Hello,

And, how about your fire department? While we’re at it, looks like the military and the police force is socialism too. No??

excon

Hello ex, welcome, and yes, state infrastructure is a form of socialism since capitalism would only provide it for profit, but don't widen the definition of socialism which after all is public largess in the interest of providing for pubic welfare

Hello ex, of course it's socialism and very necessary, as are all the government programs, as Clete has pointed out for the public good. It helps the capitalist too, since they use it to make money. I suppose you are free to bring your own highway if you got one though.

Article 1, Section 8 gives Congress the authority to “establish Post Offices and Post Roads.” The same article gives the Federal government authority 'To raise and support Armies' . Fire Depts . police forces and school systems are local under the 10th amendment . State and local governments decide how these systems operate and what level of service provided .

Government services and socialism are not one in the same . “Socialism” is state or collective ownership of the means of production, as opposed to private ownership. This idea that all public services provided by the state is socialism is a false narrative by the likes of Bernie Sanders . There is nothing in capitalism that prevents the provision of public goods and services. Socialism is Marx's transitions state between capitalism (market-based economy) and communism (stateless utopia). It involves a central government that allocates resources in the economy. It removes market-based allocations.

That's only partly true and the influence of the rich elite (And their registered lobbyist) puts their own individual needs over the needs of those that have NO lobbyist, which I might remind you that under our constitution is the RESPONSIBILITY of our elected officials. While I have no problem acknowledging free trade, free markets and a capitalistic market driven economy Tom, the choke hold on the benefits of such a consumer driven economy leaves us with very little difference in the outcomes of the free market and socialism as practiced by other governments on the earth. Unbridled socialism is no better than unbridled capitalism both of which has demonstrated the ability to subjugate it's peoples to unbridled POVERTY, while the governors of the system get UNBRIDLED wealth AND the benefits that comes with that wealth best expressed by CORRUPTION of the economic systems GLOBALLY.

I respectfully submit that no system is better than the other despite the hype.


Let all bear in mind that a society is judged not so much by the standards attained by its more affluent and privileged members as by the quality of life which it is able to assure for its weakest members.
~H.E. Javier Perez de Cuellar

The moral test of a government is how it treats those who are at the dawn of life, the children; those who are in the twilight of life, the aged; and those who are in the shadow of life, the sick and the needy, and the handicapped.
~Hubert Humphrey

So show me the great nation that actually does this!

blah blah . I was merely pointing out the obvious flaws in the logic that all government services is socialism. Socialism is an economic system very well defined by Marx as a transition from capitalism to communist utopia . Everyone of course adds their own definitions like Humpty Dumpty did .

By the very logic employed in the assumption of the question , any government action ;good or bad is a socialist act . So then ;the poisoning of Flynt Mi water is a socialist act . Wouldn't you agree ? The cops killing blacks is a socialist act ;right ? The idiotic logic of a Bernie Sanders is that only the good government acts are socialists . You can't have it both ways .



The post office was created in the U.S. Constitution in 1789 .Roads have been built by governments since at least the Ancient Greeks and most likely before .Neither communism or capitalism was a thought in anyone's mind. It is absurd to equate legitimate functions of the government with socialism .

Ah! I see your problem! The mere mention of socialism sends you to Marx and his opinion where most of us don't give a rats patoot about Marx. You have criticized Bernie before as a socialist, when even he has never talked about it moving to communism. No just you, my friend paints those terms as bad and capitalism good as long as you get yours. I get it. The mere thought of your tax money going to some poor Walmart workers family makes your head explode.

Socialism is a system of social responsibility, the state taking responsibility for those things that the economy would not otherwise provide. Capitalism is a system of economic organisation vesting ownership in corporations and wealthy individuals. Capitalism can exist within socialism, they are not mutually exclusive

Oh I get it ;peope bad government good.
People causes problems and only government can fix them.
In order to make right all of the bad things done by people, they must surrender their property and decision making to those smart enough to think and spend for them. By this logic, any action taken by government qualifies as socialism ,road building ,post offices ,fire dept ,police dept ,military ,teaching ...….Except the bad stuff ... that’s capitalism.

Sorry ;a dictionary definition is ……
: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods

2a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property
b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state

3 : a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/capitalism) and communism (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/communism) and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done


anything else is Humpty Dumpty changing the meaning to accommodate an agenda .

Socialism is a system of social responsibility, the state taking responsibility for those things that the economy would not otherwise provide. Capitalism is a system of economic organisation vesting ownership in corporations and wealthy individuals. Capitalism can exist within socialism, they are not mutually exclusive

Yes they do co exist in many countries.


Oh I get it ;peope bad government good.
People causes problems and only government can fix them.
In order to make right all of the bad things done by people, they must surrender their property and decision making to those smart enough to think and spend for them. By this logic, any action taken by government qualifies as socialism ,road building ,post offices ,fire dept ,police dept ,military ,teaching ...….Except the bad stuff ... that’s capitalism.

Sorry ;a dictionary definition is ……
: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods

2a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property
b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state

3 : a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/capitalism) and communism (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/communism) and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done


anything else is Humpty Dumpty changing the meaning to accommodate an agenda .







Your definitions are so out of date and irrelevant to reality, because they are both nothing but a self grandising justification for clogging up the system for the good of their own wealth at the expense of anybody else who isn't as good at it as they are. They both suggest and adhere to old divides of dominance, under the flimsy guise of what's good for the people after the bulk of the spoils are divided up amongst themselves.

You still cannot name a country on earth where either system is effectively used the way it's advertised. Capitalist or socialist they both depend on the few assigning value to the many and that is the difference without distinction since control of what everybody else gets is up to them exclusively. So quote your definitions like they are the imperial word of god, and deride those that disagree, for your own self serving agenda. Capitalists socialists, and theocrats are no different than any oligarchs anywhere who think they know best, but govern to their own monied interest.

The terms are synonymous and interchangeable and the outcomes of their governance is the same. Your dictionary needs updating but you really don't get that, do you?

Why argue with him Tal, he doesn't get it. Extremes in any system are bad and outcomes for individuals poor. Venezeula is the current case in point. Socialism was taken too far there, but then it is a response to capitalist extremes. You don't get revolution unless you go too far

No argument between Tom and I, just a different viewpoint. It is a difficult thing living up to ones constitution and we here have a history of getting carried away by our own freedoms, sometimes, fueled by self interest. Money is power as it's always been, and that happens everywhere all the time in history.

Comes down to how do you tell a rich guy he has gone to far? Some have to revolt. Some can only holler, but here we vote. At least that's how it's supposed to work, but a rich guy can buy a politician cheap nowadays and that too is a huge problem. I think though we agree that bad things happen when things are just out of balance, extremes as you put it, and it's a beetch getting that right balance again.

Tal balance is difficult to achieve when big money is involved

Very perceptive and I think the heart of the problem. I am glad you realize the distinction between money, and BIG money. If only a few have big money, then the money everyone else can have is by definition LIMITED. The trickle down view of a good economy where big money decides how much the rest gets.

If the many can be so arbitrarily limited, why then can't the many be also limited?

I gave the current dictionary definition and you call it out of date and irrelevent . You prove my point . You don't like the definitions so you change them to your reality .

It's not a matter of like or dislike tom, it's about policy, procedure, and the desired outcome. Solutions that work for everybody, not just YOU.

Tom you can rely on dictionary definitions or you can rely on truth told to you by those who know the reality. The great evil in the world is capitalism, not socialism.

Hello tom:

Is Medicare socialism or a government service? If it's a government service, then Medicare for all would just be a government service too, no?

Is your public grade school socialism or a government service.. If it's a government service, then free college for all would be a government service too. No?

Last question.. WHY am I 0 & 3?

excon

You are doing well Ex

Is Medicare socialism or a government service? Socialism . The idea of Social Security and Medicare came from Bismark Germany . They did not want to take on radical socialists so they implemented Socialism lite . Same thing in the US . It came from the most socialist President we have had .

Is your public grade school socialism or a government service. a government service . Free ? lol nothing is free .

Finally 0-3 is just bad luck of the draw . I haven't looked at the numbers ;but I'm guessing if you had been matched against my team in the last 2 weeks you would have a win.

The idea of Social Security and Medicare came from Bismark Germany . They did not want to take on radical socialists so they implemented Socialism lite ..
Hello again, tom:

The entire premise of my post is that "socialism lite" works pretty well within a capitalist system.. I see that I've won you over..

I'm just suggesting that if Medicare works pretty well WITHOUT everybody being covered, wouldn't it be that much better if we covered EVERYBODY?? It'll save us money and improve health..

Lemme show you the math.. If, as a nation, we spend X amount on health care, and subtracted the part the insurance industry takes, there'll be enough left over to cover everybody, and buy a few aircraft carriers to boot. Yes, insurance company executives ARE paid that much.

Lemme finish by saying, that as a staunch capitalist, I abhor the destruction of an entire industry.. But, when that industry serves the needs of its stock holders over the needs of the people they serve, it's time to take the profit OUT of medical services..

excon

If you are saying if you cannot afford to educate your kids, or see a doctor when sick, too bad? That's not good enough in a country where half the people are poor and all the money goes to the rich. So does it matter what you call it, or who named it the goal is to provide for those things that are necessary to support life and health.

So labels aside Tom, how is that accomplished when half the country can't afford it? Obviously capitalism alone hasn't gotten it done even if some have done and are doing well.

Hello Ex, great thread, I'm with you. The basics should be free and available to all, and the working poor should have dignity and respect, and OPPORTUNITY.

I would rather be lucky than good and win a few more games. Guess my luck ran out too. Bummer!

I did not say it works well. I say it will be insolvent in less than a decade . That is your typical socialist outcome . The only way out is to offer substandard care and pick the peoples pockets more .

VA is socialism because it also provides the care AND it is the glaring example of when the government takes over a service better managed by the private sector . It is a basket case .

In the case of Medicare and Social Security you can add the ponzi scheme structure to the institutions . Collapse is inevitable . The young workers who are now supporting the financing of Medicare cannot support the health care of the aged . It will not exist when it is their turn to utilize the services .Any yet you think that adding people who can use the benefits will somehow make the system stronger ? Dude !
FREE ? That is the biggest fallacy of your argument. NOTHING IS FREE .

DUDE, you better come up with something that takes care of the old folks the kids and the poor! Stop making excuses why you can't! Free sounds GREAT to me.

as long as someone else pays for it ;free is great .

as long as someone else pays for it ;free is great .
Hello again, tom:

Not free.. Nothing is free..

Here's the math again.. Let's start with whatever number, as a nation, we're CURRENTLY spending on healthcare. Let's say that 25% of that goes to the insurance industry.. If we eliminate that part, then we've got 25% MORE to spend on actual health care, WITHOUT digging into our pockets.

With that added money, I suggest we can cover EVERYBODY and buy some aircraft carriers on top of it..

Sure.. Doctors who want fees for service will find other work to do. They can probably run a hedge fund on Wall Street.. The medical profession will taken over by doctors who want to serve instead of getting rich.


excon

oh so doctors work for free in your system . I see
4-year undergraduate degree program,
4 years in medical school, and then complete 3-7 years
of residency training before they are eligible for medical licensing even more if they want to specialize
so they can get paid like a barista at WaWa .What is another name for involuntaty servitude ?

What is another name for involuntaty servitude ?

Immigrants.

oh so doctors work for free in your system . I see

Hello tom:

When you work for fees, you order as many fee producing tests or procedures that make YOU money, but don't serve your patient..

As opposed to fees, doctors at the Mayo Clinic are on salary.. They provide pretty good medicine, don't they? Fact is, they provide the BEST medicine the world has to offer, and on salary too..

excon

Save your breath Ex, Tom doesn't believe in a living wage let alone this fee stuff. Goes against his free market God. Oops did I say free? Forgive my profanity Tomder.

as long as someone else pays for it ;free is great .

Now you get the concept, so we get the rich to pay for the poor they have exploited. You red leggers just don't want to pay your share. You can't get something free unless someone pays for it, if you pay for it, it isn't free. I don't know why I have to explain these things

oh you mean all those 6 figure salary physicians and surgeons in the Mayo clinic. Do you think physicians in private practice are making more ? No they aren't . Mayo clinic salaries are on average with the industry . You gotta let go of the emperor's propaganda . There is zero chance a doctor is going to invest so much in their career without being well compensated .
It's a nice gig . They work in a prestigious hospital .Don't need to add the expense of supporting your own practice ;staffing ,payroll facility ,insurance etc. and still get WELL compensated .

As a non-profit institution it does very well . It reported $12 billion income in 2017. It reported revenues of $3.1 billion in the first quarter of this year

oh you mean all those 6 figure salary physicians and surgeons in the Mayo clinic. Do you think physicians in private practice are making more ? No they aren't . Mayo clinic salaries are on average with the industry . You gotta let go of the emperor's propaganda . There is zero chance a doctor is going to invest so much in their career without being well compensated .
It's a nice gig . They work in a prestigious hospital .Don't need to add the expense of supporting your own practice ;staffing ,payroll facility ,insurance etc. and still get WELL compensated .

As a non-profit institution it does very well . It reported $12 billion income in 2017. It reported revenues of $3.1 billion in the first quarter of this year

Don't talk to me about the medical profession, I used to work for a medical entrepreneur. They are a pack of money grubbing b@stards who prostitute their profession, even my own GP refers for every little thing, I know what's going on.

Tom, I see your eyes get brighter when you write billions associated with dollars.