why hate socialism?

[Onkel Neal]

Originally Posted by caspofungin

watching the campaigns over the last few months, and reading these forums, it's become pretty obvious that most americans hate socialism. it's used as a club against anyone (not just obama) who dares talk about fiscal reform, new health care policies, etc.

if you equate socialism and communism, that would be incorrect, but i would understand it. but if socialism means increasing taxes to pay for health care, schools, etc, without imposing on civil liberties, why the blind hatred?

or am i missing something?

Socialism is a dead end, just like communism, only more gradual. When you strip all these ideas down, at the core you have to ask, will this work long term with human beings as they are now? Self-interest and socialism don't mesh, and before anyone bashes self-interest, be aware the hypocrite filter is working in this thread Socialism forces people who are responsible to cover costs for people who....well, can't or won't, it's hard to distinguish between them. Forces, as in no choice, you have to do it. And that penalizes the main driver of the economy: initiative.

And increasing my taxes to pay for someone else's health care does impose on my civil liberties. I agree that there needs to be something done about health care, but I feel everyone should pay for their own; right now a lot of people use the emergency room as their clinic to avoid paying. I think everyone should pay a "health care tax" if they are not currently paying for health insurance. Kind of like when you take a loan to buy a car or house, the bank tells you to get insurance. If you don't, they get insurance for you and put it in the loan. In the end, you pay for your own insurance. I am willing to pay for my insurance and health care, and my family's; I am not willing to pay for some other guy's health care, especially when he has put his own health care priorities below his car, his big screen TV, his Harley-Davidson, fishing trips, $180 Nikes, $4 Starbucks coffee, his gaming computer and high speed internet connection (which he uses to get on forums and complain about his lack of health care), etc.


The funny thing about socialists (another word for beginner communist), history has shown since Lennin that as the people begin to want out of socialism, the leaders and enthusiasts will do anything to keep them in. No civil liberties there.

So, if you want socialism, fine, go to Sweden or France, no problem and more power to the socialists. I wish you luck. Prove us wrong. But I strongly oppose converting America to socialism. And as a free man, I have the right to oppose socialism. And since I'm not a college kid or dreamy radicalist, I feel I have the obligation to oppose socialism, too.

[Skybird]

How should one not resignate when reading generalisations like this.

[Onkel Neal]

Originally Posted by Skybird

How should one not resignate when reading generalisations like this.

"Resignate" any way you want. Nice try to dismiss in one sentence, 4 points.

[Skybird]

I had a long reply instead of that oneliner, and deleted it. It would be completely in vein. You already have made a decision never to see the many negative costs of capitalism that lead to incrasing distortions and conflicts in the world, make few and fewer people even richer, and more and more people falling down the sopcial ladder. Nationally. In the West. Globally. I also had a reference to the TV docu they just have had on TV, about the conditions in not few ERs in major cities that make mockery of what you said.

I think most people will not start looking beyond themselves before they get hit themselves.

[Onkel Neal]

Originally Posted by Skybird

I had a long reply instead of that oneliner, and deleted it. It would be completely in vein. You already have made a decision never to see the many negative costs of capitalism that lead to incrasing distortions and conflicts in the world, make few and fewer people even richer, and more and more people falling down the sopcial ladder. Nationally. In the West. Globally. I also had a reference to the TV docu they just have had on TV, about the conditions in not few ERs in major cities that make mockery of what you said.

I think most people will not start looking beyond themselves before they get hit themselves.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and assume you do not recognize your own editorial style here

What TV docu? Did they say the ERs are devoid of illegal aliens and low income people who don't have insurance? Because that's what it would take to make a mockery of what I said. Unless today is Opposite Day or something.

Yeah, I have my mind made up, same as you. So what? I'm not falling in line with your viewpoint. I live in the US, I understand how capitalism works, and what it takes to get ahead in life. So, I do it. No complaints here, the system works as advertised. The opportunity is the same for everyone, so if they make bad choices, or choices that limit their standard of living, why should I subsidize them?

As long as a capitalist system provides opportunity, it cannot be beat.

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by Neal Stevens

I'm going to go out on a limb here and assume you do not recognize your own editorial style here

What TV docu? Did they say the ERs are devoid of illegal aliens and low income people who don't have insurance? Because that's what it would take to make a mockery of what I said. Unless today is Opposite Day or something.

Yeah, I have my mind made up, same as you. So what? I'm not falling in line with your viewpoint. I live in the US, I understand how capitalism works, and what it takes to get ahead in life. So, I do it. No complaints here, the system works as advertised. The opportunity is the same for everyone, so if they make bad choices, or choices that limit their standard of living, why should I subsidize them?

As long as a capitalist system provides opportunity, it cannot be beat.

Emphasize the idea of 'choice' from your post.

I find it humorous why the Europeans don't understand why America has been on top for so long? Maybe they really do get it and this is all an idea to bring us down to their lower level? :hmm:

Jealousy may be at play here.

-S

[CCIP]

Originally Posted by Neal Stevens

No complaints here, the system works as advertised. The opportunity is the same for everyone

Are you sure about this? I'm not sure about this. Increasingly I am finding that the system is in fact not working, and certainly the antecedents to its partial breakdown can readily be observed, even in the US. That's been my whole point in this thread.

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by CCIP

Are you sure about this? I'm not sure about this. Increasingly I am finding that the system is in fact not working, and certainly the antecedents to its partial breakdown can readily be observed, even in the US. That's been my whole point in this thread.

I think what you are looking at is an 'imperfect' system. Capitalism is in no way perfect, but in all the alternatives, it is the best and most opportunistic alternative for the common man to any other system that is out there bar none.

It is also not kind to those that are unwilling to help themselves. You get out what you put into it over here. If you don't like it, leave.

-S

[Biggles]

On the subject of communism...I sure hope you don'nt think that the Soviet Union had a pure communistic system 'cause really....it wasn't. (Stalin wasn't a commie, he was a Stalinist...)


On the subject of healthcare....

Well I live in Sweden. We have, at least had, amongst the highest taxes in the world. The reason? Well, this ensures that anyone, anyone, who is in need of medical treatment can have it, without selling all their belongings.

On the other hand, the lines for this treatment are rather long in some cases, and people often have to wait for a period of time, unless it's crucial that treatment is given immediately ofcourse.

So is it worth it then? High taxes and everyone gets help if needed?

If you ask me...

Hell yes.

I am a swedish citizen, and damn proud of it.

Sweden is one of the wealthiest countries in the world compared to size/population.
(Just as a side not)

[Zachstar]

Originally Posted by CCIP

Are you sure about this? I'm not sure about this. Increasingly I am finding that the system is in fact not working, and certainly the antecedents to its partial breakdown can readily be observed, even in the US. That's been my whole point in this thread.

I don't know what he is sure about but things must be nice where he lives because I do not have the same Opportunity.


Pubs like to pretend lawsuits are the main reason when in fact lack of free preventive care has allowed healthcare costs to explode when you have to fight the 2nd or 5th stages.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Neal Stevens

What TV docu? Did they say the ERs are devoid of illegal aliens and low income people who don't have insurance? Because that's what it would take to make a mockery of what I said. Unless today is Opposite Day or something.

I jumped by chance into it on TV, and I think it was not German but Austrian made, or it was German-Austrian TV 3SAT, I am not sure. They filmed in ER in Boston, NY and Washington. They said not all hospitals look like that, but also not few, especially in critical social areas. They had waiting times of 24 to sometimes even 48 hours even if the person had severe pain or was an emergency (remember that black woman some month ago who died after 18 hours hours sitting in an ER waiting room?), and they took shots insight the medical treatment area and rooms, that were overcrowded and had not enough places, in no way. It looked like a hospital in adesaster area. They interviewed staff that said that at times the situation were "dramatic". Again, they said not every hospital looked like this, but quite some - and both the number of places looking like that and the number of people depending on going there (since else they would not have access to medical treatmenet at all, wether it be that they cannot afford it, or had no insurance at all), are increasing. ERs that in peace time look like after an earthquake, are no compliment for a functioning system.

I again remind of the exmaple my English teacher, her whole family living in Florida, quoted, of a patient that was brought by strangers to hospital with heart problems and was not treated for certain papers regarding who covered the cost found nobody to sign them, and while the costs were not cleared, the person died. And different to what you tried to tell me some years ago when I fiorst brought this true story, there was no legal case following. witnessing this was part of the reason why the lady (one of the best teachers I ever had, we loved and respected her), left the US again.

My impression again is that of a country of extremes. Americans, so show the statistics, spend much more on medical treatment thaneuropeans, yet the general quality they get in treatmenet is less than in europe.at the same time if you are rich you get access to some of the best hospitals and doctors in the world. Extremes collide here, and obviously in statistical means in the american system you get less health for the buck than in the european system(s). It reminds of the extremnes colliding in education as well: some of the best private schools and universities in the world - and one of the worst public school systems in the whole West.

Yeah, I have my mind made up, same as you. So what? I'm not falling in line with your viewpoint. I live in the US, I understand how capitalism works, and what it takes to get ahead in life. So, I do it. No complaints here, the system works as advertised. The opportunity is the same for everyone,

To assume that is an opportunistical choice of yours, but nevertheless is wrong. The chances are not the same for everbopdy, both statistics and understanding of and insight in social contexts or experience in social work tell that, and very clearly. You can philosophise about the fairness of capitalism as loud as you want, nevertheless ypour claim is wrong and you ignore a major disadvantage of the system. Birth is fate, and wealthy parents are a decisive factor in every country influencing your starting chances, the education you get, we even know today that it influence your IQ level and character. If you try to fight the social-scientific data on that, you are fighting windmills. To think we all have the same chances and it is only our deed and our will that decides were we land, is simply wrong. With some it works like that, there are some who make it from dish washer to millionaire. but for everyone making it I tell you you have a hundred loosers who tried and tried desperately, but had not enough power or ressources to make it, were not given a chance, or were abused by those who already made it before them. Your basic assumption by which you defend the justice of capitalism - is a self-deception, a fallacy.

If you don't believe me, come over and I show you around in Frankfurt and Berlin, I still know social worker in the field wo can lead you around a bit to make you chnage your mind.

Yes, there is abuse of social systems, but the majority of people tries hard and desperately, and accept miserable conditions and offending wages for reasons of self-respect, become physically or psychologically ill, and supress it to their cost in fear to lose the little they have. And you dare to tell them all in their faces they are not trying hard and are lazy and parasites? Obviously you have no clue what giant and mean offending you talk out to them. Maybe you do not know of the existence of such people, that may serve as your excuse.

if they make bad choices, or choices that limit their standard of living,

Yes, some black sheep do that, and they are not even rare, but still they are a minority, I claim, and really, I got some professional feedback from the social reality out there about it, even when I have left it all behind. Most sheep are white sheep. But black sheep exist. Naturally, the latter get all the attention, since they are the eyecatcher in the mass of sheep.

Also, there is ill-functioning regulation by the state, no doubt. But again, I argue it is not the rule, but the ecepotion from. To slaughter the many white sheep just to catch the few black sheep is not what I am willing to accept. A question of simple maths.

why should I subsidize them?

To prevent abuse by the few, you are willing to let the many jump into the abyss, is that your argument?

As long as a capitalist system provides opportunity, it cannot be beat.

Capitalism creates more opportunities (=options) than socialism, regarding private initiative, it inspires creativity and initiative where socialism accepts stagnation of these and calls that "equality" on a much lower standard of communal performance. In so far I agree, as therapist I know that the key to healing often lies in increasing a person'S options for thought and action, and for the same reason I have repeatedly argued that weakness is no virtue since it decreases your options, and only strength allows you to increase your options. But strength comes with responsibility, and where that is missing, it turns into tyranny and the enslaving of others. responsibility in case you are strong, is a ethical imperative, imo, you must accept it, else you become a threat to the community.

So, as long as capitalism is allowed to follow egoism without scruples, without social responsibility and without awareness for world and values that are not included in it's materialistic and selfish self-perception, it makes few and fewer people even richer, and makes more and more people poorer, it corrupts the social system and erodes the basis of the community, and over time kills competition and replaces it with monopolism, and then dictates prices and policies arbitrarily to maximise it's profit. Totally unregulated capitalism is nothing else but a crime against humanity and mankind. And who has eyes to see, can see it in the world, everywhere. the state of the capitalistically dominated world for me is the clear evidence that capitalism does not work as advertised, and has become a threat to the ongoing existence of human civilisation, and the natural preservation of the biosphere.

P.S. and please, everybody, bite your tongue before thinking you must accuse me due to this criticism of mine to be a socialist. I am not, I find it disgusting. Accepting social responsibility does not equal "being a socialist". What I want is a capitalism with the needed ammount - but as little as possible - regulation to guarantee that this social responsibility is accepted and adequately met. Also, the individual (the company as well) shall not be allowed to realise it's interests at the cost of the community, that is another imperative I want to see being enforced. How dramatically that is needed, the current finance crisis is showing us. and finally, political decision makers and economical lobbyists shall not be allowed to be in office in several posts at the same time, uniting private business and political power inside the community in one hand. It must be kept separate, strictly. Like state and religion should be kept separate, so should private enterprise and state be kept different. the state should be the stronger of the two, but acting with self-restraint and sense of responsibility towards the social community and the legitimate interests of business. In keeping his responsibility to protect the community and the planet in mind, the state nevertheless is free to react to intersts and requests of the economy, but the economy shall not be allowed to dictate the policies of a state, neither directly nor indirectly.

[Hanomag]

I am a pure Facist and really... I think you should all be shot....

Maybe we should go Roman.. didn't they have the Pax Romani (1000 years?)

Regardless, when it all collapses .. I am ready. Hell I am ready for the Zombie Apocalypse! So bring it!!

[Digital_Trucker]

Given the US governments track record at efficiency, I don't think I want them in charge of how to spend money for health care or anything else that doesn't absolutely have to be done at a federal level.

[CCIP]

Originally Posted by Neal Stevens

And since I'm not a college kid or dreamy radicalist, I feel I have the obligation to oppose socialism, too.

Neal, that's not really a nice generalization. I'm sure that wasn't pointed at anyone in particular, but still - that's not exactly what socialism comes from. Sure, the intelligentsia brought plenty of ideas, good and bad, and has equally made good points and screwed up when it came to social issues. Still, I personally resent that, having lived among poor working people who fought tooth and nail to get anywhere in life, not for personal gain but for the good of others. It's a matter of perspective - from mine, I could likewise suggest that libertarians are by and large rich, selfish people whose fortune arises from an advantageous social position rather than hard work - but that's not really true either.

I personally strongly disagree with economic incentive as the be-all, end-all in human progress. It works to a point, but when unmoderated it paves a path straight to hell by the way of greed and exploitation. The society, in my view, has a broken view of wealth and gain - I've been rather poor most of my life (heck, I spent my early years in living arrangements with an average of 3.5 people / room), but I've lived within my means and I honestly never really saw the virtues of getting greedy beyond a certain point. And people really need to consider the real cost of things - because if they don't pay the price, someone else generally does. I'm not at all happy with a very common present-day arrangement where the system works largely through exploiting low costs permitted by the exploitation of the poor - at home or abroad. Having grown up around people exploited in this fashion, I take offence at the idea that being poor is necessarily a condition resulting from being lazy. That's simply not true.
There's a systemic failure at work here, and I don't think any reasonable socialist today (besides the usual radicals) would suggest that the whole point now is to break the system - no, but unless fixes are brought in, I'm afraid quite a lot of Americans will wind up in position to be exploited without a way to fight back, owing to a nasty social imbalance which I see gradually creeping up. The right to own guns isn't going to help much there, either.

[AntEater]

No need for any further comment as the usual french/german/russo-canadian conspiracy pretty much has allready said everything I could come up with


But one thing about healthcare and social spending struck me recently:
When looking at the federal budget of the US, the whole proportions look amazingly similar to that of a "socialist" (in the redneck sense) european country like Germany or France or Sweden.
About a quarter each for healthcare and social spending and defense, with interest and other posts making up the remaining quarter.
It is about the same general division as in the german federal budget.
On the other hand, if you compare what Germany or France provide their citizens with in regards to healthcare and social spending and what a US citizen gets, the picture gets somewhat confused. Don't know about unemployment and social security benefits, but in healthcare I was expecting the US to spend substantially less on the subject than the average european country.
Analogue to "bang for buck" one could say the average US citizen seems to get less "bandages for buck" than the average european.
Where does all that social security and healthcare money go to?
The US seems to spend twice as much money for "socialist" purposes than for defense, yet the US is not renowned to be a welfare state in the european sense.
But on the other hand, the US has some welfare state elements still controversial in Germany, like guaranteed minimum wages.