Socialism Failures

Started by psmith8199210 pages
Originally posted by Knife
capitalism is simply a racket, a legitimised racket for the ruling class.

Uhuh.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Funny the elite rich class like the Clintons are the ruling class.

and they are neo liberals, you don't really have socialism in the U.S. in fact for the most part, Socialism no longer exists. The left are centre left and the right are centre right and far right. This is due to the media being owned by the rich and faking public opinion and agenda which the sheep like masses merely lap up and regurgitate. Any dictator would admire the conformity and obedience of the 1% owned media in the west. Human rights are not just violated by terrorism or American torture, they are also violated by unfair economic structures that create huge inequalities. The capitalist/corporate class does not govern, it is happy to rule the government and through the media control the capitalist (brainwashed) sheep.

People will vote for Hilary because they think she is one of them. She is not...

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
People will vote for Hilary because they think she is one of them. She is not...

No she isn't. Socialism does not really exist anymore, you have neo liberals and neo cons, the agenda of both is the same. The class struggle has been won, plutocrats increase in number as do the poor.

Originally posted by AsbestosFlaygon
So, do successful and hardworking people owe liberals/socialists something?

My brother in law borrowed 25k against his house and bought a truck, tools, and 100 pools under service contract. He worked his pool route for 8-10 hours a day and spent another 8-10 hours a day doing the business side of things. He worked a minimum of 16 hours a day, 7 days a week for over 2.5 years. He said the scariest part was hiring people to do the pool cleaning side of business. But he is now up over 3400 pools. He has a remodeling side he started up last year and a new build side he started last year too.

When he started, he only knew the basics from the internet. He learned the rest as he grew. The largest pool company in AZ offered to buy his company and give him a 6 figure job in their marketing department. They offered him $1,000,000. He declined. His new goal is to get to 6000 pools and then branch out to CA and TX. Once he does that, he will be worth millions and will be making at least 500k a year.

It makes me sick to see liberals/socialists claim a right to his earnings. Claim that he owes everyone else something since he has so much already. Well, screw the socialists and their ilk that think that. Nobody owes you anything in this life. The sooner you realizes that, the sooner you can trade in your diapers for big-boy underwear and succeed.


Congratulations to your brother, but you are arguing against a very cartoonish version of socialism that doesn't exist. Socialism is not about simple economic equality. Socialism is about equality of opportunity.

Look, I'm American. I understand the "pull yourself up by the bootstraps" narrative fed to us since childhood. Here's the secret: It's a socially constructed ideal that isn't grounded in reality. No one achieves financial success in a vacuum folks. Wealth results from the cooperation of several societal factors, with people being the most important.

No one advocates stealing away all your brother's resources because he owes some invisible debt to the liberal gods. What is advocated is the contribution of everyone so that everyone can benefit from the opportunities available in a wealthy nation.

I am going to sound like a hippie here, but we really are in this together.

Originally posted by StyleTime
Congratulations to your brother, but you are arguing against a very cartoonish version of socialism that doesn't exist. Socialism is not about simple economic equality. Socialism is about equality of opportunity.

Look, I'm American. I understand the "pull yourself up by the bootstraps" narrative fed to us since childhood. Here's the secret: It's a socially constructed ideal that isn't grounded in reality. No one achieves financial success in a vacuum folks. Wealth results from the cooperation of several societal factors, with people being the most important.

No one advocates stealing away all your brother's resources because owes some invisible debt to the liberal gods. What is advocated is the contribution of everyone so that everyone can benefit from the opportunities available in a wealthy nation.

I am going to sound like a hippie here, but we really are in this together.

I couldn't agree more.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Funny the elite rich class like the Clintons are the ruling class.

It would be worse with no socialist safeguards, like public schools.

These are the same socialist components many here likely support, but are too caught up in this demonized image of socialism to realize it. We don't think of it much now because the institution(public education) is accepted, but class mobility would suffer greatly without it.

Originally posted by StyleTime
It would be worse with no socialist safeguards, like public schools.

These are the same socialist components many here likely support, but are too caught up in this demonized image of socialism to realize it. We don't think of it much now because the institution is accepted, but class mobility would suffer greatly without it.

Social mobility in the US is a joke.

http://www.salon.com/2015/03/07/the_myth_destroying_america_why_social_mobility_is_beyond_ordinary_peoples_control/

Originally posted by Knife
No she isn't. Socialism does not really exist anymore, you have neo liberals and neo cons, the agenda of both is the same. The class struggle has been won, plutocrats increase in number as do the poor.

100% agree

We're in this together, lol. I was born in communist Russia. Spare me this "together" nonsense.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
100% agree

👆

Originally posted by psmith81992
We're in this together, lol. I was born in communist Russia. Spare me this "together" nonsense.

Communist Russia was nothing of the sort it was simply a dictatorship which after the takeover of Stalin had very little in common with communism.

'in communist russia, knife handles you.'

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
The day the word "here" becomes "generalizing" 😂

Dude, it is. Just take the Miami Metropolitan Area. You can move over one block and suddenly the cost of living doubles or triples.

That's been a problem there for years that no one ever did anything about.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
People will vote for Hilary because they think she is one of them. She is not...

👆

What people don't realize is that you can be a socialist yet be a capitalist. See the Clintons and the Gates.

Socialism is neo-communism. "Equal opportunity" is a fairy-tale concept made up by socialists in their utopian worldview of how economy works. It is not self-sustaining, hence very few countries employ such a system (if they even realistically do.)

Originally posted by psmith81992
We're in this together, lol. I was born in communist Russia. Spare me this "together" nonsense.

I wasn't talking about communism. I honestly have never heard of communism ever working anywhere.
Originally posted by AsbestosFlaygon
What people don't realize is that you can be a socialist yet be a capitalist. See the Clintons and the Gates.

Socialism is neo-communism. "Equal opportunity" is a fairy-tale concept made up by socialists in their utopian worldview of how economy works. It is not self-sustaining, hence very few countries employ such a system (if they even realistically do.)


I agree with this(said it earlier actually), which is why I think the thread premise is flawed. Capitalism and socialism can exist together, and most often do in today's world. That's why I wanted to know where the OP was drawing the line exactly.

I disagree there, but your beef seems to be with communism.

Originally posted by Knife
Social mobility in the US is a joke.

http://www.salon.com/2015/03/07/the_myth_destroying_america_why_social_mobility_is_beyond_ordinary_peoples_control/


Well, it depends. I'd argue social mobility is totally possible, but class limitations still limit the growth of many people.

That is probably due to the opposition though. A.k.a. the people that scream "socialist!" like it's a dirty word.

Originally posted by StyleTime
Congratulations to your brother, but you are arguing against a very cartoonish version of socialism that doesn't exist. Socialism is not about simple economic equality. Socialism is about equality of opportunity.

Look, I'm American. I understand the "pull yourself up by the bootstraps" narrative fed to us since childhood. Here's the secret: It's a socially constructed ideal that isn't grounded in reality. No one achieves financial success in a vacuum folks. Wealth results from the cooperation of several societal factors, with people being the most important.

No one advocates stealing away all your brother's resources because he owes some invisible debt to the liberal gods. What is advocated is the contribution of everyone so that everyone can benefit from the opportunities available in a wealthy nation.

I am going to sound like a hippie here, but we really are in this together.

👆

Originally posted by psmith81992
We're in this together, lol. I was born in communist Russia. Spare me this "together" nonsense.

You aren't old enough to remember much of communist Russia, Dave. And in any case, using an example of corrupted socialism which was a smokescreen for totalitarianism to compare to democratic socialism is sheer silliness.

You are successful now in this country. You make good money and have a disconnect with those who can't. You don't have to worry about college debt, which you somehow paid off by yourself and/or with money from relatives. You have money to invest in the stock market and reap the rewards.

How many ramen meals have you been forced to digest? How many times did you have to decide between paying a bill and food on the table? How many times did you hear "the poor are lazy" while working 40+ at a job that isn't economically rewarding?

Don't answer any of those, because we all know the answer. You've had a silver spoon in your mouth and don't want to see people with more money pay anything, because you feel entitled to accumulate and hoard wealth, as if it doesn't represent the cumulative work of everyone in this country. The super-rich don't deserve to be super rich when other people are barely scraping by. It's a disproprotionate reward system that favors those already in power, and pretends like "I earned it" is a moral argument instead of a selfish one.

That being said, I know you won't budge an inch in this debate because you never do. I just wanted to point out that you're arguing from ignorance and the usual right-wing sources and media that agree with you, as usual.

You aren't old enough to remember much of communist Russia, Dave. And in any case, using an example of corrupted socialism which was a smokescreen for totalitarianism to compare to democratic socialism is sheer silliness.

Yes, my wife tells me as much when I always say "in Russia we didn't even have showers/meat/anything we're talking about". So does my mom. They went through that though.

You are successful now in this country. You make good money and have a disconnect with those who can't. You don't have to worry about college debt, which you somehow paid off by yourself and/or with money from relatives. You have money to invest in the stock market and reap the rewards.

I was in debt before I got out of debt. It wasn't as pretty a picture as you're making out to be.

How many ramen meals have you been forced to digest? How many times did you have to decide between paying a bill and food on the table? How many times did you hear "the poor are lazy" while working 40+ at a job that isn't economically rewarding?

I had no money until the second semester of college. So I'd say 6 months before I said "**** this" and decided to do something, ANYTHING about it. My parents don't believe the poor are lazy, neither do I, but you'll excuse me if my life experiences and those of my parents have me biased towards the "american dream" that you call a myth.

Don't answer any of those, because we all know the answer. You've had a silver spoon in your mouth and don't want to see people with more money pay anything, because you feel entitled to accumulate and hoard wealth, as if it doesn't represent the cumulative work of everyone in this country.

Since you know nothing about me, I'll forgive this emotionally charged, baseless post. None of what you said is actually true. "We" know you dislike the rich simply because they're rich. That is an idiotic position to hold.

The super-rich don't deserve to be super rich when other people are barely scraping by. It's a disproprotionate reward system that favors those already in power, and pretends like "I earned it" is a moral argument instead of a selfish one.

As opposed to "they were born rich"!? What in the world makes you think the super rich don't deserve to be super rich? Some do, some don't. You're not in a position to judge like that unless you're incredibly bitter/jealous. This isn't a thought out argument, it's one of disgust.

That being said, I know you won't budge an inch in this debate because you never do. I just wanted to point out that you're arguing from ignorance and the usual right-wing sources and media that agree with you, as usual.

Well lets see, I've budged many times on this thread alone in the past few days, you keep arguing out of ignorance, spite and jealousy, and you keep throwing around "right wing sources" assuming I use them, to make yourself feel better, while at the same time hypocritically using left wing sources. You are also the one who never budgets and keep arguing until you are blue in the face. We know all this about you already, it isn't news.

Edit: In truth, the only difference between us is that you angry/bitter/resentful towards a system that did not work for you while not knowing any other system, and I am a defender of the system that allowed my family to go from nothing to upper middle class, while they spent the majority of their lives as Jews under communist oppression. So that would mean you're the only one arguing out of ignorance. All of your BS about "silver spoon" and "entitled" is a bunch of unintelligible, bitter nonsense and we all know it.

All I know for sure is that Stealth Moose is a bitter, jealous communist who lives in poverty and psmith81992 is a selfish, arrogant capitalist who was born into wealth...

Originally posted by Bardock42
All I know for sure is that Stealth Moose is a bitter, jealous communist who lives in poverty and psmith81992 is a selfish, arrogant capitalist who was born into wealth...

Arrogant? I'm more douchey than arrogant. Selfish? Kinda have trouble seeing that when I give $XX, XXX in charity annually. Wealth? Hmm it took my parents 15 years to make over 150k each. I don't know what you define as wealth though. I guess upper middle class is wealth?