Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Guest BoomBoomCrash

If Socialism Is Such A Looney Concept...

Recommended Posts

Guest BoomBoomCrash

...why is it the countries with the highest living standards are very socialist in nature? The bastion of free market philosophy (the USA) by contrast has a health care system that sees people dying on trolleys outside hospitals, people working 2 full-time jobs yet still living in poverty, and for all their toil the majority of Americans retire with less than $500 saved by the time they retire. The free market may arguably allow some people on the basis of nothing but 'merit' to achieve massive wealth, but the consequences for the rest of society are devastating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Certainly all the countries that have ever had 'socialist' in their title had far superior records on human rights.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest BoomBoomCrash
:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

Are you going to start with you're 'no true Scotman' nonsense again?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think anyone ever said it was looney idea as such? The trouble is, that we so disillusioned into thinking capitalism can be the only way out , anything else seems irrelavant and a non starter.

Now is the time for true socialism to prove a point, but the bastions of socialism seems far to busy fleecing and destroying the fabric of the UK they have lost sight of reality.

Nothing but a near total reversal in thinking at the heart of our economy will send us in the right direction in my view.

For instance, why did growth and gdp find its way into the happiness of a nation if that growth and gdp was a fraud?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest BoomBoomCrash
Certainly all the countries that have ever had 'socialist' in their title had far superior records on human rights.

Just because a populist party comes to power and decided to label itself 'socialist' it does not make it so.

Edited by BoomBoomCrash

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
a health care system that sees people dying on trolleys outside hospitals

America had a much better health care system in the 60s before the gov't started screwing thing up.

people working 2 full-time jobs yet still living in poverty

american wages have been falling behind productivity increase since the early '70s when the gold standard was removed.

the Fed & US Treasury stole peoples' wage increases via seignorage

rint135_graph4_0.PNG

The free market may arguably allow some people on the basis of nothing but 'merit' to achieve massive wealth, but the consequences for the rest of society are devastating.

a free market allows a failry even distribution of wealth with a strong middle-class.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...why is it the countries with the highest living standards are very socialist in nature? The bastion of free market philosophy (the USA) by contrast has a health care system that sees people dying on trolleys outside hospitals, people working 2 full-time jobs yet still living in poverty, and for all their toil the majority of Americans retire with less than $500 saved by the time they retire. The free market may arguably allow some people on the basis of nothing but 'merit' to achieve massive wealth, but the consequences for the rest of society are devastating.

Presumably you mean countries like Sweden and Norway?

I think you trip over loony right wing propaganda here, they are mixed economies with a welfare state, high levels of taxation which minimise the degree of inequality in society.

This isn't socialism. It's something rather different which isn't in the mental map of the intellectual midgets who pass for commentators in the US (and sometimes the UK) media - think Richard Littlejohn on Newsnight and you get the general idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest BoomBoomCrash
Presumably you mean countries like Sweden and Norway?

I think you trip over loony right wing propaganda here, they are mixed economies with a welfare state, high levels of taxation which minimise the degree of inequality in society.

This isn't socialism. It's something rather different which isn't in the mental map of the intellectual midgets who pass for commentators in the US (and sometimes the UK) media - think Richard Littlejohn on Newsnight and you get the general idea.

They are socialist countries as most people understand the term today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...why is it the countries with the highest living standards are very socialist in nature?

Are they? What country is that -- Fantasia? ;-D

You see, there is no difference between having no money in your pocket and everything in the shops to lots of cash in your wallet and nothing in the shops, but the latter feels better in principle, human nature is to be alright with whatever, just as long as everyone else is equally bad off.

I leave you with an antique East German joke, from the time when Socialism and Communism were still en-vogue and Honecker was still ruling the roost:

Question to Radio Eriwan: Vot is ze defference between American fairytale and Soviet fairytale?

Answer: In prrrinciple, there iz no difference. Howeverrr, American fairytale starts with: "Once upon a time there was...", Soviet fairytale starts with: "One day, soon in the future, we will be able to...."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Presumably you mean countries like Sweden and Norway?
They are socialist countries as most people understand the term today.

yep. taxing the sh1t out of the population to pay a huge chunk of GDP to the banksters:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/ma...-uk-bailout-gdp

Alistair Darling has already spent almost a fifth of Britain's GDP on bailing out its shattered banking system – more than any other major economy, according to a grave assessment of the world financial crisis published today by the International Monetary Fund.

It calculates that the UK has spent as much as 19.8% of its GDP, topping the table of G20 countries.

The US, where the investment bank Bear Stearns and the insurer AIG have both been rescued with public finds, has spent just 6.8% of its GDP. Only Norway has come close to the UK, spending 13.8%.

same sh1t, different country.

Edited by InternationalRockSuperstar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what you describe is essentially marxism.

marxism normally engenders images of communism and a big state however this culdnt be further from the truth. the basis of it is just the removal of class lines and a balance of power between social classes.

its got nothing to do with hindering freedom, or the ability to do what you want. in fact it involves people empowering themselves (a capitalist concept) but not playing by the rules of the current ruling class (which is disproportionately weighted to the rich)

capitalism isnt the evolutionary stage after socialism.

in fact socialism was always supposed to be the next evolutionary stage of capitalism. i.e democracy at a higher level.

Edited by mfp123

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They are socialist countries as most people understand the term today.

Most people think watching Big Brother is an awesome use of the only life they'll ever have. The Scandos aren't really socialist in any strictly doctrinal or practical sense. They have no class based political analysis and in particular have don't have public ownership of the means of production. You could say they are 'social democrats' but they aren't socialist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
{Sweden and Norway}

They are socialist countries as most people understand the term today.

Ah. But there has been, historically, a very strong culture of independence and self-reliance in both countries (and the rest of Scandinavia), as well as a strong culture of communal responsibility. As a result, the freely available public services, such as health care, were not unreasonably used by the population, and so did not suffer from the escalating cost problems in the NHS.

Also there is a very strong work ethic in both countries.

These cultural dimensions mitigate against the worst problems with socialism.

Unfortunately, recent immigrant populations in Sweden (largely of asylum seekers) seem to (in general) not have taken on the same cultural values, and freely exploit the system, which has lead to a great deal of social and racial tension in the country. The cost of the welfare state in Sweden is swelling unsustainably as a result.

Sad, but true. Socialism can work well, but, it seems, only in culturals and racially homogenous countries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Presumably you mean countries like Sweden and Norway?

I think you trip over loony right wing propaganda here, they are mixed economies with a welfare state, high levels of taxation which minimise the degree of inequality in society.

Sweden has low corporation taxes and no inheritance tax - it's just that a larger proportion of the tax burden is placed on income.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

arguably socialism is the next stage of the worlds historical development.

eventually in the future, maybe not in our generation but in future generations, money etc wont be such an important driver in life, and people look beyond it.

its got nothing to do with restricting activity or trying to pull people down but instead setting out a different set of priorities in life.

ive no doubt that in 100's of years from now people will look back at how we are now, and say; how could people live contently in luxury whilst 100's of millions of people on the planet were starving?

its because of the capitalist, look out for number 1 system we have, but in future a better system will evolve.

its just that the world is not ready and not at that stage of social development yet.

it will probably take the discovery of other living planets and realisation that we are not alone in the universe to prompt that change.

Edited by mfp123

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...why is it the countries with the highest living standards are very socialist in nature? The bastion of free market philosophy (the USA) by contrast has a health care system that sees people dying on trolleys outside hospitals, people working 2 full-time jobs yet still living in poverty, and for all their toil the majority of Americans retire with less than $500 saved by the time they retire. The free market may arguably allow some people on the basis of nothing but 'merit' to achieve massive wealth, but the consequences for the rest of society are devastating.

Here is a quote from Winston Churchill, which pretty much sums up my feeling about socialism:

“Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.â€

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
its because of the capitalist, look out for number 1, system we have, but in future a better system will evolve.

its just that the world is not ready and not at that stage of social development yet.

Never gonna happen. Human beings are hyper aggressive, relentlessly competitive apex predators. It's much more likely that we'll wipe ourselves out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Never gonna happen. Human beings are hyper aggressive, relentlessly competitive apex predators. It's much more likely that we'll wipe ourselves out.

the swedes are sort of getting there already...

socialism doesnt work today, not because of the concept, but because of the way we are as people.

when i say we i mean the vast majority of the planet, being taught to be selfish in human nature.

eventually we will change our priorities and outlook on life and society, to a higher level.

Edited by mfp123

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
what you describe is essentially marxism.

marxism normally engenders images of communism and a big state however this culdnt be further from the truth. the basis of it is just the removal of class lines and a balance of power between social classes.

its got nothing to do with hindering freedom, or the ability to do what you want. in fact it involves people empowering themselves (a capitalist concept) but not playing by the rules of the current ruling class (which is disproportionately weighted to the rich)

capitalism isnt the evolutionary stage after socialism.

in fact socialism was always supposed to be the next evolutionary stage of capitalism. i.e democracy at a higher level.

Yep. Just as feudalism couldnt copy with the new complexity that the discovery of the new world brought, something will come along which capitalism will not be able to cope with and the social system will change.My view is that a combination of new technologies and reaching the limits of the planets sustainability, in terms of resources, will be the cause of capitalisms downfall?

But, just as Durkheim reckoned, inspite of the wonders of scientific advance, there is something eternal in religion. I feel the same way about money. Even in a marxist society.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yep. Just as feudalism couldnt copy with the new complexity that the discovery of the new world brought, something will come along which capitalism will not be able to cope with and the social system will change.My view is that a combination of new technologies and reaching the limits of the planets sustainability, in terms of resources, will be the cause of capitalisms downfall?

But, just as Durkheim reckoned, inspite of the wonders of scientific advance, there is something eternal in religion. I feel the same way about money. Even in a marxist society.

youre right, a lack of resources could well be another driver for social change.

the realisation that in being selfish, you will end up spiting yourself.

by consuming too much for yourself (or as an entire country), you affect others and eventually bring yourself down in the long run. e.g the west consuming too much resulting in lack of resources.

Edited by mfp123

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
arguably socialism is the next stage of the worlds historical development.

eventually in the future, maybe not in our generation but in future generations, money etc wont be such an important driver in life, and people look beyond it.

its got nothing to do with restricting activity or trying to pull people down but instead setting out a different set of priorities in life.

ive no doubt that in 100's of years from now people will look back at how we are now, and say; how could people live contently in luxury whilst 100's of millions of people on the planet were starving?

its because of the capitalist, look out for number 1 system we have, but in future a better system will evolve.

its just that the world is not ready and not at that stage of social development yet.

it will probably take the discovery of other living planets and realisation that we are not alone in the universe to prompt that change.

I think this perfectly captures the reality of socialism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
it will probably take the discovery of other living planets and realisation that we are not alone in the universe to prompt that change.

When Europeans sailed to Australia and America for the first time we didn't start acting with benevolence and generosity toward the Aborignals and Native Americans. We wiped them out and took their shit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   285 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.