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.
This defines socialism as communists see it and also tears a chunk out of our capitalistic system.
You ask what is socialism, and then give a lesson in communism? Too, too funny!
A system is what it does. If you want to know about Communism, see what happened to people under Stalin (Russia), Mussolini (Italy), and Mao (China). Or, look at today's Communist countries: China, Cuba, North Korea, Laos, or Vietnam. Go ahead and visit. Come back and tell us you are moving.
I don't care for Capitalism, but I don't have any illusions about wanting the US to become Communist or Socialist. However, the practices that Americans try to label as Socialists are incorrect.
It's obvious that Americans need to inform themselves about political systems so we can reform ours, but I don't think it will happen from reading biased sources.
After reading through all of the post this conversation went exactly where I thought it was heading. However, I did learn a ton just by browsing through the thread. I think we have a lot more intelligent, reasonable citizens than we realize.
Okay, Okay .. You win! Socialism: A philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.
Did you "Get That"?
Or rather ensuring that all citizens have a means of reaching a minimum standard of living? Minimum wage here is A$15.51 (US$16) per hour, which is pretty high relative to elsewhere. Doesn't seem to be hurting our economy all that much with 5% unemployment and an economic growth rate of 3.3%. Medicare and high minimum wages are not about making everyone equal, and we're far from a socialist country, its about providing a basic safety net and providing a fair rate of pay for workers. The inherent insecurity of the American system I suspect creates a lot more angst and misery then those with more extensive safety nets.
Or rather ensuring that all citizens have a means of reaching a minimum standard of living? Minimum wage here is A$15.51 (US$16) per hour, which is pretty high relative to elsewhere. Doesn't seem to be hurting our economy all that much with 5% unemployment and an economic growth rate of 3.3%. Medicare and high minimum wages are not about making everyone equal, and we're far from a socialist country, its about providing a basic safety net and providing a fair rate of pay for workers. The inherent insecurity of the American system I suspect creates a lot more angst and misery then those with more extensive safety nets.
The 'Only' thing that imposing a 'minimum wage' accomplishes is .. Higher prices on everything .. for everyone!
Why not a 'minimum wage' of .. let's say .. FIVE HUNDRED dollars an hour!?
The 'Only' thing that imposing a 'minimum wage' accomplishes is .. Higher prices on everything .. for everyone!
Why not a 'minimum wage' of .. let's say .. FIVE HUNDRED dollars an hour!?
Everyone would live as kings .. huh?
Ok, so raising the minimum wage to say $12 an hour will lead to somewhat higher prices...I'm fine with that, as long as the money goes to the employees and not the shareholders pockets.
I don't think anyone is suggesting a $500 an hour minimum wage. Let's apply some common sense here.
Minimum wages wouldn't be necessary if employers wouldn't be inclined to exploit people by paying ridiculously low wages.
Ok, so raising the minimum wage to say $12 an hour will lead to somewhat higher prices...I'm fine with that, as long as the money goes to the employees and not the shareholders pockets.
I don't think anyone is suggesting a $500 an hour minimum wage. Let's apply some common sense here.
Minimum wages wouldn't be necessary if employers wouldn't be inclined to exploit people by paying ridiculously low wages.
My point was .. 'Minimum Wage' is nothing more than a vote getter for democrats who rely on people who have No Clue and 'Think' that they are being 'helped'!
In the real world of Non Socialism .. a privately owned company should be 'allowed' to pay any wage that they wish while a person can either work for that wage or .. Go Elsewhere!
It's called 'competition' and the companies that do better and want the better employees will Pay more.
And as I said .. Why not start off everyone at $500.00 an hour?
You made the claim that $12.00 (or $16.00 an hour? I forget) was working great and I say that should mean that $500.00 an hour would be REALLY GREAT!
Just reread your post.
Raising the 'Minimum Standard' of living .. is NOT raised by raising the 'Minimum Wage'!
The 'minimum standard' stays the same .. only the price on everything and on everyone .. 'Raises'!
Something that is missing in defining and discussing Socialism is the WHY. Why do things in a collective manner, why reign in destructive competition and why promote the alturistic impulses. The reason is the belief that this is a superior way to get what a society wants and is consistent with the idea that nature evolves from the simple to more complex systems . That nature shows that caring and sharing are what distinguishes us from the animals that mindlessly follow Darwin's maxim of the Survuval of the Fitest. It is no coincidence that Socialism was born at the same time as new thinking was sweeping the Natural Philosophies ideas like Darwin's Theory of the Origin of Species or the development of Thermodynamics in Physics and Chemistry. People started to explore the application of these natural mechanisms to economics, governance and society. Socialism was the response that we could move human affairs to a higher plane by deliberate action that we didn't have to leave things to chance or relie on the pain and suffering of the Law of the Jungle. Other philosophers disagreed and these Social Darwinists believed that unfettered competition and the struggle of competing individuals would winnow out the weak or incomplete and result in a society as strong as steel. This viewpoint was tailor made for the Americans who celebrate the Individual and the American Way was obviously Nature's Way. Actions like those advocated by the Socialists was actually a crime against nature.
We have a problematic situation.
First Americans won't see people starve, go without healthcare, and without a home if they are working. Its just that simple.
Secondly, how is the best way to feed, insure, and house EVERYONE that is working within a free market system?
I see what you are saying, its a cruel world, its why I personally believe that large government mandates like this simply won't work on the federal level. I think its much more likely to have success doing the objectives that Americans want on a state level. Does that mean we don't need federal funding? Does that they can be constitutional? They sure can, with an amendment.
But the problem is this, both parties, not just one, have gone off on a socialist tangent. Republicans with their war on drugs, opposing gay marriage, increasing spending while lowering taxes and expecting them to pay for themselves, etc. These things are socialist, and really just stupid economics.
Democrats can obviously see their socialist views.
But the fact of the matter is MOST Americans want social programs. Most Americans support them, god forbid you take them away, and we are supposed to be a government of the people, for the people, and by the people.
So, we have this situation where a government created by the founding fathers that give Americans the power to decide their countries future puts in place social programs that people want, and then Republicans refuse to support them.
So do you think the founding fathers knew what they were doing, or not?
Now I'm a conservative. I have no actual problems with a well thought out social program that is paid for, and is constitutional. But we need amendments for these things, that way they don't become politically demagogued by both parties. All the time while they keep increasing spending, without paying for the new spending they just passed.
That is the problem. Republicans aren't helping things, and Democrats aren't fixing things. The best way for our government to operate is to debate the social programs openly, show their merits, and their lack there of. We have enough food to feed our citizens. That doesn't mean you get a card where you can buy ice cream and candy bars, but rice cakes and a few eggs per person a week will get you by and its inexpensive. You need a house, ok, but its going to have a dirt floor, no air conditioning, and won't be a real comfy place to live. We can supply you with life saving healthcare, but if you have acne, well, get your own problems fixed.
But this "my way or the highway" attitude that Republicans and Democrats have simply isn't working.
The 'Only' thing that imposing a 'minimum wage' accomplishes is .. Higher prices on everything .. for everyone!
Why not a 'minimum wage' of .. let's say .. FIVE HUNDRED dollars an hour!?
Everyone would live as kings .. huh?
Yes a minimum wage doesn't necessarily mean people who receive it are going to have the means to get by, obviously its dependent on the amount of goods that can be bought on such a wage. The issue is about preventing exploitation of workers by ensuring a minimum standard of living with minimum rates of pay set relative to the norm.
Yes a minimum wage doesn't necessarily mean people who receive it are going to have the means to get by, obviously its dependent on the amount of goods that can be bought on such a wage. The issue is about preventing exploitation of workers by ensuring a minimum standard of living with minimum rates of pay set relative to the norm.
You don't seem to understand .. Setting a minimum wage doesn't 'insure' anything other than .. Everything will RISE in costs!
Example: A company pays an employee $5.00 an hour to make a widget and that widget on the market costs $1.00 for everyone .. including the employee!
(The employee could just as well be making bread .. same scenario)
Government comes along and 'forces' the company to raise all employee salaries to a 'minimum wage' of $10.00 an hour.
The company, to cover the increase raises the price of the widget (or bread) to $2.00 .. for everyone .. including the employee!
NOTHING has changed except the COST of the widget!
If the employee couldn't afford the widget (or bread at a $5.00 an hour wage when the price was $1.00 Then he 'still' can't afford it because the widget's cost 'doubled' right along with his wages!)
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.
