Question: Why is socialism bad?

Topic Tools

Search this Thread

dnnmllr Post #261 November 16,2009, 3:08pm

"Steady my feet in accord with your promise, Let not iniquity lead me"...

Veteran

Joined: Feb 2008

Pennsylvania

Posts: 1,600

See profile

The1Tomcat wrote :

I'm attempting to understand the American mentality towards the buzz word "socialism."

Do most American's understand what socialism or socialist concepts are? (Do I for that matter?) It just seems that every time the word comes up people come out with pitchforks and torches to denounce anyone who is a "socialist" as the worst thing ever and synonymous with communism.

Then countries like Canada or Britain (or most of Europe for that matter) are brought up as examples of why any socialist ideas should ever be used in the US. What has been so wrong with these other countries as to dismiss their ideas and policies outright?

Also, I'm wondering why the feeling on government oversight or government control of certain key elements of society are such bad buzz words as well.

Please don't take this question sarcastically. I want to honestly understand where people are coming from with their views and opinions on these matters.

(Tone = Friendly)

.....As "The Founding Father's" ensured.....I prefer Democracy. See the following:

Main Entry: so·cial·ism

Pronunciation: \ˈsō-shə-ˌli-zəm\
Function: noun Date: 1837 1 : any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2 a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3 : a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done

OR

Main Entry: de·moc·ra·cy

Pronunciation: \di-ˈmä-krə-sē\
Function: noun Inflected Form(s): plural de·moc·ra·cies
Etymology: Middle French democratie, from Late Latin democratia, from Greek dēmokratia, from dēmos + -kratia -cracy
Date: 1576 1 a : government by the people; especially : rule of the majority b : a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections
2 : a political unit that has a democratic government
3 capitalized : the principles and policies of the Democratic party in the United States
4 : the common people especially when constituting the source of political authority
5 : the absence of hereditary or arbitrary class distinctions or privileges

I am glad to be an American citizen living in a Democracy.

I wish you well.

peg099 Post #262 November 16,2009, 5:35pm

Sage

Joined: Sep 2008

Canada

Posts: 12,516

See profile

Jacquesne wrote :

I said specifically that socialism leads to totalitarianism. I never said they were the same thing. In order for a socialist economy to exist there must be some sort of structure enforcing the distribution of wealth.

The structure for distributing the wealth can be the equivalent of a company's payroll office. That's not totalitarianism. It's administration.

What leads to totalitarianism is when power becomes concentrated in the hands of very few, either through an electroral system where a small number of people are voted in to make decisions for many, or when one group usurps power. Totalitarianism is just as likely (probably more) in a capitalist nation, because money (and therefore power) is concentrated in the hands of fewer people.

wrote :

The most efficient government to enforce this system is a totalitarian system or an oligarchy, as I said previously.

The most 'efficient' government to make and enforce any kind of laws is a totalitarian system or oligarchy. The less debate you have on any issue and the fewer stakeholders you take into consideration, the more efficient you can be. This is not specific to socialism.

wrote :

I would agree that the modern U.S. is close to this socialist/totalitarian idea and it started long before Bush got into office.

Many of the Bush administration's actions (especially things that involved the curtailing of personal rights) were totalitarian. They were in no way socialist. They are two completely separate things. Just because in some cases socialism has been accompanied by totalitarianism does not mean that the two go hand in hand. There are numerous capitalist dictatorships as well.

wrote :

The original concept of the United States was to have a series of smaller, mostly independent states that were able to govern their own affairs at the lowest level. The federal government was specifically designed to deal only with issues that involved multiple states or foreign issues.

And, two hundred years ago, when there was far less mobility, far less long-distance communication, and economies were much more localized, that was feasible. The world has changed since then.

wrote :

Maybe we should go ahead and adopt China's system of totalitarian government with capitalist economy. It's working for them because capitalism works.

If hanging on to capitalism is more important to you than preserving human rights, go for it. But if that is your view, then no matter what I say, we will not see eye to eye. Democracy, equality, freedom of expression, and basic human rights are far more important to me than preserving any particular economic system.

In any event, capitalism seems to work best in more totalitarian regimes, where expression of freedom is curtailed and the disenfranchised can be more easily squelched. Socialism needs a strong democracy where people feel they have a stronger voice in order to thrive.

wrote :

In my mind we can continue to improve the system by making laws designed to prevent corruption rather than laws designed to spend money for the "common good."

Lovely theory, except that in your system, the most corrupt people are those that have the most influence in the fashioning of laws.

wrote :

A purely "free" economy is just as likely to become corrupt as one that's closely regulated. What's needed, as in most things, is balance.

That I agree with.

wrote :

Power tends to congeal. It's our job to prevent it instead of promote it.

Which is precisely why I prefer a system that's egalitarian in nature over one that's predicated on inequality.

Last edited by peg099; November 16,2009 at 7:51pm.

chapgirl Post #263 November 16,2009, 7:54pm

Quick Study

Joined: May 2009

Los Angeles

Posts: 71

See profile

The1Tomcat,

I think you hit it on the head though in one of your first sentences: They jump to the conclusion that Socialist and Communist are the same. Bottom line, they also believe the garbage that we are told here about being the best country in the world. And while we are believing that, we are 35th in the world for health care, and 18th or something in the world for education, and the countries that we have been degrading for years are marching right on past us. I have friends who have lived in Europe, and I have family in British Isles, and they all have a better standard of living than we do.

Maybe listening to too much Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Ann Coulter, and others?

The1Tomcat Post #264 November 17,2009, 2:20pm

Quick Study

Joined: Jun 2009

Canada

Posts: 73

See profile

Holy crap, I haven't been on this site in months and you people are still talking about my thread? 27 pages long lol. Only reason I checked was that dnnmllr sent me a private message on this topic which made it into my personal email.

Thanks dnnmllr.

Let me just inflame this topic further by stating that American democracy run by the people for the people died the day capitalistic greed overtook common sense. Who lets their health and financial wellbeing be decided by a greed driven corporation where you have no say in the matter versus your elected representatives? I think you guys should abolish the FDA and let the pharmaceutical companies run the show and the big aggricorps, you should abolish the NTSB and let the airlines take care of your safety with no oversight or regulations either. When you're running in to your doctor for the food poisoning/drug side effects while a plane landing gear drops on your house you can talk to your insurance company about your plan coverage.

Let me know how it goes.

God Bless the US.

Rand_011 Post #265 November 17,2009, 3:46pm

Enthusiast

Joined: Jan 2008

Anaheim

Posts: 998

See profile

Ahh yes ... The 'Common Sense' argument ...

It is common sense that Joe should work 40 hours a week so both he and Susie will have a roof over the respective heads and food on their respective tables ...

It is common sense that Joe who invests in insurance to protect him and his family should also invest in insurance to protect Susie and her family ...

It is common sense that Joe pay taxes to support schools for his kids as well as pay taxes to support schooling for Susie's kids

It is common sense that Joe has a portion of his income set aside for his retirement (earning a negative interest) as well as set aside for Susie's retirement ...

It is common sense to increase the taxation on the employers and require greater benefits/wages and expect an increase in employment ...

It is common sense that there should be a public option for insurance paid for by increase in taxation on wealthy, and an increase in taxation on other insurers ... That being the only way to keep the proposed public option competitive ...

Jacquesne Post #266 November 17,2009, 6:19pm

knows the answer...42

Veteran

Joined: May 2008

Reno, NV

Posts: 1,357

See profile

Tomcat, socialism is not regulation. The FDA and other government regulatory bodies are designed to prevent abuse by companies towards consumers.

The key is that the FDA isn't selling the food. As long as businesses play by the rules they can compete and innovate however they want. Socialism creates a government-run monopoly and is just as bad as the big corporations...the only difference being at least the big corporations tend to make money. The government systematically loses it, business-wise. I don't see how this is an improvement.

Other than some libertarian ideas most "capitalist" concepts require regulation, even back with Adam Smith. The regulation is designed to encourage competition, prevent fraud, and protect the system overall. This is not socialist.

Socialism is when a car company drives itself into the ground (no pun intended) financially and the government steps in and spends tax money to save them. It rewards failure on the grounds of "equality" which is really not (if Saab were going out of business in the U.S. would they have been given bailouts?).

I personally believe capitalism is egalitarian by nature. It gives everyone the same playing field and the same capacity to succeed in that field...as well as the same capacity to fail. Government regulation is necessary to capitalism in order to prevent it from being abused.

It's when the field no longer becomes equal that we get socialism. Socialism likes the "everyone can succeed!" motto but doesn't like how people can fail. So they create a safety net where the government, drawing on the resources of everyone in the society, supports anyone who "needs" it. In the extreme people lose their incentives to be productive as all failing means is that you get more money from everyone else. This creates a constant drain on the economic system until you have wonderful things like ten trillion dollars of debt.

What is really needed is a blend of the two systems. The safety net is a double-edged sword. Sure, it has the negatives I just mentioned, but it also has the positives of preventing someone who runs into truly unfortunate circumstances from becoming completely unproductive. Society as a whole does not benefit when people are being abused by the system.

The government is not a business. It makes and implements laws. Let businesses be businesses and let the government be the government. Regulating the economy was part of the original Constitution...in fact it was pretty much all the Articles of Confederation could do at all. Nothing in capitalism calls for deregulation. It does, however, call for the ability to compete. Socialism eliminates this component.

In doing so it tends to bring the quality of products to the consumer down as a whole. You just need to glance at Amtrak, public schools, and Medicare to see how utterly pathetic the government is as a business entity.

If it's capitalist, Wal-Mart greed versus socialist, Amtrak greed I'll take Wal-Mart any day.

Jacquesne

delicatewaves Post #267 November 17,2009, 7:11pm

Newbie

Joined: Apr 2008

Posts: 6

See profile

The argument for any one of the mentioned political systems is a lot like determining the perfect diet. None of them will work indefinitely.
No matter which political ideal you favor, any democratic country will suffer bribes and bullies, and every dictator is subject to the influence of the collective consensus of the people. The problem as I see it is simply that we as human beings have not evolved to the point where we might exist peacefully in such large numbers. Studies in group psychology have shown that we operate most efficiently in much smaller groups, and that conflict is inevitable when certain limits are exceeded. For example: lock ten people of any type in an office building together and they will likely group together to find a way out, however if the experiment is repeated with 35 people, smaller sub groups are extremely likely to form, and rivalries may result between them due to their proximity. The fact is people will find a way to corrupt any political ideal, and no political ideal will ever satisfy a population, but a healthy population density provides the opportunity for peaceful coexistence between conflicting political systems, regardless of what those systems may be.

dito Post #268 November 17,2009, 9:39pm

Veteran

Joined: Dec 2008

Colorado

Posts: 1,308

See profile

Jacquesne wrote :

What is really needed is a blend of the two systems. The safety net is a double-edged sword.

Regulating the economy was part of the original Constitution...in fact it

When we get a blend of socialism and capitalism we get what we have now. Capitalism and socialism can't exist together.

To keep regular, meaning to keep states from putting high tariffs on each other. Andrew Napolitano: Health-Care Reform and the Constitution - WSJ.com

Other than that, I agree with your post. There is very little regulation needed with capitalism but some is needed.

Thought this was interesting as well: China turns to Adam Smith - Telegraph

dnnmllr Post #269 November 18,2009, 9:20am

"Steady my feet in accord with your promise, Let not iniquity lead me"...

Veteran

Joined: Feb 2008

Pennsylvania

Posts: 1,600

See profile

The1Tomcat wrote :

God Bless the US.

You are

madewar Post #270 November 22,2009, 1:40am

Newbie

Joined: Nov 2009

Austin, TX

Posts: 4

See profile

I think Nancy Pelosi said it best when she said "The rich benefit, the poor suffer and the middle class pays for it all."

« What's more important? | Politics | Insurance? »

Topic Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new topics You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts	BB code is On Smilies are On [IMG] code is On HTML code is On Trackbacks are On Pingbacks are On Refbacks are Off
Boards Rules

Topic	Topic Starter	Board	Replies	Last Post
Similar Topics
Question for guys 20-35ish	Red28	About You	57	August 16,2011 12:24pm
eHarmony Profile Workshop: Question 3: "Who has been most influential person in your life, & why?'	eHA_Admin_Lori	Using eHarmony	97	April 20,2011 7:07pm
How do you respond to "What personal habits are important to you" question	jlb896	Using eHarmony	28	January 13,2011 5:50pm
eHarmony Profile Workshop: Question 6: What is the most important quality you seek in another?	eHA_Admin_Lori	Using eHarmony	105	December 27,2010 6:49pm
eHarmony Profile Workshop - Question 2: What are the THREE things for which you are MOST thankful?	eHA_Admin_Lori	Using eHarmony	93	May 23,2010 4:18pm

Looking for a Great Relationship?

Get started now. Fill out this form and take the questionnaire to receive your matches.

First Name:

I'm a:

seeking

Postal Code:

Country:

Email:

Confirm Email:

Password:

Must be at least 5 characters

How did you hear about us?

Latest on our Dating Advice Discussion Boards

Topic • Category	Views	Posts
First contact on eHarmony, smile, questions, email? • Using eHarmony	57	3
How do i recoonect with him again? • Ask a Dating Expert	11	2
For women to answer: How to avoid the friend zone • Ask a Dating Expert	101	6
is there a reason to ask if we're exclusive? • Dating	3921	43
Why am I not successful? • Ask a Dating Expert	340	28
Being blown off, or something else? • Dating	442	16
Is Your Gut Leading - or Misleading You? • Dating	564	11
51917 more topics in our discussion boards. Join the conversation!

“It's important to understand the way a site works. Rigidly assuming / insisting that eH works likes all the others you're used to isn't utilizing the site functions to your best advantage. No.... ... ” – Wiseman2

Join the “First contact on eHarmony, smile, questions, email?” discussion

“ If you have yet to meet, you don't know him or whether you two will form a connection. Connections formed over e-mail tend to be fantasies. You will see this echoed over and over by experienced ... ” – shapeShifter79

Join the “How do i recoonect with him again?” discussion

“ Then it's a bit premature to worry about being friend-zoned. The first step is to go out on dates! What specific steps did you try? How many women did you ask out in person? Did you buy a ... ” – shapeShifter79

Join the “For women to answer: How to avoid the friend zone” discussion

“ This is an old thread. She asked this in 2010. By now they are likely very exclusive or very over. ” – shapeShifter79

Join the “is there a reason to ask if we're exclusive?” discussion

“ I'm sure he wouldn't get that. And I can't be sure that was the actual message. But it sems kind of likely to me.” – boomer_gal

Join the “Why am I not successful?” discussion

“Hi eccemuliere and welcome to eHA.On an internet forum like eHA, you're going to get a wide variety of responses; some you'll like and some you won't. It's best to focus on the ones that speak to ... ” – Sassafras54

Join the “Being blown off, or something else?” discussion

“ Although I have ignored my gut at times, in hindsight it's always been right, in terms of recognizing bad choices. QUOTE] But once we realize our past mistakes, we can use our reason to clue us ... ” – eccemuliere

Join the “Is Your Gut Leading - or Misleading You?” discussion

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 4:00am.

Looking for a Great Relationship?

Get started now. Fill out this form and take the questionnaire to receive your matches.

First Name:

I'm a:

seeking

Postal Code:

Country:

Email:

Confirm Email:

Password:

Must be at least 5 characters

How did you hear about us?

Featured Groups

Completely Stupid Conversations

Do you have something completely stupid to talk about? Come here. Talk. It's a simple two step process. Please have a good sense of humor about all this. It is good for the heart.
eHarmony Advice Member Dating Journals

A place to chronicle the ups and downs of your dating life, to cheer on your friends (and get cheered on).

These Readers Want Your Advice!

"No head, no shirt, no service!"
"Picture of his dead wife in the bedroom"
"The lost art of conversation..."

Connect with Advice Members

tangochef

"Interests: Argentine Tango, Cooking, Travelling, Tennis, Biking, Performance Arts, Reading"View profile
faraday

"Interests: Gardening, Cooking, Baking, The Gym, Going For Walks With My Daughter, Bubble Baths, Red Wine, Dark Beer, Funny Stories And Quirky Movies." View profile

Question: Why is socialism bad?

Looking for a Great Relationship?

Latest on our Dating Advice Discussion Boards

Looking for a Great Relationship?

Related Articles

Featured Groups

Completely Stupid Conversations

eHarmony Advice Member Dating Journals

These Readers Want Your Advice!

Connect with Advice Members

tangochef

faraday

Dating Advice

Off Topic