Socialism is so bad that it allows poor people to live. Horrible true story

[JaredKaragen]

ok then do capitalism, but dont create a currency realm, and enforce it upon others, and block others from spending a different currency there.

liberty and capitalism are also going to split as will be democracy and capitalism.

I 100% agree.

One of the major issues I have is the fact we are not on any sort of "standard" when it comes to the value of "money".   You are literally cherishing "money" thinking that it is not worthless; simply based on the fact that you are told it is not and believe it.   This thinking is perpetuated through society; making it harder and harder to correct as time goes on.  

Lack of a "gold standard" or something of the like;  is the single biggest problem with the capitalist system of today that I can think of... aside from the fractional reserve system....

[KingScorpio]

ok then do capitalism, but dont create a currency realm, and enforce it upon others, and block others from spending a different currency there.

liberty and capitalism are also going to split as will be democracy and capitalism.

I 100% agree.

One of the major issues I have is the fact we are not on any sort of "standard" when it comes to the value of "money".   You are literally cherishing "money" thinking that it is not worthless; simply based on the fact that you are told it is not and believe it.   This thinking is perpetuated through society; making it harder and harder to correct as time goes on.  

Lack of a "gold standard" or something of the like;  is the single biggest problem with the capitalist system of today that I can think of... aside from the fractional reserve system....

thats not true, societies can have successful economies, because they dont have a gold standard, like for example germany, it is a ressource poor country and would have the strongest currency in europe and ressource rich countries cant have strong currencies.

[JaredKaragen]

ok then do capitalism, but dont create a currency realm, and enforce it upon others, and block others from spending a different currency there.

liberty and capitalism are also going to split as will be democracy and capitalism.

I 100% agree.

One of the major issues I have is the fact we are not on any sort of "standard" when it comes to the value of "money".   You are literally cherishing "money" thinking that it is not worthless; simply based on the fact that you are told it is not and believe it.   This thinking is perpetuated through society; making it harder and harder to correct as time goes on.  

Lack of a "gold standard" or something of the like;  is the single biggest problem with the capitalist system of today that I can think of... aside from the fractional reserve system....

thats not true, societies can have successful economies, because they dont have a gold standard, like for example germany, it is a ressource poor country and would have the strongest currency in europe and ressource rich countries cant have strong currencies.

There's obvious historical reasons why germany is not on the gold standard.......  and in the ~50+ years of their currency before adopting the euro; its value diminished by over 70%.   
Stable;  yea;  but stably on a downward trend... I don't consider that strong.  More of predictable and reliable.

[coins4commies]

I've repeatedly cited a published paper on a study that compared the two and found socialism produced better physical quality of life 93% of the time. You've done nothing but continue to regurgitate capitalist gospel.

Most people are born into their privilege in capitalism so there is no way it can be earned.  Things are bought in capitalism, not earned.  Things can only be earned when the fruit of labor goes to the laborer.  Capitalism is literally the opposite of that. I buy shares and get the fruits of other people's labor while I lay on the beach.  

Socialism cannot be blamed for every bad thing that has ever happened in a country with socialist economic principles.

Yes, You cite a paper that knitpicks certain aspects forgoing the rest of the data and historical facts that show otherwise in many other respects beyond those few.  The aspects that arise from the systems of each are vast and complicated;  and you have to be ignorant to believe that all of them can be referenced and compared at once like that.

I have lived in, and had my life effected by both systems.

I chose capitalism because I have seen its effect in my life and others is greater and better than socialism.   Your bashing of me for retaining this principal based on my real life experiences,  changes nothing.

You say things are bought and not earned.

In Venezuela;  their food is bought just like ours.... except somehow our shelves are stocked.   Your short-sided analogies are extremely flawed.


I don't blame socialism alone for the downfall of socialist societies (as you imply);  I use it in evidence of commonalities across history to make my judgments;  on top of what I have been through first-hand.

You talk about a paper not being comprehensive enough but the rest of this post and this entire thread are complete anecdotes.  You conclude that your perceived experience of socialism is what socialism is and that a failed economy like Venezuela is somehow proof that socialism does not work.  Despite the obvious fact that a privileged person in capitalism will be personally better off than they would in socialism without their privilege.

The paper is somehow not comprehensive enough in showing that socialism produced better outcomes 93% of the time but somehow a few pictures and mentions of Venezuela is. 

People mention famines and economic crashes but never mention any that occurred under capitalism.  The problem you guys have with the paper is that it provides a side-by-side apples to apples comparison and you are interested in only focusing on bad things that have happened under alleged socialism.

[TECSHARE]

Despite the obvious fact that a privileged person in capitalism will be personally better off than they would in socialism without their privilege.

This statement pretty much sums up the mentality of Socialists and Communists. It is not really about improving the quality of life for themselves or others, it is about coveting what others have and wanting to take it from them to create some sort of perverted sense of "equality" where everyone is equally impoverished and enslaved. This is why Socialism and Communism are inherently totalitarian, because they can not exist without taking from people what they have, earned or received by chance of birth.

[JaredKaragen]

People mention famines and economic crashes but never mention any that occurred under capitalism.  The problem you guys have with the paper is that it provides a side-by-side apples to apples comparison and you are interested in only focusing on bad things that have happened under alleged socialism.

I have had more bad than good come from socialism in my life.

what do you mean people don't mention problems that arise with capitalism?   The numerous stock market crashes, the homeless problem, the increased spreading of things like STD's, etc are heavily talked about in this day and age.


Speaking of "socialist" Germany earlier;  also didn't even brush on the fact that they haven't been a socialist nation for some time.... and they still declined.    Some can say its because of capitalism (using short thinking, I can understand how they come to this position) Germany had its steady downfall, but nobody stops to think that its a real possibility the mindset of the people and application of their government with socialist agendas and programs have caused things to follow that path?


Listen;   You can all try and argue until you are blue in the face on how one is greater than the other.



I have been on both sides of the coin;  had both systems effect my life in a serious way.


I chose capitalism.   I have a better chance, especially because if I work hard, I can earn that batter chance.  Being limited;  takes away that chance at a better life.


And "Better life" is subjective.    
For one person it could be something as simple as having running water in your house.
For some others, it's could be ability to pass the blame to someone else and continue being ignorant by simply enjoying what has been handed to you.

[KingScorpio]

ok then do capitalism, but dont create a currency realm, and enforce it upon others, and block others from spending a different currency there.

liberty and capitalism are also going to split as will be democracy and capitalism.

I 100% agree.

One of the major issues I have is the fact we are not on any sort of "standard" when it comes to the value of "money".   You are literally cherishing "money" thinking that it is not worthless; simply based on the fact that you are told it is not and believe it.   This thinking is perpetuated through society; making it harder and harder to correct as time goes on.  

Lack of a "gold standard" or something of the like;  is the single biggest problem with the capitalist system of today that I can think of... aside from the fractional reserve system....

thats not true, societies can have successful economies, because they dont have a gold standard, like for example germany, it is a ressource poor country and would have the strongest currency in europe and ressource rich countries cant have strong currencies.

There's obvious historical reasons why germany is not on the gold standard.......  and in the ~50+ years of their currency before adopting the euro; its value diminished by over 70%.   
Stable;  yea;  but stably on a downward trend... I don't consider that strong.  More of predictable and reliable.

gold standard is worthless junk, germany is on the national socialism standard

[JaredKaragen]

gold standard is worthless junk, germany is on the national socialism standard

Germany has been a republic for some time....  Check your facts before you vomit them everywhere please.

[KingScorpio]

gold standard is worthless junk, germany is on the national socialism standard

Germany has been a republic for some time....  Check your facts before you vomit them everywhere please.

national socialism means there is a banking cartel that runs an agenda.

even if its a "democratic" national socialism its still somehow like that. nation states have to run a socialism or they wont have support.

[JaredKaragen]

gold standard is worthless junk, germany is on the national socialism standard

Germany has been a republic for some time....  Check your facts before you vomit them everywhere please.

national socialism means there is a banking cartel that runs an agenda.

even if its a "democratic" national socialism its still somehow like that. nation states have to run a socialism or they wont have support.

I don't even know how to respond to that broken argument.... other than to correct you again:

national socialism is literally defined as "the polotical doctrine of the nazi party of germany"... which has been gone for some time now.... which I have already pointed out.

Again,  I will repeat:  check your facts bud.... I said it to you initially because you are making completely incorrect/illogical statements.

You do not know how to discuss things if you do not know the basic definitions of what you are speaking about.  You replies are clearly indicative of that.

[KingScorpio]

gold standard is worthless junk, germany is on the national socialism standard

Germany has been a republic for some time....  Check your facts before you vomit them everywhere please.

national socialism means there is a banking cartel that runs an agenda.

even if its a "democratic" national socialism its still somehow like that. nation states have to run a socialism or they wont have support.

I don't even know how to respond to that broken argument.... other than to correct you again:

national socialism is literally defined as "the polotical doctrine of the nazi party of germany"... which has been gone for some time now.... which I have already pointed out.

Again,  I will repeat:  check your facts bud.... I said it to you initially because you are making completely incorrect/illogical statements.

You do not know how to discuss things if you do not know the basic definitions of what you are speaking about.  You replies are clearly indicative of that.

you are wrong national socialism means a socialism based on a nation
there is also tribal socialism, religious socialism corporate socialism etc.

[merchantofzeny]

There's no easy solution to this but considering even doctors and accountants in Cuba are side hustling as taxi drivers for tourists to make ends meet, what's clear is government is hardly efficient, whether it's capitalist or socialist. It's not their money they're spending.

I'm no economist but probably someone can find a good way to provide incentives or at least discourage bad behavior. We don't even have universal healthcare where I live but the government does provide subsidies for certain conditions and years ago an eye clinic was shutdown for doing unnecessary operations on the elderly. These people wouldn't have been able to afford these surgeries anyway but since the government is footing the bill... Of course others don't go that far but they do make you come back more often than necessary since they get paid each time anyway. Heard this is also the reason for increasing number of C-Section surgeries in the US.

socialism has to be implemented correct.

If it fails, it must be not true Socialism but something else.

Exactly. That's the argument that these socialists use time and time again. They continue to say how it's 'not true socialism' and 'it's not true communism' and so on. They're going to lie to themselves so much, that at a certain point even THEY believe their bullshit.

I don't understand how someone can live life like that, but that's life.

The result speak for itself and at the end of the day, they're what matters. People flee from socialist states to capitalist ones and not the other way around. No one can convince me to move from my shithole to Havana, nah nah nah.

[TheCoinGrabber]

Let me tell a secret: free healthcare system doesn't work.





Sadly, healthcare is an expensive service, who promises it for free is lying to people.
We need to be realistic and look for real solutions to solve issues. Demagogy like offering free stuff to the poors doesn't help us fixing any problems.

Isn't this how the socialist regime in Venezuela started? Free this, free that. All was well while the oil money keeps coming but then the oil prices plunged. They nationalized their oil sector and it degraded to the point that they don't even refine oil now, they just sell crude.

[coins4commies]

Despite the obvious fact that a privileged person in capitalism will be personally better off than they would in socialism without their privilege.

This statement pretty much sums up the mentality of Socialists and Communists. It is not really about improving the quality of life for themselves or others, it is about coveting what others have and wanting to take it from them to create some sort of perverted sense of "equality" where everyone is equally impoverished and enslaved. This is why Socialism and Communism are inherently totalitarian, because they can not exist without taking from people what they have, earned or received by chance of birth.

No it doesn't have to take away.  Socialism can start by fairly allocating everything that is produced going forward.

[PrimeNumber7]

Despite the obvious fact that a privileged person in capitalism will be personally better off than they would in socialism without their privilege.

This statement pretty much sums up the mentality of Socialists and Communists. It is not really about improving the quality of life for themselves or others, it is about coveting what others have and wanting to take it from them to create some sort of perverted sense of "equality" where everyone is equally impoverished and enslaved. This is why Socialism and Communism are inherently totalitarian, because they can not exist without taking from people what they have, earned or received by chance of birth.

No it doesn't have to take away.  Socialism can start by fairly allocating everything that is produced going forward.

That would be taking away the means of production from those that own it. If someone previously invested in equipment that produces goods, "fairly allocating everything that is produced going forward" would reduce the value of that equipment down to zero.

[TECSHARE]

Despite the obvious fact that a privileged person in capitalism will be personally better off than they would in socialism without their privilege.

This statement pretty much sums up the mentality of Socialists and Communists. It is not really about improving the quality of life for themselves or others, it is about coveting what others have and wanting to take it from them to create some sort of perverted sense of "equality" where everyone is equally impoverished and enslaved. This is why Socialism and Communism are inherently totalitarian, because they can not exist without taking from people what they have, earned or received by chance of birth.

No it doesn't have to take away.  Socialism can start by fairly allocating everything that is produced going forward.

That would be taking away the means of production from those that own it. If someone previously invested in equipment that produces goods, "fairly allocating everything that is produced going forward" would reduce the value of that equipment down to zero.

See Venezuela. American companies funded a large portion of their refining infrastructure, they nationalized it, then it rotted into a completely useless state because Communists are not good business managers and are totally inefficient. Now they are all starving because the nation depended on that refining capacity and Maduro is blaming the US for doing this to them. What a joke.

[btc78]

Socialism creates disincentives to work and also to maximize productivity when working. It fails every time it has been tried and each time it has been tried, the country’s people see lower standard of living and the state has had to use violent force to compel people to participate in the socialism.

Socialism has killed hundreds of millions of people over the past 120 years.

I wonder how many people die a year from not being able to afford basic necessities."

Absolutely.mate since poor people are dying because of being denied from basic necessities most specially in the third world countries and those who are in mountain places
They are the one whose mostly needs this services but the sad thing is they are not in priority for health services..because just like what the poster above said that doctors are aiming for higher payments than to serve poor with small income at stake

[TECSHARE]

Socialism creates disincentives to work and also to maximize productivity when working. It fails every time it has been tried and each time it has been tried, the country’s people see lower standard of living and the state has had to use violent force to compel people to participate in the socialism.

Socialism has killed hundreds of millions of people over the past 120 years.

I wonder how many people die a year from not being able to afford basic necessities."

Absolutely.mate since poor people are dying because of being denied from basic necessities most specially in the third world countries and those who are in mountain places
They are the one whose mostly needs this services but the sad thing is they are not in priority for health services..because just like what the poster above said that doctors are aiming for higher payments than to serve poor with small income at stake

Anyone can point at a problem. You aren't providing a solution, you are just saying what is, is not good enough. Socialism is not a solution, as history shows. In the end even more people end up lacking basic necessities. Way to fix it.

[gentlemand]

It was interesting to see the reaction in the UK when the US ambassador said they wanted to get their claws into the NHS as part of a trade deal.

Everyone from every end of the spectrum apart from a couple of certifiable psycho assholes went absolutely fucking ballistic at the idea.

All you have to do is look at American government spending per capita. It's the highest in the world by a very, very significant margin yet you can still die from neglect or wind up bankrupted by it. Ergo American opinions are less than worthless on this subject.

American citizens have been conned into paying vastly more tax than anywhere else and having to pay out of their own pocket too. How did the medical industry manage that trick? If nothing else America serves as a superb example to rest of the planet on how not to end up.

[TECSHARE]

It was interesting to see the reaction in the UK when the US ambassador said they wanted to get their claws into the NHS as part of a trade deal.

Everyone from every end of the spectrum apart from a couple of certifiable psycho assholes went absolutely fucking ballistic at the idea.

All you have to do is look at American government spending per capita. It's the highest in the world by a very, very significant margin yet you can still die from neglect or wind up bankrupted by it. Ergo American opinions are less than worthless on this subject.

American citizens have been conned into paying vastly more tax than anywhere else and having to pay out of their own pocket too. How did the medical industry manage that trick? If nothing else America serves as a superb example to rest of the planet on how not to end up.

At least we can pay to see a private doctor and get treated in days to weeks and not months or years as you die on a waiting list. IMO both systems are pretty broken, but Socialism is always a countdown to inevitable failure, private healthcare can be effectively managed.