Is becoming a Socialist country all that bad?

[Elgama]

You didn't lose very much.

But somebody else had to pay for all those perks. Whether they should have been forced to do so on penalty of imprisonment, is my major beef with socialism.

Of course they did my Father, Husband, Grandfathers and when I work me pay for it, that is why we have tax and national insurance, because everyone pays it its not noticed when it goes. There aren't many countries that don't have compulsory taxation of some sort at least this way I get out from what I put in.

As for utility companies: too often, deregulation/privatization seems to lead to the substitution of private monopolies for public ones. If forced to choose, I'd say a public monopoly (i.e.--egads!--bureaucratic socialism) is preferable. But I still maintain that a truly free and open market is superior to both. While I don't know the specific situation in your neck of the woods, I will venture to guess that you'd be getting much better service if your phone, electricity, and/or water companies genuinely feared losing your (or your city's) business.

We got better service before the monopolies ended and this evidenced by the fact those companies still provide by far the best customer service which is why a lot of people having tried other utility companies go back to good service as soon as they hit a problem. We have clean water, beaches and our water companies are still working hard to make the waterways less polluted. Or are you trying to say the US has a truly free and fair market in the last 100 years?

-Charley

[Elgama]

Im sorry but what in the heck are you even talking about. people see freedom in so many different ways and usually it has to do with just them.

you are the one that said living in a more socialist country meant freedoms were sacrificed, so I am just wondering what freedoms people living the UK sacrifice?

-Charley

[jolee65]

Nope wouldnt be me. are you really thinking a socialist country would be best???

are you currently living in the state.

Edited February 27, 2009 by jolee65

[Just_A_Guy]

Of course they did my Father, Husband, Grandfathers and when I work me pay for it, that is why we have tax and national insurance, because everyone pays it its not noticed when it goes. There aren't many countries that don't have compulsory taxation of some sort at least this way I get out from what I put in.

Here's the deal, though. Assuming you really did put into the system exactly what you took out; then you could have (in the US) established a Health Savings Account in the meantime, pulled the money when you needed it, and collected interest in the meantime.

At best, you've lost the interest you could have made. (Actually, at best, you've erred in your calculations and you really did get back more than you put in. But there, again, the net result is that someone else got hosed.) At worst, you got less back than you put into the system.

We got better service before the monopolies ended and this evidenced by the fact those companies still provide by far the best customer service which is why a lot of people having tried other utility companies go back to good service as soon as they hit a problem. We have clean water, beaches and our water companies are still working hard to make the waterways less polluted

I'm confused. You say "we got better service before the monopolies ended" and then act as though those companies still exist. Assuming that the original company still exists among new competitors and is still giving better service than those new competitors--you assume that this will always be so. It won't. The competitors will adapt their service, or they will die. You also assume that the newcomers have the same access to regulators, suppliers, permits and property easements, labor, etc. that the old former monopolies do. To the extent that the old government monopolies weren't stripped of all their government-provided advantages--well, that's not really a free market at all!

Or are you trying to say the US has a truly free and fair market in the last 100 years?

Good heavens, that's a broad question! But I would say that the answer generally is, "not as free/fair as is commonly assumed".

Take, for example, the US health care industry. It's often highlighted as an example of the problems of the free market, but it's not a free market at all! A friend of mine recently tried to get an advance quote on how much a particular procedure would cost him--and ran into a cat's cradle of secrecy and sweetheart-deals between providers and HMO's. The one institution that quoted him a price (and the institution where he had the procedure done) later billed him an amount far in excess of the original price quoted.

The engine that drives a free market is informed consumers making rational choices about their expenditures. I could get behind legislation that safeguards the consumer's ability to make rational choices by ensuring the free flow of accurate information and attacking collusion by the suppliers of goods and services. Beyond that (and basic welfare so that people aren't starving to death in the streets), I'm suspicious.

(Incidentally, Mike Leavitt implemented a pilot program in HUD that would have made it easier to get advance quotes on the cost of health care services. It was recently killed by a joint effort of Congress--the Repubs were in the pocket of HMO lobbyists who wanted to preserve the status quo; and the Dems didn't want market-based health care reform to work.)

[Elgama]

Nope wouldnt be me. are you really thinking a socialist country would be best???

I think the US could do with some social reforms yes. I think the healthcare is awful what I have experienced of it, in my in Laws case I think its ridiculously overpriced for what they receive. I would like my own country to go back to the time when students were valued, and they do not need to leave university heavily in debt. When my older brother went he had a grant to live off and his fee's paid, alongside his job, when I went a little bit of debt was expected now people leave in £10,000s of debt which is for me not right. Whilst a full blown communist country is not the ideal a government should be there to take care of its people, if they take my taxes I like to see what I am getting and I do, we have great roads, good public transport, play parks every 1/2 mile for children under 5 and every mile or so for children over 5 in towns.

When my Grandfather and many others went off to WW2 this is what they wanted when they came back, the men that gave their lives saw welfare reform as a form of freedom. And in my country it certainly has been, as the welfare state is eroded by more conservative ideals people have become less free.

-Charley

[Elgama]

Here's the deal, though. Assuming you really did put into the system exactly what you took out; then you could have (in the US) established a Health Savings Account in the meantime, pulled the money when you needed it, and collected interest in the meantime.

given the banks should have gone bankrupt without being nationalised - I'd have only received at most £35,000 back does not cover even close to what my Grandparents, Parents etc have paid in taxes.

In my own case I needed the money before I started paying the taxes as my illness hit at university 3 days before coming off my parents private health insurance. No new health insurance here or possibly in the US would have taken me on.

And there are times when people who need it get more than they pay in, its how it gets paid for and I can walk into a hospital and expect treatment.

-Charley

[Just_A_Guy]

as the welfare state is eroded by more conservative ideals people have become less free.

Security--even economic security--is not freedom.

EDIT: Just saw your most recent post; I respond to it below.

given the banks should have gone bankrupt without being nationalised - I'd have only received at most £35,000 back does not cover even close to what my Grandparents, Parents etc have paid in taxes.

You seem to believe that your grandparents and parents never got anything back for their taxes. Even if that were true--how many living descendants of your grandparents are there, currently?

Even if I subscribed to your idea of generational entitlement, I would wager that you aren't owed as much as you seem to believe you are owed.

In my own case I needed the money before I started paying the taxes as my illness hit at university 3 days before coming off my parents private health insurance.

For which you could have taken a loan, and paid it off later using the taxes you otherwise would have paid to the government. (Believe it or not, a government that isn't providing health care doesn't have to charge such high taxes.)

And there are times when people who need it get more than they pay in, its how it gets paid for and I can walk into a hospital and expect treatment.

Exactly. Subsidized by someone who was forced to part with their hard-earned money on pain of imprisonment. I don't find that acceptable--at least, not where non-essential treatment is concerned.

Edited February 27, 2009 by Just_A_Guy

[jolee65]

I cant speak for another mans country and whats best for them, maybe that is whats best for you.

My post wasnt to offend even if it seems offensive, we never lived in a socialist country and the type of reform your speaking of concerning our health care i agree that people pay to much our seniors pay the price for that including my grandmother. But it was tested and tried in one of the states and it didnt work ,no one was getting care they were so inadated with people it was taking months for any one person to be seen.

[Elgama]

You seem to believe that your grandparents and parents never got anything back for their taxes. Even if that were true--how many living descendants of your grandparents are there, currently?

They got their pensions but used private healthcare, education systems etc of course they also got roads, police, fire, flushing toilets and parks:) of one set of grandparents there are only currently living - 6 descendants, and of the other 11 - of course within that people pay their own taxes and national insurance. But then you could add in other service they provided etc its all part of the social system

Even if I subscribed to your idea of generational entitlement, I would wager that you aren't owed as much as you seem to believe you are owed.

My grandparents and parents all paid it at the higher rate over a total period of 220 years - makes at even a lower rate of tax in current money a good bit over a million pounds in todays money. So with interest and allowing that they paid at a higher rate would be even more. My grandparents, parents, my husband and myself, pay in to keep ourselves and my families safe. My grandparents before they became exceedingly comfortable came from an incredibly poor background,

For which you could have taken a loan, and paid it off later using the taxes you otherwise would have paid to the government. (Believe it or not, a government that isn't providing health care doesn't have to charge such high taxes.)

Who would have given a loan to someone who might not have made it?? Then I would need health insurance - I can pay our taxes and take out private healthcare insurance for not a huge amount more than my husband's health insurance cost us our first year of marriage. That covers my whole family. If we had, had the wrong health insurance in the US my daughter's early birth may not have been covered (my husband was adopted because his parents could not afford his neonatel care). On top of that my Mother in Law would have paid taxes in the US etc

Exactly. Subsidized by someone who was forced to part with their hard-earned money on pain of imprisonment. I don't find that acceptable--at least, not where non-essential treatment is concerned.

I have no issue whatsoever helping someone out that needs it, just like when I needed it the money was there - I would rather someone who needs the help has it.

-Charley

[Just_A_Guy]

Edit: Previous post deleted. I'm just going to drop it and take a little break. Have a good day, everyone! :)

Edited February 27, 2009 by Just_A_Guy

[a-train]

State Socialism is a system wherein the state takes ownership and control of the means of production. In such a system, the state owns the land, the capital, and the resources utilized in production. The state decides what to produce, how much to produce, how to distribute it, and at what prices if any to do so.

Fascist governments allowed private ownership of the means of production. Private entities were allowed to own the land, the capital, and sometimes the natural resources involved in production. The owner may even have had the ability to choose what he/she produces. However, much of the system was based on government created monopolies. Owners were also responsible for the maintainence of the capital and land. But the state imposed heavy restrictions on production techniques and quantities, distribution, prices, and supply arrangements.

The United States is really moving into fascism more than it is moving into socialism.

Fascism and Socialism are attractive because they promise full employment. They even promise that if full employment cannot be achieved, the unemployed will be taken care of. No socialist or fascist nation has ever achieved full employment. In fact, they have been mired with misdirection of labor. There ARE countries where unemployment does not exist. These are the poorest undeveloped nations on earth. There, people work 12 hour days just to eat. They have plenty of employment opportunities. Employment is not relevant. Production is the issue. Free-market capitalism increases production and raises the standard of living. Our departure from it has lowered the standard of living in the United States.

The trouble with both fascist and socialist systems is the politicization of the economy. A business doesn't profit from pleasing consumers anymore, it does so by getting the better benefits from government legislation.

A paradoxical example is the auto industry. Obama's campaign included a commitment to put 1 million plug-in hybrid vehicles on the road by 2015. I don't know if he realized that Toyota already has a factory under construction in Blue Springs, Mississippi aimed at cranking out 750,000 plug-in Prius vehicles for the U.S. market by 2015. Toyota was greatly induced to do this by the flight to such vehicles by American consumers because of rising gas prices. Toyota was not doing this with government funds or assistance.

Today, because of economic problems caused by our money monopoly (the FED), Toyota has put this project (already under construction) on hold indefinitely. Meanwhile our Congress is using tax dollars to support GM, which has no plug-in hybrid at all. They only have the Volt which is just about back to the drawing board at this point due to cost-prohibitive issues.

The reason for this paradox is politics. The market has been telling us for years now that GM is not feasible. But, the politically connected don't need market feasibility to survive, just government assistance. Today GM needs another 16 billion tax dollars just to make it to the end of the month.

On monopolies: when deregulation of telephone services hit my area, my business's phone bill dropped 65%. It did so because we switched to a new service provider in the market. We saw no difference whatsoever in the service we were provided. After some time, Bell dropped their prices so low that we switched back. Today we have the lowest phone prices we have ever had, especially when we account for inflation.

Take a look at the mobile phone industry. That highly competitive industry offers services not available whatsoever a decade ago and at a price much lower than a decade ago. When I got my first mobile phone in 1999, I paid just over $100 a month and had a basic phone. Today I pay just $14 a month more for two phones; my wife and I each have phones with so many capabilities I don't even care to use them all.

Think about why GM is in so much trouble: competition. Imagine that our government simply did not allow Toyota to compete with GM at all. We would not even have the Prius. We would not have the Camry (the most American made vehicle you can buy).

I find it hilarious that often the people screaming 'antitrust!' the loudest also PROMOTE government monopolies. What is their real problem? Pride. They don't want any Americans to be rich. In their view, everyone should be just as poor. They don't understand that real free-market capitalism is the only reason they have a fridge, a dish-washer, a cell-phone, a computer, a car, or virtually any of the luxuries they have today.

Can you name some of the innovations which have changed our lives and the world which came from a socialist bureaucracy? What great inventions from the Soviet Union do you have the privilege of enhancing your life with today? How about fascist Italy? Perhaps we can at least drink some Tang and thank the Space Race for it with every delicious taste.

The freedom that free-market capitalists push for is the freedom to buy, to own, to create, to innovate, to produce, to sell, and to capitalize whatever the individual sees fit to. Under this system, all transactions are based on mutually agreed upon terms. Nobody is forced, every individual can 'just say no'.

A state socialist or fascist system tramples that freedom. Individuals are not allowed to 'just say no'. They are compelled by the threat of loss of property or even prison. They are compelled to buy certain things. They are compelled to buy them at specified prices and/or in specified quantities. They are prevented from free production. They are compelled to centrally planned production.

Keep America free. Let our grandchildren and great-grandchildren be free from fascism and socialism. Let them also take advantage of innovations our generation is capable of producing, just as we received so much from our grandparents and great-grandparents.

-a-train

Edited February 28, 2009 by a-train

[prospectmom]

your post was perfect..... thank you

[Moksha]

and some could flee the country and drive to Canada.....:)

As an alternative to Missouri? Have you received an updated tactical bulletin or something?

[jadams_4040]

I wonder why Obama says the worst since the Depression.....when Reagan took office unemployment was higher than it is today...of course I know Obama can't knock one from his own Party..

Another thing and this is personal....I work at a RV Dealership in St Louis...we had a RV Show this past weekend at the Edward Jones Dome. Our dealership sold 40 new units at that show....our sister Dealership sold 45 new units.

Those statements of fact did not come from obama; he is quoteing what every econimist and historian knows to be true; this is the worst since the great depression and lets hope it doesnt get worse than the great depesssion before its over; and in regards to yer statement on "R,V vehicles; thats great. really great the rich are still rich; what about the rest of us?:)

[skalenfehl]

I have to get this off my chest. Everybody agrees that the economy of the USA is in a mess and that it has affected the entire world. I understand that some very stupid things were done. I do not agree that the money just disappeared into thin air. But that is not the point I want to make with this post.

This is my point. The USA is the world’s largest and most successful capitalist country and our economy is in a horrible mess. According to president Obama it is the worse it has been since the great depression. This is despite the fact that it is a capitalist economy. So we are going to have to borrow some money – lots of money. But with the world economy in shambles where do we go to get money – who has the cash to purchase our debt? Would you believe China? The world’s largest socialist country is the most economical stable country to be able to buy our debt.

If socialism is so rotten – how come China is in the best position during these hard times to purchase our debt - with CASH?

The Traveler

I'd rather not have an oppressive government dictate such policies as how many children I can have and impose a fine, should I choose to have another. It is not capitalism or socialism that fails, but rather the greed and/or sloth on both ends of the spectrum that fails. As Winston Churchill said once, “The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries.” I don't believe for a second that a socialist or communist country is the right answer. The great thing China has going for it, in my opinion, is it has a sucker for a borrower (USA). Just like the poor Joe who's in debt to the fat cat bankers, so is the USA in debt to China. China has it made in the shade. I call that capitalistic. Not too shabby for a socialist country!

[a-train]

Those statements of fact did not come from obama; he is quoteing what every econimist and historian knows to be true; this is the worst since the great depression and lets hope it doesnt get worse than the great depesssion before its over; and in regards to yer statement on "R,V vehicles; thats great. really great the rich are still rich; what about the rest of us?:)

Unfortunately, unemployment of labor is going to go much higher. The bailouts will do far more harm than good. The stimulus plans will help to wipe out our purchasing power. The only good news is that Americans will be working for such low international prices that our labor will at last be wage competitive with China and we can expect our exports to increase. This however will be very difficult and painful because of our under-capitalization.

What should we as individuals and families be doing about all this? Food storage, savings, education, spiritual, mental, and physical nourishment, the same things the prophets have counseled us from the beginning.

-a-train

[Elphaba]

I am about to post my address here.

For all of you who are so adamantly against the stimulus, how about you send your pittance my way? I'll go to a shoe store and put it back into the economy immediately.

Or maybe I'll buy some food for the local shelter.

PM me. I'm not too shy to beg.

Elphaba

[Palerider]

I am about to post my address here.

For all of you who are so adamantly against the stimulus, how about you send your pittance my way? I'll go to a shoe store and put it back into the economy immediately.

Or maybe I'll buy some food for the local shelter.

PM me. I'm not too shy to beg.

Elphaba

just like your Bush tax check you sent me ......

[Elphaba]

we never lived in a socialist country and the type of reform your speaking of concerning our health care i agree that people pay to much our seniors pay the price for that including my grandmother. But it was tested and tried in one of the states and it didnt work ,no one was getting care they were so inadated with people it was taking months for any one person to be seen.

What state and when?

Elphaba

[Elphaba]

just like your Bush tax check you sent me ......

Nope. I never got it.

2089 North . . .

Elph

[Palerider]

thats the way that type of healthcare will work here....anytime the Gov't is involved....it will be a fine oiled machine.....

[bytor2112]

Those statements of fact did not come from obama; he is quoteing what every econimist and historian knows to be true; this is the worst since the great depression and lets hope it doesnt get worse than the great depesssion before its over; and in regards to yer statement on "R,V vehicles; thats great. really great the rich are still rich; what about the rest of us?:)

The statements aren't fact........did you actually live through the 70's, during Carter's years? And for the record, things aren't that bad now. We have just become a country of very soft, whiny people that feel entitled to everything and that have been sold a bill of goods.....that they are victims that can only be saved by Uncle Sam.

Your comment about the rich is a classic example. Do you suppose that the so-called rich might have worked very hard to become that way? That maybe......very likely, that they actually help keep this economy afloat by creating jobs because they got "rich" by creating businesses. Class envy is an ugly thing.

What about the rest of us???? What does that mean? This is America, the land of opportunity. Maybe you should try taking advantage of the incredible blessing you received when you were born in this country and work to make your life better, instead of complaining about others when they do.

[Elphaba]

The statements aren't fact........did you actually live through the 70's, during Carter's years? And for the record, things aren't that bad now. We have just become a country of very soft, whiny people that feel entitled to everything and that have been sold a bill of goods.....that they are victims that can only be saved by Uncle Sam.

Your comment about the rich is a classic example. Do you suppose that the so-called rich might have worked very hard to become that way? That maybe......very likely, that they actually help keep this economy afloat by creating jobs because they got "rich" by creating businesses. Class envy is an ugly thing.

What about the rest of us???? What does that mean? This is America, the land of opportunity. Maybe you should try taking advantage of the incredible blessing you received when you were born in this country and work to make your life better, instead of complaining about others when they do.

Maybe you should take some xanax and call us in the morning.

Elph

[Palerider]

Those statements of fact did not come from obama; he is quoteing what every econimist and historian knows to be true; this is the worst since the great depression and lets hope it doesnt get worse than the great depesssion before its over; and in regards to yer statement on "R,V vehicles; thats great. really great the rich are still rich; what about the rest of us?:)

knows to be true,.....they don't want to say since Reagan took office...it would make their boy Carter look bad....you never talk bad about one from your party....just my opinion

[Gjh1960]

China changed its approach to economy considerably some years ago. Their political system may still be labeled socialism, but their actual economy is definitely capitalistic. They're practicing kind of hardcore capitalism in many areas of the country and that's where their money is from. I've always considered this change as perfect proof that their initial socialistic approach to economy failed. It's now up to us to proof that our western approach to economy does not fail either.