What does Socialism Add to the Economy?

[Stevicus]

What may be good business between two parties could harm third parties.

For instance, it is cheaper to dump your industrial waste into a river or landfill than to dispose of it in a safe way. Saves you money and so saves your customer money, but may injure or kill third parties who live downstream or near the landfill.

Sounds like an excellent reason for having government to regulate these kinds of businesses.

 

[PureX]

Capitalist greed has existed for multiple millennium and has not done us in; sooo... your argument fails

it has never wielded this kind of power and control, thanks to advancing technology. Refusing to recognize the danger of this, as you are, only serve to prove how dangerous it really is.

No; when lazy people take more than they contribute, when they refuse to pull their own weight, they force others to take up their slack. This is harmful

Who is giving anyone more than they contribute? Who is deciding the value of one’s contribution? You? We pay people not to work in this culture because this serves the greed of the capitalists. Everything we do in this culture we do in the service of the capitalists endless greed. They want an excess of potential laborers around to keep their active laborers wages as low as possible. Then they make their workers pay for the excess laborers to sit around and do nothing. All the while making them hate and blame each other for their predicament.

And you bought right into it. Blind as a bat.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

It has already enslaved the vast majority of us

How so?

 

[anotherneil]

That's an interesting question - what does it add to the economy & in thinking about it I find that there actually are things that it adds to the economy:

Central planning of the economy
Command and control of the economy
Authoritarianism
A mandate that people have and use money, and purchase certain goods and services (meaning a gun to everyone's head)
Waste and inefficiency
Overhead jobs that don't produce anything for the economy
Economic calculation problem consequences
More challenges for individuals and families trying to make ends meet
Starvation
Stunted growth and development
Crony capitalism & corruption
Oppression
An incentive for the bulk of people to want to flee a nation under such a political system
Restrictions on speech and the press
One political party in control of the state
Control of the press by the one political party
News reports and stories in the media that only speak positively of the one party government
Gulags
Walls with armed guards ready to shoot anyone trying to flee a nation under a socialist regime
A much wider economic gap between the very few wealthy and powerful individuals in control of the state and the rest of society
Lower quality of life for the bulk of people
Lower standards of living for the bulk of people
Guilt by association
Collective punishment, including and especially for family members of political protesters/dissidents
Party intimidation of the public into voting for them and supporting them politically
Orwellianism (doublethink, 2 minute hate, anti-sex league, room 101, etc.)
Military parades
Dictators
Long bread lines
Empty supermarket shelves
Long waiting lines to the ER
One size fits all (even if it doesn't)
(I guess I could go on and on.)

 

[metis]

Yes, but it also depends on what the government does with that tax money.

Yep.

 

[Stevicus]

Who is giving anyone more than they contribute? Who is deciding the value of one’s contribution? You? We pay people not to work in this culture because this serves the greed of the capitalists. Everything we do in this culture we do in the service of the capitalists endless greed. They want an excess of potential laborers around to keep their active laborers wages as low as possible. Then they make their workers pay for the excess laborers to sit around and do nothing. All the while making them hate and blame each other for their predicament.

This is a good point, and it shows how the system pits the working poor against the non-working poor. People who bust their butts for a pittance grow resentful towards those who don't lift a finger yet get free money and "free stuff." That may be part of the reason why so many blue-collar and low-wage workers support Trump.

In my state, the non-working poor get absolutely free healthcare, while the working class have to pay through the nose for insurance, co-pays, deductibles, and other costs which can put them in the poorhouse if they get a serious illness.

Even back in the 1990s, I saw some disillusioned Democrats say that they're no longer the party of the working man as much as they became the party of the non-working man.

We live in a society where criminals get treated better than homeless people, and some people are actually worried about "rewarding laziness"?

 

[metis]

This is a good point, and it shows how the system pits the working poor against the non-working poor. People who bust their butts for a pittance grow resentful towards those who don't lift a finger yet get free money and "free stuff." That may be part of the reason why so many blue-collar and low-wage workers support Trump.

In my state, the non-working poor get absolutely free healthcare, while the working class have to pay through the nose for insurance, co-pays, deductibles, and other costs which can put them in the poorhouse if they get a serious illness.

Even back in the 1990s, I saw some disillusioned Democrats say that they're no longer the party of the working man as much as they became the party of the non-working man.

We live in a society where criminals get treated better than homeless people, and some people are actually worried about "rewarding laziness"?

So, is what you're saying is just to hell with the poor? IOW. it's one thing to complain but another thing to come up with solutions, so what do you propose?

 

[Stevicus]

So, is what you're saying is just to hell with the poor? IOW. it's one thing to complain but another thing to come up with solutions, so what do you propose?

No, that's not what I'm saying at all. In fact, I'm saying just the opposite. The workers deserve better treatment across the board, but not at the expense of the poor.

But you do see my point, don't you? Don't you see how our current policies pit the lower classes against each other?

 

[PureX]

This is a good point, and it shows how the system pits the working poor against the non-working poor. People who bust their butts for a pittance grow resentful towards those who don't lift a finger yet get free money and "free stuff." That may be part of the reason why so many blue-collar and low-wage workers support Trump.

In my state, the non-working poor get absolutely free healthcare, while the working class have to pay through the nose for insurance, co-pays, deductibles, and other costs which can put them in the poorhouse if they get a serious illness.

And guess who is paying for all that free healthcare ... it's not the oligarchs. It's those same struggling workers.

Even back in the 1990s, I saw some disillusioned Democrats say that they're no longer the party of the working man as much as they became the party of the non-working man.

Both parties are the puppets of the oligarchs. The dems pay to the poor and non-working because that's what the oligarchs want then to do. The pubs whine and complain about it because that's what the oligarchs want them to do. Both parties are doing exactly as they are being told to do by the billionaires that pay for their campaigns, and perks, and bribes, and cushy after-office jobs making sure the next generation of politicians tow the oligarch's line.

The border is a great example. The oligarchs are never going to allow any effective "fence" to be built because they want all that cheap illegal labor keeping everyone else's wages low. But they don;t want US to know this, so they have the other party whine and complain about it an PRETEND to be building that definitive wall. But they never will ever actually build it. How many years has this game been going on, now? The whole point is to keep lots of cheap labor around, while blaming it all on someone OTHER than the oligarchs.

We live in a society where criminals get treated better than homeless people, and some people are actually worried about "rewarding laziness"?

Hating and blaming those "beneath us" makes us feel better about the lousy predicament we are actually in.

 

[metis]

No, that's not what I'm saying at all. In fact, I'm saying just the opposite. The workers deserve better treatment across the board, but not at the expense of the poor.

But you do see my point, don't you? Don't you see how our current policies pit the lower classes against each other?

IMO, a better approach than what we have is to tax the wealthy at a higher rate because that's the only logical alternative unless one wants to dump on the poor. Over the most recent decades, upper-level incomes have increased dramatically while middle class income has been actually losing somewhat because of inflation.

 

[metis]

Hating and blaming those "beneath us" makes us feel better about the lousy predicament we are actually in.

We have made our own predicament; thus, we can fix it, but will we?

 

[Stevicus]

IMO, a better approach than what we have is to tax the wealthy at a higher rate because that's the only logical alternative unless one wants to dump on the poor. Over the most recent decades, upper-level incomes have increased dramatically while middle class income has been actually losing somewhat because of inflation.

Galbraith advocated for wage/price controls, at least to a limited degree, as a way of keeping things from getting too far out of hand. Real wages have been pretty much stagnant for a long time, and wages aren't keeping up with inflation.

 

[Stevicus]

And guess who is paying for all that free healthcare ... it's not the oligarchs. It's those same struggling workers.

True. It's the old "divide and conquer" technique.

Both parties are the puppets of the oligarchs. The dems pay to the poor and non-working because that's what the oligarchs want then to do. The pubs whine and complain about it because that's what the oligarchs want them to do. Both parties are doing exactly as they are being told to do by the billionaires that pay for their campaigns, and perks, and bribes, and cushy after-office jobs making sure the next generation of politicians tow the oligarch's line.

The border is a great example. The oligarchs are never going to allow any effective "fence" to be built because they want all that cheap illegal labor keeping everyone else's wages low. But they don;t want US to know this, so they have the other party whine and complain about it an PRETEND to be building that definitive wall. But they never will ever actually build it. How many years has this game been going on, now? The whole point is to keep lots of cheap labor around, while blaming it all on someone OTHER than the oligarchs.

Exactly. A wall was never going to work anyway. The whole idea was completely ludicrous from the start. I don't see that either party really looks at the border and immigration issues with any degree of rationality. It seems obvious that the issue is not with the border or with the people trying to cross it. It's more a matter of the geopolitics of Latin America, U.S. policies in the region (both current and historical), and the overriding War on Drugs which has served other purpose than to make drug cartels even richer (along the bankers who launder their money).

Hating and blaming those "beneath us" makes us feel better about the lousy predicament we are actually in.

 

[metis]

Galbraith advocated for wage/price controls, at least to a limited degree, as a way of keeping things from getting too far out of hand. Real wages have been pretty much stagnant for a long time, and wages aren't keeping up with inflation.

IMO, we will sink deeper and deeper unless we get basic healthcare and post-high school education basically paid for one way or the other. And again, the wealthy are paying a fraction of their real income as compared to those in the middle class. Unions helped create our relatively large middle class, but they have been hurt by vested business interests that want to keep wages lower so as to increase their profits. This is the pattern we're seeing in recent decades-- unfortunately.

 

[Stevicus]

IMO, we will sink deeper and deeper unless we get basic healthcare and post-high school education basically paid for one way or the other. And again, the wealthy are paying a fraction of their real income as compared to those in the middle class. Unions helped create our relatively large middle class, but they have been hurt by vested business interests that want to keep wages lower so as to increase their profits. This is the pattern we're seeing in recent decades-- unfortunately.

In today's economy, which has become far more global and international, I believe that labor unions should also become more international in their scope. That's not likely to happen, though. That's why I find it so bemusing whenever people feel the need to challenge socialism or criticize it in some way - as if there's any kind of realistic chance socialism could ever be implemented. If there's any grave threat to the political and economic order, it's nationalism.

But that's all the more reason to not let large segments of the population languish in poverty and low wages.

 

[PureX]

We have made our own predicament; thus, we can fix it, but will we?

So far, it appears we'd much rather just blame it all on someone else and await some political 'savior' to come fix it.

The solution is actually still quite simple, and would be very effective very quickly if we would employ it. But we would have to act together. And that's the rub.

That solution is to vote OUT every incumbent in every election REGARDLESS OF PARTY until we get people in office that are willing to take action against the wholesale legalized bribery that has currently rendered our government totally ineffective and corrupt. Do this, and tell them WHY we're doing it, and I guarantee the wanna-be politicos will immediately begin to do what we demand to get themselves re-elected. Because what they want first and most of all is to get and stay in office. And until this wholesale legalized bribery and corruption is stopped, NO OTHER ISSUE matters. Because every decision the corrupted government makes will be made based on the agenda of the oligarchy that now OWNS them top to bottom, and owns most everything else that matters, too.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Yes. For the most part, when people talk about the "economic system," it's really a discussion of the political system.

Particularly when politicians try to prod and poke the 'Beast' it starts going wild and out of control.

 

[Kfox]

I don't agree entirely. The buying/selling/trading of goods is a process that doesn't automatically require any written laws or governments, only a social contract between individuals. The reason that laws and governments exist is because of the human propensity towards greed, dishonesty, theft, and violence.

It's not that a system is "put into place," but it's more a matter of the complexities and inherent malice involved in human interactions which leads to the necessity of putting restrictions upon that system. That's where the trial and error comes into play, since they've had to try different ideas out from time to time. Sometimes they work, and sometimes not. The Federal Reserve Bank, for example, was created to manage the money system. The IRS was also created around the same time. Various anti-trust acts and labor reforms came about as well.

So, this proves, at the very least, there's a certain flexibility in the system which can make changes and reforms which might have certain socialistic characteristics, but wouldn't automatically "become socialist."

Just because the current system employed in the USA has taken hundreds of years of trial and error in order to get to where we are right now (which is still far from perfect) doesn't mean hundreds of years of trial and error are required in order to have a capitalist system in place.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

 

[Kfox]

it has never wielded this kind of power and control, thanks to advancing technology. Refusing to recognize the danger of this, as you are, only serve to prove how dangerous it really is.

You jokin' right? You can't be suggesting a hundred years ago when they had no Union representation, Sweat Shops for children, people forced to work dangerous working conditions, that there was less power and control over employees than today! C'mon you know better than that.

Who is giving anyone more than they contribute?

The government gives the poor more benefits than they pay in taxes.

Who is deciding the value of one’s contribution? You?

Anybody with the ability to calculate the cost of K thru 12 education, the cost of food stamps, the cost of section 8 housing, along with all the other benefits, and subtract that number from the amount they pay in taxes can decide by looking at the numbers.

We pay people not to work in this culture because this serves the greed of the capitalists.

Absurd! How does people NOT working serve capitalist greed? Capitalists want everybody to work so they can buy their products! You've got this backwarfds.

Everything we do in this culture we do in the service of the capitalists endless greed. They want an excess of potential laborers around to keep their active laborers wages as low as possible.

Didn't you just say Capitalists don't want people working? Which is it? They don't want people working? Or they want more laborers willing to work than the job market can employ?

Then they make their workers pay for the excess laborers to sit around and do nothing.

Whaaattt??? Now you really trippin!!! Name a capitalist who is in the business of hiring people to sit around and do NOTHING!

All the while making them hate and blame each other for their predicament.

What you talkin' about Willis??? The guy hired to sit around and do nothing has the best job in the world! He should be thankful for his predicament.