Is Socialism a Good Thing?

in today's political climate the idea of socialism is a big topic of discussion. especially with the likes of AOC being elected to congress as well as Bernie yet again running for President. as well as all the others coming out as "democratic socialists", which many believe is just a new branding of communist, to make it more appealing to people who live in the United States of America (it has the word democratic, as in democracy in the name after all, so it can't be bad). and it is especially true in regards to two of the biggest political arguments of the last several years, socialized medical care, versus the currant system of private medical care. as well as "free" higher education. and of course we can't forget about the new green deal, which promises pretty much everything under the sun in the name of saving the environment, and thus the world.

in arguments/debates in regards to socialized medical care and free higher education many point out that there is already a lot of socialism in the US. chiefly in things like welfare and tuition free public primary and high schools. and use those and other things to try to bolster their arguments. yet are those things actually good for the country and the people?

lets look at education. i am sure the one thing pretty much everyone, including myself can agree upon, is that education, especially basic education of primary and high school, is of extreme importance in today's technological environment. yet is socialized (ie "free" which really means government/tax paid for) education really helping? or is it in fact hindering people, and thus the country? and yes that is a serious question.

the fact is that education in the US, seems to be a giant failure. kids graduating high school who can't even read. and the seeming lack of the ability to think critically. it really seems that school has actually become more of a "free" babysitting service, and indoctrination center, more than an education system. and it's not as if there has been no effort to "fix" the system. from things like all the testing done "to insure" kids are learning what is needed. which has just resulted in teaching to the test, ie more about making the kids pass the tests, since it effects funding. than actually educating the kids. the cutting down of things like recess, and other non scholastic things, so that more time can be spent teaching those scholastic things. things like English, math and science. even to the point that now they actually expect children to already have a start at reading before they even enter kindergarten. thus in effect starting education earlier. as well as adding the need for "preschool" (which is not yet free, but people are starting to want free as not even just a baby sitting service, but to get their kids ready for even entering kindergarten). when i went to kindergarten, it was only a half day (where now almost everywhere it is a full day), and what it was rally about was starting to teach things like numbers and counting, and the ABC's, as well as to help get kids into being able to work and play with others and socialize, in preparation for actual learning starting i n grade one. (personally i feel that instead of starting education earlier, we would be much better off starting a couple years later). and yet even with that it seems the education system is failing. i have even seen discussions where they want to even extend the school day even longer to try to "fix" the problem.

i have lived several years in a country where private schools are the norm. where the parents have to pay tuition starting at kindergarten (and preschool really isn't a big thing, but you also have to pay for it), all the way through school life. and i have to say that the education of those in such schools seem to be better educated than in the US. while those who are in the public education system are not nearly so well educated. and guess what school days are actually shorter. since many of the schools actually have two completely different school sessions a day. having both morning-afternoon sessions and afternoon till evening sessions. and until a couple years ago only went to grade 10. now they have added grades 11 and twelve (pretty much just to match up with other countries), and that in the end has turned into either higher education prepitory classes or trades school.

now personally i would prefer that every child had an equal chance at a good education. but it seems that like so many other things, having the government in complete charge actually screws things up .

and then you have what is likely the most socialist thing you can have, which is welfare. and personally i think such a safety net is needed. unfortunately it seems many people who really need such help can't get it. while many of those on it, really shouldn't be on it. but even worse is that it actually creates dependence. it really is like feeding wild animals. where doing so actually is destructive to the animals as they become dependant on that food and loose the ability to fend for themselves. we have families that have been on welfare for GENERATIONS. it is not what it should be a helping hand in times of need. or when a person is really unable, or unsuitable to work. it has become a way of life. i remember a friend telling me about how pissed off they were when they went to dinner at an old friend's house. her teenage son came in and asked to bum a cigarette. instead of telling him to get a job, she instead told him to go get his own welfare. that shows the mentality of those on it. there is no real incentive to better themselves, or to actually work. it's really not helping the people in the end, it's just building a dependence on that welfare, and making them so dependant on it, they are unable to live without it.

and sadly it's the same for similar types of help. i know several people who have been involved in children's homes in poorer countries. and even that causes dependence. even years later the "kids" keep coming back asking for handouts. and most of them can't seem to get or hold onto jobs better than pedicab drivers. even though they were given a good education, and even paid for higher education, or trades. there are only a few that have actually become successful in life and holding decent jobs. for most it's coming back time and time again, all sob stories and wanting handouts. my father even payed tuition and an allowance for food and such for a college student. they graduated last year. and it has been a constant begging for money ever since. even though they have a job. now admittedly it's not the best paying job in the world. yet many raise families on the same pay. but ever since graduation it's been one long sob story about how they can't afford food or even soap. just last week it was "i'm suicidal, i need help. why won't you give me the money i need" (the truth is he doesn't have the money to give).

it seems giving help with nothing asked for it in return is actually damaging those you are trying to help. so is this socialism helping, or is it actually causing harm? making it impossible for them to live without that help. the question is how can you help people without building that damaging dependence? making them do work, in exchange for that help seems like a form of slavery. but how else can you stop that building of dependence?

will in fact expanding socialism to things like higher education and socialized medical care be bad for the country? making bad situations even worse? and i'm not even talking about the costs involved. but the unintentional issues such things can and likely will cause?

and lets face it cost is just another issue on top of anything else. i not too long ago was in a discussion about what it would cost to give free higher education "too all". and one of the points i made was that not just the cost, but how would colleges and universities even handle the numbers of people? since not only would it be those graduating from high school that would be seeking that education. in numbers much more than has been the case. but also all those who never had the opportunity to go. and even those who want to change their education since what they took before is not helping them. the reply was that not everyone would of course be able to get that higher education. that it would only be available for those who "deserved it". now how can that be? if it's tax paid, and as the proponents of it like to say it's a human right. how can not everyone go?

but even worse than that situation is what happens when everyone has the chance for higher education? in the end it makes higher education worthless. lets face it most jobs do not even need such an education. but i can tell you from living in a country that has a lot of people with higher education compared to available jobs, what happens. it becomes necessary to have a higher education FOR EVERY JOB. and yes, that would include flipping burgers a t McDonalds. i wish i could find a picture i took a few years ago of a gas station company help wanted sign. it had three positions listed. pump attendant (and it's still all full service, wash the windows and check the oil and such as well as pumping gas), college graduate preferred, but at least some college education. truck driver. college degree needed. cashier college degree needed, preferred accounting or business degree. i have seen similar signs everywhere. like at a grocery store cashiers and sales floor help, college degree needed. bagger at least some college education. in the end it would be spending a lot of money for nothing. in fact the real issue of the expense of higher education in the first place is actually DUE to socialization, from those easy to get, pretty much everyone can get student loans. fix the problem of the out of control costs of that education would be a far better solution than just throwing more tax money at it.

or how about socialized medical care. it would just be like many places with socialized medical care. a lot of tax expense for bad medical care, like i n Canada. constantly cutting back covered thing because of a lack of money. and long waits to get needed help. "short cuts" in care by using expensive medication instead of real medical help. the truth is that the real problem with medical care is medical insurance, and places with socialized medical care. Trump is right. they need to deal with the COSTS of medical care, which is the real problem. not just start paying for it with tax money.

in the end it seems that socialization can be a big part of the problems that the country, in fact that most western countries face with such things. and lets not forget about some of the favorite Scandinavian countries they like to use as great examples of how easy and better it is by providing free healthcare and free higher education. places that have tax rates like 50% income tax, plus another 25% sales tax on top of that.

a reply to: generik

Collectivism puts decisions in the hands of the few. That is hardly an idea without profound risks.

Moreover, when you socialize medicine or education, you're effectively limiting supply. Demand doesn't generally diminish. What that does is create an even bigger disaster than the one they're designed to fix.

No, socialism is not a good thing.

It inhibits excellence and ensures shared misery.

IMO, no. However, if you can provide one single success story, that is more than 30 - 40 years running, I might reconsider my position.

Oh, and scandanavian countries are not true socialist nations anymore....so they do not count.

Nope. The UK had to cancel 50,000 surgeries back in January of last year.

originally posted by: Krakatoa
IMO, no. However, if you can provide one single success story, that is more than 30 - 40 years running, I might reconsider my position.

Oh, and scandanavian countries are not true socialist nations anymore....so they do not count.

This.

I'd just say show where socialism has worked without capital from outside the system.

a reply to: generik

Is Socialism a Good Thing?

Of course it is when large corporations get taxpayer money when they are to big to fail, or when very profitable oil companies still get subsidies, or when research think tanks get taxpayer money to conduct BS research studies.
The above is where all the money should go, not to poor shlubs working 2 jobs just to make ends meet. Chumps!!

Socialism for the rich....and cut their taxes so it will trickle down.


medium.com...

a reply to: generik

the fact is that education in the US, seems to be a giant failure. kids graduating high school who can't even read

Up until about a month ago I would have thought of this as an exaggeration. Unfortunately, about a month ago I came in contact with a young lady that was 19 years old and a high school graduate. She could not read. She understood some basics and texting, but she could not read the documents that I needed her to read.

She could not read cursive at all, and made me feel a bit ancient when she said, "I didn't know anyone still wrote like that."

It is sad that our children have all the knowledge in the world at their fingertips and yet so many are so illiterate.

originally posted by: olaru12
a reply to: generik

Is Socialism a Good Thing?

Of course it is when large corporations get taxpayer money when they are to big to fail, or when very profitable oil companies still get subsidies, or when research think tanks get taxpayer money to conduct BS research studies.
The above is where all the money should go, not to poor shlubs working 2 jobs just to make ends meet. Chumps!!

Socialism for the rich....and cut their taxes so it will trickle down.


medium.com...

A quote from a rather famous socialist...

"We are socialists, we are enemies of today's capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions." -- Adolf Hitler

a reply to: DBCowboy

The champions of socialism call themselves progressives, but they recommend a system which is characterized by rigid observance of routine and by a resistance to every kind of improvement. They call themselves liberals, but they are intent upon abolishing liberty. They call themselves democrats, but they yearn for dictatorship. They call themselves revolutionaries, but they want to make the government omnipotent. They promise the blessings of the Garden of Eden, but they plan to transform the world into a gigantic post office." -- Ludwig von Mises

Everything you need to know about socialism in 20 quotes

I'll vote NO to socialism while I still have a vote that counts, TYVM....

Because the first time we vote in a Democratic Socialist as a President will be our last election.

originally posted by: Krakatoa
IMO, no. However, if you can provide one single success story, that is more than 30 - 40 years running, I might reconsider my position.

Oh, and scandanavian countries are not true socialist nations anymore....so they do not count.

They are social democracies which have things like well funded healthcare, education and social safety nets.

The things talked about in the OP.

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Krakatoa
IMO, no. However, if you can provide one single success story, that is more than 30 - 40 years running, I might reconsider my position.

Oh, and scandanavian countries are not true socialist nations anymore....so they do not count.

They are social democracies which have things like well funded healthcare, education and social safety nets.

The things talked about in the OP.

They also have very rigid immigration policies, an insane tax rate and are mostly white.

Want to play again?

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Krakatoa
IMO, no. However, if you can provide one single success story, that is more than 30 - 40 years running, I might reconsider my position.

Oh, and scandanavian countries are not true socialist nations anymore....so they do not count.

They are social democracies which have things like well funded healthcare, education and social safety nets.

The things talked about in the OP.

They also have very rigid immigration policies, an insane tax rate and are mostly white.

Want to play again?

Which has nothing to do with anything mentioned in the OP.

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Krakatoa
IMO, no. However, if you can provide one single success story, that is more than 30 - 40 years running, I might reconsider my position.

Oh, and scandanavian countries are not true socialist nations anymore....so they do not count.

They are social democracies which have things like well funded healthcare, education and social safety nets.

The things talked about in the OP.

They also have very rigid immigration policies, an insane tax rate and are mostly white.

Want to play again?

Which has nothing to do with anything mentioned in the OP.

Which is why DB brought up that they shouldn't be used as examples.

Norway or Sweden is not the USA.

Technically in Socialist-Speak they are white supremacist countries...

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Krakatoa
IMO, no. However, if you can provide one single success story, that is more than 30 - 40 years running, I might reconsider my position.

Oh, and scandanavian countries are not true socialist nations anymore....so they do not count.

They are social democracies which have things like well funded healthcare, education and social safety nets.

The things talked about in the OP.

They also have very rigid immigration policies, an insane tax rate and are mostly white.

Want to play again?

Which has nothing to do with anything mentioned in the OP.

Which is why DB brought up that they shouldn't be used as examples.

Norway or Sweden is not the USA.

Technically in Socialist-Speak they are white supremacist countries...

Ok. Let me know If you are planning on posting anything sensible.

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Krakatoa
IMO, no. However, if you can provide one single success story, that is more than 30 - 40 years running, I might reconsider my position.

Oh, and scandanavian countries are not true socialist nations anymore....so they do not count.

They are social democracies which have things like well funded healthcare, education and social safety nets.

The things talked about in the OP.

They also have very rigid immigration policies, an insane tax rate and are mostly white.

Want to play again?

Which has nothing to do with anything mentioned in the OP.

Which is why DB brought up that they shouldn't be used as examples.

Norway or Sweden is not the USA.

Technically in Socialist-Speak they are white supremacist countries...

Ok. Let me know If you are planning on posting anything sensible.

Norway is 97% white.

No diversity there at all...

So it would be odd if a socialist wants to use Norway as an example of how socialism would work in America.

Unless they are literally Hitler...

a reply to: ScepticScot

They also have confiscatory tax rates and VATs.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: ScepticScot

They also have confiscatory tax rates and VATs.

What are the taxes and VAT in the US?
And how big a % of the salary is eaten by tax, VAT and insurance?

In Norway the average incometax is around 30% and VAT on most products is 25%.
Cars (ICE-engines), petrol, booze/beer and cigarettes are very expensive.

I live a good life with these "Draconian" taxes. Education was free, no studentloan to repay.
Healthcare is basicly free of charge. I wont get ruined if I get cancer or serious injuries.
I can afford to buy what I want within reason (Cant afford a Ferrari sadly), travel where I want.

Norway is not 100% socialist. That wouldnt work. But neither would absolute capitalism.

Look up the Pareto Principle.

Then look up the empirical evidence on dynamic hierarchical structures in nature (to include human hierarchical structures and why they exist).

Then read Adam Smith's "Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations".

Look up the term "Hierarchy of competence".

The read the Wikipedia page on Socialism.

Then read the Wikipedia page on The Nordic Model or the page on Welfarism

THEN come back here and tell us whether you think what your post described is socialism or welfarism. Once you have made the correct determination, come back and tell us all whether what you advocate for is actually socialism or not, and then maybe you can answer the question as to whether socialism is "good" or not.

a reply to: generik

If you like starving it's really bitch'n.