Anyone here consider themselves non-socialists?

[Zensal]

Well, you wanted ALL the options, and it is an option. Have fun!!!

 

[TheSkinsFan]

Originally posted by: themusgrat
Craig, in a perfect world, socialism would be the best government. That's obvious. Where you and your thankfully-few buddies get it wrong, is that we don't live in a perfect world. A perfect world is a requirement for true socialism, but not the other way around. You can make an argument for all the things you listed, just like you can make an argument against them. Some are things we need, some aren't. You know what though? Any of the extremes are bad. Pure socialism, or no socialism. Maybe long, long ago, we could have completely lived without any socialist practices or services whatesoever, but it's obvious that our society has made ourselves dependent on many of the things you list above. Now we tell ourselves we have the right to those things.

this.

Once upon a time, there existed a happy medium in the U.S. between socialism and capitalism. It's when the scale starts to tip too far toward either end of the spectrum that we have a problem -- ie. socialized medicine, too many entitlement programs, corporate monopolies, too much corporate influence in DC, etc.

The only differences between most of us are where we see that scale today, and what tolerance thresholds we each have for either end of the spectrum.

 

[biostud]

To have a society you do need to share something and interact with other people otherwise it would be total anarchy. Sometimes it's cheaper for the soceity as a whole to share some expenses, than letting individuals pay from their own pocket every time. So you have to find out which part of the soceity benefits from being run by state and which benefits from being run by private investors. Saying that either should be 100% is definately not the going to give the most money and freedom to most of the people, you have to have a balance between the two. If everything is controlled by a "free market" thinking, those with most money could easily control the soceity as wealthy dictators just using their money to buy politicians, police, military and have their way with people who does have that much money. Who would be there to stop them?

 

[tk149]

Originally posted by: TheSkinsFan

Originally posted by: themusgrat
Craig, in a perfect world, socialism would be the best government. That's obvious. Where you and your thankfully-few buddies get it wrong, is that we don't live in a perfect world. A perfect world is a requirement for true socialism, but not the other way around. You can make an argument for all the things you listed, just like you can make an argument against them. Some are things we need, some aren't. You know what though? Any of the extremes are bad. Pure socialism, or no socialism. Maybe long, long ago, we could have completely lived without any socialist practices or services whatesoever, but it's obvious that our society has made ourselves dependent on many of the things you list above. Now we tell ourselves we have the right to those things.

this.

Once upon a time, there existed a happy medium in the U.S. between socialism and capitalism. It's when the scale starts to tip too far toward either end of the spectrum that we have a problem -- ie. socialized medicine, too many entitlement programs, corporate monopolies, too much corporate influence in DC, etc.

The only differences between most of us are where we see that scale today, and what tolerance thresholds we each have for either end of the spectrum.

I just want to point out that true laissez faire capitalism does not create the legal fiction known as "corporations." I suspect that much of what you don't like about capitalism would not exist if we did not have corporations (which insulate owners and officers from legal responsibility).

I disagree with the premise that Socialism would work in a perfect world. Socialism would work if humans were motivated solely by work, and not by reward. I don't think a world where humans think like ants would be a perfect world. I think it'd be gawd awful scary.

 

[xj0hnx]

Originally posted by: tk149

Originally posted by: TheSkinsFan

Originally posted by: themusgrat
Craig, in a perfect world, socialism would be the best government. That's obvious. Where you and your thankfully-few buddies get it wrong, is that we don't live in a perfect world. A perfect world is a requirement for true socialism, but not the other way around. You can make an argument for all the things you listed, just like you can make an argument against them. Some are things we need, some aren't. You know what though? Any of the extremes are bad. Pure socialism, or no socialism. Maybe long, long ago, we could have completely lived without any socialist practices or services whatesoever, but it's obvious that our society has made ourselves dependent on many of the things you list above. Now we tell ourselves we have the right to those things.

this.

Once upon a time, there existed a happy medium in the U.S. between socialism and capitalism. It's when the scale starts to tip too far toward either end of the spectrum that we have a problem -- ie. socialized medicine, too many entitlement programs, corporate monopolies, too much corporate influence in DC, etc.

The only differences between most of us are where we see that scale today, and what tolerance thresholds we each have for either end of the spectrum.

I just want to point out that true laissez faire capitalism does not create the legal fiction known as "corporations." I suspect that much of what you don't like about capitalism would not exist if we did not have corporations (which insulate owners and officers from legal responsibility).

I disagree with the premise that Socialism would work in a perfect world. Socialism would work if humans were motivated solely by work, and not by reward. I don't think a world where humans think like ants would be a perfect world. I think it'd be gawd awful scary.

This would be accurate. Socialism would work, not in a "perfect world" but if people were driven only to benefit the whole, in which case it would be a good thing for the government to be the central authority and in control of all distibution of goods and services. Thank goodness however we are free to seek our own fortune, and free to succeed and fail based on our own efforts and choices, and our governments job is to provide and atmosphere for that to happen.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

...to speak practically and as a citizen, unlike those who call them selves no-?government men, I ask for, not at once no government, but at once a better government. Let every man make known what kind of government would command his respect, and that will be one step toward obtaining it

/me wonders why one would need socialism at Walden...