Is the Democratic Party starting to lean more towards socialism than ever before?

[Hank77]

Those people need to learn that if there's something they want don't expect it to be given to you go out and work for it.
M-Bob

I agree and corporate welfare needs to be curtailed as well. Why? So they won't have an unfair advantage over the American small business man/woman.

 

[dogs4thewin]

I agree and corporate welfare needs to be curtailed as well. Why? So they won't have an unfair advantage over the American small business man/woman.

and maybe people would pay somewhat more of a livable wage.

 

[Mountainmanbob]

Kneeling at the idol of politics is not going to save anyone. It's the epitome of worldliness.

?

 

[Mountainmanbob]

and maybe people would pay somewhat more of a livable wage.

When I had a job that paid a dollar thirty-five per hour which was not much back then I went out and got another job that paid more. I never expected to buy a house or have a good retirement on the wages of a dishwasher.

They are called entry level positions for a reason these ones usually don't have much experience.

M-Bob

 

[Hank77]

Agree, and that you have to improve your disposition, seek training and education (even if it’s not formal), and be willing to work your way up if you want a piece of the pie. We ‘give’ way too much in this country now to those who aren’t willing to do the above... to the point it has become a sought-after way of life for a large percentage of people.

Including corporations who lobby the Congress for laws that are beneficial to them. Small businesses can't afford lobbyists and lawyers to give them a equal playing field. They can't afford large campaign contributions to candidates that will vote in their favor.

 

[dogs4thewin]

When I had a job that paid a dollar thirty-five per hour which was not much back then I went out and got another job that paid more. I never expected to buy a house or have a good retirement on the wages of a dishwasher.

They are called entry level positions for a reason these ones usually don't have much experience.

M-Bob

so you build up and get better.

 

[Hank77]

Americans warming to socialism over capitalism, polls show

If the polls are accurate, why do you think that is?

 

[dogs4thewin]

If the polls are accurate, why do you think that is?

Maybe because people want to be equal.

 

[Hank77]

and maybe people would pay somewhat more of a livable wage.

What people? Small business or corporations?

 

[dogs4thewin]

What people? Small business or corporations?

the corporations, mostly.

 

[expos4ever]

Those people need to learn that life is not fair and that not everyone will be equal.

From Acts 4:

All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of their possessions was their own, but they shared everything they had.

I will anticipate the "this is for the early church, not for us" objection. Or the "this does not apply to society as a whole" objection.

Let's think about this: If is good and right for believers to share their wealth, why wouldn't that basic principle generalize? If something is good for the church, surely it would also be good for society as a whole.

In any event, I am quite sure that people on both sides really do not understand what "socialism" really is. And I suggest that it is equally obvious from the facts of history that a society flourishes best with a combination of free market capitalism and strong social programs.

 

[expos4ever]

From a professor at UC Davis:

When you look closely at what today’s self-proclaimed democratic socialists are advocating, it is not state ownership of the means of production. They are simply proposing another reform epoch like the New Deal or the Progressive era that would include major legislative steps to reduce inequality of income and wealth, provide citizens with new ways to contain the power of large corporations and expand the services to which all citizens are entitled.

 

[dogs4thewin]

From Acts 4:

All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of their possessions was their own, but they shared everything they had.

I will anticipate the "this is for the early church, not for us" objection. Or the "this does not apply to society as a whole" objection.

Let's think about this: If is good and right for believers to share their wealth, why wouldn't that basic principle generalize? If something is good for the church, surely it would also be good for society as a whole.

In any event, I am quite sure that people on both sides really do not understand what "socialism" really is. And I suggest that it is equally obvious from the facts of history that a society flourishes best with a combination of free market capitalism and strong social programs.

There is a difference in very basic needs and extra stuff.

 

[Mountainmanbob]

If the polls are accurate, why do you think that is?

Because they are being deceived.
And falling for it.
Free everything sounds so good.
Especially for the non achievers.
M-Bob

 

[Hank77]

Because they are being deceived.
And falling for it.
Free everything sounds so good.
Especially for the non achievers.
M-Bob

Have you considered that it might be, at least in some people's view, that the financial gap between the haves and the have nots is getting bigger and bigger?

 

[Mountainmanbob]

Have you considered that it might be, at least in some people's view, that the financial gap between the haves and the have nots is getting bigger and bigger?

I would like to see a stronger middle class and socialism does not offer that.

Hard work and jobs does.

Something socialism has proven not to be of high concern.

Note -- most of the Have Nots that I known are in that position because they did not go out and get it when they could. Many of them are either lazy or got hung up with drinking or drugs Etc.

My friends such as myself that worked their whole lives now have homes paid for, retirement plans, money's that were put away, and medical insurance.

No one gave it to me no one!

I also started many businesses during my life. Some had many many employees. And then old Obama stated you did not build that business. Hey Obama if I did not build that business who did?????

Socialism does not promote starting businesses.

M-Bob

 

[StrivingFollower]

These democrats are the most rapidly progressive Americans we've yet seen. You never know what they'll support. In a few more years they'll be complimenting Kim Jong Un. They'll be saying "these people that hate Kim's government.. you know they're actually racist."

 

[bekkilyn]

In any event, I am quite sure that people on both sides really do not understand what "socialism" really is. And I suggest that it is equally obvious from the facts of history that a society flourishes best with a combination of free market capitalism and strong social programs.

Yes, they seem to think that strong social programs in a (appropriately regulated) free market capitalist environment is "socialism" to the effect of red China or the old Soviet Union. While they are terrified of paying any taxes to the government for programs that would benefit actual human beings, they are perfectly happy to keep paying corporate welfare to the big money organizations who happily turn around and pay a pittance of a wage to people who do the majority of the work (often taking on two or three different jobs just to scrape by) so that these same organizations can continue to drain even *more* wealth from our country and whose CEO's often gloat about paying NO taxes whatsoever.

 

[hedrick]

From a professor at UC Davis:

When you look closely at what today’s self-proclaimed democratic socialists are advocating, it is not state ownership of the means of production. They are simply proposing another reform epoch like the New Deal or the Progressive era that would include major legislative steps to reduce inequality of income and wealth, provide citizens with new ways to contain the power of large corporations and expand the services to which all citizens are entitled.

I agree.

Our system is already mixed. The main socialist trend I see at the moment is more government involvement in health care. The current system is certainly not competitive in any useful way.

 

[bekkilyn]

Socialism does not promote starting businesses.

M-Bob

Maybe you need to notify the "socialist" countries of Canada, the U.K., and especially Denmark of this "fact" considering that they are among the top ten countries where small business startups thrive.

You and your friends are probably all in the same general age range where going out and getting a job and being able to make a living on it was much easier years ago than it is today. The work environment is much different now than it was back then. More and more jobs are temporary contract jobs with little to no benefits and wages have been stagnated for decades, and the problem continues to get worse for the upcoming generations.