what's wrong with socialism?

SammyPops said:
Wow, never heard the US as closer to socialism argument before. Hard to get my head around: lower taxes, less services, less rights (not the righ word but stuff like maternity leave and vacation time).
Click to expand...

He has somewhat stumbled on the point that social services in the us are more centralized than Canada. Canada major social spending, distribution and increase in tax levy all come from the provincial level. Canada doesnt even have a national uhc, it has 10 different ones all run and administered by the provinces themselves. Hell, anyone of them can stop providing sp health care and the federal government couldn't do anything about it aside from reducing wealth transfers to the have no provinces
 
Kindacrazy said:
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.
Click to expand...


Please fucking explain how the US is closer to socialism than Canada while providing far less social programs? How the fuck does that work?
 
Kindacrazy said:
So you think it is sustainable and ethical to ask one ethnic group to provide continuing subsidies to another ethnic group through a robust welfare state and social programs? Do you think that is sustainable?
Click to expand...

Depends on the level of difference, the nature the ethnic groups and the how the situation changes. For instance New Zealand's sustained a higher rate of immigration (per capita) than Sweden every year since 2000 (latest figures 2016).
However the impact has been substantially different because of the ratios of refugees to skilled migration. Nor is it a case of one ethnic group staying the same or deteriorating. Maoris have been slowy closing the gap with New Zealanders of European backgrounds in every parameter outside income, and the increase in that gap is in terms of relative, not absolute performance. There's also less resentment of indigenous groups for obvious reasons.
Likewise in Australia, it took about 40 years for the Vietnamese refugees to bridge a similar gap, but the rest of the groups immigrating vary, for instance with Chinese, Korean and Indian immigrants significantly outperforming the general population. With our ratio of skilled labour immigration to refugees higher than 10:1, I don't think it's an issue.
 
SammyPops said:
Wow, never heard the US as closer to socialism argument before. Hard to get my head around: lower taxes, less services, less rights (not the righ word but stuff like maternity leave and vacation time).
Click to expand...
That's because few people really conceptually understand socialism and even fewer people actually understand the US system in general.

Corporate taxes in the US until very recently were very high. The US also has among the most robust welfare systems in the world, its just structured very differently. Note I said Canada and Germany. There is a huge issue with efficiency in the US to be sure but look at the numbers.

2016 numbers;
Canada per capita healthcare expenditure 6604 or 11.5% of GDP https://www.cihi.ca/en/health-spending
US per capita healthcare expenditure 10384 or 17.9% of GDP https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/health-expenditures.htm

There have been generations of massive welfare expenditures in the US targeted at sedating the population.

Since the early 2000's (at least) the US has spent more on social welfare per capita then any other nation on earth.
https://www.oecd.org/els/soc/OECD2012SocialSpendingDuringTheCrisis8pages.pdf

This idea that the US is some capitalist stronghold is simply inaccurate. The US has a huge corruption problem though.
 
Ruprecht said:
Depends on the level of difference, the nature the ethnic groups and the how the situation changes. For instance New Zealand's sustained a higher rate of immigration (per capita) than Sweden every year since 2000 (latest figures 2016).
However the impact has been substantially different because of the ratios of refugees to skilled migration. Nor is it a case of one ethnic group staying the same or deteriorating. Maoris have been slowy closing the gap with New Zealanders of European backgrounds in every parameter outside income, and the increase in that gap is in terms of relative, not absolute performance. There's also less resentment of indigenous groups for obvious reasons.
Likewise in Australia, it took about 40 years for the Vietnamese refugees to bridge a similar gap, but the rest of the groups immigrating vary, for instance with Chinese, Korean and Indian immigrants significantly outperforming the general population. With our ratio of skilled labour immigration to refugees higher than 10:1, I don't think it's an issue.
Click to expand...
I really don't know much about New Zealand I'm afraid. Has the Maori population integrated with the other ethnic groups well?
 
Chappi said:
This is an American website, so it will be hard to find anyone who actually knows what it means.
Most only know it's a dirty word wich can get you killed if you say it out loud.
Click to expand...

This is one of the reasons why pig latin is so important in Marxist circles.

Eizesay the eansmay of oductionpray
 
The real reason socialism doesn’t work is because the language of labor is also the language of slavery.
 
Socialism has been taught to be evil in America, so that the ultra rich elite can continue to rule over us all indefinitely.

The capitalist system is complete trash, the worst idea ever, and people think its good for some reason.
 
sabretruth said:
The quality of life tends to be much worse. Just look at Venezuela. Read about life in the Soviet Union. The welfare state is good. Socialism is not.
Click to expand...

What's the difference between a welfare state and socialism? Sounds like the same concept with different words.
 
Mark Hunts FIST said:
I get what your saying. Technically, here are the countries with no income tax
  • United Arab Emirates
  • Oman
  • Bahrain
  • Qatar
  • Saudi Arabia
  • Kuwait
  • Bermuda
  • Cayman Islands
  • The Bahamas
  • Brunei

Not all shitholes
Click to expand...

Would you like to live in any of those countries?
 
Kindacrazy said:
I really don't know much about New Zealand I'm afraid. Has the Maori population integrated with the other ethnic groups well?
Click to expand...

They are doing better than our Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders, although that's not saying much unfortunately. Other pacific islanders are another major ethnic group (Samoans etc) and I think they integrate well. The latest wave of Indian and Chinese immigration started in the early '90s, and there was a lot of grumbling about it at the time (as there was here in Australia), but that seemed to die out by the late '90s.
Of course aside from the welfare state, neither Australia nor New Zealand has been increasing social programs. In fact from the late '80s on it's been neoliberalism from all major political parties.
 
CauseImbetta said:
What's the difference between a welfare state and socialism? Sounds like the same concept with different words.
Click to expand...
That really depends on who you ask. These terms are far to malleable in the political sphere to try to pin any type of politics to them over the long term. Current social and economic reality will shape these definitions to a large extent.
 
CauseImbetta said:
Would you like to live in any of those countries?
Click to expand...

As a white guy. The Bahamas, Cayman islands.

As a Muslim man....UAB,Saudi Arabia, Qatar would be fine.

Choose them over the USA? Of course not.

But I would rather live here than 99% of the world.
 
WTF2008 said:
There is socialism all over America. And yes, it is bad.
It's also necessary. I would like to see where you think America is close to subsahara Africa.

And why they're our problem.
Click to expand...

It's bad but it's necessary? Thats a contradiction.
It's not bad. Look at all the countries with the highest taxes, they have the highest standard of living and are the happiest.

Google poorest parts of America. You'll be shocked. Nearly unlivable.

I don't understand the last part of your question, why whose our problem? Our own citizens?
 
Ruprecht said:
They are doing better than our Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders, although that's not saying much unfortunately. Other pacific islanders are another major ethnic group (Samoans etc) and I think they integrate well. The latest wave of Indian and Chinese immigration started in the early '90s, and there was a lot of grumbling about it at the time (as there was here in Australia), but that seemed to die out by the late '90s.
Click to expand...
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.
 
CauseImbetta said:
Yes seriously. Answer it if you can. I have all day.
Click to expand...

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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,896
Messages
55,453,137
Members
174,784
Latest member
Username Required LMAO

Share this page

Back
Top