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.
Capitalist societies will always have people who are poor or old or sick or whatever and it is up to us to decide how much of the money we collect through taxes... MONEY THAT WE WILL ALWAYS NEED TO COLLECT, SINCE THERE WILL ALWAYS BE A NEED FOR GOVERNMENT TO DO CERTAIN THING FOR THE COLLECTIVE SOCIETY... AND THAT IS NOT SOCIALIST
why is that not socialist? it seems to fit the definition rather neatly.
You just don't have a clue what socialism is do you? You still looking for reds under your bed mate?
For the life of me, I can't... just can't understand what some of you Americans have against social healthcare. A system that looks after you from the cradle to the grave irrespective of your social class or bank balance...and you fight against it!!! Freakin' crazy.
why is that not socialist? it seems to fit the definition rather neatly.
UGH! NOOO!!!!!
In the simplest terms: Socialism is when the government owns everything in sight, assigns all the jobs, pays all the salaries, takes all the profit, doles out everything people need to live: houses, food, medical care, education, etc.
There has never been any true socialist society BTW. But there have been societies where the government owns all the biggest industries and doles out rations for things like food, housing, etc to almost all its citizens.
Taxes are not socialist, because taxes are on people's profit/earnings in a free market. The government is an employer but not the only one, they have to compete with everyone else for good employees.
Things like police, firefighters, etc have to be paid for. Roads have to be built. The DMV has to run. The mayor has to be paid. These kinds of things are what taxes are for. THAT IS NOT SOCIALIST, because that has nothing to do with the government owning a profit-making business. Every society in the world collects taxes because they need to. They have to pay people. But the US government does not own industry. And no one is proposing they should.
Social programs are not about the government owning anything either, it is about what should we do with the tax money we already collect. Is it in the public interest to take care of the poor and/or provide certain services or not? And if so to what degree? All that is a worthy debate to have, but it has absolutely nothing to do with socialism. Nor is it "socialist". It is about social policy. What is best to do with the tax money. How much tax money do we need to collect. How big of a gvernment do we want. Period.
Sorry for my tone, but it just drives me crazy because I study this stuff. LOL
In the simplest terms: Socialism is when the government owns everything in sight, assigns all the jobs, pays all the salaries, takes all the profit, doles out everything people need to live: houses, food, medical care, education, etc.
that's not what the definition says.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rafius
You just don't have a clue what socialism is do you?
UGH! NOOO!!!!! In the simplest terms: Socialism is when the government owns everything in sight, assigns all the jobs, pays all the salaries, takes all the profit, doles out everything people need to live: houses, food, medical care, education, etc.
No it isn't...that's Communism.
Quote:
Sorry for my tone, but it just drives me crazy because I study this stuff. LOL
LOL indeed! May I suggest that you study a little harder because, obviously you don't know the difference between Communism and Socialism.
LOL! You are right. I was typing fast and pumped that sucker out without thinking.
Communism is a governing system, socialism is an economic system.
But the debate always conflates the 2 as if the government is trying to take all the money and give it to the poor people, and that is not what's happening. Then they call that socialism when it is not. Most societies that have even attempted anything close are communist though, and there are definitions of socialism that advocate government ownership and/or control of all industry. So that is why people get it mixed up.
Of course, then I turned around and did it too. LOL!!!!
Anyway, our economic system is not socialist, No one is trying to say all the earnings should go into a collective pool and be redistributed. THAT IS NOT HAPPENING. No one is saying we should collectively pool everything and distribute money, all we are talking about is what to do with the damn tax money. Nobody is a socialist and there is nothing "socialistic" about it.
Anyway, our economic system is not socialist, No one is trying to say all the earnings should go into a collective pool and be redistributed. THAT IS NOT HAPPENING. No one is saying we should collectively own everything, all we are talking about is what to do with the damn tax money. Nobody is a socialist and there is nothing "socialistic" about it.
Their is no social security fund or a medicare fund, it all goes into the same pool as all federal taxes do. That's why both are broke, and nothing more then an IOU in its place. They have both been robbed blind.
Their is no social security fund or a medicare fund, it all goes into the same pool as all federal taxes do. That's why both are broke, and nothing more then an IOU in its place. They have both been robbed blind.
When I say pool all the money I meant as in all the revenue/profits. etc from business, as in collective ownership.
You are talking about all the tax money being in one big pool, right? That's true, but it is not socialist.
Either way we need to do something before the country is broke.
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.