Capitol Hill Blue Forums Political Issues Finance, the economy & Economics The Debate: Is America’s future capitalist or socialist?

That was pretty funny! Also true.

Side note: Apparently The Netherlands is very supportive of the LGBT community... The whole country is filled with dikes!

how about being a "perfect number"?


It's a pun from number theory ... "Perfect number, a positive integer that is equal to the sum of its proper divisors"

or maybe Mr Trump ignores the math and knows he is "perfect"

In Trump's case it is "an integer that is equal to the sum of its proper advisors." In this case, that number is "zero".

Obviously, there is some confusion here (which I have consistently said). The RIGHT thinks that the northern European countries are socialists. My point was that doing socially responsible things (society, as a nation, have responsibilities to themselves and others - I do not consider that activity to be 'socialist') is not particularly socialist so much as governments doing things for ALL of its citizens. They are able to do this without going bankrupt. The main quibble the Republicans seem to have is that any kind of state services, that provide for their citizens, will bankrupt America - sorry, obviously wrong.

The problem, I think, is that the Republicans think that gov should provide nothing but armies - anything else is socialist. They ignore things like public hospitals, highways, dams, libraries, police and firemen, etc. That doesn't count. On the other hand they want such gov owned enterprises to be privatized as soon as possible. They are currently going after Social Security, Medicare, public schools, etc. The shutdown, for instance, was actually considered a plus by many as they think it helped with decreasing the public payroll.

As far as 'socialism' is concerned its getting pretty interesting. Now there are "socialist democrats" which, I think, means socialism owned by democrats. It, obviously, doesn't really mean Democrat as many are not Democrats (Bernie is a good example of that silly). I still believe that a socialist state is one in which the gov owns EVERYTHING. For many that means "the workers" (another silly). In theory a Democracy is 'owned' by the workers as well, just not restricted to "the workers" but every citizen. These are not thoughts particular to me but how I was raised and taught.

I guess Jackass is not the only one trying, very hard, to actually change our language with doubletalk. Oh, I still believe a Socialist State is not the way to go and even the term "Socialist" has bad connotations. I do, on the other hand, believe that states are formed, in theory, by its citizens for their own welfare. That being the case, Those states actually doing this, have found that their government can provide certain services better than "capitalists".

I have, for a long time, believed that healthcare for profit is an abomination - it costs too much, its simply not the best solution, and costs a LOT less when run by gov. I also find it interesting that Europe is able to do this kind of stuff and succeed but not us. It reminds me of the Portuguese solution for drugs. They figured it out but, instead of fixing our own problems we are into punishment and criminal private industry. One can only wonder.

I have probably said this one before but a story. When Clinton was talking about healthcare the right went nuts. One of their lies (suprise!) was that Canadians were flooding down to our hospitals to get their healthcare. We have a public hospital here that figured they would get a bit of that business (mainly from Victoria) if they changed their name, dressed themselves up and spend big bucks advertising their marvelous services. That little exercise cost the citizens something like 100,000.00 - they didn't get a single Canadian customer. They could have known this had they simply taken the ferry to Victoria and asked anybody if they preferred the American for profit system or their 'socialized' system. They would have figured out, real quick, that what they believed were just lies but they didn't even check. I am not, incidentally, saying that the Canadian system has no problems, on the other hand they live longer than Americans,amongst other little things. I also continue to believe that Americans firmly hold to the "If it ain't invented here its no damned good" view and I think that's hurting us all.

So, basically, my only real quibble, has to do with the word 'Socialist", that's it! I am even a little embarrassed about it, as going to war over a simple word kinda puts me in the insane corner - sorry about that...........

A coupla points with your musings JGW.

I don't think you can make a case for what YOUR interpretation is of socialism. At least not because it was how you were taught when being raised. I woouldn't trust that insight anymore than how you were taught what capitalism means when you were raised.

Why not give it serious study as an adult? If nothing else, it helps to discuss the subject with a better understanding of it? At least it would help you understand where millions of people are coming from....

I think it's unfair to say that there is any double talk of language going on with socialism let alone on a Trumpian scale. Again, you've stated previous the depth of your understanding of socialism.

The democratic party has had socialist traditions. Not much in the last 3-4 decades since 'Third Way' democrats marketed themselves as republican light. Lashing together a constituency of Eisenhower Republicans with moderate professional class white suburban democrats. You couldn't apply your adolescent age Democratic party to the current one anymore than you could of the Republican party past vs. present.

I mainly agree with your observations on Healthcorp. Should be socialized. Better, cheaper allows people to breath a sigh of relief on that score. We get tax breaks and drones instead. By both right wing parties.

I still agree with Wolff that 'socialism is capitalism's shadow'

Your point is good. The problem seems to be that there isn't a good word to describe what we all agree is the right blend. And as soon as we find one the Regressives will corrupt it. So we either try to reframe "socialism", which is much harder to make into a positive that it was to make it a negative, or get get a real catchy new word, and pronto!

BTW, the reason I call them Regressives is that they have turned "Progressive" into a bad word, so I always first ask Righties if they are Progressive... "Hell, no!", they say. Then I agree that they are so not Progressive that the only thing they can be is Regressives! (They all hate me...)

I'm trying out a new approach - a social, economic, and religious faction called Be Excellent to Each Other! The BETEO Party.

"Capitalists don't freely choose. They've built a system which, in a sense, is running them"

- David Harvey

Maybe it's time for a new brand, something new, something "neo"...as in "neo-capitalist".

I remain confused. Apparently our Democratic Socialists believe that the Northern Europeans are all socialists. I don't buy that one (for my thoughts expressed above). the USA, for instance, has any number of social services offered by its government but to suggest that makes us all socialists is just wrong and I don't buy it. I believe that the two are not, and need not, be exclusive to each other. Some here believe that they are and they are, obviously, wrong. I base this on my own observations.

A couple of things. I am certainly not against social services its just a case of which ones we can afford. Remember, this is the nation that has never skipped a war. I think we are spending, right now, over a billion a month just on Afghanistan. We are, basically, the undisputed military nation in the world! Anyway, good works are dandy but we gotta pay the bills! I would also point out that anytime gov has financial difficulties its ALWAYS social services that get cut. You know, little things like schools, insane asylums, police, firemen, etc. Orphanages, for instance, got done in because gov cut support and they were being run by unqualified working for minimum wage. Somehow orphanages got demonized and so, now, we have the so called fostercare which, in my mind, is a HUGE mistake and a genuine mess.

Here is a bonus. A few years ago we had a Rotary exchange student from Switzerland. I was talking to him. His parents were both doctors and Switzerland had just installed their healthcare. I no longer remember all the specifics but, if I remember correctly, they moved straight from a for profit system to healthcare for all. What they did was tricky. They told the insurance companies that, if they wanted to stay in business, they would provide basic healthcare for everybody for free (basic healthcare being defined by gov). After a couple of years their insurance companies ended up owning every hospital in Switzerland. Switzerland healthcare, incidentally, is considered one of the best in the world. Just saying, there are a number of solutions but we gotta study them all before we go off half cocked. The basic trick, to make it work, is to get rid of healthcare for profit and regulate the hell out of it.

One last. All the social stuff being offered is interesting but, I think, nobody seems to have thought it through and 'they' just want it done. Free higher education for free is one of those. This is not unusual in the world but, in every incident, one must qualify for that free part. They must also remain qualified, ie. show up for class, keep up grades, etc. This doesn't seem to be well fleshed on, hopefully I am wrong. Then there is the simple fact that Capitalism, the current whipping horse of the "Democratic Socialist". The simple fact is that Capitalism has been responsible for the raising of millions from poverty.

I will be interested when the Democratic debates start. Then we will see I think?

It did a pretty good job of sinking me and millions of others into poverty in 2008. Current income inequality is steadily sinking millions more into poverty as we speak. That's capitalism in action. You've perhaps heard of the Great Depression? Capitalism in action.

World War II? Capitalism in action. More recently the aforementioned Great Recession and the Iraqi and Afghan wars? Capitalism in action.

A handful of billionaires holding more wealth than the rest of the nation? F*cking capitalism in action. Young people dying because they have to ration their insulin? Capitalism in action.

Global Goddam Warming!!! The icecaps melting and our very survival as a species in question? Yes indeedy, that would be capitalism in action.

But it has indeed raised up some millionaires into billionaires and CEOs worldwide into the upper economic stratosphere but most of us are just barely getting by.

Speaking of social democracy have you seen the headline over at Huffpo?

LIMK

Those of us who believe in Utopian Social Democracy (would it suit you better if I called it that? Are pretty much used to being slandered as the Socialists of your imagination, which is largely a product of conservative brainwashing since the day you became politically aware.

We don't care anymore. If that one word is enough for you to re-elect Donald Trump rather than a Democrat who wants to give everyone a leg up then, dude, go for it!
Donald Trump is also....capitalism in action. Lifting up millions more from poverty every day.