re: Socialism

Quoting Chroma Hex [+1]:" I don't see how you can have an opinion on that when I didn't even say what kind of systems I believe need to be enacted. "

Ha! There's no such thing as a revenue neutral or net gain government program.

Quoting SpaceCowgirl:" Ha! There's no such thing as a revenue neutral or net gain government program."

It's still a little trigger happy to make an opinion off of no information.

Quoting Chroma Hex [+1]:" It's still a little trigger happy to make an opinion off of no information. "

Can you name any government programs that don't cost the taxpayer money?

Just one?

Quoting Chroma Hex [+1]:" I'm just talking about in general, not for our society. Everyone does a fair share and everyone gets ... [snip!] ... number of problems, issues, moral stances, and opinions that would make a society like that impossible on a large scale. "

yup..there is no Utopia.

Quoting TheNuge:" Socialism used to be good on paper but enough has been witnessed about the system to note plenty of ... [snip!] ... Same can be said about communism although I'm not sure large groups of people ever thought it sounded good on paper. "

This.

1) We are NOT a democracy. We are a constitutional republic.
2) The very definitions of socialism and communism are practically identical
3) The entire globe is in a financial meltdown. The United States was last on board in this decline. Know why? Because we were last in line for a nice hearty dose of socialism. Fiscally conservative nations are ALWAYS better off than fiscally liberal, over spending nation.

We just re-elected the biggest spender in this nations history, so socialism, here we come.

LMAO at the people who hated Bush but fully support Obama. Obama is Bush on freaking steroids! ! Hahaha

Here we're called 'socialists' but we actually have a half and half system (particularly with healthcare). We pay higher taxes for our medicare system but if you pay out of pocket for private hospital insurance you don't have to pay a medicare levy which can add up to hundreds of dollars per year. Also our public health system compared to our private health system differs immensely; in private you get specialist coverage, chose your own doctor, get a private room in a high class hospital, silver service, and extended hospital stays if needed. In our public health system you get whichever specialist or doctor is on duty at that time, share a room with up to four other people, stock standard amenities and food etc.

Quoting SpaceCowgirl:" My problem with it is that when you have a society where everyone pretty much gets the same stuff, regardless ... [snip!] ... in Washington so they can redistribute it to some person you've never met in another state, it starts to piss people off."

What if socialism was on a state level and not a federal one? I think some socialist programs could work. On a massive federal level? It would be difficult.

Quoting Back to Noob Status:" What if socialism was on a state level and not a federal one? I think some socialist programs could work. On a massive federal level? It would be difficult."

I think some states and cities that have headed in that direction are experiencing the deleterious effects of heading in that direction.

Socialism does work, and it doesn't make people poor. Next to everyone in Sweden have no problem paying higher taxes to help each other, or to get back things. There are a lot of things that we get back for it, and that makes up for the extra money we give, because we don't have to spend as much. I don't like that school get money from the county's taxes, because the poor counties have poor schools then, but otherwise most things go perfectly fine.

When people in other countries talk about Sweden, and they seem to think we have no money to spend on anything because the taxes are so high, and so on. We do have many people who are rich, and we have a middle class, and we have a working class and so on. The difference is that everyone gets as equal opportuinities as possible. We don't complain.

And yes, we DO work hard, it's a bullsmurf lie to say that if socialism is implemented, or similar models, people will work less. We still have bills to pay, things we want to buy, do and so on. We still have work ethics and so on. The difference is we don't have to work three jobs to make ends meet. It pisses me off to see people say that it'll make us lazy. Nope. No. Some people maybe, but there are always some people who benefit from the system without having to put in much effort.

I can understand that it would be hard on a country level in the US, though the "not being able to see it"... eh. We don't see it that much here either. Sure in schools, the commuter systems, and so on, are visible, but the rest? Not really. Most of us see it when we come in contact with health care, or might need some money assistance for a little while to make ends meet. But really, I honestly don't see where the money goes, and I don't mind. I paid 1000 usd off of my 3200 usd pay check. I don't see how anyone has the right to complain about that.

Quoting ~RJS~:" Socialism does work, and it doesn't make people poor. Next to everyone in Sweden have no problem paying ... [snip!] ... and I don't mind. I paid 1000 usd off of my 3200 usd pay check. I don't see how anyone has the right to complain about that. "

You paid 1000 in taxes out of a 3200 paycheck? Anyone who works for that money has the "right" to complain about it imo.

Quoting Δ ☮ ∂:" You paid 1000 in taxes out of a 3200 paycheck? Anyone who works for that money has the "right" to complain about it imo. "

I've rounded it up a little bit, but basically. This means that I get to use one of the world's best and extensive commuter systems, I don't pay for university (I actually get paid for it), I don't have to pay so much for medication, or doctor visits, or hospital stays (there is a max sum), kids in schools get free lunches, and so on. I also got about 190 usd from the state each month this spring to make ends meet. There's a lot of things I get back from that money, so I see at least half of that money back to me in different ways.

Swedes don't mind, because we've grown up with the mentality that you help people the best you can, and that paying through taxes allows people to have equal opportunities, and will help us all in the long run. We see the big picture with taxes like that. Without paying that much tax my family would be in ruins of debt, my sister would have little future to look forward to, and I would probably have had a mother with brain damage due to untreated sleep apnea (which was only discovered because she could afford to go to the doctor about her 'insomnia'), or she could have been dead. So, the big picture... it's sooooo worth it.

<blockquote><b>Quoting Back to Noob Status:</b>" What if socialism was on a state level and not a federal one? I think some socialist programs could work. On a massive federal level? It would be difficult."</blockquote>

It would definitely be preferable to let the states decide, but I still think most states are too big for heavy socialist programs. I do think states are better at gauging what social programs are necessary compared to letting someone in Washington decide what's best for 300 million people.

Another reason I think socialism works better in some of those European countries is because they are more homogenous. The US is so concerned with labeling everyone and pointing out everyone's differences that it's harder for people to want to help someone who is a different religion, race, political party, etc.

I think everyone is entitled to the same basic needs- food, clean water, shelter, and *gasp* healthcare. Everyone deserves those things. We should help people attain those things that are unable to themselves. However, Joe Schmoe who dropped out of high school and works at Rite Aid is not entitled to the same quality of life as Patty Pompous who graduated from an Ivy League college and is devoting her life to finding a cure for cancer. They both are human beings and both deserve to have food to eat, to have a place to call home, and to have the benefits of a physician if they get sick. Joe might have to eat what is provided for him, Joe might have to live in a small apartment, and Joe might not get to choose his doctor, but he is just as deserving of those things as Patty. Patty will get to eat what she wants, own a large home, and hand pick her doc, but that's because she worked for it.

The problem with a full socialist nation is that you take Patty's earnings and give them to Joe who never worked for them. Yes, they are both deserving of those basic needs, I completely agree with that. But, I think Patty is deserving of more than the basics because she actually worked for it.

No idea if that makes sense or if I answered your question at all.. but there you have it.  

Quoting ~RJS~:" Socialism does work, and it doesn't make people poor. Next to everyone in Sweden have no problem paying ... [snip!] ... and I don't mind. I paid 1000 usd off of my 3200 usd pay check. I don't see how anyone has the right to complain about that. "

Thanks for chiming in!

Sweden is definitely a country I admire. It has managed to find a great system that works for their country (I think it works so well b/c of your country's relatively small size). One thing I've observed is the higher quality in life in socialist countries like Sweden compared to that in America. It is a shame to see so many Americans in their late seventies, early eighties still working out of necessity.

I definitely wouldn't mind paying higher taxes, but that is un-American for me to say, lol.

The problem with Americans is that too many are too busy trying to keep up with Joneses by buying unnecessarily big houses, cars, expensive vacations...all about instant gratification and material wealth, and not necessarily on family time and overall health and happiness.