what's wrong with socialism?

[Ruprecht]

Are there reservation systems in New Zealand? I think native groups make an interesting case study in social isolation. I can't think of a group that has thrived with the reservation system without some kind of inherent economic advantage being attached. At the same time I know that most native groups have a strong desire to remain a distinct ethnic group. Not sure what is a good way forward on the native issues.

Not like the Canadian or American systems. There is native title and iwi (tribal) customary land though.

 

[Kindacrazy]

You are right. It shouldn't be other ethnicities responsibility to pay for all those poor whites on welfare.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-working-class-whites/?utm_term=.5e255b5a2240

Not that this deserves any kind of real response. But self identifying whites make up more then 70% of the US population, if they weren't the biggest beneficiaries it would have been an utterly stunning reality.

I don't even care what community is subsidizing what community. I care about the long term sociological effects. But if you actually want to know the statistics;

https://aspe.hhs.gov/report/welfare-indicators-and-risk-factors-thirteenth-report-congress

I also don't blame either the black or the Hispanic community for their over-dependence on welfare, I blame the democrats for using the issue as an election tool for buying votes. The Black and Hispanic communities responded in the way any community offered these benefits under these same circumstances would have.

 

[Possum Jenkins]

You are right. It shouldn't be other ethnicities responsibility to pay for all those poor whites on welfare.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-working-class-whites/?utm_term=.5e255b5a2240

Taxes and social services are the reich-wing's 21st Century White Man's Burden.

It's simply ingrained in their head that they get exploited, they get taken advantage of by everyone else. They work, everyone else leeches. And what kind of thanks do they get for their trouble? Some articles on Huffpo about white privilege.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Welfare state is redistribution of capital through various means of social spending. Socialism is an umbrella terms of various means of representation and ownerships of the means of production. There are a plethora of various types of socialism, with even some being anti-welfare state but there is no single definition that encompasses all types of socialism.

I think if we're trying to be historically correct, it's worker or social control of the means of production. But from a usage standpoint, it means something different to almost every speaker, which is why I say it's meaningless--using the word makes communication harder and opens the door for equivocation to make it even harder to discuss policy.

 

[cooks1]

lol Tell you what. Go live ina socialist place, like north korean or china....


have fun!

I already live in a socialist place right here in the US. We have taxes, Social Security, Medicare, and various welfare programs. We are just less socialist than some other places. It's better to think of socialism as a spectrum.

A logical person would look at where their country is on the spectrum. Then look at where other countries are on the spectrum, and compare the overall performance and quality of life in those nations to their nation.

Since I would be considered a liberal, I will throw out an olive branch and first look to the right of the socialist spectrum for countries that are more capitalistic and less socialist in nature than the US. Hoping to see one that offers a better overall value to me. If there is one, please point it out to me, cause I can't find it.

Now moving to the other side, I think we can point to a number of countries that are slightly more socialist (though not massively) that are currently offering better (though not massively) overall value propositions to their people than the US does. And before you go menstruate and tell me to go live in those places- I have. I spent nearly 20 years (private sector-not military) living in Canada, England, Scotland, Ireland, Germany. Spain, Norway. With 2-3 month stints in other places as well.

If you took a look objectively, I think the logical person would conclude that we would benefit from nudging in a slightly more socialist direction. Universal healthcare (whether it be state or federal) and better welfare and social mobility programs.

 

[JudoThrowFiasco]

I think if we're trying to be historically correct, it's worker or social control of the means of production. But from a usage standpoint, it means something different to almost every speaker, which is why I say it's meaningless--using the word makes communication harder and opens the door for equivocation to make it even harder to discuss policy.

I agree, the OP framed his question from a 100'000 ft lens -- so you can't really discuss specifics when you say "why is socalism xyz" and then later say "oh, welfare states are the same as socialism".

If he changed his op to "why is stronger social spending or strong welfare states a bad thing?" we could have a better discussion on it.

 

[Kindacrazy]

Taxes and social services are the reich-wing's 21st Century White Man's Burden.

It's simply ingrained in their head that they get exploited, they get taken advantage of by everyone else. They work, everyone else leeches. And what kind of thanks do they get for their trouble? Some articles on Huffpo about white privilege.

I love the complete lack of any actual evidence, or even arguments. It's like you are trying to make yourself look stupid.

 

[Jack V Savage]

I agree, the OP framed his question from a 100'000 ft lens -- so you can't really discuss specifics when you say "why is socalism xyz" and then later say "oh, welfare states are the same as socialism".

If he changed his op to "why is stronger social spending or strong welfare states a bad thing?" we could have a better discussion on it.

Yeah, but I think he's pushing back on a bad argument:

1. X policy is socialism.
2. Socialism is bad.
3. Therefore, X is bad.

That's used to discredit a lot of good policy, or at least fails to actually address the goodness or badness of the policy rationally. I'd prefer the approach of attacking the argument, but his approach is to dispute 2 on the grounds that socialism isn't *necessarily* bad (while I'm sure acknowledging that it sometimes is).

 

[JudoThrowFiasco]

Yeah, but I think he's pushing back on a bad argument:

1. X policy is socialism.
2. Socialism is bad.
3. Therefore, X is bad.

That's used to discredit a lot of good policy, or at least fails to actually address the goodness or badness of the policy rationally. I'd prefer the approach of attacking the argument, but his approach is to dispute 2 on the grounds that socialism isn't *necessarily* bad (while I'm sure acknowledging that it sometimes is).

I agree, but he is using a giant umbrella term to say undefined policy (at least undefined in his op) is good -- with some bad. Conflating welfare state examples with socialism, and not defining anything just leads to "well norway, oh yeah, well Venezuela"

 

[Jack V Savage]

I agree, but he is using a giant umbrella term to say undefined policy (at least undefined in his op) is good -- with some bad. Conflating welfare state examples with socialism, and not defining anything just leads to "well norway, oh yeah, well Venezuela"

Or it leads to "well, we need to get more specific here," which is a good outcome.

 

[JudoThrowFiasco]

Or it leads to "well, we need to get more specific here," which is a good outcome.

yeah but that usually gets done near the tail end of the thread which will be 2nd or 3rd paged shortly after and nothing after that really gets discussed. Thats why well defined OP's are important.

 

[Possum Jenkins]

I love the complete lack of any actual evidence, or even arguments. It's like you are trying to make yourself look stupid.

I love the victim mentality myself-

Americans are divided racially on the issue and not without cause. In the US a single payer healthcare system would be a direct subsidy from Asians an Whites to Blacks and Latinos.

 

[cooks1]

I think if we're trying to be historically correct, it's worker or social control of the means of production. But from a usage standpoint, it means something different to almost every speaker, which is why I say it's meaningless--using the word makes communication harder and opens the door for equivocation to make it even harder to discuss policy.

Agreed. Democratic Socialism is a concept some people find extremely difficult to grasp. And the word Socialism itself inspires disgust in so many, which is why it is often thrown out so carelessly in election cycles.

 

[Jack V Savage]

yeah but that usually gets done near the tail end of the thread which will be 2nd or 3rd paged shortly after and nothing after that really gets discussed. Thats why well defined OP's are important.

I agree that well-defined OPs are usually better, but I see this as a more meta discussion attacking that bad argument.

 

[Kindacrazy]

I love the victim mentality myself-

and? Is there a point to this post?

 

[Iceberg Slim]

you guys should table these discussions for after the next presidential elections. This is the type of shit that will get donny elected again. No, i don't want to pay more taxes so sorry fucks can go to the doctor for free.

 

[Scerpi]

The more towards Socialism the Country trends, the more we'll see this garbage....

And this is why Socialism fails... there's always a significant part of the population who will fail to uphold their end of the deal and look for the Gov't Handouts.

Also, LOL at the Government trying to run any program and at least try to recoup costs. The dipshits running most major cities are always running deep in the red. Why? They have no fucking idea how to prioritize resources and manage budgets.

I mean seriously... look at the Federal Government. Keep spending assholes...

 

[Deleted member 159002]

What's the difference between a welfare state and socialism? Sounds like the same concept with different words.

Socialism is where the state owns industry. The welfare state leaves industry for the most part in private hands while redistributing some wealth to make society more equitable.

 

[AndroidRage]

No, the US is closer to socialist then either Canada or Germany. Canada and Germany are both significantly more authoritarian also.

Americans are divided racially on the issue and not without cause. In the US a single payer healthcare system would be a direct subsidy from Asians an Whites to Blacks and Latinos. Until there is a dramatic improvement in US's integration efforts, this isn't an unreasonable complaint considering the high correlation between ethnic and cultural differences between these groups.

That subsidy would be mostly going towards whites.

 

[Islam Imamate]

So you agree but disagree at the same time?

Sort of I suppose. I don't think his losing to Killary had much to do with his claiming of socialism as much as it had to do with the internal dynamics of the Democratic Party. I do think he would've beat Trump though.