California minimum wage hike hits L.A. apparel industry: 'The exodus has begun' (Merced: rent, buying)

[jm1982]

Originally Posted by NOIGUY

USSR folded.

N. Korea, Cuba, and China are pretty awful places to live for the vast majority of the population. And I've personally been to 2/3 of those countries and can attest to this statement.


Why would anyone want the U.S. to become a socialist country. You would seriously have to be completely insane.

Yes, but they haven't "folded" .. lol.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by jm1982

Ok you win...all those nations are great and successful nations!

I guess folding or 'failing' is relative right.
I mean Cuban and North Korean leaders are all going to say how great their country is.

I've seen what socialism does to countries , it's not good.

Didn't say anything about those countries being great or successful. Simply responded to the declaration Surprise made. Which declaration was both wrong and wrongfully inferred failure due to socialist structuring.

Originally Posted by NOIGUY

USSR folded.

N. Korea, Cuba, and China are pretty awful places to live for the vast majority of the population. And I've personally been to 2/3 of those countries and can attest to this statement.


Why would anyone want the U.S. to become a socialist country. You would seriously have to be completely insane.

The USSR was not a socialist country. It was a oppressive, totalitarian communist regime.

Ditto: China.

N. Korea is also an oppressive, totalitarian communist military dictatorship.

Ditto Cuba.

No parallels in them to the declaration nor this topic.

As to whether socialism is good or bad - really a topic for a different thread in a different forum. I will say, however, that I don't subscribe to any ideology whatsoever including socialism.

Also, finally, pointing to those backward and emerging countries while discussing the benefits of specific democratic-socialist benefits to large, economically advanced nations is entirely disingenuous.

If you want to draw negative parallels to socially progressive programs - a direction that all highly developed countries experiencing intensifiying urbanization are taking and benefiting their citizens with - compare to European nations. And be sure to identify any specific ways in which the social benefits of those social democracies are causing economic burden - as opposed to other turmoils.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by jm1982

Yes, but they haven't "folded" .. lol.

Yes, but read above. They aren't socialst either. .. Lol.

[jm1982]

Unemployment rates in many European nations are horrific...
Are you kidding me?

Greece 24%, Spain 20.4%, Italy 11.7%, France 10.2%
• Unemployment rate in EU countries 2016 | Statistic

Is that what the U.S should aspire to?...be more like Europe?..

Take a look at the link above.

People have some kind of fantasy of socialism and communism being such a great thing in theory, but there aren't any good examples of it working in the real world. Never have been.

With all these countries you see a lot of corruption and the politicians and their friends get super rich , while the masses suffer. I agree that there is corruption in the U.S with big companies influencing politicians with donations,etc...but these countries take it to a whole new level.
Look at North Korea, Russia,etc. Study their history and their present.

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/north-korea...h-1-2m-1531596

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/0...n_4808823.html

Wake up!

[NOIGUY]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

Yes, but read above. They aren't socialst either. .. Lol.

k.

Union of Soviet Socialist Republics Facts, information, pictures | Encyclopedia.com articles about Union of Soviet Socialist Republics

Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR), Rus. Soyuz Sovetskikh Sotsialisticheskikh Respublik, former republic. It was established in 1922 and dissolved in 1991. The Soviet Union was the first state to be based on Marxist socialism.


I guess I should take your word over the Columbia Encyclopedia 2016 edition.

[jm1982]

Sorry Tulemutt..you are W-R-O-N-G!

[SOON2BNSURPRISE]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

Didn't say anything about those countries being great or successful. Simply responded to the declaration Surprise made. Which declaration was both wrong and wrongfully inferred failure due to socialist structuring.

The USSR was not a socialist country. It was a oppressive, totalitarian communist regime.

Ditto: China.

N. Korea is also an oppressive, totalitarian communist military dictatorship.

Ditto Cuba.

No parallels in them to the declaration nor this topic.

As to whether socialism is good or bad - really a topic for a different thread in a different forum. I will say, however, that I don't subscribe to any ideology whatsoever including socialism.

Also, finally, pointing to those backward and emerging countries while discussing the benefits of specific democratic-socialist benefits to large, economically advanced nations is entirely disingenuous.

If you want to draw negative parallels to socially progressive programs - a direction that all highly developed countries experiencing intensifiying urbanization are taking and benefiting their citizens with - compare to European nations. And be sure to identify any specific ways in which the social benefits of those social democracies are causing economic burden - as opposed to other turmoils.

I also think it is important to look at the numbers and compare nations around the world. To get a good comparison and because the USA does have 50 states, I liked the comparison offered in the following story.

https://mises.org/blog/if-sweden-and...poorest-states

Germany, Europe's economic powerhouse, has a median income ($25,528) level below all but 9 US states. Finland ranks with Germany in this regard ($25,730), and France's median income ($24,233) is lower than both Germany and Finland. Denmark fares better and has a median income ($27,304) below all but 13 US states. [LEFT]
On the other hand, were Australia ($29,875), Austria ($28,735), and Canada (28,288) to join the US, they would be regarded as "middle-income states" with incomes similar to the US median of $30,616.

Then again what will that money buy. The article went on to determine purchasing power:
Once purchasing power among the US states is taken into account, we find that Sweden's median income ($27,167) is higher than only six states: Arkansas ($26,804), Louisiana ($25,643), Mississippi ($26,517), New Mexico ($26,762), New York ($26,152) and North Carolina ($26,819).

We find something similar when we look at Germany, but in Germany's case, every single US state shows a higher median income than Germany. Germany's median income is $25,528. Things look even worse for the United Kingdom which has a median income of $21,033, compared to $26,517 in Mississippi.

[jm1982]

Wow awful numbers !
Why do people think that people want to come to the US from other countries to do business ?
Because the US historically hasn't limited opportunity like these European countries .
When you look at the numbers as you posted .. The socialistic fantasy that these pro $15 people dream about doesn't look so good

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by NOIGUY

k.

Union of Soviet Socialist Republics Facts, information, pictures | Encyclopedia.com articles about Union of Soviet Socialist Republics

Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR), Rus. Soyuz Sovetskikh Sotsialisticheskikh Respublik, former republic. It was established in 1922 and dissolved in 1991. The Soviet Union was the first state to be based on Marxist socialism.


I guess I should take your word over the Columbia Encyclopedia 2016 edition.

Well, not exactly. What you should do is read your own link. Because it says, as I did, that the USSR was a communist regime. Go ahead. Read it. "Founded on Marx's socialist principles."

Let's read the entire paragraph from which you quoted, shall we?

Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR), Rus. Soyuz Sovetskikh Sotsialisticheskikh Respublik, former republic. It was established in 1922 and dissolved in 1991. The Soviet Union was the first state to be based on Marxist socialism (see also Marxism; communism). Until 1989 the Communist party indirectly controlled all levels of government; the party's politburo effectively ruled the country, and its general secretary was the country's most powerful leader. Soviet industry was owned and managed by the state, and agricultural land was divided into state farms, collective farms, and small, privately held plots.

And more from your link:

Dissolution of the Union

Gorbachev's criticisms of the Communist leaders of Eastern Europe who were not attempting reforms similar to glasnost hinted that the Brezhnev doctrine would be ignored. Frantic, last-minute efforts at reform by Eastern European leaders in the summer and fall of 1989 at best only slowed the collapse of their Communist governments. The loss of dominance over Eastern Europe stunned conservatives in the military and the CPSU, and Gorbachev came under increasing pressure to slow glasnost and perestroika.

And from another link from that same source:

In modern usage, the term Communism (written with a capital C) is applied to the movement that aims to overthrow the capitalist order by revolutionary means and to establish a classless society in which all goods will be socially owned. The theories of the movement come from Karl Marx, as modified by Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, leader of the successful Communist revolution in Russia.

Originally Posted by jm1982

Sorry Tulemutt..you are W-R-O-N-G!

Ummm, what?


In any case, we aren't discussing pure Socialism or Communism. We are discussing socially progressive policies which are becoming more and more the norm of the developed, urbanized world. By necessity. My observation of this is just that: observation. I am not preaching any ideology. I am not an ideologue.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by SOON2BNSURPRISE

I also think it is important to look at the numbers and compare nations around the world. To get a good comparison and because the USA does have 50 states, I liked the comparison offered in the following story.

https://mises.org/blog/if-sweden-and...poorest-states

Germany, Europe's economic powerhouse, has a median income ($25,528) level below all but 9 US states. Finland ranks with Germany in this regard ($25,730), and France's median income ($24,233) is lower than both Germany and Finland. Denmark fares better and has a median income ($27,304) below all but 13 US states. [LEFT]
On the other hand, were Australia ($29,875), Austria ($28,735), and Canada (28,288) to join the US, they would be regarded as "middle-income states" with incomes similar to the US median of $30,616.

Then again what will that money buy. The article went on to determine purchasing power:
Once purchasing power among the US states is taken into account, we find that Sweden's median income ($27,167) is higher than only six states: Arkansas ($26,804), Louisiana ($25,643), Mississippi ($26,517), New Mexico ($26,762), New York ($26,152) and North Carolina ($26,819).

We find something similar when we look at Germany, but in Germany's case, every single US state shows a higher median income than Germany. Germany's median income is $25,528. Things look even worse for the United Kingdom which has a median income of $21,033, compared to $26,517 in Mississippi.

Well, let's see. We can evaluate the issue by reading a blog by a Libertarian organization with a specific economic platform agenda to advance, such as the source you cite.

The Ludwig von Mises Institute (LvMI), often referred to as the Mises Institute, is a tax-exempt libertarian organization located in Auburn, Alabama, United States.[5] It is named for Austrian School economist Ludwig von Mises (1881–1973). Its website states that it is dedicated to advancing "the Misesian tradition of thought through the defense of the market economy, private property, sound money, and peaceful international relations, while opposing government intervention."[1]

Or we could merely make a broad overview of most independent ranking sites comparing the various factors in standards of living and quality of life indexes - pretty much all of which rank the US somewhere between about 8th and 12th behind many of the very European nations your source says are rather miserable. I'll offer one as an example among many. You can look up the rest.
Quality of Life Index by Country 2016

The manipulation of statistical numbers to present a specious point of view is an old game. The trick in discerning truth is to seek reporting sources without agenda. And seek multiples of them. And then think rationally through their criteria presentations to arrive at a truly comparative picture. I can school you on how to make such comparisons. Somehow, though, I suspect that will be a complete waste of my pleasurable retirement time.