Does socialism work?

[ElderKingpin]

Spoiler

(Of course it doesnt)

So. HEALTHCARE HERE WE COME? yes, probably. But lets get into a broader sense. Just socialism in general.

I was pretty much taught that socialism is.

A huge government.
They smash the rich and give it to the poor
You get paid, for doing nothing.

---
Free enterprise is the way to go :3. Like i said (i think) it gives people motivation. You dont do your job? Well. YUR FIRED. Socialism. You dont do your job? Well, we will pay you anyway.
---
People get into this really crap argument about how they can't afford anything. And honestly? i dont know what to say. Here is a chat i had with someone. I kinda failed at the debate (ok ya, i uber failed, not the point though)

Spoiler

TheRealKream1: i didnt have an opition about this until I was a hardworking college student getting by on my own with a part time job and bank loans and scholarships, and then i got cancer
ElderKingpin: ok?
ElderKingpin: am i supposed to have pity?
ElderKingpin: you want longer wait times?
TheRealKream1: no way, i dont want pity for anyone
TheRealKream1: from*
TheRealKream1: longer wait times for what?
TheRealKream1: i didnt have any healthcare at all when i got sick
ElderKingpin: And that is because..?
TheRealKream1: cause i wasnt born super rich to afford the $1000+ a year private health insurance premiums

I dont know. I honestly dont know. I know socialism has been constantly known to fail. I just dont know, i cannot see the future.

tl;dr

See Miz's Post

 

[ReVolver]

I dont know. I honestly dont know. I know socialism has been constantly known to fail. I just dont know, i cannot see the future.

Apparently you don't know what Socialism is and how it works.

All these nations currently have a socialism economy, doesn't seem like it's failing.

Spoiler

You probably got Communism and Socialism confused.

Spoiler

 

[ElderKingpin]

is it not true that the nations that are not purple have a higher standard of living?

Is it not true, that the more power government has, the less freedom the people have?

 

[uberfoop]

is it not true that the nations that are not purple have a higher standard of living?

First, let's point out that the map is a little ridiculous in context. The nations in the EU for example have implimented many socialistic policies, and, might I point out, they're doing pretty well.

Let's also define 'standard of living.' It's true, for example, that the USA has a higher PC-GDP than most EU nations. Does that mean that we're happier? Hardly. Money as a direct standard of wealth would be like sugar as a direct standard of tastiness.

It also might be pointed out that at least some socialistic systems are more or less necessary. Thank god, for example, that utilities tend to be government regulated. And the military.

Finally, we know that all-out lasseiz-faire sucks. How do we know? 1990's Russia.

Is it not true, that the more power government has, the less freedom the people have?

What kind of point are you even making? That more freedoms are inherintly better? Fantastic, let's just remove government as a whole and see what happens.



The scale goes both ways, and the current situation in the US is not necessarily the ideal.
Do I have the answer? Not particularily. Still, saying that socialism is inherintly bad is ridiculous.

 

[Varine]

is it not true that the nations that are not purple have a higher standard of living?

Is it not true, that the more power government has, the less freedom the people have?

They have a higher standard of living but that comes from a massive tax that comes with it to try and spread the wealth, which isn't really what I want therefore don't want socialism. It works, yes, but so does Capitalism (when the government isn't trying to fix, like FDR and Obama, that is).

It doesn't work though; the point of socialism is to eliminate poverty. Tell me a nation that it's been successful in doing so.

Over the next few years I'm sure we'll find out though.

"The things we admire in men -- kindness and generosity, openness, honesty, understanding and feeling -- are the concomitants of failure in our system. And those traits we detest -- sharpness, greed, acquisitiveness, meanness, egotism and self-interest -- are the traits of success. And while men admire the quality of the first, they love the produce of the second."

 

[Azlier]

I, for one, believe that Communism is the only type of "government" that can work flawlessly and indefinitely. The requirement of everybody underneath it to be perfect and without blemish is a real bummer in order for everything to work, though... I do not like the idea of Socialism.

 

[Avaleirra]

I, for one, believe that Communism is the only type of "government" that can work flawlessly and indefinitely. The requirement of everybody underneath it to be perfect and without blemish is a real bummer in order for everything to work, though... I do not like the idea of Socialism.

Only in theory. As you said, everybody would have to do everything perfectly, which is impossible in large countries. Even in small countries eventually someone's gonna get bored.

I personally believe tyranny is the only way.

 

[ElderKingpin]

meh. communism doesnt work because people get greedy >.> Its the only way to get crap done. but people get greedy

 

[Azlier]

Which is why everyone has to be perfect. Perfect people don't get greedy.

 

[ElderKingpin]

too bad. NO ONE IS PERFECT :/

 

[CatCat]

Is the OP a child from a rich family, and does he go to a private school?

Y/N ?

 

[Varine]

Is the OP a child from a rich family that goes to a private school?

Y/N ?

What?

 

[Avaleirra]

Is the OP a child from a rich family that goes to a private school?

Y/N ?

I dint know about the rich part, but he says he goes to a private school

 

[ElderKingpin]

no im not rich. My parents wanted me to go to a good school so they were willing to pay for a private school.

 

[Darthfett]

All governments are flawed primarily because not every person is perfect. I think this is a key point in how you choose your government.

Spoiler

Person A is a workhorse. He likes money, he enjoys living with a high standard of living and he excels because of this.

Person B is the average person. He works 40 hours per week, and earns enough money to get by, living paycheck to paycheck. He is in debt, but not over his head.

Person C is the guy who doesn't enjoy working. He gets by with as little as possible, and avoids work at all costs. He is lazy, and so he is in a never-ending cycle of debt.

Socialism will make Person A continue working as hard as he is for the same amount of pay as Person B. Even though Person A got ahead in life, and worked hard to pay for college, he doesn't get anything better.

Person B will go on living as normal. He earns the same amount, works the same amount, this government doesn't affect him.

Person C starts earning the same as Persons A&B. Although he only works 20 hours a week or so, and dropped out of high school, he is earning the same amount of money as Person A, who took the extra 6 years to get a degree.

How is this fair? Person A, who wants to live with a higher standard of living, has no possible way to do this. Instead, he has to sit in his mediocre house (compared to what he was living in), for even longer. He has options to improve his life, and is doomed to be average.

Person B doesn't have any options, but he is happy with this style of living.

Person C really enjoys Socialism. He hardly works, and he has nice things. He gets to spend much of his time with his friends. He won't work any more because he knows he doesn't have to. He is given everything in life, and becomes lazier.

I personally feel that if you work hard enough, you can improve your own living conditions. You shouldn't be forced into any situation, it's your life to live as you want. Socialism prevents people from living as they want. It forces everyone to feel as if they owe something to everyone else. It forces you to stay in your current living conditions forever. You can't move up in pay.

You shouldn't owe your neighbors anything. It's up to you to give as you feel is fair. Socialism will only worsen the economy, as lazy people will be given everything in life (and in effect become lazier), and hardworking people will not work as hard, because they know they won't earn anything more.

More people will drop out of highschool or avoid college. Why go to school for 4-6 years when you can start earning your money now? Why go to school when you won't get any more money?

Does that mean that we're happier? Hardly. Money as a direct standard of wealth would be like sugar as a direct standard of tastiness.

Socialism primarily changes the monetary system. This is a completely invalid comparison, as standard of living has a huge impact on happiness.

 

[Ninva]

Communism does not work. The Christians did it. They were killed. The Russians did it. Their nation shattered. The Chinese do it, and they're going through some harsh times... No on communism.

Socialism works, yet you have your facts all wrong. Our health care plan isn't socialism.

 

[ReVolver]

Communism does not work. The Christians did it. They were killed. The Russians did it. Their nation shattered. The Chinese do it, and they're going through some harsh times... No on communism.

Socialism works, yet you have your facts all wrong. Our health care plan isn't socialism.

Socialism != Communism... :banghead:

 

[Jackal]

Person A is a workhorse. He likes money, he enjoys living with a high standard of living and he excels because of this.

Person B is the average person. He works 40 hours per week, and earns enough money to get by, living paycheck to paycheck. He is in debt, but not over his head.

Person C is the guy who doesn't enjoy working. He gets by with as little as possible, and avoids work at all costs. He is lazy, and so he is in a never-ending cycle of debt.

Socialism will make Person A continue working as hard as he is for the same amount of pay as Person B. Even though Person A got ahead in life, and worked hard to pay for college, he doesn't get anything better.

Person B will go on living as normal. He earns the same amount, works the same amount, this government doesn't affect him.

Person C starts earning the same as Persons A&B. Although he only works 20 hours a week or so, and dropped out of high school, he is earning the same amount of money as Person A, who took the extra 6 years to get a degree.

How is this fair? Person A, who wants to live with a higher standard of living, has no possible way to do this. Instead, he has to sit in his mediocre house (compared to what he was living in), for even longer. He has options to improve his life, and is doomed to be average.

Person B doesn't have any options, but he is happy with this style of living.

Person C really enjoys Socialism. He hardly works, and he has nice things. He gets to spend much of his time with his friends. He won't work any more because he knows he doesn't have to. He is given everything in life, and becomes lazier.

>_>
<_<
>_>

Person A is a product of a rich family that has been a rich family for many generations. He went to private school, got to one of the top universities and works in the family business that lands him a healthy paycheck for not too demanding hours.

Person B is the average joe. He was born into a middle-class family that granted him a decent education and he landed himself a job working in Person A's parent's company.

Person C is a working-class citizen that has been born to working-class parents. In the area that he lives the only school is fairly run-down. He couldn't move house because his family couldn't afford it. When he left school, Person C had little qualifications and ended up working at one of the tills in the local supermarket because thats the best place his qualifications and learnt abilities could land him.



Socialism would cause Person As to pay more taxes, not sacrifice their very good salaries so that Person Cs could get a chance in life like Person B got. How is this not fair?

 

[Azlier]

>The Christians did it. They were killed. The Russians did it. Their nation shattered. The Chinese do it, and they're going through some harsh times...

The Soviet Union was not truly Communist. China is not truly Communist. Cuba is the same. I've never heard of an instance of Christian Communism, but it had to fail because somebody had to have gotten greedy.

A true Communist "government" is actually anarchy. And it requires everyone to be perfect, otherwise you get somebody who tries to take over :nuts:. And you need every human on earth to participate, lest outside influences corrupt the population.

 

[ElderKingpin]

>_>
<_<
>_>

Person A is a product of a rich family that has been a rich family for many generations. He went to private school, got to one of the top universities and works in the family business that lands him a healthy paycheck for not too demanding hours.

Person B is the average joe. He was born into a middle-class family that granted him a decent education and he landed himself a job working in Person A's parent's company.

Person C is a working-class citizen that has been born to working-class parents. In the area that he lives the only school is fairly run-down. He couldn't move house because his family couldn't afford it. When he left school, Person C had little qualifications and ended up working at one of the tills in the local supermarket because thats the best place his qualifications and learnt abilities could land him.



Socialism would cause Person As to pay more taxes, not sacrifice their very good salaries so that Person Cs could get a chance in life like Person B got. How is this not fair?

(Im taking this thread as a learning experience, since i dont know)

Ok. It would be "fair" but it wouldnt be "right" why should Person A give up part of his money and just throw it away to Person C without Person C equally contributing. In other words, why should Person C get money for doing nothing