If we lived in a world where communism could work, we wouldn't need it.
Communism might not work but socialism isnt bad.
@The Aussie, it's immoral though. For all you morality knights who think taking things from people because you think that they would "do better things" with it
@The Common Shaman, universal healthcare is a small bit from socialism. Socialism is the government has control over certain means of production not all(communism is all) Fire department, police, imagine if that was privatized(which is some places across us it is pretty much).
@The Common Shaman, nothing immoral about it at all. If you don't want to pay tax you can move. People willing to give up their stuff for the social safety net that government provides isn't immoral.
@The Common Shaman, you shouldn't say that it is immoral, because morality is not a truly defined thing, so while you think that taking things from people is immoral it could also be viewed that them keeping those things would be immoral
@Breast Day Ever, I'm not talking about taxes. I'm talking about taxes paying for other people's stuff
@magrar, yea it is
@The Common Shaman, Don't know why socialism has become a slur nowdays. There are bad parts of socialism and good parts. Personally i think defining ones self as one brand of ideaology is kinda stupid anyway. You can be a conservative base ideaology and still belive in some socialism or visa versa. Whats important isn't that we define our selves in seperate camps, divide everyone by political concepts. But instead that we look at what benefits each side brings to the table and taking the good from both.
@BexarMinimum, police and fire departments aren't hallmark of socialism, they are part of every goverment system. Socialism would be goverment control of healthcare or industries.
@Oujosh29, not totally true, e.g. in the days of rome fire departments were private companies which is why some romans amassed huge amounta of wealth from owning fire agencies. However they have become that much ingrained in our society that we see them as a given right nowadays, which really they should be. But the concept itself is a way socialist ij nature.
@bonja, by that definition any time the goverment does anything it's socialism. Stuff like fire and police services aren't economic production they are public infrastructure which occurs under any goverment system. America can completely swear off socialism and still keep our roads, police, and air traffic controllers
@bonja, I don't side with conservatives or liberals really, I think freely. I'm pretty moderate actually. But the inherent ideology behind socialism weather you decide to involve government or not is "let's take things from these people, and give it to those people" solely based on the opinion that they need it more/can do more with it which isn't necessarily true (i.e. Welfare). It's a dumb concept. Let each individual earn their share and give as they please. When you start infringing on freedoms, you will lose
@The Common Shaman, Someone born to poverty has less chance of being given the opportunity to create or be something the greatly benefits the entire population. Though some may go out and do this on their own, the risks of say starting a business are far greater for someone starting with little as to someone born into money. State wellfare doesnt total solve this problem and inherently causes additonal problems but it does help to an extent alleviate the issue. It really dependa how far you take socialism... I disagree that its purely a take from people and give to others. To me socialism is not an ideal oractice to put into effect but one way of counter balancing inequality which in turn is an issue which causes a lot of problems. Economya have to be pyramids, if the top section of the pyramid becomes overburdened the whole system will collapse which benefits no one. There will be and needs to be a top golden portion of the pyramid but it needs to reasonably managed like every section
@Oujosh29, police and fire services very much are economic based. They are a service. Look at private security, they maintain security for a fee much like the police do through taxiation.
@The Aussie, you're right. It's terrible! (because it's forced)
@bonja, economic based would mean they produce or generate some kind of wealth. Police and fire fighters don't, unless you take an indirect way of they keep businesses safe but that's just trying to expand the definition to an insane amount. The existence of private security firms doesn't mean it's socialism, police don't generate wealth. Just because some companies need more protection and thus hire private security doesn't mean police in general is socialistic.
Example: goverment wants to build a road, not socialism. Goverment wants to build a road and owns the only road building company, that's socialism.
@BexarMinimum, fire depts used to be private. Fire insurance essentially became "shame if your house burned down"
@Oujosh29, the reason police and firefighters don't make profit is because the government is not supposed/allowed to make profit(which I believe individuals in gov. Do) and they are apart from governments
@bonja, well you're wrong. You want equal outcome, not equal opportunity. Nobody will ever be born into the same status, and that doesn't mean that we should try to level the playing field
@The Common Shaman, how on earth is that equal outcome? I'm not saying go and give someone money because they don't earn as much. I'm saying by helping especially with children born into low income families we give them more opportunities to focus on things such aa education rather than the need to go straight into work in order to support themselves. Saying I'm looking for equal outcome is extremely far from what I'am saying.
@Oujosh29, just because they don't generate wealth under your current system doesnt mean that they don't generate wealth.
Roads can be tolled and private companies make money from people using them thereforw.
Fire depts did use to make money by well being paid to put out fires.
Police keep security and order, again something that makes wealth.
These are gov controlled now but not in the past totally. If your meaning they dont create an product well yeah they do... its a service based industry. Just like an consultance firm or a banker they are a service. Bankers make money for companies just as fire deps do by not letting their buildings burn down.
@bonja, you seem to saying because private companies also do the same things that somehow has something to do with it being socialistic. If anything, it's the opposite, because in socialistic countries the goverment would control the whole industry. Police and fire dept can be said to indirectly help the economy, but that's not generating wealth. They would themselves need to be generating wealth, not helping others do it.
Not everything goverment does is socialism. Most of what it does isn't socialism. It's only socialism if they control entire sectors of the economy. Having a military not socialism, controlling the health care sector is socialism.
@Breast Day Ever, That just sounds like extortion with extra steps...
@bonja, I believe you're looking for equal opportunity. But life simply doesn't work that way. We can't all be 7 feet tall and play in the NBA or sing like Freddy Mercury or be as smart as Stephen Hawking. Life exists on a broad and diverse spectrum and economics is no exception. There will always be smart and capable people born to poor circumstance as there will always be dull and incapable people born into great circumstances. It is not only impossible to create equal opportunity but also unethical. You will inevitably cripple the good to boast the bad. I have always viewed the accumulation of wealth as something that spans generations. Our economy is in part based on bettering the opportunities for subsequent generations. You are were you are in life and there are limits to the extent everyone can change it, but all of us can work towards bettering the starting position of the following generations. In an ethical way, through voluntarism, cooperation and rationality.
@NotCaveJohnson, thank you for that
@Oujosh29, Including things like food companies and car companies.
@bonja, the amount of doublethink required for their worldview is astounding, isn't it?
First box is true. Communism was a great and wonderful idea by karl marx. A man that i beleive was probably a person with great intentions. But communism is so very top heavy that corruption is more inevitable here than anything short of a dictatorship, which is usually what it slides into anyway. The government becomes a beacon of censorship and the horrible mega corporations become horrible government controlled mega corporations. The problem is simply that for communism to work you need perfect people in the government. Flawless politicians. This is devoid of reality as if we had that nearly any government, even a dictatorship would be wonderful to live under. In light of that communism will never work in a world where it is necessary
I dont even know about the whole on paper thing. When you centralize all the contries means of production under the government and is owned by the government thats always going to lead to a dictatorship and even if they then do what theyre supposed to and dissolve the government then what? Whos in charge? How do you make decisions on a country wide level? All that would be left is anarchy and the neighboring nations would just take over after that. All around its a pretty terrible idea. And personally i like to have personal property.