Is America becoming Socialist ?

[ginnyfizz]

It doesn't follow that Socialist type policies are the answer. You say the tax cuts are not the answer, nor are they sustainable, and you may well be right, our own Coalition has ruled out tax cuts as part of the austerity measures. But then I see the term "the rich" being bandied about. Socialists often have a very weird idea of what constitutes rich - like anyone earning over GB£20,000/US$30,000 per annum. Or anyone who runs their own business,large or small. They are instinctively hostile to enterprise and wealth creation and are unable to resist the urge to tax it out of existence. The easier availability of loans will be to no avail if it is just going to feed a monster tax bill, rather than fund business expansion.

[Aurielius]

Making it easier for small businesses to get loans comes to mind. As for Republicans trying to drive our economy further into the ground, look no further than their efforts to extend the Bush-era tax cuts for the rich.

Businesses that earn $250,000 are hardly rich, and when they stop investing in personnel and new equipment lets see how many jobs other than government ones that Obama can claim. Just as a further note this administration has spent more than the top five spending administrations combined, what a great fiscal policy that you promo.

[evilneko]

That's quite amusing. You're actually going to say that Shrub spent less in 8 years than Obama has in two? The man increased the deficit by an order of magnitude in his last year!

 

Doesn't jive with reality I think.

 

I'm still wondering, where is the fiscal responsibility in continuing the Bush tax cuts as the right wants to do? Seriously, this is one of the policies that got us into this recession in the first place. Well, besides a completely unnecessary war, which thankfully Obama's getting us out of. Speaking of wars, where's the fiscal responsibility in cutting taxes during a war? You're spending more, so you're gonna cut your income! Sure, makes sense. Got it.

 

Taxes can't be cut continuously and indefinitely, the government needs income. I know, we'd all like it to be free, but it's money makes the world go round. If you cut somewhere, you need to raise taxes elsewhere, or cut some budget items.

 

But the right doesn't want to do that. They want to cut taxes... and then not balance out the cuts! And they don't want just any cuts, either: they demand the cuts for the rich, to the extent that they are willing to block the extension of the middle-class cuts if the cuts for the rich aren't included. (WTF?)

 

If the Republicans want to help the country they'd stop being the obstructionist bastards that they are right now, realize that their plan of continuing Bush-era economic policy is insane, and try to figure out something different. They'd come out and silence (no, not that kind of silencing, ginny) the Birthers and the Obama's-a-Muslim/Socialist/Kenyan Anti-Colonialist whackos, and show us a real plan that might actually work instead of merely slinging mud around. They want tax cuts? Show a method of paying for it. They want to repeal ObamaCare? Pay attention to the desires of the people: leave alone the provisions for pre-existing condition coverage. (Heck, they were all for that before, now that they're the party of no, they've decided they're against it, THE most popular part of the health care reform bill. WTF?)

 

And I'm still wondering where the socialism is...

[ginnyfizz]

They'd come out and silence (no, not that kind of silencing, ginny) the Birthers and the Obama's-a-Muslim/Socialist/Kenyan Anti-Colonialist whackos

 

Would you care to explain the meaning of that jibe of yours?

[Harbringe]

Well some interesting posts in this thread ,so would just like to put out a few thoughts

 

When it comes to this whole Socialism vs Capitalism debate I hope people realize that the US is a liberal socialist idea like come on now a government for the people,by the people and of the people ,even the socialists haven't been able to come up with anything in their ideology to top that one and as far as capitalism goes it was just one of many tools that brought about this new idea on the face of the earth ,capitalism is a tool it doesn't define who you are ,just as socialism is a tool that doesn't define who you are ,its what you do with those tools and what those tools allow you to become that defines you.Maybe people need to realize that the solution lies somewhere between the two and is not the sole property of either.

 

When it comes to Health Care and is this an Obama plan to socialize it ,well what does it matter, on a per capita basis Americans pay 2X as much as the British and its one of the least efficiently run systems in the western world ,using the British as a basis of comparison is nonsensical.If they had that kinda money to spend they would probably have room service in their hospitals.Like seriously your already being overcharged anyway ,you don't have a life expectancy any greater than most in the industrialized countries and some you lag behind,you leave 40 - 50 million people under insured or with no insurance at all.Also the number one reason for bankruptcies in the US is medical expenses and the only ones getting rich of that are lawyers and who banks ,wow sounds like a really great system if your a health care insurer ,lawyer or banker not so good for the rest of yas.So in the end what does it matter if Obama is trying something different ,your already getting ripped off anyway.

 

When it comes to China people like to reference it as an example of how even the communists are looking to capitalism ,but it was the turn of the 18th - 19th century chinese philosopher Sun Yat Sen who told the chinese people they would have to embrace communisn ,then turn to capitalism and after a time only then would they be able to avail themselves of the liberties that democracy offers and from the looks of it they may have finally realized he may be right.

 

In 1990 China launched a 50 year economic plan to take advantage of the tools capitalism offered to build themselves a self sustaining economy and it was recognized that in order to achieve this they would need to sell to the biggest economy in the world , the US economy and earlier this year they did a generational review to determine how far along they were and they determined they were approx 18 years ahead of schedule ,so for the time being they will continue to prop up your country (lend money) in order to keep selling you products but once they do reach a self sustaining economy ,they will no longer need to lend you money and is that the day Communisn triumphs over Capitalism .The Soviet Union didn't fall because of anything Reagan did they fell cause they ran out of money and the only difference between you and them is in their country the Government had way more guns than the people ,but in America its the people who got way more guns than the Government

 

Am I concerned about America becoming Socialist hell no ,I'm far more worried that they don't wise up and end up digging themselves into such a hole that their only choice becomes to choose Fascism or plunges themselves into a civil war.Futures so bright I gotta wear shades BOOM.

[ginnyfizz]

But Fascism IS a form of Socialism. Nazi Party = National Socialist Party, for example. Now not for a moment do I equate any mainstream politicians such as Obama with that odious creed,so please don't misquote me as doing so. But let us dispel the notion that Fascism is an exclusive of the Conservative Right. My family have a long history of being card carrying members of the Conservative Party, and an equally long record of spilling their blood in the fight against Fascism.

 

And no it is NOT nonsensical for me to use the British situation on healthcare as a basis for comparison, because I AM British, I live with the system and see it failing. So the current US system isn't working for all people, that I have not disputed, but I am using the British example to show that a lurch to Socialism and socialized healthcare won't work either. It grieves me to see how Socialism is seen as such a panacea for all ills, the Socialists promising the earth to get elected, and then failing to deliver anything but a whopping public sector.

 

Fortunately, I think the American people are already wise to the pitfalls and will not allow Obama a chance to try anything too Socialist.

[Harbringe]

But Fascism IS a form of Socialism. Nazi Party = National Socialist Party, for example. Now not for a moment do I equate any mainstream politicians such as Obama with that odious creed,so please don't misquote me as doing so. But let us dispel the notion that Fascism is an exclusive of the Conservative Right. My family have a long history of being card carrying members of the Conservative Party, and an equally long record of spilling their blood in the fight against Fascism.

 

And no it is NOT nonsensical for me to use the British situation on healthcare as a basis for comparison, because I AM British, I live with the system and see it failing. So the current US system isn't working for all people, that I have not disputed, but I am using the British example to show that a lurch to Socialism and socialized healthcare won't work either. It grieves me to see how Socialism is seen as such a panacea for all ills, the Socialists promising the earth to get elected, and then failing to deliver anything but a whopping public sector.

 

Fortunately, I think the American people are already wise to the pitfalls and will not allow Obama a chance to try anything too Socialist.

 

Of course Fascism is socialist all of them are (democracy,communism,capitalism,liberalism and even conservatism) are all socialist ,those things are just tools of social change.As for the Nazis being socialist that was in name and name only ,they sit on the political scale as far right as you can go except maybe for the despotic form of government.

 

Of course using the British health care system is a nonsensical basis of comparison ,you can't be casting the blame on any political ideology just because your politicians are too stupid or the British people too selfish to construct a workable health care system ,using something that's broken in and of itself is no evidence that another is better ,cause its broken.Your problem has more to do with your selves and your own personal disaffection with the whole thing.

Think about it America in total is being overcharged in the range of 1 trillion + for their health care ,with that alone if they had Canada's health care system they could pay for ours and maybe yours in its entirety (not sure how much your costs ,but being as dysfunctional as you claim ,have to leave that as a maybe) so how exactly is the American system a measure of success ,sounds to me theirs is as broken as yours ,a rotten apple comparing itself to a rotten orange.Just flawed logic

 

I understand you have already pointed out that the US system like yours has its problems and I agree liberal socialism has presented itself as a panacea but so has conservatism in the US and with each electoral go around they are really no farther ahead than when Reagan was in power ,almost dug themselves out under Clinton but then along came Bush.

 

Anyhow neither system or its underlying ideologies seems to be able to totally solve the issue and maybe when it comes to health care nothing ever will , suppose that's the nature of people taking ill .its suppose to be trying ,just something you always gotta work at

[evilneko]

Would you care to explain the meaning of that jibe of yours?

 

I was referring to your comments (well, pretty sure it was you :whistling:) , either earlier in this thread or in the Tea Party thread, about how certain people in the UK were "silenced."

 

In this context I meant silenced by having "their own side" so to speak turn the harsh light of reality on the beliefs of such idiots as I mentioned: eg, having prominent Republicans come out and take the wind out of, for example, the Birthers' sails by showing copies of the birth certificate. Hell Beck himself tried to tell the Tea Partiers to knock it off (well, at least in regards to their appearance anyway), only to be subverted by Gingrich lending credence to not only Birthers but the Islamophobes as well. (Shame on you, former Speaker, shame. We thought you were smarter than that)

 

So the current US system isn't working for all people, that I have not disputed, but I am using the British example to show that a lurch to Socialism and socialized healthcare won't work either.

 

Here's the thing though. Health care in the US is not, and will not be, socialized, not even under the Affordable Care Act.

[MetalDragon]

But Fascism IS a form of Socialism. Nazi Party = National Socialist Party, for example. Now not for a moment do I equate any mainstream politicians such as Obama with that odious creed,so please don't misquote me as doing so. But let us dispel the notion that Fascism is an exclusive of the Conservative Right. My family have a long history of being card carrying members of the Conservative Party, and an equally long record of spilling their blood in the fight against Fascism.

 

And no it is NOT nonsensical for me to use the British situation on healthcare as a basis for comparison, because I AM British, I live with the system and see it failing. So the current US system isn't working for all people, that I have not disputed, but I am using the British example to show that a lurch to Socialism and socialized healthcare won't work either. It grieves me to see how Socialism is seen as such a panacea for all ills, the Socialists promising the earth to get elected, and then failing to deliver anything but a whopping public sector.

 

Fortunately, I think the American people are already wise to the pitfalls and will not allow Obama a chance to try anything too Socialist.

 

Of course Fascism is socialist all of them are (democracy,communism,capitalism,liberalism and even conservatism) are all socialist ,those things are just tools of social change.As for the Nazis being socialist that was in name and name only ,they sit on the political scale as far right as you can go except maybe for the despotic form of government.

 

Of course using the British health care system is a nonsensical basis of comparison ,you can't be casting the blame on any political ideology just because your politicians are too stupid or the British people too selfish to construct a workable health care system ,using something that's broken in and of itself is no evidence that another is better ,cause its broken.Your problem has more to do with your selves and your own personal disaffection with the whole thing.

Think about it America in total is being overcharged in the range of 1 trillion + for their health care ,with that alone if they had Canada's health care system they could pay for ours and maybe yours in its entirety (not sure how much your costs ,but being as dysfunctional as you claim ,have to leave that as a maybe) so how exactly is the American system a measure of success ,sounds to me theirs is as broken as yours ,a rotten apple comparing itself to a rotten orange.Just flawed logic

 

I understand you have already pointed out that the US system like yours has its problems and I agree liberal socialism has presented itself as a panacea but so has conservatism in the US and with each electoral go around they are really no farther ahead than when Reagan was in power ,almost dug themselves out under Clinton but then along came Bush.

 

 

Anyhow neither system or its underlying ideologies seems to be able to totally solve the issue and maybe when it comes to health care nothing ever will , suppose that's the nature of people taking ill .its suppose to be trying ,just something you always gotta work at

 

Ugh, I don't know whats worse, his punctuation, or his views.

 

I do not like how this is running, seems to be teetering on the brink of an all out mud fight. I came close to firing a volley just now. I cannot say I agree with everything that comes out of the right, but I can say I agree with almost nothing that comes out of the left. The problem is that both are so entrenched that no REAL change can happen, Obama's slogan was "We need change" and he was right, but he will not be delivering it, and the question becomes: what KIND of change do we need? Surely not a complete run toward socialism, and also not a sprint toward total capitalism, which amounts to anarchy. Neither one sounds preferable. I believe we need more variety in our political landscape, as is we are forced to try and balance two squabbling giants, both of whom would crush us if they ever defeated the other. This is a bad situation, the twin party system just does not work. If we had more maybe we could actually find a group that is devoted to our views.

 

Also, the whole government has turned to much to politics. We do not need politicians, we need leaders, men and women of solid judgment, not fools with silver tongues.

[JimboUK]

@Harbringe This explains better than I can how the Nazis were socialist. Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian. As for healthcare problems you certainly can blame it on ideology. There is no incentive whatsoever to provide a decent level of service, be efficient or answerable under a system where the state provides healthcare via mandatory taxation (National Insurance). If they screw up and get sued who pays? if they overspend who pays? who has no choice but to keep paying even if the service is appalling? yep that bottomless pit of money otherwise known as the taxpayer. In the last 13 years spending on the NHS in the UK has trebled yet there has been next to no improvement in the service, in some cases it has got worse. The reasons for this are simple. Socialists do not trust people, they insist on micromanaging everything from the centre via layers of bureaucracy who are answerable to the government rather than the users of the service . The socialists answer to every problem within an organisation such as the NHS is to throw other peoples money at it, hire more bureaucracy instead of trusting those within the organisation to manage it themselves to a set budget. At one point the under the Labour government the ratio of managers to nurses being hired was 5 to 1, you never got this waste under the previous Conservative government.