To the Blissfully Ignorant - Socialism is Unsustainable

I've just got done reading a ridiculous post from someone who very clearly falls into one or more of the following three categories:

1. Too young to have any life experience
   
2. Painfully uninformed and/or unread (aka "ignorant")
   
3. Idealist who overlooks reality and fact so their ideal isn't killed
   

Their assertion was that Socialism is the answer for the United States... no - seriously...

As a quick aside - please let me educate any of you that may ALSO fall into one or more of the above 3 categories:

Socialism is an economic model (some would say it can also be called a political theory) in which there is a common ownership and management of resources AND the means for production. Communism is a political structure that manages this economic model.

The two are not synonymous - but they are inherently related and cannot be distanced from each other too much to maintain the true definition of Socialism.

The problem this this model is that its premise of success relies on the theory of "materialism" and that human behavior is not shaped by instinctual desires but by socially engineered desires. Therefore the principle goal of Socialism is remove the "labor" from the means of motivation for material things.

In smaller easier words for you public school kids - Socialists believe that you want stuff because the TV tells you to - and Evil Capitalists have programmed you to think you need to go to work to get things. But if everything was just commonly owned - then we'd all work because we just love to.

</lesson>

Ok, so now we all at least actually understand what Socialism is (including you 16 year olds that are just figuring out that this is way more complicated than you thought)

Problem 1:
The "human" element
To actually enact Socialism we have to have a way to commonly own both the resources ... AND .. the means of production. And as anyone who's lived through high-school knows, everyone isn't a nice guy or gal, and some people are greedy and will take more than they need.

So the enforcement of this mandate (common ownership) must be done through some agency/vehicle that has both the authority of the people AND the means of enforcement.

Enter Uncle Sam. But wait - don't you already think Government is corrupt? Do you some how think that magically only the "good" people will get into the government?

A democratically elected government is the only solution to create an "objective" owner/manager of the people's resources and means of production. But that's the rub - Government is a group of representative PEOPLE. Remember Johnny - the kid that took your lunch money. He can be elected into the government just like Sarah who used to help you study.

We're going to even deeper than this - but on the surface level we've already failed the B.S. test because our mechanism for managing and owning resources and means of production is a complete failure (see: Corrupt Politicians). People are people - and no amount of social reprogramming will help that.

Moving on - because I know there are some stalwarts out there who've got some crap excuse of how this wouldn't be a problem (never mind the reality that EVERYONE who's tried it has failed).

Problem 2:
Limited means of production v/s growing labor force
If there is common ownership of the means of production (i.e. factories, offices, art studios, restaurants, farms, etc...) then all people have equal ownership of those facilities and hence can equally benefit from them - after all, this is the base premise of Socialism.

The U.S. population is growing by about 2.5 million people each year. Of that, immigration contributes over one million people to the U.S. population annually.

-NPG

But if all of these people need equal access to the means of production (because everyone needs a 52" flat screen TV right?) - and the means of production are incapable of growing at the same rate - everyone will simply begin to lose their access to the means of production.

They're not making any more land folks... sorry to tell ya.

Problem 3
Innovation is dead
Now this is probably the most basic problem with the premise of socialism. Let me start off with a simple fact:

Behind every innovation in the last 200 years has been a need. But more importantly - behind filling that need has been someone willing to risk their time and resources for the potential reward they will receive upon being the person to fill that need.

This is THE basic tenant of capitalism - Supply and Demand.

So, let's pretend for a second we've somehow gotten past the problem of humans (i.e. capable of corruption) managing all property, and we've gotten past the little problem if increasing population but decreasing resources. Who would begin to fund innovation and progress?

The "people" who own things? But what if some of the people didn't want to and others did? What about the iPhone sitting in your pocket right now? Who would fund the research and development of that technology? Who would fund the factory to manufacture it? Who would fund the further development of apps for it?

Do your grandparents (who've got just as much ownership as you) support that project? What about the government (who's actually the manager of our property)? What if they want to spend those resources on the next missile or jet fighter instead?

OMG - does this mean the end of luxury items? - in a one word answer: YEP

Problem 4
Motivation to work v/s Motivation not to work
Remember the basic idea that social engineering has taught me to "work" for things - and if we remove that as my motivation for working - all will be well?

So what exactly is my motivation for working then? If my job is to flip burgers - why am I going to flip burgers at all? What if I hate flipping burgers?

If your answer is because then I'll be cut off from the things I need to live - well you can't do that - I own them just like you and I have equal access to them just like you. If you try to hold them out as a carrot on a stick so I'll flip burgers.... you just went all "capitalist" on me man!

Cave men didn't hunt dangerous animals because it was good for the people - they did it because they bellies grumbled and their little kids were crying all the time.

People don't work hard today because it's good for the country - they work hard because they want more money/praise/things/power... whatever.

Simply put - Socialism ignores the basic construct of humans which is: Regardless of our societal upbringing - we are lazy. As a people we don't do more than we have to do.

If there is no larger reward for "extra" effort by any individual in the society - there will simply be less "extra" effort. Less effort will then induce the lowest level producers to produce EVEN less - and then the higher producers will come down again...

on and on until all production has stopped because there is no reason to produce...

Summary:
Socialism is a great idea that is simply not feasible in its application.

There are elements of it that can be mixed into a capitalistic economic model to help avoid the inherent pitfalls in the capitalistic model - but you cannot adopt it as the primary economic/political mechanism without enforcing a sever (if not fatal) drop in labor levels, efficiency levels, ingenuity and technological advancement, and general nationalistic pride.

There is absolutely no example in history of a socialist model that was able to achieve the same success as the United States - nor able to sustain itself for more than 50 years before having to adopt MAJOR reforms and capitalist principles.

--------------------------------

So please stop posting a thread saying we need to go here because you're college professor (or high school teacher?) taught you the wonders of Socialism while leaving the realities of life in the big city.

Psst...*WHISPER*...you might want to try telling that to all the European Countries that are Socialist and have a higher standard of living, better health care and education, and even a higher prosperity rating than the United States. Apparently they don't realize that it is unsustainable yet.

I agree, great thread. Star and Flag

Just to remind our right-wingers over here, read closely the definition of socialism.

-Government payed basic healthcare and education alternative or other necessary basic services provided by the government ALONGSIDE the commercial alternatives, to encourage competition and provide basic availability and quality / price ratio under which services in question should never fall is NOT socialism.
-Social democracy is NOT socialism, and is fully compatible with capitalism and ideals of classical liberalism.
-Obama is NOT a socialist.
-Basic income or other forms of welfare is NOT socialism.

Socialism means government ownership of ALL or overwhelming majority of the means of production, coupled with severe restrictions on allowed size and growth of private companies.

reply to post by gncnew



1.Too young to have any life experience
2.Painfully uninformed and/or unread (aka "ignorant")
3.Idealist who overlooks reality and fact so their ideal isn't killed

it sounds like you have described The USA

Originally posted by fraterormus
Psst...*WHISPER*...you might want to try telling that to all the European Countries that are Socialist and have a higher standard of living, better health care and education, and even a higher prosperity rating than the United States. Apparently they don't realize that it is unsustainable yet.

Haven't read the news coming out of Europe lately I presume?

Originally posted by fraterormus
Psst...*WHISPER*...you might want to try telling that to all the European Countries that are Socialist and have a higher standard of living, better health care and education, and even a higher prosperity rating than the United States. Apparently they don't realize that it is unsustainable yet.

Which European countriese would these be then?

Are you refering to France perhaps? Where the French Government is planning to raise the retirement age, which is not a socialist thing to do.

Or are you talking about Germany? Where Angela Merkel has just admitted that "multiculturalism has failed"... not very socialist that. Socialism says that multiculturalism works.

I live in the United Kingdom, which just so happens to be in the geo-political region known as Europe (do some research on this if you're stuck), and there are MASSIVE cuts being made to public spending... Perhaps that's because the Government isn't socialist, but I could be wrong....

I wonder where the socialism went?

Although, if you are refering to the Eastern European countries such as Poland and Romania, etc. then you are sadly mistaken in thinking that they are successful. If you do a bit of research you'll see that they are being bailed out to the tune of BILLIONS of Euros, in order to keep those countries "afloat". Check out Turkey... they are now endebted to the German taxpayer, amongst others, and the Germans aren't very happy about this... Socialism at work in the German thinking? I think not.

pssssssssssssssssst.......................pay attention the riots in european oh lets say greece..........and other countries...............it aint all fun and games......................

socialism will fail it always has and it always will

like the op said people too young and educated by some liberal teacher/professor.................remember the ole saying............those who can do...............those who cant teach and lie about how good socialism is.

this is a product of the department of education=communism good socialism good capitalism bad..........they just dont get it and they never will great post tho.....

meh

reply to post by NewlyAwakened


yeh no kidding.

Originally posted by woodwardjnr
reply to post by gncnew

 

1.Too young to have any life experience
2.Painfully uninformed and/or unread (aka "ignorant")
3.Idealist who overlooks reality and fact so their ideal isn't killed

it sounds like you have described The USA

Are we talking the country, the politicians or the people of the USA (?), because I can't imagine tarring themy all with the same brush is worth the effort, nor would it be true... there are some very enlightened people in the US, but you are right... it does sound like a good description.

Having said that we could apply it to just about anyone today who thinks they have an opinion on anything. Especially the youth of today who think they can "think for themselves".

Originally posted by fraterormus
Psst...*WHISPER*...you might want to try telling that to all the European Countries that are Socialist and have a higher standard of living, better health care and education, and even a higher prosperity rating than the United States. Apparently they don't realize that it is unsustainable yet.

Pssst you might want to know that Europe has been living under the protection of the U.S. military for the past 60 years and therefore can spend money on social goodies.

Originally posted by dampnickers
Which European countriese would these be then?

I live in the United Kingdom, which just so happens to be in the geo-political region known as Europe (do some research on this if you're stuck), and there are MASSIVE cuts being made to public spending... Perhaps that's because the Government isn't socialist, but I could be wrong....

I wonder where the socialism went?

I'm talking about Finland, Switzerland, Sweden, Denmark, Norway, and the Netherlands, all of which outrank the United States and the United Kingdom for prosperity, education, and health care, and all of which happen to be socialized nations in Europe. Even Belgium, Ireland and Austria are quickly catching up and are but a hair behind the U.S. and U.K.

Perhaps you are unsure where socialism went in Europe because the U.K. is not a participating member of the economic part of the E.U. Yes, countries like France and Germany get taxed more heavily than countries like Hungary or Romania do, but Ireland has been the poster-child of how and why the E.U. economic model has worked and worked well. It wasn't that long ago that Ireland was the poorest of the E.U. and now, not a decade later, they have almost exceeded the U.K. in prosperity.

reply to post by gncnew


This whole thread is blissfully ignorant.

Capitalism isn't sustainable either.

This thread is a good example of just how much ATS has gone downhill. It's like Redstate on steroids nowadays.

I used to think that Canada was a great place to live, because of the free health care. Now, after living here over a year, I know I was wrong. There is no free health care here, we just pay more taxes. I live in new bruswic now, and you either have a family physician, or you have to go to a clinic. Having a family physician is the better way, but due to the low doctor/high patient ratio, they are hard to get. You have to try to get the same doctor in the clinic a bunch of times, then request that he become your family doctor if you were not born here or have not lived here for a long time. To get into a clinic, you have a 3 hour time period, on wednesday to call and make an appointment. You got to sit there pressing redial till you get through, as there are a lot of people trying to get an appointment and the lines are always busy. If you go to the hospital on your own accord, you have a long wait. If you pay the 300 dollar fee(you have to prepay BTW, unless you are unconscious or losing a lot of blood etc) for an ambulance ride you get seen right away. A lot of the wealthy here, end up going to the US for any major things they need. It is a lot of the same, the US has some of the best health care in the world, IF you can afford it. Even having insurance isn't a guarantee, they do a lot of underhanded things to avoid paying for things.

reply to post by neo96


To be fair, that countries did not fail so hard only because of their partly socialist economic policies and great corruption (which you forgot). They were also not overdebted too much, they were indebted rationally given the economic and monetary conditions at a time. We must remember that the whole currency market was victim of a huge fraud perpetuated by american FED and real estate policies. FED caused the price of money to steadily decrease, so everyone borrowed money (and it was rational), and then suddenly raised interest rates and skrewed everyone. When the whole market is a victim of a blatant fraud, even rational a liable participants can have problems.

Originally posted by gncnew

1. Too young to have any life experience
   

This thought occurred to me the other day: the young need to step up and do away with old thinking.
It is their future, after all.

Look at the world we live in.
One could wonder if it is a result of decisions made by those with all of the "life experience."

Which leads me to a quote from my buddy Einstein: "Imagination is more important than knowledge."

Socialism by itself doesn't have all the solutions, but neither does any other system.

reply to post by Maslo


so the fed is to blame for greeces current situation? thats hilarious

it had nothinng to do with the people wanting everything handed to them on a silver platter.............

last time i checked the current coin of the realm is the euro as they are a part of the european union meh

nice try but greeces problems and those others countries problems are not the result of the fed it is the result from their own greed for promising the sun without a thought as to where the cash was going to come from..........meh

Originally posted by fraterormus
Psst...*WHISPER*...you might want to try telling that to all the European Countries that are Socialist and have a higher standard of living, better health care and education, and even a higher prosperity rating than the United States. Apparently they don't realize that it is unsustainable yet.

No need to whisper... for two reasons:
1. They've got free markets there - with elements of socialism to counter the negative trends of capitalism. They are not "Socialist"
2. Have you noticed the recent "labor disputes"???

When's the last time you saw that here?... oh wait - it was the Auto Unions and the public workers. Free market labor with current employee rights laws simply are more efficient and the American worker produces more than anyone else in the world.

Originally posted by woodwardjnr
reply to post by gncnew

 

1.Too young to have any life experience
2.Painfully uninformed and/or unread (aka "ignorant")
3.Idealist who overlooks reality and fact so their ideal isn't killed

it sounds like you have described The USA

ROFL... nice quip... seriously... but anyway - I do tire of Europeans who assume an air of experience and superiority over the US despite the overwhelming evidence that the United States has offered the world (specifically Europe) quite a bit in the way of advancement and progress.

Unless that is of course you're now countering that the EU is "leading the world" and when TSHTF the world looks to the EU? I don't only speak from a military perspective mind you.

I would propose that the largest reason you see the United States making so many "gaffes" in the world is simply because the United States does so much.

The easy way to make sure you don't make a mistake is to do nothing...

Originally posted by wutone

Originally posted by fraterormus
Psst...*WHISPER*...you might want to try telling that to all the European Countries that are Socialist and have a higher standard of living, better health care and education, and even a higher prosperity rating than the United States. Apparently they don't realize that it is unsustainable yet.

Pssst you might want to know that Europe has been living under the protection of the U.S. military for the past 60 years and therefore can spend money on social goodies.

While this is VERY true - please don't let this fall into the Euro/Us diatribe around military. I say this because far to often the United States devalues it's other MAJOR contributions to the Western world because we focus so heavily on the military aspect of things.

Originally posted by fraterormus

Originally posted by dampnickers
Which European countriese would these be then?

I live in the United Kingdom, which just so happens to be in the geo-political region known as Europe (do some research on this if you're stuck), and there are MASSIVE cuts being made to public spending... Perhaps that's because the Government isn't socialist, but I could be wrong....

I wonder where the socialism went?

I'm talking about Finland, Switzerland, Sweden, Denmark, Norway, and the Netherlands, all of which outrank the United States and the United Kingdom for prosperity, education, and health care, and all of which happen to be socialized nations in Europe. Even Belgium, Ireland and Austria are quickly catching up and are but a hair behind the U.S. and U.K.

Perhaps you are unsure where socialism went in Europe because the U.K. is not a participating member of the economic part of the E.U. Yes, countries like France and Germany get taxed more heavily than countries like Hungary or Romania do, but Ireland has been the poster-child of how and why the E.U. economic model has worked and worked well. It wasn't that long ago that Ireland was the poorest of the E.U. and now, not a decade later, they have almost exceeded the U.K. in prosperity.

ROFL...

Ok, sorry - we left out the protectrate states of the major nations that actually have an impact on the world.

When you are free to spend your entire GDP on everything BUT national security - and you've got litterally zero globalization other than massive immigration into your welfare state - you can do all kinds of fun things.

But for the rest of the world players - life's not quite as simple.

I akin that situation somewhat to the teenager living at home with his parents. He can spend his entire paycheck on a new outfit for the club - going on a date - and a good pizza.. .until next paycheck.