially on social issues.

I'm similar to you but different. I was fiscally liberal (pay for tons of public programs and make NASA's budget 50 times larger, for example) and socially conservative when I was younger. But as I got older, I become fiscally conservative and socially liberal. I just needed to be exposed to some facts like how terrible and corrupt the drug war is. Also, a lot of me becoming more socially liberal had to do with Christian teachings. Christ's teachings resonated with me when I was in my late teens. "Perhaps I shouldn't judge others so much, forgive freely, and let others do what they want - it's up to God to judge." Something like that.

Part of it had to do with having multiple atheist friends who loved to smoke weed. The world said they were bad people. But I knew better. They were great people.

People really do change as they get older. I am "influence-able" with facts, solid studies, and great arguments.

Originally posted by BackFire
I can't remember. I looked into it some years ago. It was one that wasn't full single payer, though. It had a hybrid system of some sort. Like a guaranteed baseline level of care for serious illnesses, and then you could purchase additional coverage if you wanted.

Sounds like Germany's "Krankenkassen" coverage. Release the Kranken...coverage.

Edit - Just looked it up. That's not it. Germany is not a single-payer. But it's similar enough that I think this may be what you're talking about.

Originally posted by Surtur
Okay so literally nothing you said here constituted evidence that people are just scared of the word socialism right now. On to the next stuff:

Well, actually, it is evidence in support of that argument. It's not 100% proof of course, as I can't hook up everyone's brains to measure their fear response. But hey, don't call it fear if you don't want. The general revulsion fades the further we get from those time periods, indicating a connection with the smear campaign that went on.
Originally posted by Surtur
It's not a good point because nobody says we don't have social programs. At least I haven't seen anyone who says that.

It's a good point because you dismissed socialism entirely with jokes, while benefiting from socialist policies in your own country. That is what we're trying to highlight.

It doesn't mean you're a bad person. We're simply trying to establish a healthy discourse here.
Originally posted by Surtur

His chart was ignored because places like Sweden are not socialist countries.

Again: Sweden is not a socialist country. What you just typed out doesn't negate that. So it is flat out incorrect to try to use Sweden as an example that socialism doesn't kill innovation. If you want to say it means we aren't pure capitalist okay...we aren't lol.

The nordic models aren't examples of socialist success stories though. That is how some try to paint it. You also didn't really back up the claims that people these days are just scared over the word socialism. The scares of the past do not mean it's going on in the present. Most I see complaining about socialism don't just complain in general, they complain about the specific policies democratic socialists wanna put forth.

The fact of the matter is it's quite silly to hold up a place with a mixed economy as some kind of "this shows socialism doesn't kill innovation". Especially when some of these nordic countries do not consider themselves socialist countries.
Cool man. You want a nuanced discussion of mixed economies, I'm all for it. But, again, that isn't what you were doing before. Socialism quite clearly has elements that function successfully in modern economies, just like capitalism. Now that you're not simply going "lolsocialism", we can actually talk.

When people say the "socialist" countries using the Nordic model, they refer to their successful implementation of socialist policies that naysayers claim will be the death of any economy. Are they socialist? Not purely, but they skew that way in a manner previously thought absurd by some.
Originally posted by Surtur
Pure socialism *does* kill innovation, and generous social programs are not at all possible without capitalism.

Capitalism and socialism can co-exist as long as people don't go overboard. What democratic socialists like AOC want definitely goes overboard.
In all honesty, I'm not sure any pure economy would do well in the end. How many have we even had throughout history at all?

Well, see, this is where I think the discussion is to be had. What socialist/capitalist/whatever policies to we enact, where do we put them, and how do we implement them. "Overboard" will mean different things to different people. I think we are a far cry from evolving to a money-less system, but universal healthcare or universal basic income is doable.

Originally posted by Surtur
Which country would you guys say has the best healthcare system right now?

What things are you looking for when you determine "best." Tell me that and I'll dive into that pool (maybe not tonight have to do dinner time with the family and play with the kid and what not.)

Originally posted by StyleTime
Definitely. People aren't acknowledging it though.

Right, but that isn't what happened here. What happened here is multiple posters making caricatures of and mocking socialism, despite contrary statistics no less.

And in the real world, let's be serious here. Most naysayers are reacting to the term "socialism" alone. They aren't simply voicing concerns over a specific policy. They are legit afraid of the word.

That's why I want to do a full blown, Jean Grey mindwipe. Then, hopefully, we can just discuss this stuff without the baggage, or at least with much less of the baggage.

I was pretty tired the last time I responded to this, so let's try again:

I agree with you. About the very concept "socialism" being a boogie man no one wants to discuss.


Capitalism is great and all, but I've known plenty of hardliners who used the very words "..and those who can't, let Darwin take out the trash."

No, dude. Advocating those who fall into poverty should die...? Just no.

Originally posted by StyleTime
Well, actually, it is evidence in support of that argument. It's not 100% proof of course, as I can't hook up everyone's brains to measure their fear response. But hey, don't call it fear if you don't want. The general revulsion fades the further we get from those time periods, indicating a connection with the smear campaign that went on.

It's a good point because you dismissed socialism entirely with jokes, while benefiting from socialist policies in your own country. That is what we're trying to highlight.

It doesn't mean you're a bad person. We're simply trying to establish a healthy discourse here.

Cool man. You want a nuanced discussion of mixed economies, I'm all for it. But, again, that isn't what you were doing before. Socialism quite clearly has elements that function successfully in modern economies, just like capitalism. Now that you're not simply going "lolsocialism", we can actually talk.

When people say the "socialist" countries using the Nordic model, they refer to their successful implementation of socialist policies that naysayers claim will be the death of any economy. Are they socialist? Not purely, but they skew that way in a manner previously thought absurd by some.

In all honesty, I'm not sure any pure economy would do well in the end. How many have we even had throughout history at all?

Well, see, this is where I think the discussion is to be had. What socialist/capitalist/whatever policies to we enact, where do we put them, and how do we implement them. "Overboard" will mean different things to different people. I think we are a far cry from evolving to a money-less system, but universal healthcare or universal basic income is doable.
Yeah but the thing is, most liberals would throw a fit if we just outright adopted the Nordic model economy. Take Denmark for example... Yeah, rich people pay more taxes, but so does everybody else. And a whole lot of people we consider to be "middle class" like successful plumbers, would also fall into the 60% tax bracket. Their corporate tax rate is higher, but not by a whole lot. Ours is 21% and theirs is 24.5%... and liberals here were shouting for us to raise it further back when it was 37%. What's more the cost of goods and services over there is also higher pretty much across the board. Housing is more expensive, and individual houses are smaller in general. Yes education is free, but you don't get to pick what school you go to the way you do over here. And their options in regards to their personal education is much more limited than it is in the US. You focus your college on a specific career path rather than getting to study whatever kind of randomness you want the way you do over here, and the government will only pay for it IF you choose a field that the Ministry of Education decides the country needs more graduates from.

Basically, the people arguing for it would be miserable if they actually got it. As for they themselves being happier about their system, that kind of thing is understandable when you consider the fact that military service is mandatory over there. If we forced all of our 18 year olds to serve in the military for a couple of years we'd likely have a happier and more homogeneous culture too since instilling a love of one's country is basically the primary goal for training/service.

From what I've seen, what most people who clamor for Nordic socialism really want is to take the good stuff and leave the stuff that would make their own life harder... but I honestly don't see that working. If we start taxing all the rich people and corporations enough to make up the difference for the parts of the Nordic system we leave behind, what will end up happening is that those rich people and corporations will move somewhere else and this whole country will go bankrupt. All we know is that the Nordic model is a successful system AS A WHOLE, there's not evidence that we could adopt the 1/3 of their system most liberals want and leave the rest behind and be anywhere near as successful as they are.

Originally posted by StyleTime
Well, actually, it is evidence in support of that argument. It's not 100% proof of course, as I can't hook up everyone's brains to measure their fear response. But hey, don't call it fear if you don't want. The general revulsion fades the further we get from those time periods, indicating a connection with the smear campaign that went on.

Lol no, it's not evidence. You didn't show conclusively most people today are just afraid of the word.



It's only a good point if you believed people weren't making jokes about socialism with those comments. Which *you* clearly recognize is what was going on. Now for someone who doesn't and has to use this "gotcha" it's weak.



But again: people joke about how awful socialism is. I guess the point is there was no valid gotcha here.



A socialist policy is not the same as a socialist country.

Originally posted by Surtur
Lol no, it's not evidence. You didn't show conclusively most people today are just afraid of the word.

It's only a good point if you believed people weren't making jokes about socialism with those comments. Which *you* clearly recognize is what was going on. Now for someone who doesn't and has to use this "gotcha" it's weak.

But again: people joke about how awful socialism is. I guess the point is there was no valid gotcha here.

A socialist policy is not the same as a socialist country.
Yes, it is. You're confusing information which supports a matter with information which settles a matter. I didn't prove it's a fact, so you don't have to use fear if you don't want. I did establish a valid framework for the view though.

Well, no. You can make a joke and actually believe the logic informing the joke. You didn't indicate otherwise until recently, so our reaction is perfectly understandable.

Same as above.

I never said otherwise. As I pointed out earlier, it's used as shorthand, the same way America is called "capitalist." In an in-depth discussion, most people will acknowledge we're basically talking about complicated, mixed up systems.

Originally posted by darthgoober
Yeah but the thing is, most liberals would throw a fit if we just outright adopted the Nordic model economy. Take Denmark for example... Yeah, rich people pay more taxes, but so does everybody else. And a whole lot of people we consider to be "middle class" like successful plumbers, would also fall into the 60% tax bracket. Their corporate tax rate is higher, but not by a whole lot. Ours is 21% and theirs is 24.5%... and liberals here were shouting for us to raise it further back when it was 37%. What's more the cost of goods and services over there is also higher pretty much across the board. Housing is more expensive, and individual houses are smaller in general. Yes education is free, but you don't get to pick what school you go to the way you do over here. And their options in regards to their personal education is much more limited than it is in the US. You focus your college on a specific career path rather than getting to study whatever kind of randomness you want the way you do over here, and the government will only pay for it IF you choose a field that the Ministry of Education decides the country needs more graduates from.

Basically, the people arguing for it would be miserable if they actually got it. As for they themselves being happier about their system, that kind of thing is understandable when you consider the fact that military service is mandatory over there. If we forced all of our 18 year olds to serve in the military for a couple of years we'd likely have a happier and more homogeneous culture too since instilling a love of one's country is basically the primary goal for training/service.

From what I've seen, what most people who clamor for Nordic socialism really want is to take the good stuff and leave the stuff that would make their own life harder... but I honestly don't see that working. If we start taxing all the rich people and corporations enough to make up the difference for the parts of the Nordic system we leave behind, what will end up happening is that those rich people and corporations will move somewhere else and this whole country will go bankrupt. All we know is that the Nordic model is a successful system AS A WHOLE, there's not evidence that we could adopt the 1/3 of their system most liberals want and leave the rest behind and be anywhere near as successful as they are.
All I can really say to this is "maybe, maybe not." Maybe people will be happier with it. Maybe not. Evidence says they will be.

And the "mandatory" military service is mandatory in name and not practice when you get right down to it. Most people serve like 4 months, not several years, if I understand correctly. Additionally, they only fulfill 5000 spots(and only if they actually need them), so the rest of the populace is totally safe. And there's ways of getting out of it, including just conscientious objection.

https://www.dr.dk/nyheder/indland/19-unge-tvunget-i-militaeret
In 2014, only 19 individuals were actually forced to serve. 99.1% of their military is voluntary. I'm depending on translations for that, but it sounds similar to our Selective Service tbh. I got my card like everyone else, but the military never came knocking for me. You'd need to be in a serious wartime situation for that it seems.

Regardless, that style of military dates back to the Viking Ages for many Scandinavian countries. They did that stuff long before socialism or capitalism, and there is no reason to think you need mandatory military service to make those economic practices work.
Originally posted by cdtm
I was pretty tired the last time I responded to this, so let's try again:

I agree with you. About the very concept "socialism" being a boogie man no one wants to discuss.

Capitalism is great and all, but I've known plenty of hardliners who used the very words "..and those who can't, let Darwin take out the trash."

No, dude. Advocating those who fall into poverty should die...? Just no.


This is me theorizing, but I feel like empowering as many people as possible can only benefit society.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Sounds like Germany's "Krankenkassen" coverage. Release the Kranken...coverage.

Edit - Just looked it up. That's not it. Germany is not a single-payer. But it's similar enough that I think this may be what you're talking about.

I can't remember for the life of me, I'm pretty sure it wasn't Germany, though. Maybe France? Or maybe I'm just full of shit, I don't remember.

The new KSA healthcare system based on the French model is going to be solid!

Originally posted by StyleTime
All I can really say to this is "maybe, maybe not." Maybe people will be happier with it. Maybe not. Evidence says they will be.

And the "mandatory" military service is mandatory in name and not practice when you get right down to it. Most people serve like 4 months, not several years, if I understand correctly. Additionally, they only fulfill 5000 spots(and only if they actually need them), so the rest of the populace is totally safe. And there's ways of getting out of it, including just conscientious objection.

https://www.dr.dk/nyheder/indland/19-unge-tvunget-i-militaeret
In 2014, only 19 individuals were actually forced to serve. 99.1% of their military is voluntary. I'm depending on translations for that, but it sounds similar to our Selective Service tbh. I got my card like everyone else, but the military never came knocking for me. You'd need to be in a serious wartime situation for that it seems.

Regardless, that style of military dates back to the Viking Ages for many Scandinavian countries. They did that stuff long before socialism or capitalism, and there is no reason to think you need mandatory military service to make those economic practices work.



This is me theorizing, but I feel like empowering as many people as possible can only benefit society.
Not really. There's zero evidence that all the people who want the corporate tax raised to over 37% will be happy about it settling at 24%. There's zero proof that successful members of the middle class will enjoy a 60% income tax rate. There's no proof that ANYONE would enjoy sales taxes being raised from 7% to 25%... let alone the whooping 180% sales tax Denmark has for automobile purchases. People already b*tch to high heaven too much now about how much housing costs in the US now to believe they'll be ok with the the price going up even further. There are too many students who are dyng to move across the country for college to get away from their parents while they study stuff like gender studies to believe that they'd enjoy having to stay close to home and drop that stuff and focus their studies on whatever fields the government dictates we need more graduates from. Denmark is small and for the most part culturally homogeneous, the US is big as shit and culturally diverse.

No it's mandatory. Don't get me wrong because I don't (now)mean that every single person serves(I originally thought that was the case because I misread the thing and I now admit to being mistaken about that), but on the Day of Defense(which I couldn't get specific details on but from the sound of it happens every year) every male over the age of 18 is drafted for introduction to the military and health test. Those who are healthy have to participate in the draw for conscription even if they don't want to serve. If there's not enough volunteers for service, depending on what number they draw, people who are against the whole thing have to serve anyway, even in peacetime. Them only needing to force 19 people into service in 2014 was due to a massive increase in the number of volunteers, when there are fewer volunteers more people are forced to serve.

And I never meant to say that the mandatory military service was required for their economic system to work, I said that it likely contributes to why their culture is happier than ours. When you've been taking 18 year olds who might otherwise be on the way to opposing your way of life and spend time brainwashing them(the way pretty much every military does) for over 300 years, it will likely to add up and make a big difference overall.

So what is the US system again?

Part capitalism, part socialism sounds good, except I'm not all that sure what we have is capitalism. I mean, the big bailouts sure don't look like open competition. "Too big to fail?"

And what about the cable industry? Is that what open competition looks like?

How about that time Apple and other tech giants promised not to poach their top
talent? What is that, if not collusion to keep wages low?

Originally posted by cdtm
So what is the US system again?

Part capitalism, part socialism sounds good, except I'm not all that sure what we have is capitalism. I mean, the big bailouts sure don't look like open competition. "Too big to fail?"

And what about the cable industry? Is that what open competition looks like?

How about that time Apple and other tech giants promised not to poach their top
talent? What is that, if not collusion to keep wages low?

We have some socialism for the very poor (though not enough, imo)

Capitalism for the lower middle class, middle class and upper middle class.

Socialism for the super rich. Hence the bailouts and things like that you mentioned.

Originally posted by darthgoober
Not really. There's zero evidence that all the people who want the corporate tax raised to over 37% will be happy about it settling at 24%. There's zero proof that successful members of the middle class will enjoy a 60% income tax rate. There's no proof that ANYONE would enjoy sales taxes being raised from 7% to 25%... let alone the whooping 180% sales tax Denmark has for automobile purchases. People already b*tch to high heaven too much now about how much housing costs in the US now to believe they'll be ok with the the price going up even further. There are too many students who are dyng to move across the country for college to get away from their parents while they study stuff like gender studies to believe that they'd enjoy having to stay close to home and drop that stuff and focus their studies on whatever fields the government dictates we need more graduates from. Denmark is small and for the most part culturally homogeneous, the US is big as shit and culturally diverse.

No it's mandatory. Don't get me wrong because I don't (now)mean that every single person serves(I originally thought that was the case because I misread the thing and I now admit to being mistaken about that), but on the Day of Defense(which I couldn't get specific details on but from the sound of it happens every year) every male over the age of 18 is drafted for introduction to the military and health test. Those who are healthy have to participate in the draw for conscription even if they don't want to serve. If there's not enough volunteers for service, depending on what number they draw, people who are against the whole thing have to serve anyway, even in peacetime. Them only needing to force 19 people into service in 2014 was due to a massive increase in the number of volunteers, when there are fewer volunteers more people are forced to serve.

The evidence is that the people under that system are pretty happy. This "they are homogenous, so that's why" reasoning is in-group bias tbh. Maybe it's not what you meant, but I usually notice people are referring to race when they say this. They don't all share the same viewpoint on everything just because they are mostly white. It also ignores the fact that American culture is a bit more uniform than people acknowledge. Asian/black/white American kids of similar economic backgrounds will likely have more in common with each other than they would with some rando from their "ancestral homeland." But, cool, we'll set Denmark aside for a moment. What about Norway, which has a sizable and still growing immigrant population? They've repeatedly rated happiest nation on Earth in spite of that.

Right, but in practice it's mandatory in name only. Only 4200 of those will actually even be considered, and most of those still won't get selected. They've been curtailing this practice in general, as 2 out 3 Danes want to abolish it.
https://www.b.dk/politiko/forsvarsminister-vaernepligt-skal-bevares

And there's still the option to take alternatives to conscription for those who are called. These places don't have many enemies, so keeping a military task force is a huge concern.
Originally posted by darthgoober
And I never meant to say that the mandatory military service was required for their economic system to work, I said that it likely contributes to why their culture is happier than ours. When you've been taking 18 year olds who might otherwise be on the way to opposing your way of life and spend time brainwashing them(the way pretty much every military does) for over 300 years, it will likely to add up and make a big difference overall.
Fair enough, and I didn't mean to oversimplify your statement if it came off that way.

I guess I just don't see why it would make them happier. Most Danes want to abolish the practice, so it seems like they are happy in spite of it rather than because of it.

I think we've got this idea of American exceptionlism slammed into our heads from childhood, and it makes us think we're some ultra unique beast that could never benefit from the practices of other countries. Sure, there are some weird Americanisms around, but "we have more brown people" isn't really a defense against universal healthcare advocacy.

Originally posted by StyleTime


I think we've got this idea of American exceptionlism slammed into our heads from childhood, and it makes us think we're some ultra unique beast that could never benefit from the practices of other countries. Sure, there are some weird Americanisms around, but "we have more brown people" isn't really a defense against universal healthcare advocacy.

This is the opposite of what most gen x'rs are taught. We were taught the melting pot which means we absorb other cultures and make them our own. We don't look to identify with individual cultures within.

I believe we were taught america opens doors of opportunity for everyone that comes to our country. That does create some exceptionlism I suspect.

Originally posted by StyleTime

These places don't have many enemies, so keeping a military task force is a huge concern.
That is supposed to say isn't a huge concern.
Originally posted by snowdragon
This is the opposite of what most gen x'rs are taught. We were taught the melting pot which means we absorb other cultures and make them our own. We don't look to identify with individual cultures within.

I believe we were taught america opens doors of opportunity for everyone that comes to our country. That does create some exceptionlism I suspect.
That is true in my experience as well, but it doesn't seem to apply to economics and systems of government. The melting pot idea seems to stop at racial/religious tolerance. When it comes to the way we actually run the country, I always detect an air of "diversity is all well and good, but don't you dare alter our system you commie bastard" from the masses. Not to say it doesn't get altered and borrow from other places, but people don't want it pointed out.

Just feels like we can't admit we may have gotten something wrong sometimes.