Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think you have been baking in the sun too long on that beach!
there have been SEVERAL utopias tried in this country! Some STILL exist in some forms!
{research 'coal mine company store' and see what you find, also try 'coal mine 20th century history' and the like. The coal companies paid Appalachian coal miners in script and made them buy at the company store, where one could NEVER get"ahead' of what was owed for basic needs,. The coal companies made lots of money, the miners didn't. Not exactly a 'utopia", but it was GREAT for the companies!}
As someone said, if you like the Scandinavian models, MOVE there....{PS I am a 3rd generation Scandinavian transplant to the USA}
But:
1}the Federal poverty level for 2015 for a family of 4 is: $24,250/year. You want to reduce EVERYONE TO POVERTY levels? Already"?
2} Many are already on "socialistic type programs" such as welfare {already mentioned}, social security, and SSI, SSDI for those who cannot work.
3} those who have jobs on top the federal "disbursement of funds" {DF}, would quickly become the 1% of such a society, and if they were offered to earn money OR to collect the 'DF', why would they choose to work? Many ALREADY complain they "do more work than others".
4}what happens when the machinery breaks down to a point of beyond repair, OR needs NEW machines? That requires MORE money, just like it does now.
5} DF will have to grow with the cost of living? SS already is "behind the COL" already even when they give out increases.
6} you say you are top 3% how nice for you! Have you ever lived near poverty for an extended period of time?
7}there would be perhaps little or no incentive to create new...say.. leisure time activities such as the Disney parks..or new housing complexes , or new cities...
8} there are still the 'lazy people' who WON't do much more than the minimum {if that} at cleaning the toilets on rotation, even IF most were 'required' to rotate working for their share of the DF.
I am not saying capitalism is all the end all to be all either, as the wealthy only get wealthier and people like my household, who have 3 income streams {and I am looking at additional part time job for fourth income stream} still cannot get ahead in THIS economy.
There have been several models of societal operations over the mega years the human population has tried to get along and form. NONE have been a panacea for the people!
SO what to do? I don't have the answer or I'd be running for president!
I used to be poor ReachTheBeach but instead of hating on the rich I learned all I could about money and now my life is very nice. Socialism, why would I care to try it when in this country I was able to move from poor to upper middle class, some may say rich.
There is one thing that will stop you, actually would have stopped me. I had many neigh sayers around me. Had I listened to them I'd still be poor. Stop listening to sour, angry, hopeless people who will stop you.
Ahhhh........the dreaded "pull yourself up by your own bootstraps" philosophy. In my experience, this type of person, somewhere along the way, has had some kind of good fortune that, coupled with hard work and perseverance, has enabled them to become successful. In this country we are so entrenched in capitalism, it's difficult to imagine any another way. I think that our brand of unbound capitalism breeds social Darwinism, like we see in some of the posts here. That and a carefully cultivated fear from governments past that any form of government different from our own is a "threat" to our American way of life.
As someone noted in a previous post, we are like children in a sandbox in terms of social development. The United States, still in it's infancy in terms of a civilization, certainly isn't ready to let go of the "I've got mine, you go scrape for yours" philosophy that dominates our culture.......a culture that often sees empathy as a sign of weakness. The irony of this can be found in small isolated tribes throughout the world. In "undeveloped" areas like isolated pacific islands, remote jungle areas or in the godforsaken African bush where "progress" hasn't subverted tradition. In areas like this it's common to find peoples that have little concept of personal possessions, where elder members of the tribe are venerated for their wisdom and not cast aside because some arbitrary expiration date has been reached, where a function is found for everyone regardless of intellectual or physical limitations.
I suppose it isn't just progress that dooms societies like these but size and with that, complexity. It still all boils down to the evolution of human consciousness. Utopia will remain out of our collective reach until we can leave behind concepts like ego and the greed that accompanies it. To move forward as a species we need to find a new kind of government........one that will hopefully arise at some point in the future, but probably only after we have nearly destroyed either our planet or ourselves in the pursuit of progress.
I am about to give up just because I am getting tired of repeating it...
I do not advocate everyone being paid the same. I keep saying I believe that more work or clever innovation should get more rewards; just not a crazy amount more (like 100 times).
The Nordic model of social democracy is an actual real life example of other countries doing this with success and satisfaction. Suggestions that people should move away if they are unhappy with something are not in keeping with the spirit of our country.
Those that are against any form of socialism, even social democracy, have not offered up any solution for what to do when progress will eliminate jobs and there really aren't enough to go around.
Status:
"Mistress of finance and foods."
(set 24 days ago)
Location: Coastal Georgia
50,063 posts, read 63,416,388 times
Reputation: 92644
Quote:
Originally Posted by ReachTheBeach
I look to Denmark, Finland, Sweden and Norway as the models of the kind of socialism I am referring to. They are doing fairly well and rank among the happiest countries according to UN surveys.
Yes but they are homogeneous cultures. If you throw in a few other cultural customs, it wouldn't work as well. If you threw in some stinky stacker Frenchmen, and some worker bee Asians, all hell would break loose.
Yes but they are homogeneous cultures. If you throw in a few other cultural customs, it wouldn't work as well. If you threw in some stinky stacker Frenchmen, and some worker bee Asians, all hell would break loose.
According to Eurostat, in 2010, there were 1.33 million foreign-born residents in Sweden, corresponding to 14.3% of the total population. Of these, 859,000 (64.3%) were born outside the EU and 477,000 (35.7%) were born in another EU Member State.
So that is almost 15% foreign born. I would guess that roughly the same number are first or second generation Swedes who are not of the homogenous culture. So probably 1 in 4 sticks out as being a member of a minority.
If you're money mad, or an idiot, socialism (compulsory labor for the benefit of another) sounds great. Recipients always outvote donors.
However, redistribution of wealth is not the cure for poverty. If it did, then let us give everyone 22 billion billion quatloos and thus make everybody equally rich with more than they could ever spend. However, if no one exerts themselves to labor, produce, transport or trade, civilization collapses. Because if the marketplace is bare, money is worthless.
Knowing that prosperity is based on the production, trade and enjoyment of surplus usable goods and services, what prevents “the poor” from producing and trading that which they produce?
Look around - unmet need, unemployed (or underemployed) workers, and unused productive facilities.
What stops people from being productive?
Lack of money tokens?
Who has the power to create money?
Congress only has power to coin money (stamp bullion) or borrow money. If it could create money, why would it need to borrow it? And if Congress can't make money, it can't give that power to anyone else.
Once you figure out who really has the power to create the medium of exchange to facilitate trade of usable goods and services, you [The following has been censored by the MINISTRY OF TRUTH. "MiniTru" thanks you for your cooperation in not reading further. Move along, nothing to see here....]
I say looking at the world today most even former socalist states have moved to capitalist system to build their utopia. Namely people with enough to eat and basics and hope for a future. Even those with socialist welfare systems rely on capitalist market to supply the funding. North korea is a example of one that doesn't with the government controlling means and fruits of production.
Knowing that prosperity is based on the production, trade and enjoyment of surplus usable goods and services, what prevents “the poor” from producing and trading that which they produce?
is this a serious question? I am pretty sure you realize that lots of things are impediments, like survival and needing to acquire skills to produce something of value, possibly raw materials.
But you fail to address the big question - how can we adapt society when automation is making full contribution not just unnecessary but inefficient? People cannot compete with machines to perform many jobs on a pure cost basis. We would have to put curbs on capitalism and ask the wealthy industrialists not to automate if we want enough work to be available for everyone. Or we automate and adjust society. Or do you see another truly viable option? I don't consider letting people play in a rigged game (free to "compete" but against incredible odds) an option.
I say looking at the world today most even former socalist states have moved to capitalist system to build their utopia. Namely people with enough to eat and basics and hope for a future. Even those with socialist welfare systems rely on capitalist market to supply the funding. North korea is a example of one that doesn't with the government controlling means and fruits of production.
Are you just going to refuse to acknowledge that I am only talking about social democracies? You keep referencing socialist oligarchies. Oligarchies are bad whether they are socialist or not. When you have only a small percentage of the population controlling the government and/or economy, it is not likely that decisions will be made in the best interests of the majority.
I look to Denmark, Finland, Sweden and Norway as the models of the kind of socialism I am referring to. They are doing fairly well and rank among the happiest countries according to UN surveys.
That's because all their people who were worth a dang moved to America to start businesses and build better lives. The stupid ones who don't know any better were left behind to pay 50% of their income to the tax man so that they can all be equally lame and "happy".
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
