Communism- Socialism

[Yttrium]

Are you okay with America becoming a Communist and or Socialist country? Yes or No? And why?

No. They significantly reduce the incentive for progress. And I don't see any chance of them happening in the US.

 

[durangodawood]

Are you okay with America becoming a Communist and or Socialist country? Yes or No? And why?

Its essential that this country have certain socialist elements, services which are provided for collectively.

Its also essential that a regulated free market is our economic backbone.

So does that answer your question?

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

How many have died under capitalism?

Not 100 million

 

[Desk trauma]

Not 100 million

Is 100 million the cut off for acceptable losses?

 

[Fervent]

Capitalism is where the poor are miserable and the rich are parasytes. Communism is where everyone is miserable equally. Socialism is somewhere in the middle.

I really don't care what we call the system we operate under, but it's quite clear that the chrony capitalist system in the US isn't working for a majority of people. So maybe we need to eat the rich.

 

[caffeinated.hermit]

Capitalism is where the poor are miserable and the rich are parasytes. Communism is where everyone is miserable equally. Socialism is somewhere in the middle.

I really don't care what we call the system we operate under, but it's quite clear that the chrony capitalist system in the US isn't working for a majority of people. So maybe we need to eat the rich.

I have this weird idea that free housing would solve maybe 40% of most people's economic issues. If you're not sinking a huge chunk of your wages into rent, that's more money left over to save for the future, pay for other expenses, and even treat yourself a bit. Helps working class and middle-class people, might help businesses who won't need to constantly raise wages due to rising rents, and might help businesses by giving average people more disposable income. Make property taxes a thing of the past, too.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Are you okay with America becoming a Communist and or Socialist country? Yes or No? And why?

Communism, no. A modified socialized democratic Capitalism? Maybe. But only if it could be done with Christian sensibilities rather than purely secular sensibilities. However, knowing how things tend to move ideologically, I doubt it'll ever move forward and develop in a more Christian direction, despite all of the lip service being done in that direction at the moment.

 

[public hermit]

So maybe we need to eat the rich

That sounds dramatic as if the rich paying more is a horrible thing. The Christian principle, from those who have much, much is expected, can have a wider application than just spiritual matters. In fact, if it holds true spiritually, then even more so materially. Of course, we don't have to appeal to Christian principles. We are a communal species. We are interdependent whether we like it or not. With privilege comes responsibility: noblesse oblige.

 

[Fervent]

I have this weird idea that free housing would solve maybe 40% of most people's economic issues. If you're not sinking a huge chunk of your wages into rent, that's more money left over to save for the future, pay for other expenses, and even treat yourself a bit. Helps working class and middle-class people, might help businesses who won't need to constantly raise wages due to rising rents, and might help businesses by giving average people more disposable income. Make property taxes a thing of the past, too.

What's odd to me is the people most opposed to restoring the wealth of the people from those who have unjustly hoarded it are people who claim to believe in the Bible, but somehow miss the very progressive nature of the nation of Israel with its policies like reserving a significant portion of the harvest for the poor to glean, 7 year cycles of debt forgiveness, and similar. God's heart for the poor is ignored, and instead it is the well to do who are believed to have His favor.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

Is 100 million the cut off for acceptable losses?

You tell me...just posting the deaths under Communism/socialist regimes

 

[Fervent]

That sounds dramatic as if the rich paying more is horrible thing. The Christian principle, from those who have much, much is expected, can have a wider application than just spiritual matters. In fact, if it holds true spiritually, then even more so materially. Of course, we don't have to appeal to Christian principles. We are a communal species. We are interdependent whether we like it or not. With privilege comes responsibility: noblesse oblige.

It wasn't meant as a critical statement. The wealthy in America didn't get there on their own, and if they oppose providing food for the masses then perhaps they should become the meal. We need more Amos' and Obadiahs.

 

[Desk trauma]

You tell me...

I’m not privy to your thoughts unless you post them.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

I’m not privy to your thoughts unless you post them.

I posted my response to the OP...there was no mention regarding capitalism or deaths under capitalism. YOU all brought it up so I would expect that YOU can answer it...

 

[public hermit]

We need more Amos' and Obadiahs.

All the respect, and I'm with you. Although, I hope today's Amos' and Obadiah's stear clear of the promo and marketing team for this idea.

 

[Desk trauma]

I posted my response to the OP...there was no mention regarding capitalism or deaths under capitalism. YOU all brought it up so I would expect that YOU can answer it...

Pommer brought it up and your reply was less than 100 million hence my asking you if that’s the cut off for acceptable losses. So, again, is 100 million your cut off for acceptable losses?

 

[Vambram]

Our government in its current form and its current leadership is every bit as vulnerable to abuse of power as the communism and socialism you describe.

That is incorrect.

 

[BCP1928]

Capitalism is where the poor are miserable and the rich are parasytes. Communism is where everyone is miserable equally. Socialism is somewhere in the middle.

You've been sold a bill of goods. Socialism is not "in the middle." Both socialism and communism are authoritarian economic systems. The difference is that communists believe that socialism can only be brought about through violent revolution.

I really don't care what we call the system we operate under, but it's quite clear that the chrony capitalist system in the US isn't working for a majority of people. So maybe we need to eat the rich.

That "crony capitalism" you refer to has a technical name: Neoliberalism. Neoliberalism is the authoritarian economic system of the Right. What's really in the middle is free market capitalism.

 

[Fervent]

All the respect, and I'm with you. Although, I hope today's Amos' and Obadiah's stear clear of the promo and marketing team for this idea.

Yeah...it can be a hard sell for some people who believe themselves temporarily embarrassed millionaires, rather than recognizing the parasytic role that a few "noble" families have played in monopolizing the wealth and productivity of the nation. So many spend their time worrying about doing the billionaire's wrong than recognize the very real harm that our system does to the most vulnerable among us.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

Pommer brought it up and your reply was less than 100 million hence my asking you if that’s the cut off for acceptable losses. So, again, is 100 million your cut off for acceptable losses?

I know Pommer brought it up. And then you asked this. I said I don't know, is it? I know the immense deaths under socialist/communist regimes so I posted it. I did not bring up cut offs, I posted what I thought. If you can,t answer it I can't either...

 

[Fervent]

You've been sold a bill of goods. Socialism is not "in the middle." Both socialism and communism are authoritarian economic systems. The difference is that communists believe that socialism can only be brought about through violent revolution.

Socialism is the daring idea that government can and should use its power to provide for the good of the disadvantaged.

That "crony capitalism" you refer to has a technical name: Neoliberalism. Neoliberalism is the authoritarian economic system of the Right. What's really in the middle is free market capitalism.

Free market capitalism is a recipe for monopolies and gross violations of human rights, as was seen in the 19th century. While a regulated capitalist economy is likely the best of imperfect systems to choose from, the glory of free market capitalism is as much of a myth as a communist utopia.