• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Socialism -- a pathway to disaster

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member
As someone who lived in Venezuela and married a Venezuelan, have friends in Cuba and was in the neighboring countries when the Socialist Sandanistas were in power, I can't help but wonder how people can follow Socialism with Bernie Sanders leading the charge.

I have seen it again and again. They promise utopia, using real-life issues, and it ends up being worse than what they had when they started.

Example: Bernie's "Great education with Cuba -- you can't throw out the good of what he did"... really?

It was an education in communism and not in growing in education. It was an elimination of faith-religion and the promotion of the state religion of communism. Yes, graduated doctors in medicine with no medicine to treat the people. Yes, it was agriculture... but for export while each family had delegated 2 chickens a months (to eat), a few pounds of coffee, and other bare minimal sustenance to get you by while the cows were exported and if you killed one, certain prison time.

BUT THEY DID HAVE HOSPITALS FOR ALL AND EVERYONE WAS EQUAL... equal in poverty unless you were in the upper echelon and medicine shelves were bare.

I still remember in an interview with a Cuban pastor in the US (year ago when it was a rare event) - as he began to perspire profusely when asked questions about Cuba. Why? Because his family was still in Cuba and a wrong statement heard by other Cubans (who might be plants by the government) would mean disaster for their family.

So, what do we have today? What is the carrot on the hook of Socialism?

1) Free university education (as long as you don't mind getting the same pay as one who didn't go)
2) Free medical for all (as long as you don't mind not getting the treatment you want when you want it - IF - there are medicines
3) Everybody gets minimum wages $20/hr - you keep $10/ hour and then the government parcels out your monthly need.

See it happen again and again--and they say it would never happen! That is what THEY ALL PROMISED!

Bernie and the rest of them are no different. They are simply adding some heat to the frog in the water.

Are people blind?
 

Left Coast

This Is Water
Staff member
Premium Member
As someone who lived in Venezuela and married a Venezuelan, have friends in Cuba and was in the neighboring countries when the Socialist Sandanistas were in power, I can't help but wonder how people can follow Socialism with Bernie Sanders leading the charge.

I have seen it again and again. They promise utopia, using real-life issues, and it ends up being worse than what they had when they started.

Example: Bernie's "Great education with Cuba -- you can't throw out the good of what he did"... really?

It was an education in communism and not in growing in education. It was an elimination of faith-religion and the promotion of the state religion of communism. Yes, graduated doctors in medicine with no medicine to treat the people. Yes, it was agriculture... but for export while each family had delegated 2 chickens a months (to eat), a few pounds of coffee, and other bare minimal sustenance to get you by while the cows were exported and if you killed one, certain prison time.

BUT THEY DID HAVE HOSPITALS FOR ALL AND EVERYONE WAS EQUAL... equal in poverty unless you were in the upper echelon and medicine shelves were bare.

I still remember in an interview with a Cuban pastor in the US (year ago when it was a rare event) - as he began to perspire profusely when asked questions about Cuba. Why? Because his family was still in Cuba and a wrong statement heard by other Cubans (who might be plants by the government) would mean disaster for their family.

So, what do we have today? What is the carrot on the hook of Socialism?

1) Free university education (as long as you don't mind getting the same pay as one who didn't go)
2) Free medical for all (as long as you don't mind not getting the treatment you want when you want it - IF - there are medicines
3) Everybody gets minimum wages $20/hr - you keep $10/ hour and then the government parcels out your monthly need.

See it happen again and again--and they say it would never happen! That is what THEY ALL PROMISED!

Bernie and the rest of them are no different. They are simply adding some heat to the frog in the water.

Are people blind?

Bernie's policies would make us basically a social democracy a la Scandinavia. Not exactly dirt poor countries. Better healthcare than us, for example.

Why do people constantly fall for this equivocation between Bernie and Venezuela, or Bernie and the USSR? Are they blind?
 

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist
Premium Member
As someone who lived in Venezuela and married a Venezuelan, have friends in Cuba and was in the neighboring countries when the Socialist Sandanistas were in power, I can't help but wonder how people can follow Socialism with Bernie Sanders leading the charge.

I have seen it again and again. They promise utopia, using real-life issues, and it ends up being worse than what they had when they started.

Example: Bernie's "Great education with Cuba -- you can't throw out the good of what he did"... really?

It was an education in communism and not in growing in education. It was an elimination of faith-religion and the promotion of the state religion of communism. Yes, graduated doctors in medicine with no medicine to treat the people. Yes, it was agriculture... but for export while each family had delegated 2 chickens a months (to eat), a few pounds of coffee, and other bare minimal sustenance to get you by while the cows were exported and if you killed one, certain prison time.

BUT THEY DID HAVE HOSPITALS FOR ALL AND EVERYONE WAS EQUAL... equal in poverty unless you were in the upper echelon and medicine shelves were bare.

I still remember in an interview with a Cuban pastor in the US (year ago when it was a rare event) - as he began to perspire profusely when asked questions about Cuba. Why? Because his family was still in Cuba and a wrong statement heard by other Cubans (who might be plants by the government) would mean disaster for their family.

So, what do we have today? What is the carrot on the hook of Socialism?

1) Free university education (as long as you don't mind getting the same pay as one who didn't go)
2) Free medical for all (as long as you don't mind not getting the treatment you want when you want it - IF - there are medicines
3) Everybody gets minimum wages $20/hr - you keep $10/ hour and then the government parcels out your monthly need.

See it happen again and again--and they say it would never happen! That is what THEY ALL PROMISED!

Bernie and the rest of them are no different. They are simply adding some heat to the frog in the water.

Are people blind?

It's not really... cough, cough... socialism Bernie is pushing. :rolleyes:

So healthcare is the problem, for millions of Americas and a single payer system is the promised cure.

Transitioning to a universal healthcare system is going to be costly — in terms of dollars — no matter what. But by adopting a single-payer system, Americans would be forced to endure high costs that aren’t calculated in dollars: long wait times, rationed care, and few choices beyond the government-controlled system.

The innovation, quality improvements, and timely care offered by competing private firms would be largely destroyed by adopting a single-payer system. Although these advantages have been only partially preserved by multi-payer systems that allow some of the advantages of a free marketplace, those now clamoring for a single-payer system would have us believe this all must be abolished in favor of near-total government control.
Single-Payer Healthcare Is The Worst Kind Of Universal Healthcare. - Center for Individualism


More government control does not necessarily translate to better healthcare.
 

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member
Bernie's policies would make us basically a social democracy a la Scandinavia. Not exactly dirt poor countries. Better healthcare than us, for example.

Why do people constantly fall for this equivocation between Bernie and Venezuela, or Bernie and the USSR? Are they blind?
No... because he eulogizes Castro, Ortega and the Venezuela revolution. A rose is still a rose no matter what you want to call it.

The carrot is blinding.
 

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member
It's not really... cough, cough... socialism Bernie is pushing. :rolleyes:

So healthcare is the problem, for millions of Americas and a single payer system is the promised cure.

Transitioning to a universal healthcare system is going to be costly — in terms of dollars — no matter what. But by adopting a single-payer system, Americans would be forced to endure high costs that aren’t calculated in dollars: long wait times, rationed care, and few choices beyond the government-controlled system.

The innovation, quality improvements, and timely care offered by competing private firms would be largely destroyed by adopting a single-payer system. Although these advantages have been only partially preserved by multi-payer systems that allow some of the advantages of a free marketplace, those now clamoring for a single-payer system would have us believe this all must be abolished in favor of near-total government control.
Single-Payer Healthcare Is The Worst Kind Of Universal Healthcare. - Center for Individualism


More government control does not necessarily translate to better healthcare.
gesundheit :)

but understand what ails you... :D
 

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member
It's cute cherry picking third world countries but how about having a look at other developed, 1st world nations?
If they can't live within their means today and still want more money to make it all happen, then end will still be the end.
 

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member
No. We just want to be able to live comfortably, have a government that represents us and know that the world is going to be better for us being here. It's not really that complicated. :)

Then, socialism wouldn't be the answer. There is a reason why the purpose of our fathers was a "limited government" and not a government control for all people
 

Left Coast

This Is Water
Staff member
Premium Member
No... because he eulogizes Castro, Ortega and the Venezuela revolution. A rose is still a rose no matter what you want to call it.

The carrot is blinding.

Let's look at what he actually said about those things, I'd be interested in the direct quotes.

Pretending there is no difference between authoritarian dictatorships and democracy is what's blinding here.
 

Father Heathen

Veteran Member
If they can't live within their means today and still want more money to make it all happen, then end will still be the end.
Except the majority of developed, 1st world nations (even conservative darling Israel) have universal healthcare and are doing quite well if not better than the U.S.
Only utter buffoons believe that a lack of privatized, predatory rackets would lead to the collapse of civilization.
 

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist
Premium Member
No. We just want to be able to live comfortably, have a government that represents us and know that the world is going to be better for us being here. It's not really that complicated. :)

Which I have now, but I understand not everyone does. So, how do you provide healthcare for everyone without destroying what millions of Americans already have? That's where it gets complicated.
 

Laika

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Then, socialism wouldn't be the answer. There is a reason why the purpose of our fathers was a "limited government" and not a government control for all people

The founding fathers lived in a pre-industrial economy based heavily on agriculture, including the slave plantations for sugar, cotton and tobacco. Even with slavery, the early United States was the most egalitarian society of it's day in contrast to the bloated monarchies and aristocracies of Europe. It didn't become more unequal until the late 19th century when the effects of the industrial revolution were felt.

Economic equality, 1774 and beyond

Whilst the concerns about tyranny and individual liberty remain relevant today, particularly in the context of totalitarianism in the 20th century, we still have to take in to account the growth in the power of private industry and banks, both of which the founding fathers were troubled by.

America has been going further and further to the right since the New Deal in the 1930's which tried to address the economic dislocation of the great depression by greater government intervention, which had produced widespread support for communism and fascism elsewhere around the world. In response to those difficult realities, even the Republican candidate for President in 1940, Wendell Willkie, would today be regarded as a far-left extremist.

 
Last edited:
Top