Jump to content
THE BROWNS BOARD

Joe Scarborough


Guest Aloysius

Recommended Posts

It is, IMO, a completely unworkable system in our culture.

And I'd guess that even you'd admit Norway is a far different place than the US.

And a fairly rare case of socialistic success.

But in another thousand years who knows?

WSS

 

I am tired of trying to argue about Socialism and it's many and DIFFERENT applications to people who either really dont understand the term or are confusing it with the SOLE application of COMMUNISM. Here READ first: http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/551569/socialism

 

socialism

Overview

System of social organization in which private property and the distribution of income are subject to social control

(Funny that sounds like our medicare/medicaid/welfare programs/hud housing/Federal and State Grant systems) Seems to be working HERE for quite a while)

; also, the political movements aimed at putting that system into practice.

 

Because “social control” may be interpreted in widely diverging ways, socialism ranges from statist to libertarian, from Marxist to liberal. The term was first used to describe the doctrines of Charles Fourier, Henri de Saint-Simon, and Robert Owen, who emphasized noncoercive communities of people working noncompetitively for the spiritual and physical well-being of all (see utopian socialism). Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, seeing socialism as a transition state between capitalism and communism, appropriated what they found useful in socialist movements to develop their “scientific socialism.” In the 20th century, the Soviet Union was the principal model of strictly centralized socialism, while Sweden and Denmark were well-known for their noncommunist socialism. See also collectivism, communitarianism, social democracy.

 

Main

social and economic doctrine that calls for public rather than private ownership or control of property and natural resources. According to the socialist view, individuals do not live or work in isolation but live in cooperation with one another. Furthermore, everything that people produce is in some sense a social product, and everyone who contributes to the production of a good is entitled to a share in it. Society as a whole, therefore, should own or at least control property for the benefit of all its members.

 

 

HMMM that kind of alludes to our Taxing system of how we to REALLOCATE according to income levels in order to make fair who actually benefits the most........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 71
  • Created
  • Last Reply
The tenets of Jante Law are:

. You shall not think you are special.

. You shall not believe you are smarter than others.

. You shall not believe you are wiser than others.

. You shall not behave as if you are better than others.

. You shall not believe that you know more than others.

. You shall not believe that you can fix things better than others.

. You shall not laugh at others.

. You shall not believe that others care about you.

. You shall not believe that you can teach others anything.

 

As I've said repeatedly socialism is not evil.

It is, IMO, a completely unworkable system in our culture.

 

And I'd guess that even you'd admit Norway is a far different place than the US.

And a fairly rare case of socialistic success.

But in another thousand years who knows?

WSS

 

I agree. What if we combined the two. Capisocialism. lol

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So all we need to do is export as much oil as Saudi Arabia and shrink our population by 99%, and we can have a higher standard of living? Who's in?!! Yeah!

 

 

So how is our overbalanced consumerism working for us Tupa? You denigrate another country because they have a small population and are a net exporter as a basis of a counter argument?

 

Imagine that a culture that instead of practicing unbalanced credit based consumerism vs what they produce and manufacture domestically has a higher standard of living...

 

That makes their appilcation of socialism invalid..... sure sounds logical.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So how is our overbalanced consumerism working for us Tupa? You denigrate another country because they have a small population and are a net exporter as a basis of a counter argument?

 

Imagine that a culture that instead of practicing unbalanced credit based consumerism vs what they produce and manufacture domestically has a higher standard of living...

 

That makes their appilcation of socialism invalid..... sure sounds logical.

It makes their application irrelevant to the US. There is nothing we can do to make our economy as dependent on natural resources as theirs. And there is nothing we can do to shrink our population down to the size of Phoenix. Am I wrong about that? Do you have a plan to implement either of those proposals?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So how is our overbalanced consumerism working for us Tupa? You denigrate another country because they have a small population and are a net exporter as a basis of a counter argument?

 

Imagine that a culture that instead of practicing unbalanced credit based consumerism vs what they produce and manufacture domestically has a higher standard of living...

 

That makes their appilcation of socialism invalid..... sure sounds logical.

 

 

I don't think Toop denigrated anyone.

Just explaining how a tiny and ancient country with huge natural resource income might be OK as socialists.

 

And who will be the morality csar to tell us what we can and cant have in America?

You?

 

Jante law?

WSS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just because they have a small population and a net exporter does not mean the socialistic application they use is invalid nor the theory of its application on how it compared to our version of socialistic applications.

 

Two different sets of rescources and populations/cultures are never going to be Exactly the same in comparison. There standard of living according to the formula used to measure each respective country is high. Yes the system is not stressed because the net income versus population service numbers is on the positive side because of net exporting of oil.

 

We can not conclude where the "stress" point is financially that has a correlary population number. NO system will be perfect, that factor by itself does not invalidate socialistic applications in government.

 

We ALREADY DO PRACTICE socialism, our tax system and medicare, etc are all forms of social capital redistribution meaning SOCIALISM. the broad brush that is negatively painted about that word is odd to say the least. Almost ALL forms of government practice some sort of socialistic application in order to deal with the squalor and poverty factor. That is how governments stay in power, keeping some sort of control on the unhappy poorer sections of each system. Well maybe not Medieval France and others.... but they were eventually Beheaded by the population....

 

I am not for a centralized system like communism or something like Chavez is trying in Venezuela and others. There is nothing wrong and really everything right to apply SOME social redistribution in our system. Without that well EVERY government system is brought down low by the unhappy poorer class.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the 9th grade civics lesson, but I never said all social programs were evil or that we should avoid them. My only point was that Norway is not a strong example of anything relevant to this discussion. If the point is that Socialism doesn't necessarily result in doom, then I agree. Otherwise, I dont see how it applies. And from your post, it seems like we agree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the 9th grade civics lesson, but I never said all social programs were evil or that we should avoid them. My only point was that Norway is not a strong example of anything relevant to this discussion. If the point is that Socialism doesn't necessarily result in doom, then I agree. Otherwise, I dont see how it applies. And from your post, it seems like we agree.

 

 

most of that "civics lesson was not pointed toward you Tupa".

 

Yes we do agree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just because they have a small population and a net exporter does not mean the socialistic application they use is invalid nor the theory of its application on how it compared to our version of socialistic applications.

 

 

No shit professor.

Nor does it make the fact that Norway is a rare success story a great example of the virtues of Socialism.

Does it?

 

WSS

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Steve...... socialism and its MANY different aspects and applications has been successful for our species since the dawn of time.

 

Redistribution of rescources for the collective is what gives us the ability to work in large groups in the first place. Socialism as it applies toward formal government theories and structures has been successful in almost ALL systems.

 

Communism and other totaliarian forms of TOTAL rescource allocation to a central government is what has not been successful in larger populated states. Too much corruption and distance from the society by administrators along with stress on the system to work adequately and efficiently to service large populations has been proven to be unmanegable.

 

Norway is a low density state so therefore its centralized rescource allocation stemming from oil profits does not stress the system enough and allows for some ineffiencies and corruption without too much loss of service. that was Tupa's point about how the system is not applicable to our country (not to mention geographical size has and effect on delivery of efficient services from a centralized power base)

 

We already do perform limited socialism, I would never want us to move toward a more centralized government controlled economy like communism or some quasi system like China has.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then it isn't socialism. The lack of private ownership for the good of all, is what socialism is.

 

It isn't federal programs.

 

Whatever... Obama is heading down a very, very bad road. Bad for all of us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Steve...... socialism and its MANY different aspects and applications has been successful for our species since the dawn of time.

 

 

 

We already do perform limited socialism, I would never want us to move toward a more centralized government controlled economy like communism or some quasi system like China has.

 

 

Yes we all know that Sev.

 

Aside from the fact that you think it makes you seem smart to change the subject and then expound on governmental systems and practice (and there is NO pure form of ANY system on earth) Norway is successful mostly because they are rich and small.

 

Every system of government is prone to corruption and greed.

And no system og government is inherently good or evil.

 

I personbally don't think the US wants to scale hback the consumerism you bitch about.

I also think the competetive human nature will most often trump egalitarian platitudes.

 

 

ps I don't think you're an idiot.

I do think you play the red herring card often.

<G>

 

WSS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...