The Lotus Cars Community banner

1 - 20 of 174 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,637 Posts
Why doesn't it work? People, that is why. Some people want to get more out of life, and work hard for it. Other people want to work just hard enough to get by. When some people learn they don't have to work to survive, I.E. they can get on government programs, they stop producing toward the common good. Many people who have started their own businesses will tell you they lived like a pauper for a few years to get the company off the ground. They sacrificed the "now" for the "later". Some people only see the "now" and will never sacrifice for a later date. Socialism needs some form of capital to support those who do not want to work towards the common good. In a true socialistic society, capital is a dirty word, but may include mineral resources and land. Eventually you run out of these things and have problems. Even Jamestown had a problem with their socialism and had to instigate a "if you don't work, you don't eat policy". Otherwise, everone would have starved. The essential problem with socialism is: You eventually run out of someone elses money to fund it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
709 Posts
Since the Chick-Fil-A thread got shut down due to name calling, let's have a factual discussion about socialism and why it doesn't work.

Discuss.
I love the objectivity in the way you posed the question ;)

I think it's obvious that both pure socialism and pure unregulated capitalism are unworkable for the vast majority of the citizenry. The only question is where on the scale is most workable, and for whom, and to what degree. The standard starting point seems to be "equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome," but that's a far more complex undertaking than it seems to be.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
693 Posts
“Socialism only works in two places: Heaven where they don’t need it, and hell where they already have it.”

- Ronald Reagan
 

·
Back to the Future, again
Joined
·
6,184 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
It would be just as objective about discussions of the shortfalls of the unregulated wild west style capitalism which resulted in the Triangle Shirt Factory fires, but at least with capitalism, it's private actors and not government. You can escape private actors, not an all encompassing government.

Oh, for those who still think socialists live the same as their people, even if they are subject to the same plan... The next time the Prime Minister of Canada is spotted waiting in line at Clinique Cinquante Neuf, filling out forms to get advanced treatment therapies after exhausting the cheaper therapies, just like everyone else in Canada, let me know and I will buy you a Trabant, the finest example of excellence in engineering innovation under a Socialist regime.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
693 Posts
Socialism maintains the same size of total pie and the distribution of wealth becomes bigger and bigger piece of Governement slice. Over time the entire pie size becomes smaller due to lack of government funds to support it's own programs.

Capitalism takes the same pie and each class of people, lower, middle, upper have their prospective size slices. Then over time, the entire pie grows larger. When the entire pie grows, the slices grow. As the slices grow, the middle class expands but both lower and upper class benefit. The result is self sufficient living without government dependancy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
194 Posts
Okay, I'm game. First define your terms. Socialism can mean anything from Soviet/North Korean style government where there is almost no private ownership to present day Germany where only certain societal functions are 'socialized.' What are we talkin' about here?...I doubt you'll have many people interested discussing the merits of North Korean socialism, but you might get a something if you want to talk about the role of government in a capitalist society...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,360 Posts
Pure socialism doesnt work, but neither do 100% free markets.

I am all for minimum governmental regulation, but some degree of public policy is required.

Our health care system needs work. It is a travesty that many people dont have access to good health care and that it cant be reasonably afforded by the middle class in many cases. I am not an expert. I don't have the answer. Some compromises will be required.

Some people want to talk about principles. It is an absolute core princilple to me that every human deserves decent healthcare. According to 100% free markets nobody deserves anything they dont work for. Maybe I am a dirty hippy I am all for even the fattest, laziest, hell even terrible people having some form of health care available to them

My position is one of Idealism and of course comes with all sorts of pragmatic problems (as does the counter position). I dont know how to overcome these, but we need to work towards it.

My father is a cardiologist that has worked in both the canadian and US medical industries. My mother was a nurse in the canadian system. My sister is a new doctor in the american system. I have been to Norway several times and all over europe. Half my relatives are canadian. I have had some exposure to several different systems.

My thought is that "in between" system will be required. I am not fully up to speed with "obama care". I am sure it is not popular on this site. I am sure it is frought with issues. At least the admistration is "trying". They tried to preserve some aspects of free markets and private insurnce in the mix.

I dont think there is an easy solution. The status quo isnt acceptable to me.
 

·
Back to the Future, again
Joined
·
6,184 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
Fair enough, but I think expanding it to the role of government in a free society has to be within certain parameters.

In a Constitutional Republic (not democracy) like America, the role of government is limited by the SUPREME law of the land, which is a charter of negative liberties, as one famous socialist put it. It tells the government what it can't do, not what the government must do on your behalf.

So the proper role of government in America is to provide for the general welfare WITHIN the confines of the enumerated powers and no more. Whether that is enough or not is a matter of scholarly conjecture but it has prevailed against all other systems so far.

I am comfortable to say we need to shrink it some more from the present day leviathan and go back to a strict Constitution limited government. First order of business, strike down Wickard v. Filburn. The rest will follow.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,286 Posts
Fair enough, but I think expanding it to the role of government in a free society has to be within certain parameters.

In a Constitutional Republic (not democracy) like America, the role of government is limited by the SUPREME law of the land, which is a charter of negative liberties, as one famous socialist put it. It tells the government what it can't do, not what the government must do on your behalf.

So the proper role of government in America is to provide for the general welfare WITHIN the confines of the enumerated powers and no more. Whether that is enough or not is a matter of scholarly conjecture but it has prevailed against all other systems so far.

I am comfortable to say we need to shrink it some more from the present day leviathan and go back to a strict Constitution limited government. First order of business, strike down Wickard v. Filburn. The rest will follow.
I agree, unfortunately I think that there are too many people in political positions of power that would lose by doing this, which means that it wont happen.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,637 Posts
Shhhh Notorious,
Don't mention Wickard v. Filburn, or I might have to dig up my tomato plants. As they interfere with interstate commerce.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
570 Posts
Our health care system needs work. It is a travesty that many people dont have access to good health care and that it cant be reasonably afforded by the middle class in many cases.

Some people want to talk about principles. It is an absolute core princilple to me that every human deserves decent healthcare.
All humans on our soil have access to healthcare for free. I have witnessed first hand an illegal (cousin of spouse) getting free hospital care. I won't get into why I disagree with "obamacare", only that I will say that everyone needs some skin in the game.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,534 Posts
The discussion can take it's course, but I WILL NOT consider any arguments which bring up Norway.

Trying to compare a largely homogenous culture, thousands of years old, with a population the size of Chicago proper to the US is just silly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,534 Posts
As I stated in the other thread, EVERY time I get into these sort of discussions, those in favor ALWAYS come to the same angle:

they want something and they want someone else to pay for it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
709 Posts
The discussion can take it's course, but I WILL NOT consider any arguments which bring up Norway.

Trying to compare a largely homogenous culture, thousands of years old, with a population the size of Chicago proper to the US is just silly.
And *I* WILL NOT consider any arguments which bring up Mao, Lenin or Stalin, or the communist regimes of Soviet Russia and China.

Trying to compare countries with populations that are multiples of those of the US, created by fiat and held together by force to the US is just silly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
709 Posts
As I stated in the other thread, EVERY time I get into these sort of discussions, those in favor ALWAYS come to the same angle:

they want something and they want someone else to pay for it.
Er.. no. It's more a matter of acknowledging the reality of a basic social contract and then finding the most efficient way to pay for it. And trust me - I'm one of the ones that will be doing the paying, not one of the ones that will be doing the getting.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,360 Posts
As I stated in the other thread, EVERY time I get into these sort of discussions, those in favor ALWAYS come to the same angle:

they want something and they want someone else to pay for it.
I want nothing personally and am willing to make compromises (and contribute) to the greater good.


Sent from my DROID RAZR using AutoGuide.Com Free App
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,360 Posts
All humans on our soil have access to healthcare for free. I have witnessed first hand an illegal (cousin of spouse) getting free hospital care. I won't get into why I disagree with "obamacare", only that I will say that everyone needs some skin in the game.
More emergency care than general healthcare. People arnt really turned away for emergency care and certain things but many dont have complete medical care. There are creative ways to get many types of health care of course though.

I also have known several people who have encured financial ruin due to healthcare issues, gennerally lower middle class.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,360 Posts
The discussion can take it's course, but I WILL NOT consider any arguments which bring up Norway.

Trying to compare a largely homogenous culture, thousands of years old, with a population the size of Chicago proper to the US is just silly.
I WILL consider arguments I dont nessicarily agree with. It is a discussion afterall.

Norway is an oddball case mostly because they have huge revenue from North sea Oil.
 
1 - 20 of 174 Posts
Top