We've all been Socialists once and we will likely all be Socialists again. Socialism is an ideology focused on helping the masses. And after a global pandemic where millions have been hurt through no fault of their own, Socialism could rise again in popularity again.
When we were growing up, we had to depend on our parents to survive. They redistributed their wealth to care for us helpless kids. In a way, we were Socialists depending on others.
Therefore, it's with great dismay when I see kids and teenagers disrespecting their parents. Without them, they'd be nowhere. Kids need to listen to their parents, thank them for all they've done and give back when they can.
Instead, I see more adult children rely on their parents for everything nowadays. I'm talking getting their parents to pay for their car, a 20% down payment on a house, and so forth.
Socialism Helps Take Care Of Us In Retirement
When we retire, we depend on government through Medicare and dependable Social Security to take care of us. The reason is, most American haven't saved or invested enough to care for our own.
You'd think it would be rational to save a good percentage of your money every year, so that after 30 years you'll have millions of dollars. However, example after example says otherwise. The retirement balance by age in America demonstrates millions must rely on the government.
The government redistributes wealth from the richer working population who likely won't need Medicare and Social Security and funnels their income to the rest.
Therefore, it also dismays me when people who receive support from the government debase the rich for not paying their fair share. They are paying for you as money doesn't come out of thin air.
Socialism Allows For Better Equality
There's nothing wrong with being a Socialist and believing in the ideals of Socialism so long as we're the ones benefiting. It's only logical to want to promote Socialism if you don't have the constant drive to outperform. The decline in merit-based reward is a nod toward Socialism.
Not everybody is Superman, and nor should they be. Socialism provides a comfort that we will always be taken care of, no matter how little we try.
Imagine getting 60 months of unemployment through my Shock & Awe Yeah program instead of only 99 weeks, how much better work would be. Or what about the $600/week in enhanced unemployment benefits during the pandemic? I spoke to several people who made more while unemployed than while working.
By eliminating the constant stress of competition and survival, we become happier. We focus our attention on more important things such as family, friends, and living the good life. Comparing ourselves to others and always trying to surpass the Jones is a straight route to unhappiness.
Socialism For A Better Healthcare System
Socialism is why Universal Healthcare, also known as the Affordable Care Act is critical to the promotion of a better America. Genetic diseases do not discriminate between the poor or rich. Millionaires can even get healthcare subsidies if they have income equal to 400% or less of the latest Federal Poverty Limits by household number.
Getting wealthy is relatively easy with effort and time. Sooner or later, we'll all become 401k millionaires with enough time. However, no matter how healthy you eat and how often you work out, if you are genetically destined to get cancer, you will get it, and may likely die.
You shouldn't be denied health-care just because you are poor and cannot afford it. You shouldn't have to go bankrupt just because of an illness. In a country as rich as ours, every US citizen deserves a health-care safety net.
It's easy to shoot down Socialism because of the belief that it breeds laziness. Why should I work hard if someone else doesn't and gets paid the same?
Socialism isn't about that. It's about making sure everybody has a minimal standard quality of living. The below story is something to ponder.
A Parable About Socialism
A young woman was about to finish her first year of college. Like so many her age, she considered herself to be a very liberal Democrat and very much in favor of higher taxes to redistribute wealth to support more government programs that help others such as herself.
She was deeply ashamed of her staunch Republican father, a feeling she openly expressed. Based on the lectures that she had participated in, and the occasional chat with a professor, she felt that her father had for years harbored an evil, selfish desire to keep what he thought should be his and not share it with the rest of society.
One day she was challenging her father on his opposition to higher taxes on the rich and the need for more government programs. He responded by asking how she was doing in school.
Taken aback, she answered rather haughtily that she had a 4.0 GPA, and let him know that it was tough to maintain, insisting that she was taking a very difficult course load and was constantly studying, which left her no time to go out and party like other people she knew. She didn't even have time for a boyfriend, and didn't really have many college friends because she spent all her time studying.
Her father listened and then asked, ‘How is your friend Audrey doing?' She replied, ‘Audrey is barely getting by. All she takes are easy classes, she never studies, and she barely has a 2.0 GPA. She is so popular on campus; college for her is a blast. She's always invited to all the parties and lots of times she doesn't even show up for classes because she's too hung over.'
Her selfish father asked his daughter, ‘Why don't you go to the Dean's office and ask him to deduct 1.0 off your GPA and give it to your friend who only has a 2.0. That way you will both have a 3.0 GPA and certainly that would be a fair and equal distribution of GPA.'
The daughter, visibly shocked by her father's suggestion, angrily fired back, ‘That's a crazy idea, how would that be fair! I've worked really hard for my grades! I've invested a lot of time, and a lot of hard work! Audrey has done next to nothing toward her degree. She played while I worked my tail off!'
The father slowly smiled, winked and said gently, ‘Welcome to the conservative's philosophy.'
A Father And Socialism
Now that I'm a father of two, it's interesting to read the parable about Socialism. I want my children to work hard and do well. At the same time, I understand the world is a brutally competitive place.
Due to extreme competition, I'm noticing some really depressed and lonely kids. There are even annual stories about kids committing suicide due to so much school pressure. That is absolutely terrible.
With a more Socialist culture, kids can enjoy their youth more. The pressure to get straight As and a high SAT or ACT score dissipates. Doing so much to get into Harvard to only end up a nobody is pointless.
Parents just want their kids to be happy. If their kids can do something meaningful with their lives and find someone who loves them, that's all a parent really wants.
There Will Be War Without Socialism
Some of us believe that grades don't matter because we think we are all special. Hard work is for those who aren't smart enough to work smarter. What matters is that we eliminate the classes by narrowing the ever increasing gap between the rich and poor.
It's unbelievable how wealthy some have become over the past couple decades. Meanwhile, the middle-to-lower income people continually get squeezed. Jeff Bezos has donated less than 3% of his fortune, yet he's worth over $150B before his divorce. Who can spend it all?
It's not right, and I know everybody knows this.
One day, a random hoodlum started barking at me on the subway. My golf clubs were taking too much space in a half-empty cart. How disconcerting.
When they call you curse words you take out your driver, wield it with a crazy look in your eye and ask, “What the fuck is your problem punk?!” You have to stand up for yourself and fight back in this world of Capitalism. You might get beat up, or they might cower away, apologize and ask you to forget about it like they did after I was about to start swinging.
In Socialist society, the punk kid may have less anxiety and rage to lash out against someone who was minding their own business on the subway.
All his fears about living a low class life forever would melt away because he knew he'd be guaranteed a decent standard of living under Socialism.
With Capitalism, there's immediate tension thanks to class warfare. Class warfare is why it's important to adopt Stealth Wealth if you've seen your fortune grow over the years.
There's resentment against anybody, whether true or false who might have it better than you. That's no good for happiness.
Accept & Embrace Socialism
We need to embrace Socialism for the foreseeable future. This is where our society is heading and there's no point fighting it. I've seen the future and it looks much like many European countries. And you know what? Many of its citizens are happy!
Joe Biden is now the President of the United States who will be expanding our social safety net. Rockstars in Congress like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez have risen to power due to the desire for Democratic Socialism. Although she attended $70,000 a year Boston University, she’s a socialist!
Read the room. The people want change
Keep your head down and do not brag about your successes. Always try and keep as low a profile as you can. We are in this economic fight together. Let's help out our comrades today.
If you've been thinking about retiring or are close to retiring, I think retiring with Joe Biden as President is a good idea. I retired in 2012 when Obama was President. I plan to retire again in 2023. I'm burned out and need a break from Capitalism.
Related Posts:
The New Three-Legged Retirement Stool: You, You, And You
Democratic Socialist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Gives Rich Private School Graduates Hope And Pride
Recommendation To Build Wealth
Sign up for a free account with Empower, the web’s #1 free wealth management tool to get a better handle on your finances. In addition to better money oversight, run your investments through their award-winning Investment Checkup tool. You will see exactly how much you are paying in fees. Fees hurt returns.
After you link all your accounts, use their Retirement Planning calculator. It pulls your real data to give you as pure an estimation of your financial future as possible using Monte Carlo simulation algorithms.
Definitely run your numbers to see how you’re doing. I’ve been using Empower since 2012. As a result, I have seen my net worth skyrocket during this time thanks to better money management.
I’m sharing the college grades story with my kid!
So what happens when you run out of MY money?
I really enjoy reading this article, you are not biased or leaning against one side, but take a very rational approach to view the topic from different perspective.
I do believe we should provide people the basic living standard(food, house, medical and education) while strike the balance of still encourage the rest of people who are more competitive to stay competitive, bcz to the end, that’s what keeps the society moving forward.
Personally I live in san jose and work in tech industry with relative high income, and i am paying extra taxes to support obama care from my pay check. every year, my tax is going up, property tax, local tax, here and there, as i said i don’t mind contributing, my only concern is how efficiently the government is doing it’s job?! I doubt big government because they are running very inefficiently and wasted tax payers money left and right. some easy examples: terrible BART systems here in SF though they increase budget and fund every year; the famous bullet train program they spent over billions and got canceled.
It’s no coincidence that social democracies have a high degree of correlation with top spots on the happiness index. The common ground that capitalists and socialists can agree on is the need to maintain motivation (read: economic productivity) while increasing standards of living for all (and particularly for the more marginalized segments of society). This is not utopian thinking, as certain societies are finding this balance. A good example would be to keep competition in the labor force through certain policies (e.g., giving employers power to hiring and firing procedures), but also to make sure that those in the labor force who fall into unemployment can gain quick re-entry into the workplace within the same tier at which they exited. This can be done through policies which encourage training. This has worked and is working, and it’s difficult to argue with history. It’s much easier to debate the theory. Here, sociologists and anthropologists would add much to the conversation. For example, it is much easier for social democracy to work in smaller, more homogenous societies than in larger, diverse societies, such as the US.
As the saying goes… If you want to pursue the American dream, move to Denmark. =)
[…] Socialism As A Means To A Brighter Future […]
What you are talking about isn’t socialism, it’s welfarism. According to you the rich really earned everything they have, even if they just inherited it from their parents. The ridiculous notion that hard work must automatically lead to wealth and high status and therefore those who are poor must be lazy. Are migrant farm workers lazy, are janitors lazy? How about the children in third world countries making our clothes for less than a dollar a day? Many of the homeless and the poor in this country are people who were injured while doing hard physical labor. Having lost the ability to produce for those hard working CEOS and shareholders in their private jets, phoning in to “work” from the Hamptons they are cast off like garbage. I don’t even have the energy to really get into this discussion. It is amazing how much people in America have been brainwashed.
right on Tyler. Speak truth brother. I would add that the inherited wealth was likely stolen in the first place (colonialism, imperialism, etc.) then the stolen wealth was protected by the state which is what we now call modern “capitalism” or what we might call an emergent 21st century feudalism where the new royals are inherited wealth holders – almost ALL billionaires.
The new royals are not inherited wealth holders in their majority, and most billionaires don’t inherit their wealth. This is flat-out false.
I don’t know if Anyone mentioned this but the parable about grades and conservatism is erroneous: in the college scenario, All Students have equal access to school resources while, in the economic scenario alluded to by the notion of conservatism-versus-higher-taxes, not Everyone has access to the same economic resources. The other points You make I think are quite good, though.
A society that chooses between capitalism and socialism does not choose between two social systems; it chooses between social cooperation and the disintegration of society. Socialism is not an alternative to capitalism; it is an alternative to any system under which men can live as human beings.
There are many socialists who have never come to grips in any way with the problems of economics, and who have made no attempt at all to form for themselves any clear conception of the conditions which determine the character of human society.
Socialism knows no freedom of choice in occupation. Everyone has to do what he is told to do and to go where he is sent.
Socialism… is not the pioneer of a better and finer world, but the spoiler of what thousands of years of civilization have created. It does not build; it destroys. For destruction is the essence of it. It produces nothing, it only consumes what the social order based on private ownership in the means of production has created.
Socialism is unrealizable as an economic system because a socialist society would not have any possibility of resorting to economic calculation. This is why it cannot be considered as a system of society’s economic organization. It is a means to disintegrate social cooperation and to bring about poverty and chaos.
The socialists of Eastern Germany, the self-styled German Democratic Republic, spectacularly admitted the bankruptcy of the Marxian dreams when they built a wall to prevent their comrades from fleeing into the non-socialist part of Germany.
If Socialism is bad, why is America becoming more Socialist eg universal health care, redistribution of wealth, higher taxes, bigger government? We the people voted for bigger government.
Have you ever lived in Europe? Life is awesome out there!
Related:
Democratic Socialist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Gives Hope And Pride To Rich Private School Graduates
Ranking The Happiest Countries In The World – Top 10 All From Europe
It really is necessary to distinguish between different “veins” of “socialism”. The Scandinavian economies are very free-market economies. Corporate taxes in Sweden are actually very reasonable, and most people pay around 1/3 of their income in taxes while employers also pay pretty hefty payroll tax. Perhaps the most interest things about the Scandinavian economies is that EVERYONE IS FREAKING WORKING! Labor rate participation in all Scandinavian countries (democratic socialism supported by a free-market economy with strong unions) is significantly higher than in the US. It actually makes sense for women to stay in the workforce because they make more than what they are paying in childcare. Free-market capitalism and strong social systems can absolutely co-exist, and don’t have to lead to these apocolyptic outocomes that Machoman evokes. However, it should be underlined that not all is perfect in Europe: it’s true that wages are generally lower at the top, taxes can be crippling in some cases, though in others they aren’t actually much higher than in the US and you get way more for it, less venture capital and more regulation generally leads to less innovation, and, perhaps the most significant problem is higher taxes leading to less disposable income and higher unemployment, while house prices continue to climb. For a long period, the US had the good fortune of having 1° Nearly full employment, 2° Very low house price to income ratio, 3° High disposable income for the middle class and up. Some European countries are still achieving this; others much less so. The Scandinavian systems do seem to be the best “socialist”-type systems in Europe, along with the Netherlands, while Spain, Italy and Greece are just basket cases. The only leg up these three places have on the US is health care and the fact that you can buy a pile of stones for 1€ and call it a house.
https://capitalismmagazine.com/2000/06/why-socialism-must-always-fail-ludwig-von-mises-on-economic-calculation-under-socialism/
The problem he identified was not lack of motivation on the part of planners. Instead, the cause of socialism’s irrationality is that those highly motivated and competent civil servants have no rational mechanism to guide their productive efforts and thus any decisions they make are necessarily arbitrary. Their position is akin to that of the captain of a ship in the midst of the ocean without a compass. No matter how able he is, any efforts he makes to set the course of his ship are doomed from the outset.
Although Mises’ analysis is purely economic, it illustrates the effects of an abstract philosophic principle in an economic practical context. That principle is that capitalism is the only economic system based on reason, while socialism rests on arbitrary whim. While capitalism cannot be effectively defended solely on economic grounds, Mises’ exposition is of tremendous value to philosophical defenders of capitalism.
Mises’ conclusion can be combined with the defense of capitalism on the basis of the rational moral code defined by Ayn Rand (in “The Virtue of Selfishness” and “Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal”). In a brilliant demonstration of the power of integration, the philosophy of reason and sound economic theory concur to uphold the rationality of capitalism and expose the patent irrationality of socialism.
The truth of Mises’ analysis was confirmed by historical experience. The irrationality of socialism was revealed in the fate of all socialist experiments conducted throughout the twentieth century. Stalin’s Ukraine famine, the widespread starvation brought about by Mao’s “Great Leap Forward,” the decadent misery that is a daily fact of life in North Korea, Vietnam, Cambodia, Cuba, and all other socialist utopias is writ large for the full slate of the practical manifestations of Mises’ conclusion that “Socialism is the renunciation of rational economy.”
Now if only the economic professors at Yale and Harvard could grasp this fact.
Two articles that describe the coming disaster that is Nobamascare. https://healthwyze.org/index.php/component/content/article/364-the-health-care-bill-how-the-system-really-works-and-the-unfree-market.html
lastly, from one of the great Economic Minds of our time, why Socialism will always be an “Epic Fail”. Socialism is Flawed and always will be.
“Without calculation, economic activity is impossible. Since under Socialism economic calculation is impossible, under Socialism there can be no economic activity in our sense of the word … All economic change, therefore, would involve operations the value of which could neither be predicted beforehand nor ascertained after they had taken place. Everything would be a leap in the dark. Socialism is the renunciation of rational economy.” — Ludwig von Mises, Socialism, 1981, pp. 103-105.
https://capitalismmagazine.com/2000/06/why-socialism-must-always-fail-ludwig-von-mises-on-economic-calculation-under-socialism/
sorry, had to end all the irrational thinking in this grand imaginary utopia world of sunshines and rainbows where unicorns shoot magic colorful rainbows out of their horns and pixies fly around spreading pixie dust. Welcome back to reality and history.
It is sunshine and rainbows. My financial nut is providing a good return as the real estate and stock market match to record highs and I no longer have to work for a living as a result. Doesn’t that sound good to you?
On the GPA sharing analogy, see Alfie Kohn (“Punished by Rewards”) or Dan Pink for studies have shown that reward generally decreases performance on intellectual tasks requiring creativity. Search especially for an YouTube video featuring Dan Pink called “RSA Animate – Drive: The surprising truth about what motivates us”. That is not to say we don’t need money in this society, or that money does not correlate with happiness up to around US$75K a year for most people. Alfie Kohn has an essay called “From Degrading to De-Grading” on why grades decrease the quality of academic classes and student cooperation to help each other learn.
Another spin on the GPA situation might be asking the woman to tutor her friend in academics, while her friend tutors her in social skills? Or maybe that the friend kept the woman from OD-ing once related to academic stress or a breakup with a boyfriend. What if her friend brings her fresh veggies to eat at study breaks to keep the woman in top health? What if her friend was involved with lobbying the university President to keep the department the woman is studying in from being shut down? Most people contribute to society in various ways that even if they may not be compensated monetarily. What if her friend was the reasons some person felt better about himself from a kind word and so did not do something horrible on campus as with some tragedies? Would it be better if such a friend had been expelled earlier for a low GPA, before the kind word was said?
As I see it, discussed on my site, there are at least five different types of transactions that form different sub-economies: subsistence, gift, exchange, planned, and theft. A society has some balance of all of these based on its culture and history — and that balance can change as technology or culture changes. A healthy society probably has a lot of all of the first four, and little of the last. In the case of exchange, since there are fundamental reasons “the rich get richer”. Studies show that societies with high inequality are unhappier — even for the wealthy there. The money-based exchange market only hears the needs of those with money, which is why people can starve next to full grain silos.
Something like a “basic income” (as social security for all from birth) can soften the exchange economy so it works better to avoid people being left out by increasing economic equality somewhat. That can also replace all other forms of need-based public assistance like welfare or food stamps or unemployment insurance, as well as things like minimum wage laws and employment discrimination laws and such, perhaps even public education as well. A basic income as a human right in an advanced technological society includes acknowledging all the unpaid volunteer labor that goes into a real society — including parenting, being a good neighbor, being an informed citizen, and so on. It also acknowledges a claim on the productive commons where the land and patents and copyrights have “enclosed” so much productive capacity that individuals can not do subsistence production even if they wanted to.
Paul Krugman, along with previously several other Nobel-prize winning economists (see the Wikipedia page on “basic income” and also “social credit”), recent endorsed something like a basic income as probably the only answer to increasing technological unemployment in the 21st century. Search on “Sympathy for the Luddites”. Something like a basic income passed the US House around 1970 under Nixon, and almost passed the US Senate. There is a growing movement for it in Germany.
To get back to the GPA example, imagine if was the partying lesser-academically-inclined friend had the 4.0 GPA because her parents were friends with the Dean, and because she had lots of “tutors” who did her homework for her, and that the woman who worked her butt off was getting a 2.0 GPA being graded on a curve. That is more like what we have in the USA today for most people — many of which work long hours at minimum wage jobs, with various reasons in their history or current family circumstances why they can’t do better financially.
For more ideas, search also on “Economics for the Rest of Us: Debunking the Science that Makes Life Dismal” and “The Spirit Level: Why Greater Equality Makes Societies Stronger” and “The Price of Inequality: How Today’s Divided Society Endangers Our Future”. I also wrote a related essay called “Basic income from a millionaire’s perspective?” listing reasons why most wealthy people and their families would ultimately benefit from a basic income.
The following is from a 2012 article by Economist Walter williams ” the horrors committed by the communists in the former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and the People’s Republic of China. Between 1917 and 1987, Vladimir Lenin, Josef Stalin and their successors murdered and were otherwise responsible for the deaths of 62 million of their own people. Between 1949 and 1987, China’s communists, led by Mao Zedong and his successors, murdered and were otherwise responsible for the deaths of 76 million Chinese. The most authoritative tally of history’s most murderous regimes is documented on University of Hawaii Professor Rudolph J. Rummel’s website, at https://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills, and in his book “Death by Government.”
How much hunting down and punishment have there been for these communist murderers? To the contrary, it’s acceptable both in Europe and in the U.S. to hoist and march under the former USSR’s red flag emblazoned with a hammer and sickle. Mao Zedong has been long admired by academics and leftists across our country, as they often marched around singing the praises of Mao and waving his little red book, “Quotations From Chairman Mao Tse-tung.” President Barack Obama’s communications director, Anita Dunn, in her June 2009 commencement address to St. Andrews Episcopal High School at Washington National Cathedral, said Mao was one of her heroes.
Whether it’s the academic community, the media elite, stalwarts of the Democratic Party or organizations such as the NAACP, the National Council of La Raza, Green for All, the Sierra Club and the Children’s Defense Fund, there is a great tolerance for the ideas of socialism — a system that has caused more deaths and human misery than all other systems combined.
Today’s leftists, socialists and progressives would bristle at the suggestion that their agenda differs little from those of Nazi, Soviet and Maoist mass murderers. One does not have to be in favor of death camps or wars of conquest to be a tyrant. The only requirement is that one has to believe in the primacy of the state over individual rights.
The unspeakable horrors of Nazism didn’t happen overnight. They were simply the end result of a long evolution of ideas leading to consolidation of power in central government in the quest for “social justice.” It was decent but misguided earlier generations of Germans — who would have cringed at the thought of genocide — who created the Trojan horse for Hitler’s ascendancy. Today’s Americans are similarly accepting the massive consolidation of power in Washington in the name of social justice.
I’m confused by this post…unless it is meant to be sheer sarcasm. From all of your other blog entries, it seems like you are a hard-core economic conservative who is clearly against socialism and heavier taxes on the rich; I believe you even support a FLAT TAX!
Anyway, if this post is actually something beyond sarcasm, then I’d certainly be interested in hearing you elaborate on this topic; I find it very intriguing to see an economic conservative defend socialism (if you haven’t guessed already, I am a socialist for all intents and purposes).
What are the things that make you a Socialist? How did your ideology change to Socialism?
It is not the governments job to provide for people, it is the individuals responsibility to take care of himself and his family. If an individual is incapable of helping himself, it is the responsibility of that persons family and/or community to take care of him, not the government. I am for equal rights, but that means I have the same rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Everyone has those rights in a Capitalistic society, in a Socialistic society more people have less rights. Remember this, the bigger the government, the smaller the individual.
France is going to be an interesting case study on this subject.
Socialism is just a word and we should not be afraid of it. America is not truely a capitalist society anyways. Our school, police, military and fire services are all government funded, to name a few. Imagine if we lived in a world where you had to negotiate a price with the fire company for their services to put out the fire that is burning down your house (actually this used to be how fire companies functioned in the 1900s).
Nor do we truely have free and open markets which are the cornerstone of a Capitalist society. Instead we highly regulate our economy (this is a good thing as it provides stability) and even bail out failing corporations, this doesn’t sound like Capitalism to me. I remember one of my professors in college said that we could live in a world of plenty if everyone just worked 16 hours a week, that is all that is needed to keep society moving.
I agree with you Sam that the US is moving more towards a socialist society and that it is nothing to be worried about so long as we live in a society where education, individualism and freedom of speech is celebrated.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Are you joking? Do you really think as we move more and more toward socialism that individualism is still going to be kept alive? NOPE! Say bye to it and say hello to collectivism. Do you know how much of a tyranny socialism really is? Having the government fund police, fire, military and post office is one thing but you need to do mroe studying on it. Also look at the past failures there are some good examples like USSR. Look at all these heavily socialist countries today. They suck and there poor. Look at all the heavily capitalist countries. There the best on earth.
You should really be ashamed of yourself. I really wouldn’t call yourself an American. The founding fathers wanted a limited government not a big one that regulates a persons every move. They were strongly against tyranny and that is what a heavily socialist society is.
So why did America vote for huge government?
Financial Samurai, I really wouldn’t say America voted for huge government. Do you know not even half of Americans vote! In the 2012 presidential election only around 125 million total people voted and America’s population is around 300 million. Out of those 125 million voters 51% voted for Obama. And not everyone who votes for Obama means they support big government.
If you look at public opinion polls on sites like the Pew Research Center and Gallup they show you what America’s ideological leanings have been for the last 10 or 20 years. All these sites show very similar results. America’s ideological leanings have been very consistent over time. America is around 36% conservative, 37% moderate and 22% liberal. America is a center-right nation. We lean just a tad right from the center.
Justin, some of the happiest people on this planet come from heavily government subsidized societies as Sam has touched on in previous posts. There is no link between socialism and tyranny, that is a complete falsity with no academic correlation and using the USSR as a data point is like using North Korea or Italy under Mussolini’s rule as an example and doesn’t represent the true nature of a socialist society.
I take major offense to your comment “You should really be ashamed of yourself. I really wouldn’t call yourself an American.” because I am exercising my write to free speech and individuality. Its one thing to have a disagreement about something but to say someone should feel ashamed for exercising that right is representative of censorship and a tyrannical mindset.
San Diego, I just find it really really funny that you say moving more and more towards a socialist society in the US is nothing to worry about as long as individualism is celebrated. I find it really funny because individualism is the antithesis of socialism! Haven’t you ever seen all these people who advocate socialism and talk badly about capitalism and individualism? Look it up on the internet. Socialists hate individualism and love collectivism. Capitalism=individualism. Socialism=collectivism.
You are correct that America does not have a true capitalist society in fact many scholars believe a true capitalist society has never existed. America has a mixed economy which is a mix of capitalism and socialism. Now the ratio of capitalism and socialism in America swings more towards capitalism but as America moves more and more towards socialism individualism will die and collectivism will rise and the government will become bigger and more intrusive economic freedoms will start to suffer and the tyranny begins.
The reason you should feel ashamed of yourself and anti-American is because the Founding Fathers of this country were supportive of a small limited government so people could have complete freedom because they knew big government can be oppressive! They were supportive of a capitalist economy that was setup by the 1st Secretary of Treasury Alexander Hamilton. Socialism is the opposite of this. American socialists spit in the faces of the Founding Fathers. Go to a protest in America that is a bunch of socialists and tell me how many American flags you see these socialists holding? You’ll see barely any American flags in fact some of them may burn the flag. Now go to a Tea Party protest and tell me how many American flags you see? You’ll see a ton because Tea Partiers support capitalism, freedom and a small limited government like the Founding Fathers.
Justin you are making broad and sweeping statements with no merit to them.
Most of what you said has no academic evidence to support it. Academic evidence is something that our founding fathers, being wise men, would have valued.
The only statement you made I found truth in, beyond some mundane details, was the following, “America has a mixed economy which is a mix of capitalism and socialism. Now the ratio of capitalism and socialism in America swings more towards capitalism…” However, there is no evidence for the conclusion of that statement, “but as America moves more and more towards socialism individualism will die and collectivism will rise and the government will become bigger and more intrusive economic freedoms will start to suffer and the tyranny begins.” There is no evidence to support that statement. Your bias and the fear of what you don’t understand makes you cling to what you have obviously been misinformed about.
You went off on some pretty offensive tangents about something about party protests as well and I am not sure that I completely understood what you meant at times during your ramblings.
I am proud to be an American and respect your right to criticism but bigotry is never tolerated in any format.
Ohh, a seemingly old but relevant post…
“You shouldn’t be denied health-care just because you are poor and cannot afford it.”
Even worse – having to choose treatment options that are known to be less effective. A choice due to cost. I am at that juncture now – I can’t pay $15,000 every 8 weeks so I’ll probably pay with surgery later in life. I’m 26 and recently diagnosed with Crohn’s disease. I’ll be okay – it’s just frustrating to know that being fit, eating well, taking care of myself and having zero family history for this didn’t matter.
Previously I was on track to hitting financial independence on a 12-15 year time horizon. That just changed to 25-35 years assuming health insurance can be acquired at quitting time and no more visits to the emergency room. Talk about dream crushing. A lot can change in 25 years (politically, economically, etc.) – hope isn’t lost.
I would go further to say – it’s not about guaranteeing a minimum standard of living. It’s about a minimum quality of life.
That is frustrating, and sorry to hear about this situation. Hopefully medicine and technology will improve drastically over the next decade to help you out.
It will be really interesting to see how things pan out with Hollande. I just read that he wants to implement a 75-percent income tax on the rich. Whew that’s a lot! I wonder if other EU countries will follow suit and elect other socialist leaders if France has good results with Hollande.
75% would be sweet! So long as we’re not paying for it! Go Hollande!
So when Audrey gets the same job and making the same wage as the young woman in your story, and has all those great party stories to tell her new co-workers, while the young woman keeps her nose to the grindstone, but doesn’t have the “networking” abilities, who would you rather be? And who will end up more “successful”?
You have really missed the boat. You have written the article from a collectivist assumption – that everyone has a right to all wealth that is created. This is terribly wrong. The constitution was written from the perspective that one has the right to the work of their hands. We own what we say, do and are. It is our individual property. What I choose to do with the work of my hands is my choice. No one has the right to it. It is mine. It is mine to create, it is mine to use, and it is mine to choose to give away. Any form of socialism is stealing. If you didn’t build it or create it, what right to you have to it? Am I selfish? No, this is just the fundamental fact of life. You must start from this point. It is absolute. But here is the trick. Since I own the work of my hands, then I have something to give. If I do not own the work of my hands, I have nothing to give. Socialism robs me of my right to be benevolent. There is no personal morality in paying taxes to support welfare. There is no compassion in that. I am forced to do it, I have no choice. I’m amazed how the liberal mind misses this. The liberal mind believes they are compassionate by taking someone else’s money and giving it to those in need. How sad that they do not give of themselves.
And what is with the statement about Obamacare. It was sold as a means to reduce healthcare costs. But we all know by experience that government control is incapable of reducing costs or regulating cost. Government has never been able to effectively regulate anything. Using the government to provide minimal coverage won’t work. Government has no motivation to be efficient. If you don’t believe that, look at our educational system. Costs are high, and the results are marginal at best. Compare public education to private, where the costs are much less, and the results are much better.
If I have missed the boat, then why did the American people elect President Obama? Why will he win again in 2012? And why is there this big “We Are The 99%” uprising if we aren’t fighting for Socialism?
“We Are The 99%” is simply a fight against Wall Street it’s not necessarily a bunch of socialists! Do you know most “We Are The 99%” and Occupy Wall Street people opposed the bank bailouts which were socialist. I guarantee a lot of them also oppose corporate welfare which is also socialism. A decent amount of these people on Occupy Wall Street were Ron Paul supporters and Ron Paul is big on capitalism.
@Janna
He says that to scare you and the rest of the voting electorate. “Socialism” is a buzzword used by Republicans to scare the voters into thinking change is actually happening.
Notice how in his response, he says “big government spending” (I guess we were a Socialist Nation when we recovered from the Great Depression), “Socialist Programs” (He doesn’t name any, not really shocking), “99 weeks of Unemployment” (Wouldn’t that fit in one of the other two, unless he was just adding on to seem smarter), and the tax comment, which you addressed, he just glosses over because he knows he has no answer.
This is just some Republican wanker who espouses conservative talking points in a way in which he thinks he is smarter than everyone else, but can’t respond when someone posts a legitimate counterpoint.
He also uses the word “comrade” in a mocking way since the term has been used by Communists and Socialists in the past.
It’s really sad that some people use blogs as scholarly works. It’s part of the reason why the country is fucked.
I think practically everybody I know offline is doing real well. Have you seen what Facebook, Apple, Google have done over the past five years? I’m sorry if you’re in a rut. Just try harder and get more education. Trust me, work ethic, perseverance, and education will set you free!
The stupid example you use is the the punk in the subway would magically turn into a nice person if I gave him more. That is where you are wrong Comrade, the more you give people the lazier they get, ie-people on welfare are dirty people in general versus blue collar hard working people. The more you give the less motivitated the creators are in a society. My parable: The ant worked hard all summer collecting food and preparing his home for winter. The grass hopper played all summer not doing any work. When winter came the grasshopper had no food. No worries, the grasshopper elected a socialist leader that took away 40 percent of the ants food and gave it to the grasshopper. The next year the ant decided that the new government would take care of him the same way so he played all summer too, as did all the other hard working producing ants. When winter came, there was no food and they all starved to death.
Comrade Ted. Thank you for sharing your parable.
Comrade Sam, I am with you! Obama 2012!
Sam, I don’t understand why you say we are “heading towards” Socialism when the highest marginal tax rate is only 35%, a relatively very low rate historically speaking. From 1932 – 1986 it ranged between 50% and 92%. During most of the Reagan years it was 50-70% until 1987 when it was lowered to 38.5%. Were we a Socialist country all that time?? The rich are getting richer in the U.S., and the ranks of the people struggling to survive is increasing. Is that Socialism??
We weren’t heading towards Socialism, but now with all the big government spending, socialist programs, 99 weeks of unemployment, universal healthcare, desire to increase taxes on those who pay all the taxes anyway, we are certainly heading towards Socialism. And I’m fine with that, as I write in the post.
I don’t want to pay taxes, and am happy to have other people pay for my well being. I’m on board!