From Wikipedia

[Roy.E.Munson]

Modern socialism originated in the late nineteenth-century working class political movement. Karl Marx posited that socialism would be achieved via class struggle and a proletarian revolution which represents the transitional stage between capitalism and communism.[3][4]

 

Socialists mainly share the belief that capitalism unfairly concentrates power and wealth among a small segment of society that controls capital and creates an unequal society. All socialists advocate the creation of an egalitarian society, in which wealth and power are distributed more evenly, although there is considerable disagreement among socialists over how, and to what extent this could be achieved.[1]

 

It kind of sounds alot like what obama is preaching!

[Guest Aloysius]

The kibbutz model worked for a time in Israel, but now they're falling apart. Part of the reason is that Israel's transitioned to a high-tech economy, but you've also got the problem of young Israelis not being at all interested in living on a kibbutz. They want their own things and to be able to pursue wealth for their own sakes, not for the betterment of the commune.

 

Which gets at why socialism ultimately doesn't work: the profit motive and self-interest are just too difficult to sublimate. Instead, it's better to have a free market system in which the state smooths out some of the rough edges of capitalism.

[We need Tom Tupa]

Instead, it's better to have a free market system in which the state smooths out some of the rough edges of capitalism.

Although experience has shown that there are significant costs when the words "state", "some", and "rough edges" are defined incorrectly.

[Mr. T]

The biggest problem with socialism is that there is still a dictator you will have Price controls with socialism.

 

If the government decides what price your property may be sold at then do you actually own the property?

 

You are merely a steward of the property on behalf of the state.

 

What seperates one dictator from the next, is the extent as to which he is willing to use violence to enforce such controls.

 

At any time socilist governments try to manipulate the cost of goods they will also try and manipulate farms and manufacturing to the extent that they must provide x amount of goods and services at a controled pay.

 

And for them to demand this the government will have to resort to more violent means, then socialism leads to a tyranical government.

 

the irony. A socialist armed robber and murderer whining and pissing his communist pants about somebody else ?robbing? him.

[Guest Aloysius]

KIBBUTZ!!!!

 

That's the name of it. As you can tell, I was far too lazy to look it up myself. Kudos.

 

Sad to see it's falling apart though, it was a good system that worked for many many years.

 

My cousin wanted to go live in one back in the 80's.

 

He's a putz though...

 

And about seeing the kibbutzim die - I do agree that it is a little sad, but it's also a sign that they served their purpose. Besides the socialism, the kibbutzim were justified based on the perception that tremendous sacrifices would need to be made in order for Israel to be established/in order for it to survive.

 

Fortunately, Israel's now on more sturdy ground. Hopefully, it'll stay that way.

[Guest Aloysius]

Instead, it's better to have a free market system in which the state smooths out some of the rough edges of capitalism.

Although experience has shown that there are significant costs when the words "state", "some", and "rough edges" are defined incorrectly.

Fo shizzle, my Tizzle.

 

Though we're probably not on the road to serfdom, we should always be aware of the costs of government action, especially when it overreaches.

[We need Tom Tupa]

Yeah, as we all know from elementary school, serfdom is where the owner of the land forces you to pay as much as 1/3 of your crop as duty. America would never do that.

 

(insert appropriate smiley icon of your choosing)

[Mr. T]

my accountant said were all screwed!!

[Westside Steve]

The biggest problem with socialism is that there is still a dictator you will have Price controls with socialism.

 

I don't think that's part of it.

Socialism CAN be linked up with repressive and brutal regimes but I don't think it must' date=' T.

Not even Fascism requires anything evil.

But most Fascist regimes lean that way.

You can have a dictator in a Democracy or a Republic too.

And a "dictator" can just as easily be benevolent.

 

We sapend too much time defending or attacking these terms without a basic understanding.

 

WSS[/b']

[Roy.E.Munson]

Totally agree. It's an "on paper" concept only. Like a totally free market. The actionable version is always somewhere in between.

 

 

I will agree. At this present time I dont make a lot of money. So sure, spreading the wealth sound good. But its the lazy asses in this country that unjustifiably live off the welfare system that will be waiting for their compensation check that ruin this idea!

 

Socialism would work if we all had jobs that were equal! If we all whent to collee to learn a trade and each pulled our own weight.

 

But the facts are that some of us pay are own way through 8 years of college to make good money... while others sit on their ass and work 3 days a week to support their drug habbits. Or some people sit around making babys without a job because they are too fucking ignorant to take advantage of the many oportunities that this country offers us.

 

That being said, I dont want my hard earned money being spread to any of those waste of space loosers!

 

If your not completly lazy their are oportunities and that is what our country was founded on. Not giving the ignorant tax breaks because we need their votes!

[Westside Steve]

[

 

If your not completly lazy their are oportunities and that is what our country was founded on. Not giving the ignorant tax breaks because we need their votes!

 

Actually we were "founded" because the rich guys here got tired of paying the king his cut.

Then they butchered anyone who thought differently.

 

For the lovers of the comic book history ask how long before the US of A put down the Whiskey Rebellion.

 

WSS

[Roy.E.Munson]

And all these years i thought the problem was taxation without representation!

 

you get my point. WE WERE NOT founded on socialism.

 

Everyone should be taxed the same % no matter how much they make.

[Roy.E.Munson]

HAHAHAHA

 

SOunds great!

[Westside Steve]

And all these years i thought the problem was taxation without representation!

 

LOL

 

you get my point. WE WERE NOT founded on socialism.

Exactly true.

Actually quite the opposite.

 

Everyone should be taxed the same % no matter how much they make.

 

Sounds more fair.

When 60% contribute for services and 40% do not (soon to be 52 to 48%) it seems unbalanced to me.

 

But when you can vote yourself more of the other guys money.......

WSS

[Roy.E.Munson]

In all actuality, ill be willing to bet any amount of money that says you guys cant show me a law that says we evne have to pay income tax.

 

Hell, the constitution says we can only be taxed "Directly" on property or goods.

 

The income tax system is unconstitutional... therefor illeagal!

[Roy.E.Munson]

And all these years i thought the problem was taxation without representation!

 

LOL

 

you get my point. WE WERE NOT founded on socialism.

Exactly true.

Actually quite the opposite.

 

Everyone should be taxed the same % no matter how much they make.

 

Sounds more fair.

When 60% contribute for services and 40% do not (soon to be 52 to 48%) it seems unbalanced to me.

 

But when you can vote yourself more of the other guys money.......

WSS

 

 

Can you explain a little more!

[Westside Steve]

And all these years i thought the problem was taxation without representation!

 

LOL

 

you get my point. WE WERE NOT founded on socialism.

Exactly true.

Actually quite the opposite.

 

Everyone should be taxed the same % no matter how much they make.

 

Sounds more fair.

When 60% contribute for services and 40% do not (soon to be 52 to 48%) it seems unbalanced to me.

 

But when you can vote yourself more of the other guys money.......

WSS

 

 

Can you explain a little more!

 

What in particular Roy?

 

WSS

[darkstar]

Wow! I have been lurking here for a long time. This might be the first time I have seen a discussion about anything that hasn't devolved into calling someone Hitler, or a War Criminal. Nice job guys!

[Guest Aloysius]

Me, I'm kind of Gandhi with a little David Duchovny mixed in.

So you're a tranquil sex fiend?

[darkstar]

You're all Hitlers. Every last one of you.

 

I spoke to soon. Thanks for reassuring me, I was getting concerned that the board was being overrun by sensible posters.

[Guest mz.]

Wow! I have been lurking here for a long time. This might be the first time I have seen a discussion about anything that hasn't devolved into calling someone Hitler, or a War Criminal. Nice job guys!

 

Welcome!

[darkstar]

I like it!

[Mr. T]

Socialism, the lazy mans way of getting payed!

 

lazy man says Vote Obama. he needs a pay raise.

[Westside Steve]

In all actuality, ill be willing to bet any amount of money that says you guys cant show me a law that says we evne have to pay income tax.

 

Hell, the constitution says we can only be taxed "Directly" on property or goods.

 

The income tax system is unconstitutional... therefor illeagal!

 

The constitution is basically meaningless though every party accuses the other one of abusing it.

 

For any lovers of the constitution I ask you to list the unrestricted freedoms it guarantees us.

 

WSS

[Westside Steve]

You're all Hitlers. Every last one of you.

 

Alo Where's the "How DARE you!!!!!"

WSS

[Guest Aloysius]

Shep was kidding, just like I was when I responded to his post.

 

If he actually compared Bush or McCain to Hitler, I'd call him out on it.

[Guest mz.]

You're all Hitlers. Every last one of you.

 

Alo Where's the "How DARE you!!!!!"

WSS

 

Oh, Steve.

[Pumpkin Eater]

Totally agree. It's an "on paper" concept only. Like a totally free market. The actionable version is always somewhere in between.

 

 

I will agree. At this present time I dont make a lot of money. So sure, spreading the wealth sound good. But its the lazy asses in this country that unjustifiably live off the welfare system that will be waiting for their compensation check that ruin this idea!

 

Socialism would work if we all had jobs that were equal! If we all whent to collee to learn a trade and each pulled our own weight.

 

But the facts are that some of us pay are own way through 8 years of college to make good money... while others sit on their ass and work 3 days a week to support their drug habbits. Or some people sit around making babys without a job because they are too fucking ignorant to take advantage of the many oportunities that this country offers us.

 

That being said, I dont want my hard earned money being spread to any of those waste of space loosers!

 

If your not completly lazy their are oportunities and that is what our country was founded on. Not giving the ignorant tax breaks because we need their votes!

 

What lazy ass is able to actually WORK (and therefore pay income taxes) and collect welfare both? Obama's tax cuts are for the WORKING. It is a TAX CUT not welfare.