socialism in society

[sfzombie13 324]

i just took that political compass test again, and it says i am a socialist, and at first, i was thinking no way. but upon reflection, it makes sense to me that our society should have socialistic tendencies. not in the way that communism dictates that everyone should have the same things and that the state should control everything. but if one studies the formation of modern society, it makes sense. no longer can we just go out into the wilderness (or anywhere else) and just exist. we have created a society where everyone is interdependant on everyone else.

sure, some individuals could, and do, just go certain places and exist. but not the masses, it is an option open only to the privileged. most urban dwellers will never have that option. as we are all interdependant, it logically follows that there should be certain provisions made to help each other out in time of need. most, if not all, of my friends and a lot of people i know have taken assistance from welfare, myself included. i see nothing wrong with giving a helping hand to those in need. i do not think it should be the only source of income, nor should it be forever.

this could be easily accomplished by simply equalizing the tax structure. the first thing would be to deny any tax breaks to any company which sells things in the us. the second thing could be to scrap the current income tax system and institute a flat tax. it could be graduated in order to be fair, something like 5% for under the poverty level, graduated up to 50% on income greater than a million dollars a year. i have no problems with letting people earn whatever they can, but i do have a problem with people who take money for just moving other people's money around. the only thing they add to society is additional earnings for the wealthy. those drains on society should pay a penalty, not be rewarded.

it needs some work, and it will never come to pass because it involves reducing the income of the wealthy, and only the wealthy have a say in any kind of regulation. i have been looking into some of the policies of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, and while some of the thnigs which were done were atrocious, some of them were actually far-sighted.

_________________________________________
Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes

[rehmwa 2]

sfzombie13

institute a flat tax. it could be graduated in order to be fair, something like 5% for under the poverty level, graduated up to 50% on income greater than a million dollars a year

I don't think you know what 'flat tax' means.....
there's two kinds -
- flat amount or;
- flat rate

that's neither - you are suggesting a "progressive rate tax". we already have that. the degree of progressiveness is already optimized to ensure voting is 50/50 every two years. You are further advocating for an even more progressive tax structure by picking and choosing who gets what 'breaks' by not treating all citizens equally


I'm a bigger fan of:

- eliminating all breaks and subsidies for everyone and every org
- eliminating all penalties for everyone and every org
- then a flat rate tax established

it's much simpler
everyone pays proportional to their income

if we still want to preference the lower income brackets, do it in a way that still treats everyone equally - I'm fond of no sales taxes for purchase certain critical items - food and clothes and housing comes to mind - but give that treatment to everyone - it'll help the poor much more than the rich proportionately. This also requires people to participate in the economy if they want to have benefits from it.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[Boomerdog 0]

Quote

... our society should have socialistic tendencies. not in the way that communism dictates that everyone should have the same things and that the state should control everything.

Well, that's how it starts out then "mission creep" or should I say "power creep" leads to the nightmare that is communism.

Quote

...it logically follows that there should be certain provisions made to help each other out in time of need. most, if not all, of my friends and a lot of people i know have taken assistance from welfare, myself included. i see nothing wrong with giving a helping hand to those in need. i do not think it should be the only source of income, nor should it be forever

By all means, go out and help your fellow human being. Put YOUR time and YOUR money into the effort but please do not force me at the point of the gun vis a vis law to make me follow you and those who agree with you. I truly am heartened and proud of you that you are off the welfare rolls and it sounds like your supporting yourself well. If you want to go out and return the favor, go do it. Rest assured I do the same in my community both with my $$$ and my time.

Quote

this could be easily accomplished by simply equalizing the tax structure. the first thing would be to deny any tax breaks to any company which sells things in the us. the second thing could be to scrap the current income tax system and institute a flat tax. it could be graduated in order to be fair, something like 5% for under the poverty level, graduated up to 50% on income greater than a million dollars a year. i have no problems with letting people earn whatever they can, but i do have a problem with people who take money for just moving other people's money around. the only thing they add to society is additional earnings for the wealthy. those drains on society should pay a penalty, not be rewarded.

What you're advocating is NOT a Flat Tax but a Progressive Income Tax which currently exists to this day. A flat tax works like this...a 10% across the board flat tax means a person with a reportable taxed income of $50,000.00 pays a tax of $5000.00.
A person with a reportable taxed income of $5,000,000.00 pays an income tax of $500,000. Make more pay more but at the same flat rate.

If you think you're not being taxed enough, you are welcome to write a cheque for more money to the Government and I'm sure they'll be happy to take the money. I won't tell you how to spend your money so please don't tell me how to spend mine.

Obviously, your heart and my heart go out to poor people but IMHO a job is the best sociological invention known to foster our development and upward mobility. When was the last time you ever heard of a poor person creating a job? The wealthy create jobs through investment and risk taking.

What specific "drains" on society" are the wealthy making?

You state that you have "no problems with letting people earn whatever they can, but have a problem with people who take money and move it around etc etc." Well perhpas those people are taking their capital gains and re-investing those gains into a businees that creates jobs?


Lastly, what makes you think government is a better arbiter and spender for the public good? Don't empower yourself with other people's money of which neither you or I are entitled to.

May I humbly (and I do mean humbly) suggest you read and take to heart some basic economics?

[quade 4]

sfzombie13

...it makes sense to me that our society should have socialistic tendencies.

Actually, that's ALL civilization. Humans are so socialistic they expanded it beyond their own species. Doing this enabled civilization to happen.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[billvon 3,120]

>it makes sense to me that our society should have socialistic tendencies.

It does. One of the reasons the US works is that it takes pieces of all systems - capitalism, socialism, communism, pure democracy, republic, meritocracy etc etc - and combines them, thus often getting the best of those things while avoiding the worst.


> the second thing could be to scrap the current income tax system and institute a
>flat tax. it could be graduated in order to be fair, something like 5% for under the
>poverty level, graduated up to 50% on income greater than a million dollars a year.

As others have mentioned that's not a flat tax. Personally I'd be OK with a flat tax (say 25%) on every dollar made over the poverty level. That's also technically not a flat tax but is a lot flatter - and a lot easier to manage - than our current system. However in general it's not the actual percentage that's the problem, it is the million and one exemptions that make it more of a game than a rational system for funding a government.

[Coreece 190]

billvon

>it makes sense to me that our society should have socialistic tendencies.

It does. One of the reasons the US works is that it takes pieces of all systems - capitalism, socialism, communism, pure democracy, republic, meritocracy etc etc - and combines them, thus often getting the best of those things while avoiding the worst.

Well, there is this new concept that gained popularity in the 90's with regard to the old concept of Social Capitalism...if what you stated avoids the worst, then why the need of this new concept?

I'll admit, This concept of social capitalism (neither socialistic nor capitalistic) is new to me...I didn't even know it existed until I googled it to see if there was such a thing.

Personally I think the problem is with the lazy -the lazy poor and lazy rich alike....the sluggard and swinish plutocrat...

Fix that problem, and we restore confidence...

Your secrets are the true reflection of who you really are...

[sfzombie13 324]

i mistakenly said flat tax when i had intended to say graduated, i even used that term later. and when i say that it needs scrapped, i means the tax code, not the system, per se. if all income were reported, then taxed accordingly, you wouldn't have to make it so high, and it would be more fair. i heard a lot of complaints about the fact i used the wrong term, but i didn't hear any comments referring to flat taxes being bad. i used to advocat that idea, and to some extent, i still do.

i stand by my ideas that all society should be more socialistic, simply because it works better. i think that we could put the states rights back to the forefront of the governing of the country where they belong. that would leave the necessarily leaner federal government to interact with the rest of the world, much as the eu does, as opposed to the un; that puts us on more level playing field.

if we could actually get an agreement like that in effect, think of the ramifications. we could use nothing but solar power to supply the world power, there is always 12 hours of sunlight around the planet, no batteries needed, just a huge grid. and with all of the other options as well, it would allow us to provide free power to everyone. that, in turn, allows the poorer population to have a little increase in their disposable income.

_________________________________________
Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes

[Coreece 190]

sfzombie13

i just took that political compass test again, and it says i am a socialist...

Personally, I think you're taking that test a little too serious...

It may accurately project our economic beliefs, but as for societal beliefs, its a joke...we're all liberal, lol...the questions are very leading and it doesn't even talk about guns.

Your secrets are the true reflection of who you really are...

[sfzombie13 324]

not really. i try not to take any personality tests seriously. some are pretty good, like the meyers briggs assessment. i did notice the questions being a little leading, but i missed the guns not being in there. i still stand by my statement, we need to take care of each other. it should not be made mandatory, and a lot of wealthy people already do. i think the corporations could do better, though. and i think that there should be a ratio of top paid to bottom paid people at a company, something like 30-40 times at the most. now, it can go as high as 500-600 times. that would be much better than a minimum wage.

_________________________________________
Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes

[quade 4]

sfzombie13

some are pretty good, like the meyers briggs assessment.

Which is not saying much since Meyers-Briggs is roughly as accurate as a trip to the local palm reader and even that is being generous.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[StreetScooby 5]

Quote

we need to take care of each other.

Where does taking care of yourself, and your family, fit into your philosophy?

We are all engines of karma

[mpohl 1]

There is a school of thought called Ordoliberalism, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordoliberalism.

It's been implemented to great success in Germany. 80M Germans export almost as much as 300M US Americans. Or almost 50% as 1B+ underpaid Chinese factory slaves.

[turtlespeed 226]

mpohl

There is a school of thought called Ordoliberalism, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordoliberalism.

It's been implemented to great success in Germany. 80M Germans export almost as much as 300M US Americans. Or almost 50% as 1B+ underpaid Chinese factory slaves.

Chinese don't exactly corner the beer market there Chumley

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[richravizza 28]

Thought a little youtube video may Open your mind and eyes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RWsx1X8PV_A

[Amazon 7]

Iago

***Thought a little youtube video may Open your mind and eyes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RWsx1X8PV_A

It is also important to note that 'greedy free capitalists' give their fortunes back to the masses.

Rockefeller
Carnegie
Eastman
Gates
Hilton
Behrend
B. Ray Thompson

et al., et al.

How about those who "give Back" when the recipients are symphonies and ballets which is kind of like giving to themselves since many people had no way of EVER affording tickets at those venues.

[quade 4]

Amazon

How about those who "give Back" when the recipients are symphonies and ballets which is kind of like giving to themselves since many people had no way of EVER affording tickets at those venues.

Art patronage is less about giving to the audience and more about investing in the facilities and artists. This is how art has been promoted and financed since the Renaissance. Without it, we wouldn't have Shakespeare.

Think of it as investing in any other company only instead of manufacturing widgets, they're manufacturing enlightenment in humanity.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[richravizza 28]

and his lessons seem to echo true to this day.
"Is is really true, that political self interest is nobler some how than economic self interest?"

Yet we seem to demonize economic self interest as Greed?

Socialism as we know it in America has been a complete failure and like the insane, Americans believe, this time it will be different.
Every form of socialism turns into a Ponzie sceme, putting the cost on Future generations.
SSI,Medicare,Now the ACA.
When does the madness end?

[quade 4]

Nonsense. Society IS socialism. Without a certain amount of socialism, you're talking about nothing more than anarchy with money.

Society can not exist without it, at least to a certain extent. We can quibble over what the limits are, but you do not have a society without it.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[richravizza 28]

It Doesn't
It Removes his personal responsiblities,inserts the gov't,
and removes his Money,Freedoms and Choices.

[quade 4]

richravizza

It Doesn't
It Removes his personal responsiblities,inserts the gov't,
and removes his Money,Freedoms and Choices.

Have you ever . . . driven on a public road?

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[billvon 3,120]

>Yet we seem to demonize economic self interest as Greed?

Oddly we lament the failure of greed when it occurs (i.e. "I bought this house, and I can't afford it and I am going to lose it!" "gee that's too bad") and celebrate it when it accomplishes modest goals. ("I kept my house and sent my kids to college, and can retire early!" "Hooray, your hard work is an example to us all.")

But that stops at some point, which if media portrayals are any indications happens just above about a net worth of a million. At that point they are greedy, making money off the backs of their hardworking employees etc. Hollywood generally fills these roles with, at best, bumbling blowhards and at worst evil conspirators out to rob kindly Mrs. Johnson the secretary of her last penny. It almost seems that if someone wishes to be seen as "good" they should stop earning at that point.

The basis of this, I think, is simple jealousy. People give kudos to other people who have either gotten to the same level that they have or gotten slightly above, in a way that the person hearing the story can imagine themselves attaining a similar position. Beyond that point they realize "I am never going to get there" for a myriad of reasons, and they begin to see them as elitist and evil.

[richravizza 28]

You mean to tell me Societies of the world never existed before Political Socialism?

[quade 4]

richravizza

You mean to tell me Societies of the world never existed before Political Socialism?

I mean to tell you that when Joseph with his coat of many colors warned the Pharaoh about the seven years of drought and the Pharaoh PLANNED his economy around it, thus saving his kingdom . . . THAT was fucking socialism.

People working for the collective good is socialism. It's what makes civilization possible.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[richravizza 28]

quade

***You mean to tell me Societies of the world never existed before Political Socialism?

I mean to tell you that when Joseph with his coat of many colors warned the Pharaoh about the seven years of drought and the Pharaoh PLANNED his economy around it, thus saving his kingdom . . . THAT was fucking socialism.

People working for the collective good is socialism. It's what makes civilization possible.

Deep and WIDE.
Your only definition of socialism is Quite warm and Fuzzy it definately makes me FEEL GOOD.

Yet, SSI and Medicare have some 100Triilion in unfunded liabilities.
Is that for the "Collective GOOD" you speak of ?
Do I have a Choice in paying self employment Tax?

Your tax is a Contribution,your subsidies are a Benifit,that is how the lies are sold.

Anarchy where did you get that,I never mentioned removal of all gov't.
But, limited gov't you bet,0% growth would be a good start.
We could start a List !!!
I'll start with the USPS, and i'll raise you with the Dept of Education.
Here from wiki;
"socialism" referred to any concern for the social problems of capitalism irrespective of the solutions to those problems.

[Amazon 7]

Iago

*********Thought a little youtube video may Open your mind and eyes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RWsx1X8PV_A

It is also important to note that 'greedy free capitalists' give their fortunes back to the masses.

Rockefeller
Carnegie
Eastman
Gates
Hilton
Behrend
B. Ray Thompson

et al., et al.

How about those who "give Back" when the recipients are symphonies and ballets which is kind of like giving to themselves since many people had no way of EVER affording tickets at those venues.

Quite recently you pitched a fit when one of the Kochs endowed $200 Million to a hospital. It seems you had a problem with Koch having his name being visible on the facility that was being built with the money.

Did you look into WHO is being "helped" in the facility??? Welfare for the wealthy and well to do... driven by egomaniacal zeal... is not charitable contribution.