Do you support Socialism?

[rambov]

I do think that capitalism does breed some sort of greed. Over the past three years there had been this huge desire for the "already wealthy" to be in the "Billionaire club".

I mean those Business owners and Hedge fund managers literally making deals with the devil to get them to that billionaire status.

But they're not doing anything wrong because they are simply "capitalizing" on "specific" opportunities in order to make themselves rich. Wheather it be driving up the price of oil, or using scare tactics to imply that the world is running out of food .....all so that we the people pay more.

And they would make the arguement that if we were as smart as they were, we'd be doing the same thing.
I'll be the first to say that hey "only the strong survive" and if I could do it I probably would but why not have a little of both capitalism and socialism to balance things out a little?

[!! Shawn]

Huge levels of economic inequality exist in every country in the world; except in this one, it is much more possible to increase your wealth and stature than anywhere else. We're the strongest country in the world because we have the greatest mixture of cultures and we use a wide variety of different economic systems. Like you have posted, our police force, public education system, etc are socialistic in nature, yet work fairly well. But our Government also owns Amtrak, which loses a billion and a half dollars per year. Your argument reads "well if a beer a day is good for you, a case a day must be great," which simply isn't true.

Capitalism hasn't failed in this country. We are in a downturn, which happens in a cyclical economy, and which was caused in great part by the huge numbers of bank failures over the last year. Almost all of these were due to banks being forced into making bad loans by organizations like ACORN. We had inflation, mostly caused by oil skyrocketing to 146 dollars a barrel, due to our huge consumption (20 million barrels per day) and complete unwillingness to drill for more (or convert coal to oil, or mine oil shale, build new nuclear power plants, etc and artificially driven up by futures speculation.)

The top 1% in this country pay as much income tax as the bottom 90%, yet people like yourself cry that they should pay more. Our government has turned into a 2+ trillion dollar a year eating slug, with an increasing population that feed off those that produce and keep begging for more.

You have this elitist attitude because you have some secondary education, taught by dirtbags like William Ayers and Rashid Khalidi, no doubt. I know many like you, most have never gotten dirt under their fingernails and have no idea what real work is.

I agree with that point. It is much easier to tell people they should give away more of their money when you have never had to really work for it.

I also agree with your point that every single failure of capitalism is a direct result of interference.

Oil prices are a direct result of capitalism not being allowed to increase supply to levels needed to meet demand.

The subprime crisis is a result of capitalism being forced to make decisions that did not make sense on a risk/reward basis.

The notion that capitalism is responsible for massive gaps in inequality is also patently false. There is always a fine balance between the rich and the poor in capitalism.

If the poor get too poor the rich don't make money. Greed is not rewarded, contributing positively to your customers is. The companies are not out there robbing people. They are out there providing goods and services that help people, that enhance peoples lives, and improve the economic environment.

Socialism is where true inequality comes into play. When the people do not have a choice of how to spend their money, the government can funnel that money to whoever they chose. Look at places like Cuba. Fidel Castro is a BILLIONAIRE.

Do you think he got that was because he worked hard and contributed to the economy? Nope. He got that way because the government is in charge of where peoples tax dollars go, and the government decided they should go to Castro.

In a system where one entity has the power to decided who is allowed to have, and who isn't a small group of people always come out as the winners.

[Mizzou]

I agree with that point. It is much easier to tell people they should give away more of their money when you have never had to really work for it.

I also agree with your point that every single failure of capitalism is a direct result of interference.

Oil prices are a direct result of capitalism not being allowed to increase supply to levels needed to meet demand.

The subprime crisis is a result of capitalism being forced to make decisions that did not make sense on a risk/reward basis.

The notion that capitalism is responsible for massive gaps in inequality is also patently false. There is always a fine balance between the rich and the poor in capitalism.

If the poor get too poor the rich don't make money. Greed is not rewarded, contributing positively to your customers is. The companies are not out there robbing people. They are out there providing goods and services that help people, that enhance peoples lives, and improve the economic environment.

Socialism is where true inequality comes into play. When the people do not have a choice of how to spend their money, the government can funnel that money to whoever they chose. Look at places like Cuba. Fidel Castro is a BILLIONAIRE.

Do you think he got that was because he worked hard and contributed to the economy? Nope. He got that way because the government is in charge of where peoples tax dollars go, and the government decided they should go to Castro.

In a system where one entity has the power to decided who is allowed to have, and who isn't a small group of people always come out as the winners.

OPEC(towelheads) are primarily responsible for oil prices(considering we dont produce enough of our own energy). They are already cutting supply to make the prices go up. Castro's regime is communist, not socialist.

[P4P Opinion]

Huge levels of economic inequality exist in every country in the world; except in this one, it is much more possible to increase your wealth and stature than anywhere else.

Prove it. I won't take a few pieces of anecdotal evidence by the way. I want cold, hard facts. It seems to me that you've bought the idea of American dream working without question. As ever though, I will condede at the drop of a hat if you can prove it to me. I doubt you can though, not that I am necessarily saying it isn't true. I just doubt it's possible to prove.

Capitalism hasn't failed in this country. We are in a downturn, which happens in a cyclical economy, and which was caused in great part by the huge numbers of bank failures over the last year. Almost all of these were due to banks being forced into making bad loans by organizations like ACORN. We had inflation, mostly caused by oil skyrocketing to 146 dollars a barrel, due to our huge consumption (20 million barrels per day) and complete unwillingness to drill for more (or convert coal to oil, or mine oil shale, build new nuclear power plants, etc and artificially driven up by futures speculation.)

Long-term planning by a right winger coming into play again I see...which I am of the opinion is the major problem with the right. Everything is about the now with you guys, failing to recognise longer term solutions, bourne out of a paranoia towards your fellow men.

The top 1% in this country pay as much income tax as the bottom 90%, yet people like yourself cry that they should pay more. Our government has turned into a 2+ trillion dollar a year eating slug, with an increasing population that feed off those that produce and keep begging for more.

Your lack of perspective is startling. I can't believe that so many citizens of a Republic could be so loyal to a virtual monarchy like the rich. The majority of rich people in America were born into privilege, all the while the majority of people born into poor or poorer families don't have a chance from the start, as a result of the schools they have to go to, the vast financial difficulty they have in regards to getting a college education and the consequent result of social abnormality towards someone from a poorer community even attempting to go to college.

You have this elitist attitude because you have some secondary education, taught by dirtbags like William Ayers and Rashid Khalidi, no doubt. I know many like you, most have never gotten dirt under their fingernails and have no idea what real work is.

This all sounds a little like bitterness to me. Were you born into a middle class family but didn't take advantage of your opportunities? Or maybe you were born into a poorer family and didn't have the opportunities! Why the Hell do you lean to the right if this is the case?!

[Crazylegs77]

A great man once said "I believe we should be able to deliver bottled hot water to dehydrated babies."


Yeah thats right Im socialist scum.

[!! Shawn]

Prove it. I won't take a few pieces of anecdotal evidence by the way. I want cold, hard facts. It seems to me that you've bought the idea of American dream working without question. As ever though, I will condede at the drop of a hat if you can prove it to me. I doubt you can though, not that I am necessarily saying it isn't true. I just doubt it's possible to prove.




Long-term planning by a right winger coming into play again I see...which I am of the opinion is the major problem with the right. Everything is about the now with you guys, failing to recognise longer term solutions, bourne out of a paranoia towards your fellow men.



Your lack of perspective is startling. I can't believe that so many citizens of a Republic could be so loyal to a virtual monarchy like the rich. The majority of rich people in America were born into privilege, all the while the majority of people born into poor or poorer families don't have a chance from the start, as a result of the schools they have to go to, the vast financial difficulty they have in regards to getting a college education and the consequent result of social abnormality towards someone from a poorer community even attempting to go to college.



This all sounds a little like bitterness to me. Were you born into a middle class family but didn't take advantage of your opportunities? Or maybe you were born into a poorer family and didn't have the opportunities! Why the Hell do you lean to the right if this is the case?!

Your hypocrisy and insulting attitude are not appreciated in this thread. This is a place for logical discourse and discussion, not political hatred.

[Mizzou]

Your hypocrisy and insulting attitude are not appreciated in this thread. This is a place for logical discourse and discussion, not political hatred.

I don't agree with everything he said, but it was stated rather reasonably.

[P4P Opinion]

Your hypocrisy and insulting attitude are not appreciated in this thread. This is a place for logical discourse and discussion, not political hatred.

Do you even understand what you just said? I'd like you to explain how I'm a hypocrite and I'm a little worried for you if you're insulted in a discussion about politics. I notice of course, that you failed to address the points I made. If you disagree with me, why not show me why? I just said exactly what I thought about Jim's post and about the right wing of politics generally, I have no hate towards anything. In fact, I find it more than a little ironic that I am being accused of hatred by a neo-conservative. I am no Socialist in the strictest sense either to counter your next accusation (as if it were an insult anyway), more centre-left. It's just my opinion that it's about time society was held accountable for the atrocious way it neglects people born into difficult circumstances.

[Mizzou]

Do you even understand what you just said? I'd like you to explain how I'm a hypocrite and I'm a little worried for you if you're insulted in a discussion about politics. I notice of course, that you failed to address the points I made. If you disagree with me, why not show me why? I just said exactly what I thought about Jim's post and about the right wing of politics generally, I have no hate towards anything. In fact, I find it more than a little ironic that I am being accused of hatred by a neo-conservative. I am no Socialist in the strictest sense either to counter your next accusation (as if it were an insult anyway), more centre-left. It's just my opinion that it's about time society was held accountable for the atrocious way it neglects people born into difficult circumstances.

Define "difficult circumstance".

[P4P Opinion]

Define "difficult circumstance".

Ok, that's a fair request.

I cannot give you a dictionary definition, or I'd be here all night, but I'd suggest the following two examples are examples of 'difficult circumstances' and I've suggested non-radical solutions:

1. Being born into poverty - yes, I know there is welfare, but it often doesn't amount to enough, let alone enough to save towards a college education.

Solution: Equal percentage income tax. Wouldn't even have to be a high percentage, could even be lower than it is at the moment.

2. Being born into a poorer community - you know the areas and you know the attitudes in those areas is that a different life is nigh on impossible.

Solution: Simply better education. Possible if the tax breaks large corporations are currently getting are reeled in by even 10%. A better standard of education simply changes attitudes from one generation to the next, bringing realistic hope of a better life.