What Do You Think of Socialism?

by minimus 64 Replies latest jw friends

  • The 12 Apostates
    The 12 Apostates

    Socialism with a capital S? No.

    Socialism as in a mixed economy with a strong social safety net and solid infrastructure investment from the government? Yes, very much so.

    I also think large corporations should be taxed at least as heavily as the populace, and monopolies should be broken up into as many pieces as possible.

  • LoveUniHateExams

    Senator Warren from Massachusetts just announce she’s running for President - wonderful!

    She'll be the first woman and first Native American elected as US president.

    Her Indian name is Chief Batshit Crazy Horse.

    Free tee-pees for everyone!

    Image result for elizabeth warren in head dress

  • pepperheart

    its a good thing if it means that that google,starbucks and amazon pay the same percentage in tax as the man on the street does

  • Simon
    its a good thing if it means that that google,starbucks and amazon pay the same percentage in tax as the man on the street does

    You should look at which political opinions the likes of Google promote and which they demote and demonetize then ask yourself if they would truly go against their own self-interests.

    Google's claim to do no evil are hollow - they are happy suppressing news that socialist regimes in Russia and China don't like because it's critical of them.

  • zeb

    All you anti socialist devotees should have lived in Australia under the past prime minister John Howard.

    He did the best to destroy social security and was eventually himself voted out to a big mouthed journalist, BUT continues to get massive benefits from a corrupted political system.

    support yourself? and the govt will tax that out of you all the while as well. Wait till you are broken in health cant earn an income and have to rely on the SS..

  • The 12 Apostates
    The 12 Apostates

    Americans are heavily brainwashed to fear the word socialism. To be sure, hardcore socialism ruins countries, but social welfare is the mark of a civilised nation, and their pathological aversion to basic ideas like healthcare that doesn't extort people to the point of bankruptcy is concerning to say the least. It's as though they can't tell the difference between a nationalised health service and gulags. Very 'sad', as their president would say.

  • Tobyjones262

    We are not talking about a social net. But socialism an a form of government. It has never worked and can never work. Its scrapped every time its tried. The idea that there is no real failure makes it so that people just put in enough work to get by. It was tried even here in the beginning of the USA. They saw that some worked hard and others sucked off the work of others. We have it here still called the ghettos.

  • The 12 Apostates
    The 12 Apostates

    But talking about socialism as opposed to a social net is pointless because no one of any consequence is calling for socialism in the western world. A handful of people (too few) are calling for a social net and the opposition are erroneously labelling it as 'socialism' in order to trick the less informed (the majority, let's be honest) into being too scared to accept it. So what I am talking about is extremely pertinent.

    Socialism as a form of government is a historical curiosity at best in the western world.

    P.S. That's a very simplistic take on ghettos.

  • DesirousOfChange

    We have a niece who lives with a man and both are on welfare. She got pregnant, high risk pregnancy, and had the best local university hospital and medical care. FREE.

    Another friend of ours has two unmarried under-employed (loser) daughters. In the past 2-3 years, both have gotten pregnant and had babies, all expenses paid for by State Medicaid (welfare).

    All three get "food stamps" (more welfare) and free medical care (for God knows how many years) and one of them gets free or reduced housing (HUD).

    Let's not forget though -- none of this is FREE. I just completed my income taxes. Despite the "Trump Tax Cut" that dramatically increased family deduction amounts, I paid more taxes than last year. (I thought only the rich were to pay more?) It's easy to see who is paying for the "socialized freebies" for all these lazy losers. (ME for one.)

    Since when was it decreed that medical care is a "right" that you do not have to pay for yourself? Or free/reduced housing? Or even free food? They all have iphones (newer than mine) and cable TV and all smoke cigarettes (at $5.50/pack), and at least one of them is a regular pot smoker.

    Why does "society" feel that the people who have chosen to be responsible in life and who have planned ahead, paid for insurance for emergencies, worked (maybe two jobs) to support themselves, should pay for all of these expenses for the irresponsible and lazy?

  • Tobyjones262

Share this