1. 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!

Featured Socialism and the Far Right

Discussion in 'Religious Debates' started by Fool, Jan 13, 2022.

  1. Revoltingest

    Revoltingest Abnormal before it was fashionable
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Messages:
    209,764
    Ratings:
    +78,715
    Religion:
    Atheist
    I'm not a conservative.
    I observe friends who can't find enuf help for their business.
    All contractors are busy, & simply cannot do more work than
    is already lined up. Paying more would simply mean getting
    workers from competitors. The labor force simply has no
    reserve. So if someone wants to enter, great pay awaits.
    The keys....
    Be honest, diligent, timely, & willing to improve.
     
  2. Clara Tea

    Clara Tea Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2020
    Messages:
    3,849
    Ratings:
    +1,496
    Republicans convinced the poor to support the rich, claiming that the rich would then raise their wages and improve their conditions (example: medical care).

    This is called "trickle down."

    Trickle down didn't work when President Ronald Reagan tried it. US steel industries shut down, and the inferior steel manufactured abroad was so bad that bolts were breaking that held engines to airplanes (they had to switch to military grade bolts with ISO-9000 standards). In the mean time, US workers lost their jobs.

    President Reagan made it easier to get farm loans, but due to economic shake-ups, farmers were unable to make a living despite working very hard. They lost farms that had been in their families for perhaps 300 years. Ronald Reagan blamed the farmers, claiming that all farmers in America, suddenly, during his term, became stupid, instead of admitting that decisions by Reagan caused economic decline of the US. Banks collapsed under Reagan (and the FSLIC went out of business entirely). Republicans of Congress wanted to collapse the US currency, but

    President GHW Bush tried trickle down again, and again it failed. Another recession was born.

    President W. Bush tried trickle down yet again, and again it failed. Companies were outsourced overseas, and many had to train their foreign counterparts to take their jobs.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. Jack11

    Jack11 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2022
    Messages:
    54
    Ratings:
    +17
    Religion:
    Catholic
    With huge populations comes socialism. There will be an even bigger slide to socialism as population look to Governments to take care of them. It was predicted decades ago. There is a population problem on the planet its going to take another decade or two before this truth is realized humans are not ready for that truth.
     
  4. metis

    metis aged ecumenical anthropologist

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2013
    Messages:
    38,667
    Ratings:
    +19,318
    Religion:
    ecumenical & naturalistic Catholic
    I hear ya, but it is virtually impossible for me to believe that Jesus would have advocated a dismantling of the mandate to take care of others in need, which is more compatible with compassionate form of socialism than dog-eat-dog capitalism.
     
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
  5. metis

    metis aged ecumenical anthropologist

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2013
    Messages:
    38,667
    Ratings:
    +19,318
    Religion:
    ecumenical & naturalistic Catholic
    This is pretty much what anthropologist Desmond Morris said decades ago, whereas he said not doing as such would lead to massive problems that would undermine stability and lead to more civil wars and wars between nations.
     
  6. Revoltingest

    Revoltingest Abnormal before it was fashionable
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Messages:
    209,764
    Ratings:
    +78,715
    Religion:
    Atheist
    Somehow, I just don't believe that this Jesus fellow you
    keep citing would want private enterprise eliminated, &
    replaced with government run means of production.
    A great many of his followers think that would be bonkers.
    They like economic liberty. They like charity being voluntary.
    There's usefulness in having government provide social
    benefits. But we needn't go socialist to do that.

    A problem I see is that capitalism generates enuf tax
    revenue to provide wonderful benefits. But your ilk
    keeps voting for politicians who like to start wars, eg,
    Hillary, Joe. Wouldn't your Jesus favor a more peaceful
    foreign policy? And perhaps not imprisoning so many
    people....as Joe & Bill wanted?

    Instead of blaming others, eg, Republicans, capitalism,
    consider cleaning up your own house, the Democratic
    Party. Run some candidates who favor peace.
     
  7. 1213

    1213 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2017
    Messages:
    4,460
    Ratings:
    +887
    Religion:
    Disciple of Jesus
    If they anyway pay it, does it really matter how they pay it? The cost exists anyway, if people would pay directly those, by own choice, they could have some influence to the prices and quality of service. Now they have none and the prices are extravagant. The problem with all that government arranges is that government doesn’t protect the interest of the ones that pay it.

    But, I understand that there are some services that would be reasonable to arrange collectively. Those are 1) Healthcare 2) Education 3) Basic roads 4) Police/Justice system 5) Fire department. Everything else is not necessary. And for those 5 items the cost shouldn’t be more than 400 $/month/citizen. For that it would be enough to have about 10 % Vat and 10 % income tax, nothing else. I think that could be considered fair and acceptable for all. All that goes over that is tyranny and exploitation and can’t be justified well.
     
  8. 1213

    1213 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2017
    Messages:
    4,460
    Ratings:
    +887
    Religion:
    Disciple of Jesus
    In that case I don’t think there are any real socialists. But, I think socialism as Marx defined is different than what you think, and in my opinion Marx is the one whose definition is the correct one. And by his definition, socialism is not good, it is legalized theft an exploits people.
     
  9. Father Heathen

    Father Heathen Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2008
    Messages:
    36,211
    Ratings:
    +21,960
    Then we might be at an agreement for the most part. I'm not anti-capitalist. I just think that our privatized, profit driven healthcare is a predatory racket that gouges and drives many into debt. The rest of the 1st world tends to be shocked by our system.
     
  10. Valjean

    Valjean Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2004
    Messages:
    29,561
    Ratings:
    +15,980
    Religion:
    Vedanta (reform)
    I don't think anyone is advocating the elimination of private ownership. Me, I'm advocating more employee-owned, co-operative businesses, and public ownership of the commons.
    The "Socialism" we radical leftists, socialist extremists and anarchist militants advocate is patterned on Western Europe, not the USSR, North Korea or Red China.
    We advocate reïnstating the regulations, checks and balances we had before the Reagan revolution channeled all the money to the .01%, and industry overseas. Oddly, it's we liberals who want to turn back the clock.
    Who would this élite be, and what power would it have over the people?
    Give us some examples of these iron booted, socialist tyrants, SVP.
    Capitalism has a history of booms and busts ("business cycle)"), monopoly, government capture and exploitation and wage/power inequality. Prosperity of the few emerges from exploitation of those who create the wealth, either domestically or abroad. Profits go to the owner class, which might -- or might not -- pay a living wage to the workers.
    What liberty does a wage-slave have?
     
    #170 Valjean, Jan 17, 2022
    Last edited: Jan 18, 2022
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  11. Valjean

    Valjean Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2004
    Messages:
    29,561
    Ratings:
    +15,980
    Religion:
    Vedanta (reform)
    Socialism like we had in the '60s, in the '30s? Socialism as it exists in Western Europe?
    What sort of socialism are you talking bout? And who is this "government?" Government as a separate class or entity is a capitalist thing. Socialist governments are workers' committees.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. Jack11

    Jack11 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2022
    Messages:
    54
    Ratings:
    +17
    Religion:
    Catholic
    I am wrong saying socialism - massive social programs funded by Government will be required the larger the population gets.

    I don't believe socialism is possible it would require a revolution to take from the rich making it communism good luck with socialism the rich will never have it. The world has never been greedier.
     
  13. Valjean

    Valjean Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2004
    Messages:
    29,561
    Ratings:
    +15,980
    Religion:
    Vedanta (reform)
    And yet both Theodore Roosevelt, his cousin Franklin, and to some extent, Lyndon Johnson managed to do it.
    Yes, the economic royalists railed against them. They complained that Teddy "didn't stay bought," and, in the case of FDR, they condemned him as a socialist, enlisted the military and almost puled off a coup d'état.

    Nevertheless, regulations were imposed that lasted >45 years before the corporatists managed to make significant inroads against the regulations that had produced the prosperity and strong middle class that characterized America's Golden Age.
     
  14. 1213

    1213 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2017
    Messages:
    4,460
    Ratings:
    +887
    Religion:
    Disciple of Jesus
    It can be so in any case, if those who pay it, can’t really control it. The problem seems to be when the system grows too big and powerful. Private company can grow as big, or bigger than government organization. And then people lose opportunity to choose, which is what leads to situation where people pay and don’t get what they should get. This is why I don’t think the problem is really in the way the system is funded, it is in the centralization of power. The smaller all units are, the more choices for people, which then gives the control to the people (true democracy), because then they can change the provider, if it doesn’t do a good job.

    Government is essentially monopoly. And monopolies are bad for people, because it allows the provider to do poor job that people must pay, but can’t change.
     
  15. Father Heathen

    Father Heathen Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2008
    Messages:
    36,211
    Ratings:
    +21,960
    Government is supposed to be of, by, and for the people via democracy, but the problem is that the choices are picked by big money and lobbyists. Also, a large portion of the electorate are either woefully uninformed or misinformed and are easily deceived and manipulated into voting against their own interests.
     
  16. Valjean

    Valjean Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2004
    Messages:
    29,561
    Ratings:
    +15,980
    Religion:
    Vedanta (reform)
    Yet other countries, with centralized medical care or regulatory control, manage better outcomes at half the price.
    As long as healthcare companies and big pharma are allowed to buy the legislators who regulate the industry, prices will remain extortionate.

    "Small government" = industry free-for-all.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  17. Revoltingest

    Revoltingest Abnormal before it was fashionable
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Messages:
    209,764
    Ratings:
    +78,715
    Religion:
    Atheist
    Only in the minds of socialists who refuse to allow
    for useful regulation, eg, preventing monopolies,
    consumer protection laws, environmental protection.
    Much government activity at all levels can be jettisoned
    with either no or positive effects....
    - Subsidizing building in flood plains
    - Who can use which public bathroom
    - Policing the world
    - Requiring risky home lending
    - Rent control
    - Affirmative action
    - Banning small houses

    But some additional regulation is needed....
    - Trust administration
    - Police behavior
    - Firearm training & storage
     
  18. Valjean

    Valjean Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2004
    Messages:
    29,561
    Ratings:
    +15,980
    Religion:
    Vedanta (reform)
    Frankly I don't see where we're in disagreement here, except maybe the small house thing. If I want to move into a garden shed, why shouldn't I?
     
  19. Revoltingest

    Revoltingest Abnormal before it was fashionable
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Messages:
    209,764
    Ratings:
    +78,715
    Religion:
    Atheist
    I sense a much greater desire for government control.
    I prefer that if employees want more say in a company,
    they can....
    - Start their own.
    - Buy stock in the company.
     
  20. 1213

    1213 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2017
    Messages:
    4,460
    Ratings:
    +887
    Religion:
    Disciple of Jesus
    Please give one example.
     
Loading...