Author Topic: Explaining Socialism to Republicans  (Read 922 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline two-blocked

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1155
Explaining Socialism to Republicans
« on: June 29, 2013, 04:46:30 AM »

 
Explaining Socialism To A Republican
 
I was talking recently with a new friend who I’m just getting to know.  She tends to be somewhat conservative, while I lean more toward the progressive  side.
 
When our conversation drifted to politics, somehow the dreaded word  “socialism” came up. My friend seemed totally shocked when I said “All socialism  isn’t bad”.  She became very serious and replied “So you want to take money  away from the rich and give to the poor?”  I smiled and said “No, not at  all.  Why do you think socialism means taking money from the rich and  giving to the poor?
 
“Well it is, isn’t it?” was her reply.
 
I explained to her that I rather liked something called Democratic Socialism,  just as Senator Bernie Sanders, talk show host Thom Hartman, and many other  people do. Democratic Socialism consists of a democratic form of  government with a mix of socialism and capitalism. I proceeded to explain to her  the actual meaning terms “democracy” and “socialism”.
 
Democracy is a form of government in which all citizens take  part. It is government of the people, by the people, and for  the people.
 
Socialism is where we all put our resources together and  work for the common good of us all and not just for our own benefit. In  this sense, we are sharing the wealth within society.
 
Of course when people hear that term, “Share the wealth” they start  screaming, “OMG you want to rob from the rich and give it all to the  poor!”  But that is NOT what Democratic Socialism means.
 
To a Democratic Socialist, sharing the wealth means pooling tax money  together to design social programs that benefit ALL citizens of that country,  city, state, etc.
 
The fire and police departments are both excellent examples of Democratic  Socialism in America.  Rather than leaving each individual responsible for  protecting their own home from fire, everyone pools their money together,  through taxes, to maintain a fire and police department. It’s operated  under a non-profit status, and yes, your tax dollars pay for putting out other  people’s fires. It would almost seem absurd to think of some  corporation profiting from putting out fires.  But it’s more efficient  and far less expensive to have government run fire departments funded by tax  dollars.
 
Similarly, public education is another social program in the USA. It  benefits all of us to have a taxpayer supported, publicly run education  system. Unfortunately, in America, the public education system ends with high  school.  Most of Europe now provides low cost or free college  education for their citizens. This is because their citizens  understand that an educated society is a safer, more productive and more  prosperous society. Living in such a society, everyone benefits from public  education.
 
When an American graduates from college, they usually hold burdensome debt in  the form of student loans that may take 10 to even 30 years to pay  off. Instead of being able to start a business or invest in their  career, the college graduate has to send off monthly payments for years on  end.
 
On the other hand, a new college graduate from a European country begins  without the burdensome debt that an American is forced to take on. The young man  or woman is freer to start up businesses, take an economic risk on a  new venture, or invest more money in the economy, instead of spending their  money paying off student loans to for-profit financial institutions.  Of  course this does not benefit wealthy corporations, but it does greatly benefit  everyone in that society.
 
EXAMPLE  American style  capitalistic program for college: If you pay (average) $20,000  annually for four years of college, that will total $80,000 + interest for  student loans. The interest you would owe could easily total or exceed the  $80,000 you originally borrowed, which means your degree could cost in excess of  $100,000.
 
EXAMPLE European style  social program for college: Your college classes are paid for  through government taxes.  When you graduate from that college and begin  your career, you also start paying an extra tax for fellow citizens to attend  college.
 
Question - You might be thinking how is that fair?  If you’re no longer attending college, why would you want to help everyone else  pay for their college degree?
 
Answer - Every working citizen pays a tax that is  equivalent to say, $20 monthly.  If you work for 40 years and then retire,  you will have paid $9,600 into the Social college program.  So you could  say that your degree ends up costing only $9,600. When everyone pools their  money together and the program is non-profit, the price goes down tremendously.  This allows you to keep more of your hard earned cash!
 
Health care is another example: If your employer  does not provide health insurance, you must purchase a policy  independently.  The cost will be thousands of dollars annually, in addition  to deductible and co-pays.
 
In Holland, an individual will pay around $35 monthly, period.  Everyone  pays into the system and this helps reduce the price for everyone, so they get  to keep more of their hard earned cash.
 
In the United States we are told and frequently reminded that anything  run by the government is bad and that everything should be operated by  for-profit companies. Of course, with for-profit entities the cost to  the consumer is much higher because they have corporate executives who  expect compensation packages of tens of millions of dollars and shareholders who  expect to be paid dividends, and so on.
 
This (and more) pushes up the price of everything, with much more money  going to the already rich and powerful, which in turn, leaves the  middle class with less spending money and creates greater class  separation.
 
This economic framework makes it much more difficult for average Joes  to ”lift themselves up by their bootstraps” and raise themselves to a  higher economic standing.
 
So next time you hear the word “socialism” and “spreading the wealth” in the  same breath, understand that this is a serious misconception.
 
Social programs require tax money and your taxes may be higher. But  as you can see everyone benefits because other costs go down and, in the long  run, you get to keep more of your hard earned cash!
 
Democratic Socialism does NOT mean taking from the rich and giving to the  poor.  It works to benefit everyone so the rich can no longer take  advantage of the poor and middle class.
 


Read more: http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/12/11/explaining-socialism-to-a-republican/#ixzz2XcHQ8CIS

Offline magooch

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6641
Re: Explaining Socialism to Republicans
« Reply #1 on: June 29, 2013, 04:54:46 AM »
Democratic Socialism=Communism.
Swingem

Offline Bugflipper

  • Trade Count: (6)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1849
  • Gender: Male
Re: Explaining Socialism to Republicans
« Reply #2 on: June 29, 2013, 05:08:32 AM »
Rob from the rich and give to the poor is a republican scare tactic. What history has shown that actuallly happens is the govt robs from the working class and gives to the poor. The rich have all kinds of ways to get deductions and credits so they can beat the tax man. The Dems hop on the band wagon but again history has shown that the working class foot the bill for the country. Dem politician don't want the rich to pay for everything either, because through their corrupt endeavors they are rich as well. They just want to appeal to the masses so they can keep the money coming in for their own pockets. No difference with a Rep. In my oppinion both sides need a major shakedown and the majority of them on the state and federal level most likely need jail time for all their closed room deals, bribes and underhanded activity. But then again this is a Democracy so it must just be my imagination, no the people are really in control and the govt just does exactly as we want them to do, right?
Molon labe

Offline Brett

  • Trade Count: (6)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5148
  • Gender: Male
Re: Explaining Socialism to Republicans
« Reply #3 on: June 29, 2013, 06:16:58 AM »
Good post Bugflipper.  I think you hit the nail right on the head.  Our two ruling, major political parties amount to nothing more than two sides of the same coin... and right now that coin ain't worth a crap.  >:(
Life memberships:  <><, NRA, BASS, NAFC

Offline Bob Riebe

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7454
Re: Explaining Socialism to Republicans
« Reply #4 on: June 29, 2013, 07:47:48 AM »

Socialism is where we all put our resources together and  work for the common good of us all and not just for our own benefit. In  this sense, we are sharing the wealth within society.
ROFLMAO

Back in Thoreau's day the glorious commune idea was tried but it fell apart when some did all the work and the others lived off of them.

Even though it failed it was probably the abstract used to form the Democratic Party.

Offline ChungDoQuan

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1417
  • Eisenhower Conservative
Re: Explaining Socialism to Republicans
« Reply #5 on: June 29, 2013, 04:11:23 PM »
Athens was one of the first democratic city-states. It failed, too. Rome didn't fall as long as there was an all powerful emperor, it fell as the Senate grew more powerful. That's called an oligarchy. You know, like the system we have here, except the people with the power here are corporations.

Capitalistic advancement has to be allowed--- for individuals. Corporations HAVE to be regulated. They may or may not be too big to fail, but, without regulation, they can certainly be too big to control.
If you give up, THEY don't have to win.

"'Cause what they do in Washington, they just take care of number 1. And number 1 ain't you. $__t, you ain't even number 2!" Frank Zappa

The greatest idea the right ever had is personal responsibility; the greatest idea the left ever had is social responsibility. Both take effort.

The Founding Fathers had complete access to the Bible, but they came up with the Constitution as our governing document.

Offline Guy Pike

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 374
  • Gender: Male
Re: Explaining Socialism to Republicans
« Reply #6 on: June 29, 2013, 04:57:06 PM »
The US was formed as a Republic. The widespread practice of Democracy has reduced it to a laughing stock.
You can't beat a Cerberus!

Offline ChungDoQuan

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1417
  • Eisenhower Conservative
Re: Explaining Socialism to Republicans
« Reply #7 on: June 29, 2013, 07:11:47 PM »
Technically, a democratic republic. Just as neither pure socialism nor pure capitalism are good, neither is a pure democracy nor a pure republic. Rightys seem to think it has to be either/or.
If you give up, THEY don't have to win.

"'Cause what they do in Washington, they just take care of number 1. And number 1 ain't you. $__t, you ain't even number 2!" Frank Zappa

The greatest idea the right ever had is personal responsibility; the greatest idea the left ever had is social responsibility. Both take effort.

The Founding Fathers had complete access to the Bible, but they came up with the Constitution as our governing document.

Offline Bob Riebe

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7454
Re: Explaining Socialism to Republicans
« Reply #8 on: June 29, 2013, 07:20:45 PM »
Athens was one of the first democratic city-states. It failed, too. Rome didn't fall as long as there was an all powerful emperor, it fell as the Senate grew more powerful. That's called an oligarchy. You know, like the system we have here, except the people with the power here are corporations.

Capitalistic advancement has to be allowed--- for individuals. Corporations HAVE to be regulated. They may or may not be too big to fail, but, without regulation, they can certainly be too big to control.
Wrong, Rome was at its strongest before it became a dictatorship.

Offline Bob Riebe

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7454
Re: Explaining Socialism to Republicans
« Reply #9 on: June 29, 2013, 07:21:49 PM »
Technically, a democratic republic. Just as neither pure socialism nor pure capitalism are good, neither is a pure democracy nor a pure republic. Rightys seem to think it has to be either/or.
The people who founded this country thought it had to be either or, get it straight.

Offline Bob Riebe

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7454
Re: Explaining Socialism to Republicans
« Reply #10 on: June 29, 2013, 07:23:34 PM »
The US was formed as a Republic. The widespread practice of Democracy has reduced it to a laughing stock.
No the wide spread use of the Supreme Court to make the laws has done that, the Constitution be damned.

I can now see why some other countries have abolished their supreme courts.

Offline ChungDoQuan

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1417
  • Eisenhower Conservative
Re: Explaining Socialism to Republicans
« Reply #11 on: June 29, 2013, 08:47:50 PM »
Absolutely incorrect! If the US was founded as a pure republic, explain "of the people, by the people and for the people." Also, if you think it's a republic, and NOT a democracy, you are arguing on the side of big government--- a government that RULES. A government that can NOT be overridden by its constituents, so you're saying that not only do people like you and me not matter, even though it says that, verbatim. So, now the rightys are supporting big, all powerful government?
If you give up, THEY don't have to win.

"'Cause what they do in Washington, they just take care of number 1. And number 1 ain't you. $__t, you ain't even number 2!" Frank Zappa

The greatest idea the right ever had is personal responsibility; the greatest idea the left ever had is social responsibility. Both take effort.

The Founding Fathers had complete access to the Bible, but they came up with the Constitution as our governing document.

Offline mcwoodduck

  • Trade Count: (11)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7983
  • Gender: Male
Re: Explaining Socialism to Republicans
« Reply #12 on: June 30, 2013, 06:14:12 PM »
Athens was one of the first democratic city-states. It failed, too. Rome didn't fall as long as there was an all powerful emperor, it fell as the Senate grew more powerful. That's called an oligarchy. You know, like the system we have here, except the people with the power here are corporations.

Capitalistic advancement has to be allowed--- for individuals. Corporations HAVE to be regulated. They may or may not be too big to fail, but, without regulation, they can certainly be too big to control.
Athens was conquered and lost Democracy. 
Rome when the Senate realized they could keep and grow power if they handed out part of the treasury to the people,  At some point the Democracy was stolen by people that could. 
You seem to think that Democracy does not work and that we should all be subjects of one kind or another,  Because history has shown that at some point either the Senate gets greedy and power hungry and they steal it, a strong man ammases power and takes it, or someone is taken over by an invasion and takes democracy from them. 
Reading what you wrote does not make sense.  Heck, I can eat a bowl of Alphebet soup and poop out a better argument than you made.   
But then again I should know better than arguing with someone delusional and not grasping reality. 
Any and all Socialism is enforcing power over others.  Socialism is not natural to human nature,  It soulds good in therory but has never worked in practice.  Showing that the Fall of Rome only proves that Socialism does not work.  They taxed the rich more and more to give to the poor, they had an open boarder policy that allowed the Huns the Vandals, and the Goths to raid Rome and steal their wealth. 
After the fall of Rome, who's money was Copper, Silver, and Gold started about 1,000 years of the Dark ages.  With the US being he new World Power that Rome was of the Acient world.  What Dark ages will come after we fall?  With the Democrats pushing to ruin the country faster with the policies to ruin the economy and drive the US, China and most ofd Western Europe into a World wide Super depression and into wars where the ones owed money that can never be paid back and those that are owed demand hard assets like Silver, Gold, Oil, land, or other assets.
Your Hero Obama said he should not have ot pick up the Phone to get the 29 year old trator back, well he made the country irrelevant and is willing to give away our standing as a super power and the nwants super power status when he gave it away. 

Offline nw_hunter

  • Moderator
  • Trade Count: (4)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5200
  • Gender: Male
Re: Explaining Socialism to Republicans
« Reply #13 on: June 30, 2013, 06:51:53 PM »
 
We were given a Republican form of Government
       It had been observed that a pure democracy if it were practicable
would be the most perfect government. Experience has proved that no
position is more false than this. The ancient democracies in which the
people themselves deliberated never possessed one good feature of
government. Their very character was tyranny; their figure deformity......Alexander Hamilton
Hamilton also said: "We are a Republican Government. Real liberty
is never found in despotism or in the extremes of Democracy." Samuel Adams
said "Remember, Democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts
and  murders itself! There never was a democracy that 'did not commit
suicide."' James Madison, who was
charged with drawing up our Constitution, wrote
       . . . democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and
contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security, or
the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives
as  they have been violent in their deaths.
Freedom Of Speech.....Once we lose it, every other freedom will follow.

Offline ChungDoQuan

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1417
  • Eisenhower Conservative
Re: Explaining Socialism to Republicans
« Reply #14 on: July 01, 2013, 12:57:51 AM »
We are a Democratic Republic. Part of the checks and balances is that the Republic part keeps the Democratic part from degenerating into mob rule; the Democratic part keeps the Republic from becoming a dictatorship. Real Socialism is the ultimate form of Democracy. What you were told was Socialism was not Socialism at all--- it was a tyrannical oligarchy, modeled on the capitalist corporation. It, too failed, just as our corporation run economy has failed.

http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/headtohead/2013/06/201361294652861958.html

It was carefully orchestrated by corporations to take over the economy, over a period of five decades starting with the Nixon administration. The purpose was to suck every cent out of the working population of the country and gain economic power, and thus, power over the government.

http://www.reclaimdemocracy.org/powell_memo_lewis/
If you give up, THEY don't have to win.

"'Cause what they do in Washington, they just take care of number 1. And number 1 ain't you. $__t, you ain't even number 2!" Frank Zappa

The greatest idea the right ever had is personal responsibility; the greatest idea the left ever had is social responsibility. Both take effort.

The Founding Fathers had complete access to the Bible, but they came up with the Constitution as our governing document.

Offline Empty Quiver

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2847
Re: Explaining Socialism to Republicans
« Reply #15 on: July 01, 2013, 09:28:18 AM »
Real socialism cannot exist. The fact remains that some humans will not work for others gain, at some point they get tired of it. On the other side are those who believe they are too smart too be in the fields and factories, their efforts are best spent making sure the lessors are busy. The two sides grow ever further apart, leaving those in the middle doing all the work.


I feel like most here are in that middle. I have been able to keep ahead working enough to have extra. The extra though is beginning to come at a higher toll in labor. The tipping point is near, where I am going to have to decide whether to give up and lie down, or buck up and fight this. Waiting too long will mean my resources are diminished. Too soon makes some sort of reactionary kook sitting in prison.


There is no appeasing the lazy or power hungry.
**Concealed Carry...Because when seconds count help is only minutes away**

Offline ChungDoQuan

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1417
  • Eisenhower Conservative
Re: Explaining Socialism to Republicans
« Reply #16 on: July 01, 2013, 12:27:51 PM »
PURE socialism may not be able to exist, just like PURE capitalism cannot exist. All of your arguments against socialism show one thing: most of you think people are generally bad unless they are forced to ACT like they are good. I prefer to think people tend to be good unless they are forced or simply choose to be bad. The former, we call "poor;" the latter, "criminals." I cannot help the criminals. Not even the legal ones. By the way, even the Chinese government admits they are not really socialists:


http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2013-06-30/news/40286860_1_president-xi-jinping-gdp-numbers-cpc
If you give up, THEY don't have to win.

"'Cause what they do in Washington, they just take care of number 1. And number 1 ain't you. $__t, you ain't even number 2!" Frank Zappa

The greatest idea the right ever had is personal responsibility; the greatest idea the left ever had is social responsibility. Both take effort.

The Founding Fathers had complete access to the Bible, but they came up with the Constitution as our governing document.

Offline mcwoodduck

  • Trade Count: (11)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7983
  • Gender: Male
Re: Explaining Socialism to Republicans
« Reply #17 on: July 01, 2013, 02:42:18 PM »
PURE socialism may not be able to exist, just like PURE capitalism cannot exist. All of your arguments against socialism show one thing: most of you think people are generally bad unless they are forced to ACT like they are good. I prefer to think people tend to be good unless they are forced or simply choose to be bad. The former, we call "poor;" the latter, "criminals." I cannot help the criminals. Not even the legal ones. By the way, even the Chinese government admits they are not really socialists:


http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2013-06-30/news/40286860_1_president-xi-jinping-gdp-numbers-cpc
But of the two.  You can get closer to pure capitalism with a few restrictions on some goods.  Like we do not want Acme to make and sell thermo nuclear weapons.  But in restricted capitalism where the Government does not regulate the creation on products but in the sale of the items.  In true Capitalism Bud Wiser can seel to anyone and everyone.  Instead we have laws that you need to be 21 to buy alcohol. 
But reguardless of the laws the market desides what goods will cost - Willing and able to pay.  Are you willing to buy a 200+ MPH sports car.  Sure, are you able to spend the quarter of a million $ for one? 
In Socialism there is a central planning that sets price for the goods they deem worthy to be made and how many of them will be made. 
In Capitalism the individual is paramount and meeting that persons needs and wants is what drives the economy.
In Socialism the good of the group is what matters and meeting their needs.  Not meeting their wants.  You do not work for yourself but for the community reguardless of what you want or really need.  To each according to their means each according to their needs.  The state will make you do what it needs you to do, reguardless of what you want to do, and will provide you with clothing, shelter, drinkable water, food and basic health care. 
Capitalism provides for all of your needs, some of your wants, better health care, Art, literature, science fiction, innovations in efficiency, new materials, and products based on wants and needs. 
And China has seen socialism fail and have tried to embrace capitalism and are in a transition between the Slave state and the beginnings of a middle class.  When before they had the ruling elite and the slaves and very few of hte slaves ever became a ruling elite.  In capitalism you have millions of people that started with nothing and made it to the top with smarts, determination, and hard work.  And you ahve had many that started at the top and lost everything. 
I know I would rather be free to deside between Ford and Chevy and figure out a way to pay for it than be giving a bus pass to get to my job.