LDS Socialism

[threepercent]

Again to cite a few:

"You would have classes established here, some very poor and some very rich. Now, the Lord is not going to have anything of that kind. There has to be an equality; and we have to observe these principles that are designed to give every one the privilege of gathering around him the comforts and conveniences of life.” Lorenzo Snow (Journal of Discourses 19:349)

"It is not given that one man should possess that which is above another" (Doctrine and Covenants 49:20).

"Appoint unto this people their portions, every man equal according to his family, according to his circumstances and his wants and needs" (Doctrine and Covenants 51:3).

And behold, thou wilt remember the poor, and consecrate of thy properties for their support that which thou hast to impart unto them, with a covenant and a deed which cannot be broken. (D&C 42:30)

Therefore, if any man shall take of the abundance which I have made, and impart not his portion, according to the law of my gospel, unto the poor and the needy, he shall, with the wicked, lift up his eyes in hell, being in torment. (D&C 104:18)

Wo unto you rich men, that will not give your substance to the poor, for your riches will canker your souls; and this shall be your lamentation in the day of visitation, and of judgment, and of indignation: The harvest is past, the summer is ended, and my soul is not saved! (D&C 56:16)

how in the world do you take these statements as justification for socialism?

how do you instigate socialism without theft? HOW?

tell me how do you retain property rights under socialism?

[drjme]

I was pointing out that at the beginning of the Russian Revolution many people widely supported it. Even high officials in the LDS church, so claiming the Civil Rights Movement was funded and connected to Communist Russia because one member provided some funds to the Russian Revolution of 1917 is absurd.

As I said he is the only one I have looked into so far, You asked me for 'any' evidence and I provided you with some. I can get more for you if you want me to, But I would hope you would investigate things a bit more to see another side of the story.

So this thread has evolved into attacking the Civil Rights Movement as a Russian funded subversion in the United States? Wow. At least you guys are showing your true colors.

I'm 'coloured' and no, I'm not a racist.

"You would have classes established here, some very poor and some very rich. Now, the Lord is not going to have anything of that kind. There has to be an equality; and we have to observe these principles that are designed to give every one the privilege of gathering around him the comforts and conveniences of life.” Lorenzo Snow (Journal of Discourses 19:349)

"It is not given that one man should possess that which is above another" (Doctrine and Covenants 49:20).

"Appoint unto this people their portions, every man equal according to his family, according to his circumstances and his wants and needs" (Doctrine and Covenants 51:3).

And behold, thou wilt remember the poor, and consecrate of thy properties for their support that which thou hast to impart unto them, with a covenant and a deed which cannot be broken. (D&C 42:30)

Therefore, if any man shall take of the abundance which I have made, and impart not his portion, according to the law of my gospel, unto the poor and the needy, he shall, with the wicked, lift up his eyes in hell, being in torment. (D&C 104:18)

Wo unto you rich men, that will not give your substance to the poor, for your riches will canker your souls; and this shall be your lamentation in the day of visitation, and of judgment, and of indignation: The harvest is past, the summer is ended, and my soul is not saved! (D&C 56:16)

Do you give all of your excess to the government to redistribute it to those in need? or would you rather give it yourself by choice(Charity with Christlike love) to people in need? Will you give all away so that you do not 'possess that which is above another' Or would you rather take of someone else's excess that is rightfully theirs and give it to someone who may or may not need it? These scriptures talk of giving freely, utilising your agency to help others, not being forced to give.

The acid of boiling intolerance which Marx frequently poured down on the heads of his followers may be partially explained by his own complete certainty that the theories he had concocted were infallible gems of cosmic truth. In his heyday of abounding strength Marx often bowled over his opposition with mountain-moving declarations of supreme self-confidence:

"Historical evolution is on your side," he shouted to his followers. "Capitalism, brought into being by the laws of historical evolution, will be destroyed by the inexorable working of these same laws. The bourgeoisie, the business manager of the capitalist system, appeared on the stage of history with that system, and must make its exit when that system walks off the stage. You, proletarians, keep capitalism going by your labour, and maintain the whole of bourgeois society by the fruits of your industry. But socialism will be a necessary organic outcome of capitalism, the essence of the latter being implied in the essence of the former. With the end of capitalism, comes the beginning of socialism as a logical consequence. You proletarians, as a class, being the incorporators of the forces and tendencies which will do away with capitalism, must necessarily make an end of the bourgeoisie. You merely need, as a class, to fulfill the evolution which your mission calls on you to fulfill. All you need is to will! History makes this as easy as possible for you. You need not hatch out any new ideas, make any plans, discover a future State. You need not 'dogmatically anticipate the world.' You need merely put your hands to the task which is awaiting you. The means by which you will do it are to be found in the unceasing, purposive, consistent fighting of the class struggle, whose crown will be the victory of the social revolution."

[Elgama]

And yet in the UK he's considered to be right of center (but then again they have already swallowed the heavy tax burden of a lot of socialism including socialized medicine so maybe in that context it's easy to seem "right of center."

he is considered to be right of centre despite the party he used to lead supposedly being left wing, prior to his reincarnation he claimed to be a proper socialist when he first joined the party -My experience in the US with your healthcare is you get far less for a lot more, when I describe the experiences to people in most European countries they are shocked - I mean who has to pay for an ambulance, when I chat to people in the chatroom and they are wondering if they can afford an ambulance for something potentially serious I can't help but feel as I would for someone in a much less developed country???? not me I just phone 999 and they come. The tax burden of socialized medicine is not so great I totalled it from my husbands recent pay check and our National Insurance comes to much, much less than our Health Insurance in the US for JUST my husband was costing us in the first couple of years of our marriage - and I don't have to find any money to go to the Doctor, my children get glasses we don't need to pay for, dental and other checks. My current ear infection is being treated at no extra expense -if we wanted Private family Health Insurance it doesn't cost as much because our private health care is supplemented by the NHS, it comes to less to cover my family with both NHS and Private Healthcare than the equivelent in the US and what I get by way of Private Healthcare is fabulous the hospitals are much more like a hotel with private rooms, proper TV etc This is much better than what my Father in Law got for his very expensive health insurance in UCLA. In fact I thought NHS hospitals were shocking until I visited UCLA, the only thing was the canteen was better but the food the patients got was just as bad if not worse than anything in an NHS hospital, which is at least attempting to improve the food and in many cases has much more excuse as the hospitals are usually much older.

Public money also provides proper hospice and palliative care something sadly lacking in the LA area within what my Mother in Law could afford, which ment my Father in Law who had served his country for many years died in an uncomfortable dirty hospital. My maternity care is considerably better than that my Sister in Law gets for her very expensive insurance, I got more scans, and a birthing pool!!! also my Doctors were much more enlightened we only see them if something goes wrong we have highly trained midwives that are fantastic, the care my Sister in Law has got with her 3 pregnancies would be what someone in a bad area here would get for much less money. If I had been in the US its unlikely my daughter and I would have made it alive from my first pregnancy as no way would I have been able to visit the Doctor in our situation for just a swollen face. And according to my modern US pregnancy book some health insurances won't cover babies born before 35 weeks - my daughter would have either died, both of us would have had to have taken unecessary risks or I could have done what my husbands parents did 25 years previous and adopt her - I got to keep my daughter and both of us received amazing care.

On a purely financial basis your system is a complete crock in comparison - and people don't get treated until it is too late - my good friend from school and my husbands best friend had daughters at the same time with the same condition - my friends daughter was treated in the womb by key hole surgery and is now fine, my husbands friend had to take a lower paying job with better health insurance and his daughter had to wait until she was born, she now has complications - this has prevented my husbands friend from getting better jobs and moving on, whereas my friend has improved his general position in life.

As a Brit I am continually shocked by the poverty I see in the US. I don't understand a wealthy nation who lets its people suffer that way, that doesn't do its best to care for everyone. If I include your Health Insurance as a tax we pay much less for a lot more back. I just don't understand why Americans choose such a grotty standard of living in comparison to countries in Europe

-Charley

[why me]

I have been a socialist since I was 16 years old and that was many years ago. Socialism, especially from a Marxist-Humanist position centers political and economic thought in the early Marx. Marx hit the nail on the head with his theory of alienation. I would recommend the posters to research his theory. One can also go to Marxists Internet Archive for more information about socialist thought. Socialism is very diversified as an ideology. Also, there is a mormon organization that dabbles in socialist thinking. It is made up of active lds who believe in social justice and social equality. You can find it here:

Mormons for Equality and Social Justice

As a young teenager I came to an awareness that capitalism in its raw form is unjust. It also caters to the the more negative aspects of human nature. Socialism, on the other hand, attempts to bring out the more nurturing aspects of human nature through collective thought and action. The goal is a more human centered life world.

[Guest Malcolm]

Well my friends, I keep trying to make a point and nobody seem interested in addressing it. it is the fact ALL those groups that spend time toying with the Socialist ideals and reading obsolete workers movement theory do not really understand the subject matter.

The gap between the theoretical framework and the practical application of the doctrine can not be bridged!! Again, 80 years of Communism and 50 million people dead later we stare at the evidence; the doctrine did not work. From the beginning it never delivered. Egalitarian societies do not exist. In EVERY country that tried communism or socialism the experiment failed miserably. It created dictatorships (working class?) that imposed laws and rules by force, fear and so penalty of death. The "ruling working class" abandoned communal living and the sharing of resources and political power as soon as it was practical. Dissent was not tolerated.

They (Marx & Engels) used the framework of the Kingdom of God, removed the King's name and all that pertained to the kingdom itself and called Communism. They sold the idea to the masses and used the same idea to enslaved them for nearly a century. Do not forget that Stalin was born out of that womb.

It is quite naive to theorize and intellectualize about a pseudo-political system while ignoring the real fruits of it in the last 100 years.

[a-train]

"You would have classes established here, some very poor and some very rich. Now, the Lord is not going to have anything of that kind. There has to be an equality; and we have to observe these principles that are designed to give every one the privilege of gathering around him the comforts and conveniences of life.” Lorenzo Snow (Journal of Discourses 19:349)

Hmmm.... There was no mention of socialism in any of the quotes you gave. Perhaps you have something better? Anyways, speaking of putting things in their proper context, I'll just quote President Snow from the exact same talk you quoted:

In things that pertain to celestial glory there can be no forced operations. We must do according as the Spirit of the Lord operates upon our understandings and feelings. We cannot be crowded into matters, however great might be the blessing attending such procedure. We cannot be forced into living a celestial law; we must do this ourselves, of our own free will. And whatever we do in regard to the principles of the United Order, we must do it because we desire to do it.

(emphasis added)

This is the spirit and aim of the United Order, and that we should endeavor to establish. We should employ our surplus means in a manner that the poor can have employment and see before them a competence and the conveniences of life, so that they may not be dependent upon their neighbors. Where is the man who wants to be dependent upon his neighbors or the Tithing Office? No! He is a man, and is the image of God, and wants to gather the means around him, by his own, individual exertions. Blessed of God, are we, who have surplus means, and we should be willing to employ those means whereby such individuals may have, as before mentioned. The United Order is not French Communism. It is not required of those who possess the means of living to expend those means among those who know nothing about taking care of and preserving them.

(emphasis added)

In President Snow's talk, he mentioned the industry in Brigham City and the fact that it was all owned by the people. He never once mentioned a state operated socialist program. The United Order is NOT a socialist program. The state is not involved at all, the participants give willingly to the cause. Do you really think that we could institute the united order through the federal government? Should I stop paying tithing because I pay my social security taxes?

Show me a single quote from a Church leader that says anything about supporting a socialist government to follow the law of concecration. When was the last time you attended the temple? In the endowment, we are told plainly what the law of consecration is, it says nothing about consecrating our posessions to the U.S. government. In fact, the more socialism that is put in place in America, the less we will be able to consecrate to the Church, because our corrupt government would be taking it.

Frankly, the assertion that state socialism is the will of the LORD is unfounded false doctrine. It is satanic and has been demonstrated as such by our church leaders. Don't believe the lies.

-a-train

[gomspal]

O that cunning plan of the evil one! O the vainness, and the frailties, and the foolishness of men! When they are learned they think they are wise, and they hearken not unto the counsel of God, for they set it aside, supposing they know of themselves, wherefore, their wisdom is foolishness and it profiteth them not. And they shall perish.

But to be learned is good IF THEY HEARKEN UNTO THE COUNSELS OF GOD.

[WANDERER]

I don't have a problem with taxation. I give happily and willingly and don't consider it my income.

[Guest Malcolm]

O that cunning plan of the evil one! O the vainness, and the frailties, and the foolishness of men! When they are learned they think they are wise, and they hearken not unto the counsel of God, for they set it aside, supposing they know of themselves, wherefore, their wisdom is foolishness and it profiteth them not. And they shall perish.

But to be learned is good IF THEY HEARKEN UNTO THE COUNSELS OF GOD.

Amen to that!

[Guest Malcolm]

I don't have a problem with taxation. I give happily and willingly and don't consider it my income.

LOL. Well, guess what; I do have problems with taxation. Especially when they take $500K/year from my business and my family and give it to my (wife's) cousin on a $1500/month welfare check, who at 23 has 4 children from 5 different men and has worked but 100 hours in her whole life. I have a real issue with that.

[Elgama]

LOL. Well, guess what; I do have problems with taxation. Especially when they take $500K/year from my business and my family and give it to my (wife's) cousin on a $1500/month welfare check, who at 23 has 4 children from 5 different men and has worked but 100 hours in her whole life. I have a real issue with that.

I'd rather pay my taxes than see the kids starve, my taxes allow those children in my country to receive a good education, be able to go to uni and be well fed and health retained to make that easier (it doesn't always happen like that but everyone has that opportunity) - I had a friend in the US who was as comfortable as yourself called me apostate for being happy at being taxed and held the same views until his business went belly up and he ended up divorced living in a car, his views have since changed radically. Why not pay people who don't work not too then there is more work availible for those that do..

There is no saying what those 4 children will become. I know my friends are unlikely to have made it far in the US looking at what happened to my husbands friends here we all went to university and pay taxes - my own situation was to go from a very very comfortable background until I was 13 to homeless in 2 years - fortunately I live where I do and my 3 periods of being homeless have been sorted quickly. After uni I got ill and was unable to work - I was allowed a house, I was diagnosed 9 days before my 21st birthday which ment I came off my Fathers private Health Insurance and was unlikely to be able to get my own thank goodness for the NHS.

I know my area is particularly good, but I pay for that I have a very high quality of living - good schools, our waiting lists are shorter than elsewhere in the UK, the crime rate is very low - tax wise it takes about half my husbands salary but I have a carer, I can if my condition gets worse get help to get about etc and we have loads of safety nets. Should life go belly up again.

-Charley

[Guest Malcolm]

I'd rather pay my taxes than see the kids starve, my taxes allow those children in my country to receive a good education, be able to go to uni and be well fed and health retained to make that easier (it doesn't always happen like that but everyone has that opportunity) - I had a friend in the US who was as comfortable as yourself called me apostate for being happy at being taxed and held the same views until his business went belly up and he ended up divorced living in a car, his views have since changed radically. Why not pay people who don't work not too then there is more work availible for those that do..

There is no saying what those 4 children will become. I know my friends are unlikely to have made it far in the US looking at what happened to my husbands friends here we all went to university and pay taxes - my own situation was to go from a very very comfortable background until I was 13 to homeless in 2 years - fortunately I live where I do and my 3 periods of being homeless have been sorted quickly. After uni I got ill and was unable to work - I was allowed a house, I was diagnosed 9 days before my 21st birthday which ment I came off my Fathers private Health Insurance and was unlikely to be able to get my own thank goodness for the NHS.

I know my area is particularly good, but I pay for that I have a very high quality of living - good schools, our waiting lists are shorter than elsewhere in the UK, the crime rate is very low - tax wise it takes about half my husbands salary but I have a carer, I can if my condition gets worse get help to get about etc and we have loads of safety nets. Should life go belly up again.

-Charley

My issue are with people that will do nothing for themselves. I am more than willing (and I have several times) to take into my home ANYONE in need. My issue is with people that thru riotous and unrighteous living bring upon themselves all kinds of misery. My issue is with those that think they deserve everything when they have not worked a day in their lives to provide for their own or another in need, with those that have no humility to repent and try to mend their ways.

I have helped in relief efforts in Central and South America for 8 years now since I know the region like few. If there was a flood, a hurricane, a mood slide or a volcanic eruption there I went. I have left my family and my home to contribute in whatever measure I could when need aroused. The group that I work with can land a plane and 600 tons of relief anywhere in the continent within 8 hours.

My issue is with others not those in need because of disease, disaster or disability.

[WANDERER]

The issue isn't other people's morality, only my morality...so I don't have any angst about my taxes. People cheat on the system in a variety of ways: by looking for tax concession loopholes, government funded luxuries and some things that I find immoral for a country to spend money on, and people who are not helping themselves. I don't imagine living on welfare is easy or luxurious. 4 children, 5 different partners...I hear your frustration. But I don't think taking away welfare is going to change people's behaviour and the children are innocent. If God can provide Earth and offer salvation for those that are unrighteous and without merit, I can pay taxes. I am fortunate to be able to do so.

I use roads, rely on police and fire brigades...and I'm not about to secede though some have gone to the lengths of creating their own tax-free republic. $500 000...this currency is manufactured through taxes and has no real value other than systemic.

I understand why people are anti-taxation, it's got it's flaws and it's not wrong to want to improve things. But giving to others ...I just don't comprehend the apostasy in that.

[Still_Small_Voice]

My issue are with people that will do nothing for themselves. I am more than willing (and I have several times) to take into my home ANYONE in need. My issue is with people that thru riotous and unrighteous living bring upon themselves all kinds of misery. My issue is with those that think they deserve everything when they have not worked a day in their lives to provide for their own or another in need, with those that have no humility to repent and try to mend their ways.

Those who have able bodies and are of a sound mind who refuse to work for their own bread are not in the right way.

Doctrine and Covenants Section 68

17 Wo unto you poor men, whose hearts are not broken, whose spirits are not contrite, and whose bellies are not satisfied, and whose hands are not stayed from laying hold upon other men’s goods, whose eyes are full of greediness, and who will not labor with your own hands!

18 But blessed are the poor who are pure in heart, whose hearts are broken, and whose spirits are contrite, for they shall see the kingdom of God coming in power and great glory unto their deliverance; for the fatness of the earth shall be theirs.

[a-train]

I'd rather pay my taxes than see the kids starve

What if it is YOUR kids that are starving? Would you be glad to pay taxes into a socialist system that wasn't feeding your starving children?

Starvation existed in the U.S.S.R., in NAZI Germany, in North Korea. People worked as slaves who weren't allowed to keep the fruits of their own labors while they starved to death. Meanwhile, the elite class lived in luxury without lifting a finger.

In the late 1990's, the U.S. was sending money and food to North Korea to support the victims, but it was either not enough, or it was not used properly. Check out this PBS story from 1997.

The North Korean government took so much money from the people to afford their military spending that the whole economy suffered collapse. No fuel, no food, the people were starving to death in their own homes.

There, the state owns everything, there are no private factories or farms, the whole economy is owned and operated by the state. Imagine if we adopted such a program in the U.S. Imagine we are no longer allowed to save up money and start a business. We are no longer allowed to pay our tithing, provide for our family, give to the support of humanitarian aid. We are at the mercy of the government to take care of these important issues with our money.

Millions of people have come to America to escape the horrible effects of socialism. What people need to understand is that problems such as unemployment, monopolies, business cycles, and those things supposed to be the horrors of capitalism come only with the involvement of the state.

It is not the right to property that causes these troubles, but it is the refusal of government to respect that right that brings all the trouble. Neither a democratic majority, nor a dictator can control and operate the economy or any specific industry without violating property rights, nor have we seen any great benefit in such an arrangement, as economic woes seem to plague government controlled industry just as much as those left alone.

For the LDS people, it should be noted that those economies designed to give to men, the power which is only possessed by God, can never bring prosperity because the Provider of all prosperity cannot go ignored if one seeks true prosperity.

-a-train

[Elgama]

What if it is YOUR kids that are starving? Would you be glad to pay taxes into a socialist system that wasn't feeding your starving children?

Starvation existed in the U.S.S.R., in NAZI Germany, in North Korea. People worked as slaves who weren't allowed to keep the fruits of their own labors while they starved to ortant issues with our money.

Millions of people have come to America to escape the horrible effects of socialism. What people need to understand is that problems such as unemployment, monopolies, business cycles, and those things supposed to be the horrors of capitalism come only with the involvement of the state.

It is not the right to property that causes these troubles, but it is the refusal of government to respect that right that brings all the trouble. Neither a democratic majority, nor a dictator can control and operate the economy or any specific industry without violating property rights, nor have we seen any great benefit in such an arrangement, as economic woes seem to plague government controlled industry just as much as those left alone.

For the LDS people, it should be noted that those economies designed to give to men, the power which is only possessed by God, can never bring prosperity because the Provider of all prosperity cannot go ignored if one seeks true prosperity.

-a-train

I don't see the end of communism putting food in children's bellies in Russia, I see plenty of people starving and skyrocketing alcoholism and depression, increased STD s - life hasn't been so rosy since and pure capitalism didn't work before 1905 in Russia either, its as much to do with the geography and its past that people starve. In both the case of Hitler and Stalin the extreme regimes came in because people were already starving and in some respects Hitler did lift Germany out of the depression it was in (and I do hope you are not about to call Kaiser Wilhelm, Russian Czars and Bismarck socialists)- in fact Germany today benefits from some of the infrastructure he put in place. But why does socialism have to be so extreme? My country has a welfare state and an unelected Head of State I know of plenty of Americans, South Africans and Australians that move here to escape countries which don't have one, I'm married to one who is absolutely amazed at the difference, and he comes from a Republican background. It is believed over the next 10-20 years our country will swell from nearly 60 million to 70 million in population (in an area smaller than California), because we have such a high standard of living people are desperate to move here financiers want to live in London so are rapidly using it to replace New York as an economic centre. As I will keep saying I know the Lord has chosen America as a Promised Land but to someone who lives elsewhere and just visits for a month every so often it doesn't look like that and it isn't the first time pride has caused America to fall. I live with an all American family for that period of time, I see intelligent good kids who can't afford to study, my Sister in Law drinking cranberry juice rather than go to the Doctors whilst pregnant, schools with heavy security, metal detectors at the doors and dogs and this isn't in a big inner city, which is the only place here I would expect to see stuff like that, I go to a nice restaurant and I am put off my food by the old man going through the bins, again it has to be centre of a big city for that here. Russia may have had too much socialism but the US from what I see doesn't have enough.

I think I have to move to the US in a few years the Lord seems to want us too - but I don't think either myself or my husband are overly joyous at the prospect. We will be finding third parties to support

-Charley

[WANDERER]

Metal detectors: In schools? Not that I know of anywhere.

Intelligent good kids who can't afford to study: Sadly the majority of our university students are not Australian. This started a decade ago when education became user pays. The cost is deducted through tax and definitely not at the price that foreign students are charged. It seems that education has gone corporate at least at university level.

Healthcare: not going to the doctors when pregnant...nope, the cranberry story is scarey...waiting an hour to see a doctor for bulk billed clinics yep or pay $60 to see a doctor in 15 mins to half an hour and claim about $27 back in tax I think. The last time I was referred to a specialist it was free with the doctor's letter. The price of asthma medication in the States is horrific. Thank goodness for healthcare (as imperfect as waiting lists for surgery are and all that it could be nonexistent) and cheap medication is a blessing.

Homeless: A bit of an issue in terms of needing an address to claim government funds...and there are people who live on the streets...you would have to really know your city well to identify one. Vancouver shocked me. I didn't expect to see so many people on the streets in a country that wasn't third world.

Capitalist: yes, it would be hard to find items that were not made overseas and it is 'exploitation'. It's unlikely that pensions will be provided to the elderly in years to come even at a basic level.

Welfare: I hope it stays that way at whatever the cost. I don't like the consequences of not doing that. There is no doubt that there are some pretty sad things to see in indigenous communities that would surprise most urban Australians.

Democratic: Your choice is two parties and they both implement the same policies pretty much regardless of election promises, although when they swap around they do as much as possible to point the finger at the opposition for any mishaps and generally stuff up any public programs that have been implemented by the other, in my opinion. One appears to be conservative and the other union oriented. It just means they make the same decisions more or less, but phrase it differently but generally in the best interests of the majority in a muddled way. I think people have less freedom in that laws are still passed that almost the entire nation unanimously disagrees with like workchoices and Rudds copping quite a bit of flak over his sorry speech as we all knew where that was going, but maybe it's the start of healing.

I think I would find it hard to live in the U.S. as the welfare situation is worrying. Promised land? I'm not sure what LDS beliefs on that one are and I confess to being brought up on Revelations.

[a-train]

I don't see the end of communism putting food in children's bellies in Russia, I see plenty of people starving and skyrocketing alcoholism and depression, increased STD s - life hasn't been so rosy since and pure capitalism didn't work before 1905 in Russia either, its as much to do with the geography and its past that people starve.

Hmm.... so then you are admitting that socialism is powerless to save these people. I didn't see you say that you would be willing to pay taxes into a socialist system that refused to feed your starving family.

In both the case of Hitler and Stalin the extreme regimes came in because people were already starving and in some respects Hitler did lift Germany out of the depression it was in (and I do hope you are not about to call Kaiser Wilhelm, Russian Czars and Bismarck socialists)- in fact Germany today benefits from some of the infrastructure he put in place.

Oh yes, socialism benefits greatly the master race or whatever democratic majority it is put in place to save at the cost of the slavery and death of those not in the club.

But why does socialism have to be so extreme? My country has a welfare state and an unelected Head of State I know of plenty of Americans, South Africans and Australians that move here to escape countries which don't have one, I'm married to one who is absolutely amazed at the difference, and he comes from a Republican background.

It should be understood that U.S. healthcare is not a free-market. It is strongly regulated by our government. It is this regulation that is the cause for the rise in the expense and thus the rise in the number of uninsured. Don't think for a second that the uninsured get no healthcare here. Hospitals are forced by the government to care for these people. Millions of people poor into the U.S. to get this care. As the number of uninsured grows, the costs associated with providing them with that care grows also. Who pays that? The people who DO have insurance or who DO pay out of pocket. So in effect, the U.S. already has a social healthcare system. And, if the U.S. government wasn't taking half my wages, I might be able to give more money to a charitable organization that provides free healthcare to the poor.

As I will keep saying I know the Lord has chosen America as a Promised Land but to someone who lives elsewhere and just visits for a month every so often it doesn't look like that and it isn't the first time pride has caused America to fall.

Exactly. This current pridefull imperialistic regime that has hijacked our government and is seeking to take more liberty from the people through socialist reform will be the cause of a great downfall.

I live with an all American family for that period of time, I see intelligent good kids who can't afford to study, my Sister in Law drinking cranberry juice rather than go to the Doctors whilst pregnant, schools with heavy security, metal detectors at the doors and dogs and this isn't in a big inner city, which is the only place here I would expect to see stuff like that, I go to a nice restaurant and I am put off my food by the old man going through the bins, again it has to be centre of a big city for that here. Russia may have had too much socialism but the US from what I see doesn't have enough.

There are FREE clinics for expecting mothers in the U.S. These are totally funded by charitable Americans. There are only a handful of schools in Missouri with metal detectors, none of them have dogs, all of them are in the inner city of St. Louis and Kansas City. I attended one in Kansas City, not a single gun was ever found on a student or in the school. The metal detectors are nothing more than show. The fact is, the unarmed staff would be powerless against an armed attacker.

There are Americans so disgusted with commercialism and government control that they actually have chosen to be homeless and jobless, they live off of the land and pan-handle. Thousands of white Americans live on Indian Reservations, in National Parks, or squat on private land. 'Hippy Communes' exist in almost every state. This is not the result of too little government involvement in the lives of these people, but just the opposite. What these people are saying is: 'We aren't impressed with your big cities, your fancy cars, your big hospitals, your expensive schools, your military, your whole approach to life in general.'

Now imagine that these hippies were in power and they endeavored to force us all to live on farms and give up our electronics, our schools, our hospitals, etc. Would you agree that those not wishing to live that way should be compelled to live that way? Should you NOT be allowed to own a car? Should your university be shut down? Should you be forced to have your next baby in a log cabin with a midwife?

In the U.S. there are shelters for the homeless that house and feed anyone who walks in that isn't drunk or high. These shelters are all operated on donated funds and run by mostly volunteers. Most of the visitors there are only travelling through town. There are still many homeless who do not go to them because they simply do not wish to, or are drug addicts or alcoholics. Still, there are clinics for addicts also and there are many success stories, but there are also many not willing to stay off of drugs and alcohol. Are we willing to round these people up and put them into prison or some sort of forced hospital just so we don't have to be completely repulsed by seeing them? Should we be repulsed by seeing them? We have been taught to help the poor, we have not been instructed by the LORD to take away their liberty.

I think I have to move to the US in a few years the Lord seems to want us too - but I don't think either myself or my husband are overly joyous at the prospect. We will be finding third parties to support.

Certainly the frontrunners in the two parties in this Presidential election stand for imperialism, socialism, and U.S. domination of the lives of the people and of the world, but they are those who have hijacked the parties, they do not stand on the platform of the constitution or liberty. Like the British financiers they are in bed with, like Hitler and Stalin, they seek only their own wealth and power and pay only lip service to the welfare of the people.

Liberty, true liberty, the liberty fought for in the U.S. revolution, the liberty fought for by Captain Moroni, provides the individual with the freedom to choose how they live. Under the title of liberty, nobody is robbed or their freedom to buy what they want; to live in a house, an apartment, on a farm, or in the street; to put their money toward wholesome food, cigarettes, drugs, alcohol, the clothing of their choice, the healthcare plan of their choice. True liberty forces no one to work, it forces no one to buy, it allows people to make these decisions for themselves.

God has not given you nor I the right to make these decisions for others. Only Satan and his followers seek to take away agency. It is the effort to take away agency that is at the root of ALL war. It caused the war in heaven.

A man cannot be a fascist and a Christian at the same time. We cannot take away liberty and give it at the same time. We cannot respect God and attempt to take away what He has given to His children at the same time.

-a-train

[Elgama]

My Sister in Law has good insurance my Mother in Law pays through the nose for it but she still needs to pay part of the fee to attend - right now I am constantly at the Drs wouldn't be if I had to pay everytime, and whatever my condition is could go undiagnosed - which since MS is a good possibility, it needs to be checked. My Father in Law worked for the military they provided his insurance but his wife still had to come back from his funeral to 20 messages on the answer phone asking who was going to pay his ambulance bill. .... my travel insurance worked much better when I had my miscarriage but I was shocked at the waste I had so many blood tests that were unecessary to make the money out of my insurance - I am not an idiot I know that my blood type does not change. And try refusing drugs boy that was hard.

Living in a mostly midwife led system the idea of giving birth with one in a log cabin does not scare me here they are highly trained and much better baby catchers than my obstetrician. Even with Pre-Eclampsia I only saw him a few times the midwives were more than capable.

-Charley

[Argentina84]

As is George W. Bush, William J. Clinton, and nearly every former President of the last 110 years.

It's a joke, isn't it?

[JohnBirchSociety]

It's a joke, isn't it?

Sadly, it isn't

[Argentina84]

Sadly, it isn't

George W. Bush a socialist? I am speechless! No, no, no..I can't believe it!

[crytsprospect]

I believe the economic position of the Church is that every man is responsibly for his own economic prosperity. If he cannot meet his own needs he can look toward his family then the Church.

That says it

Sometimes people want to make things so much harder than it is. They get caught up in Knowledge and overanalyze it all.

This is how I understand the church on this and is how I live. I have the freedom to work hard and make what I can of my life. I am ENCOURAGED to give tiths and offerings help others members or not when in need. My choices help decide how many riches I have on this earth my actions decide how many riches I have in Heaven. The scriptures state sometimes how things should be, we have to apply that to ourselves individually as we all have the freedom to choose.

[a-train]

crytsprospect,

Your right. It is that simple. Liberty isn't complicated.

Argentina 84,

If you are not an American and therefore not up to speed on all that is going on here, you would probably believe that George W. Bush is a Republican capitalist, pushing for constitutional liberty and free markets. Many Americans even believe this.

While I wish that was true, it is far from. He is a socialist through and through. No matter what he has said, don't let him fool you. He is a liar. He and the neoconservatives that surround him, are working diligently to take away liberty and freedom to build monopolies that serve only a select business elite whose plan is to manage a worldwide socialist system devoid of liberty.

The next step in their plan is to institute socialized medicine in the U.S. This will go on simultaneously with the formation of the North American Union which will ultimately be the American Union. Common tarrifs and taxes will support continental laws, government, and troops. Bush and His family have openly been talking about a New World Order for decades now. What are they talking about? They are talking about a worldwide system of government that does NOT include the liberty Americans once knew.

Google search Prescott Bush's ties to the NAZIs. This family doesn't have a great record of standing up for freedom, but they have a good record of seeking personal wealth and gain. Tragic, but true.

-a-train

[Moksha]

This family doesn't have a great record of standing up for freedom, but they have a good record of seeking personal wealth and gain.

-a-train

Not only that, but I bet they are also against the stockpiling of thermonuclear devices in our compounds. How can one have true liberty without these devices? Not to mention their namby-pamby crackdown on sovereign lawful Americans obtaining chemical and biological weaponry solely for hunting purposes.