We need Socialism. Socialism Is A Good Thing. Socialism Promotes The General Welfare.

[Nordberg]

Socialism in America is just nasty labeling. Like capitalism has been, except it has been purified by the wealthy for our consumption. Capitalism needs lots of laws and regulation to keep it at all tolerable for the people. that is why someone like trump is railing about regulation and saying how proud he is to roll it back. Voters, regulation is for your benefit. It keeps a fairer field of commerce going. It cleans up the water, land and air.

Privitazation is a way to enable the rich to loot the tax payers and pour even more money up, up and up to the top 1 percent. A vote for Repugs is a vote for the owners to have even more power and control. Your enemies are not the poor, the minorities or the old. you are looking in the wrong direction. look up.

[Flash]

Do you know it is a very poor country and that is almost all our fault? Of course, they get homes and food too. Did you count that in your total?

They get subsidized food when it is available. It often gets sold out the back door on the black market because the prices are kept so low. The problem with setting prices lower than the cost of production means there is no supply. Communist government policies have a lot to do with the low standard of living and oppressive government.

[Nordberg]

They get subsidized food when it is available. It often gets sold out the back door on the black market because the prices are kept so low. The problem with setting prices lower than the cost of production means there is no supply. Communist government policies have a lot to do with the low standard of living and oppressive government.

in your very, very humble opinion. fact is socialistic type countries do not have food shortages, Lots of food shortages in Russia though. Lots of American people go to bed hungry too. https://www.dosomething.org/facts/11...bout-hunger-us

[Flash]

in your very, very humble opinion. fact is socialistic type countries do not have food shortages, Lots of food shortages in Russia though. Lots of American people go to bed hungry too. https://www.dosomething.org/facts/11...bout-hunger-us

Many made the same claims about the Soviet Union before the fall of Communism--it was a paradise. Now it is Cuba.

https://www.naplesnews.com/story/new...ives/94885894/

[Nordberg]

Many made the same claims about the Soviet Union before the fall of Communism--it was a paradise. Now it is Cuba.

https://www.naplesnews.com/story/new...ives/94885894/

Sounds like America.

[Flash]

Sounds like America.

Except Americans don't go to Cuba for a better life while about one million people born in Cuba have fled to the U. S.

[PoliTalker]

Hello Rob,

The truth is that you neither have capitalism nor socialism, but few will believe this. What you do have is a mixture of things.

I prefer the words ‘free-market’, trade, barter or laissez faire. That last one means:

“An economic doctrine that opposes governmental regulation of or interference in commerce beyond the minimum necessary for a free-enterprise system to operate according to its own economic laws.”

As for socialism, it is merely a mythological system of legalized theft that cannot and will not work, no matter how many times it is tried. It’s a bit like Scientology – many people believe it, but it doesn’t actually work.

You need Socialism in the USA like a man with lung cancer needs brain cancer.

If we just let the free market do whatever it wants then we get the rich and powerful harming the environment, and disregarding the safety and well-being of workers, consumers and the public. And we get the poor being unable to earn enough to have a basic life. It is clear the rich and powerful can make more money if they don't care about their fellow citizens. It is up to government to force them to not harm people or the environment. We do this through regulation.

If the totally free market was the best thing for our economy, it would benefit everyone. That doesn't happen, so we regulate it. And even with regulation, such inequality exists that those on the lower end of the wealth spectrum can't even have the basics needed for a safe and comfortable life. That is why we have a government safety net, because the free market alone does not provide that, has no interest in that, and will never do that.

Now, you can call these things whatever you want, and play all kinds of games with connotations and definitions. I go with the common understanding that the free market is capitalism, and the government safety net is socialism. We need a balance of each in order to Promote the General Welfare. Promoting the General Welfare is one of the basic reasons we have the USA. Capitalism and the Free Market are not even mentioned in the founding documents!

[Rob Larrikin]

Hello Rob,
If we just let the free market do whatever it wants then we get the rich and powerful harming the environment,

The rich want the Rule of Law more than most people, as they are the obvious targets of theft. With the rule of law, the rich will give you New York. With Socialism the State will give you Shanghai.

and disregarding the safety and well-being of workers,

It isn’t profitable for industry to disregard workers’ safety as they will be sued in court and exposed by the media, thanks to the Rule of Law. Unless you go to a Socialist State, where industry will have no regard for worker’s safety and workers are not allowed to sue the State, or be exposed by State run media.

consumers and the public. And we get the poor being unable to earn enough to have a basic life. It is clear the rich and powerful can make more money if they don't care about their fellow citizens.

Regardless of whether they care or not, the Rule of Law keeps things in order.

It is up to government to force them to not harm people or the environment. We do this through regulation.

[Life is Golden]

I was going to "thank" that post...until the last line.

I'm 82...and fuck the "red scare."

Capitalism of the type we have...SCARES ME MORE.

Donald, the abomination, Trump...SCARES ME MORE.

Healthcare should indeed be taken out of the Capitalistic realm...and moved to a right.

Sufficient food for each individual should be move there next.

An education for every person who wants it...should also.

And, of course, there are others.

The basic needs of a decent life should be met for everyone...then the greedy can fight to get as much of the plenty that will be left.

No fool like an old fool.

[Life is Golden]

Socialism in America is just nasty labeling.

No, it's a stone's throw away from Communism.

[Evergreen58]

I suppose the idea of Socialism could be good if human nature was pure. If everyone truly did work to the best of their ability then it would be easier to feel good about goods and services being distributed to them. But I believe there are those who would take advantage of the system - as William Bradford discovered in 1620. He discovered that those participating in the work increased when they got to reap the benefits of their own work - and not have the product of their hard work given to those who did not work. I believe there are many conservatives who would be more open to a socialist society if there could be a way to eliminate benefits going to those who don't want to work. How could we fix this problem?

Then there is another problem. I believe greed is the driving force behind much innovation and invention. Why would someone want to work tirelessly to innovate and invent if the goods and services they produce will be regulated by the government? There may be exceptions, but surely no-one is naive enough to think that most men and women will work solely for the common good. This sounds good. It is probably the Christian way. But it is not human nature.

Also, it appears to me that many politicians who support socialism live in opulence themselves sharing very little of what they have with others. Sadly, they do not practice what they preach. This is a huge problem which leads to cynicism by conservatives. We all are more likely to follow those who practice what they preach. Which modern day politician does this?

I just joined this site. I am not looking for a fight. I would like to understand the socialist point of view better.

[Frank Apisa]

No fool like an old fool.

Bite me, sucker!

You should be attending to your Trump shrine rather than wasting time posting the nonsense you do.

[Frank Apisa]

I suppose the idea of Socialism could be good if human nature was pure. If everyone truly did work to the best of their ability then it would be easier to feel good about goods and services being distributed to them. But I believe there are those who would take advantage of the system - as William Bradford discovered in 1620. He discovered that those participating in the work increased when they got to reap the benefits of their own work - and not have the product of their hard work given to those who did not work. I believe there are many conservatives who would be more open to a socialist society if there could be a way to eliminate benefits going to those who don't want to work. How could we fix this problem?

Then there is another problem. I believe greed is the driving force behind much innovation and invention. Why would someone want to work tirelessly to innovate and invent if the goods and services they produce will be regulated by the government? There may be exceptions, but surely no-one is naive enough to think that most men and women will work solely for the common good. This sounds good. It is probably the Christian way. But it is not human nature.

Also, it appears to me that many politicians who support socialism live in opulence themselves sharing very little of what they have with others. Sadly, they do not practice what they preach. This is a huge problem which leads to cynicism by conservatives. We all are more likely to follow those who practice what they preach. Which modern day politician does this?

Are you saying we need more human workers?

Are you saying there are enough "jobs" most humans can do...that pay a reasonable wage?

I just joined this site. I am not looking for a fight. I would like to understand the socialist point of view better.

If you want to understand the socialistic point of view better...take some classes in comparative economics.

This is not the place for that.

[canceled.2021.2]

America works

its a capitalist country run by the people


when we properly fetter our capitalism


that is our history

if you want socialism move

I always laugh when you say dumb things like we need to “fetter” our capitalisn


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[PoliTalker]

Hello Rob,

It isn’t profitable for industry to disregard workers’ safety as they will be sued in court and exposed by the media, thanks to the Rule of Law.

Fallacy. Big rich powerful corporations have very expensive lawyers. Harmed individuals have no access to the kind of legal teams they would be up against if they sue. Fancy corporate lawyers can easily drag a case out for years, effectively starving out the claimant.

If your position were accurate, there would be no need for OSHA. Yet, rampant violations keep OSHA very busy. The people at OSHA can tell you they do not have enough resources to effectively regulate all they are supposed to do.

Unless you go to a Socialist State, where industry will have no regard for worker’s safety and workers are not allowed to sue the State, or be exposed by State run media.

I am not arguing to have a purely socialist state, where the means of production is owned by government, so yours is a moot point.

I am championing a mixed economy where luxuries and wants are traded under well-regulated capitalism, and basic needs are managed through government-run operations.

Under the ideal system, government would own and run health care. The Federal Health Care Service would provide health care to all, and be funded through taxes. Doctors and workers would be directly employed by the government, just as people in the military currently are. They would be motivated to work efficiently because they serve their nation, which they are proud to support, just as our military members are. They would be paid a fair wage with good benefits, just as our military is. It would be a public service, and it would cost less than our current for-profit health care system, because the government doesn't have to generate profits for share-holders. Remove the profit margin, and the cost is lower. Each worker would have greater take-home pay after payroll deductions, because no part of those deductions would go to making the very rich even richer.

The government should operate basic mass transportation, because there is no good capitalist model for that, and the need exists. Just like health care.

If people want a private automobile, that is a luxury, so they should pay for that in the capitalist economy.
If people want luxury foods, jewelry, a speedboat, a camping trailer, an RV, a big screen TV or elaborate entertainment center, cruise ship vacations, etc, then they will need to work to earn the money for those things. If they want prime real estate, stocks, bonds, airplanes, yachts, fancy touring motorcycles, etc, they need to work and earn to pay for that. At least as long as there are actually enough good jobs to go around (becoming doubtful.) After automation displaces most workers (predicted with AI,) then the government will need to tax the very rich so much that the government issues a standard basic income to most people, whether they work or not.

We are going to have to accept more socialism, whether you like it or not.

We really have no choice.

There are just too many of us, and overpopulation is taking it's toll on our society.