Ok, something no government has or will ever consider implementing.
-
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!
I Hate Socialism
- Thread starter Nakosis
- Start date
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
Nowadays, yes, but that wasn't always the case.
It's common to argue against a flavor of
capitalism that doesn't exist, in order to
support socialism that's actually capitalism.
muhammad_isa
Well-Known Member
I'm not so sure about that..
It is just as well that our democracies consist of more than one party.
The UK and US in particular rely heavily on the financial sector.
They are of historical importance, and many people would like to see that continue.
I doubt any government would allow the market to run without interference. They would at a minimum need to setup tax revenue.
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
Depends what you mean by "socialism".
If you mean a kind of communism as exists in North Korea or existed in Soviet Russia, then yeah - wouldn't want to live under such a system either.
However here in old europe, we live in what you could call "socialist secular democracies", where "socialist" means that there are certain things, primarily in context of solidarity, rights and equal opportunity, which are government funded.
Things like universal health care, sick leave, maternal leave, paternal leave, education, welfare, ...
Other then those specific things, it's just capitalism in all other area's.
I wouldn't want to live in a country where there aren't such government operated social plans.
lukethethird
unknown member
Paying into a tax pool and building schools and hospitals, maintaining parks, roads, sidewalks, sounds dreadful.
Is that what socialism is to you?
If so, then USA is socialist.
So it seems that everyone who wants
socialism, wants our status quo.
lukethethird
unknown member
Yes, that is socialism, and everyone who wants socialism wants their social programs to be better funded, with the exception of police forces perhaps, and military.
Last edited:
When cutting police funding, where would you cut?
Training? Vetting? Supervision? Pay? Workforce size?
Heyo
Veteran Member
Equipment. Police doesn't need tanks.
Last edited:
lukethethird
unknown member
Not in my country, we still have public property.Yes, we can thank capitalism for the ability to pay for all that.
lukethethird
unknown member
Downsize and demilitarize.
So do we, maintained by capitalism.
Last edited:
That would depend on how quickly they want
to kill how many civilians at what distance.
But ,maybe that's not a capability they need.
Last edited:
Works for me!
But my preference is to increase funding, spending it
on higher pay to get better qualified cops. And give
them far more comprehensive training & supervision.
A surgeon has the power of life & death too. For it,
they train many years. Policing needs to move in
that direction of taking responsibility to do the job well.
lukethethird
unknown member
I have no problem with fair pay but that in itself does not guarantee quality. Proper training would go further in that regard as you suggested.
lukethethird
unknown member
If you mean contracts to private companies, the so called panacea that will reduce costs, that isn't working out very well in a lot of cases.
Better pay is about attracting a larger pool of
applicants, from which to select better candidates.
No guarantees....just better results.