Biden's economic plan requires Socialism.

OldWiseGuy · Nov 30, 2020

Gene2memE said:
Way to read into a statement what isn't there. Governments intervene in markets - that's what's meant by "create an economy".

Read the rest of the sentence.

"...create an economy that gives every single person across America a fair shot and an equal chance to get ahead.”

As I stated, that would require a socialistic economy.

OldWiseGuy · Nov 30, 2020

grasping the after wind said:
No government is capable of providing that under any system. Government can't do the impossible. An actual socialist system, where the government is control of the means of production, always provides totally inadequate resources for anyone but those in the government or those in the black market. Capitalist social democracies that are common in what is referred to by many as the western world do tend to provide the most reasonable amount of prosperity for the vast majority of citizens though they inevitably provide an extremely lavish lifestyle for those that produce the most and bankroll government to the greatest degree. .

While I agree with this the only way to accomplish Biden's plan is through socialism, regardless of whether it's possible or not.

Paulos23 · Nov 30, 2020

Albion said:
That all depends on who is speaking.

So the policy doesn't matter, just who is doing it?

OldWiseGuy · Nov 30, 2020

Trogdor the Burninator said:
We're still OK with socialism when it's the government subsidising farmers or bailing out corporations though, right?

Without those subsidies to agriculture we'd all go hungry. The bailout of the auto companies had to be repaid. Also tax advantages aren't bailouts, they're incentives for investors.

Trogdor the Burninator · Nov 30, 2020

OldWiseGuy said:
Without those subsidies to agriculture we'd all go hungry.

No you wouldn't. The market would sort it out. You might have to pay higher prices for imported food, or do without certain products you couldn't afford, but that's capitalism.

OldWiseGuy said:
The bailout of the auto companies had to be repaid.

It still cost the government money. Why not let them go bankrupt. People can buy their cars from other countries.

Desk trauma · Nov 30, 2020

OldWiseGuy said:
I'm also considering the progressive's agenda for Biden's administration. Very socialistic, imo.

Still requires an Olympic level leap from a boilerplate phrase to the state controlling the means of production.

Sparagmos · Nov 30, 2020

OldWiseGuy said:
Read the rest of the sentence.

"...create an economy that gives every single person across America a fair shot and an equal chance to get ahead.”

As I stated, that would require a socialistic economy.

Now equal opportunity is socialism? LOL.

CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN · Nov 30, 2020

OldWiseGuy said:
They already do this through Medicare, Medicaid, and the ACA.

Actually until Obama. The only people ,that could Medicaid was Welfare moms, her kids and the disability. And there's only ACA ,because of Obama.

CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN · Nov 30, 2020

nonaeroterraqueous said:
I've seen the quality of healthcare provided by government-run institutions, and I think it's safe to say that the general welfare is better served by keeping the government out of it, for the most part.

Insurance companies are in it for money. So I dont see how the government would be worse.

ThatRobGuy · Nov 30, 2020

Strathos said:
Guess what? Without "socialism" we wouldn't have publicly funded police and fire departments, roads, and utilities. Stop using "socialism" as a boogeyman for everything you don't like.

It's also pretty ironic how conservatives will go out of their way to defend everything the police do these days and paint liberals as hating the very idea of police, yet they don't seem to realize how the police department is about as "socialist" as you can get - controlled by the government and paid for with public tax money.

Providing public funding for non-rivalrous and non-excludable goods/services has nothing to do with socialism.

...as it has virtually nothing to do with the means of production.

High Fidelity · Nov 30, 2020

Another election cycle and seemingly fewer Americans understand what socialism is.

Truly baffling.

Speedwell · Nov 30, 2020

OldWiseGuy said:
Read the rest of the sentence.

"...create an economy that gives every single person across America a fair shot and an equal chance to get ahead.”

As I stated, that would require a socialistic economy.

So you re saying that capitalism does not give every American an equal chance to get ahead.

Strathos · Nov 30, 2020

ThatRobGuy said:
Providing public funding for non-rivalrous and non-excludable goods/services has nothing to do with socialism.

...as it has virtually nothing to do with the means of production.

You're talking about market socialism as if it was the only type of socialism. Which is a bait and switch since no one in mainstream US politics is suggesting market socialism.

OldWiseGuy · Nov 30, 2020

Sparagmos said:
Now equal opportunity is socialism? LOL.

I don't think people who lack abilities, and those with mental, drug, or criminal problems, can 'get ahead' without direct handouts from the government. That would require communism, not just socialism.

OldWiseGuy · Nov 30, 2020

CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN said:
Insurance companies are in it for money. So I dont see how the government would be worse.

Government can't afford to insure everyone without seriously limiting medical services.

OldWiseGuy · Nov 30, 2020

Speedwell said:
So you re saying that capitalism does not give every American an equal chance to get ahead.

That's what Biden seems to be saying.

Capitalism and free enterprise provide the greatest opportunity for the most people to succeed financially. However, many don't want to 'get ahead' in that way. We should do a study on that. We might not actually have the economic problems that we are told we have. I'm a good example of that. I have turned down some great opportunities because I treasure my free time.

Sparagmos · Nov 30, 2020

OldWiseGuy said:
I don't think people who lack abilities, and those with mental, drug, or criminal problems, can 'get ahead' without direct handouts from the government. That would require communism, not just socialism.

Im curious, how do you define communism?

OldWiseGuy · Nov 30, 2020

Sparagmos said:
Im curious, how do you define communism?

Equality of misery.

Sparagmos · Nov 30, 2020

OldWiseGuy said:
Equality of misery.

No really, if you’re going to discuss it, surely you can share how you define it?

Albion · Nov 30, 2020

Strathos said:
It's a matter of degree. A nation with zero socialist policies would have a government that never did anything at all, or no government whatsoever (i.e. Somalia for quite a while).

That's wrong. The definition of Socialism is NOT that it's a government that does something, anything.

Biden's economic plan requires Socialism.

Wake me when it's soup.

Wake me when it's soup.

Never tell me the odds!

Wake me when it's soup.

Senior Veteran

Front row at the dumpster fire of the republic

Well-Known Member

My dad died 1/12/2023. I'm still devastated.

My dad died 1/12/2023. I'm still devastated.

Part of the IT crowd

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

No one important

Wake me when it's soup.

Wake me when it's soup.

Wake me when it's soup.

Well-Known Member

Wake me when it's soup.

Well-Known Member

Facilitator

Similar threads