usn ret Loc: SoCal High Desert

If you really think socialism is so great, watch this video from Venezuela.

http://www.dcstatesman.com/filmmaker-ami-horowitz-goes-venezuela-get-truth-socialism/


OCCUPY PLYMOUTH COLONY: How A Failed Commune Led To Thanksgiving-- Jerry Bowyer , CONTRIBUTOR

It's wrong to say that American was founded by capitalists. In fact, America was founded by socialists who had the humility to learn from their initial mistakes and embrace freedom.

One of the earliest and arguably most historically significant North American colonies was Plymouth Colony, founded in 1620 in what is now known as Plymouth, Massachusetts. As I've outlined in greater detail here before (Lessons From a Capitalist Thanksgiving), the original colony had written into its charter a system of communal property and labor.

As William Bradford recorded in his Of Plymouth Plantation, a people who had formerly been known for their virtue and hard work became lazy and unproductive. Resources were squandered, vegetables were allowed to rot on the ground and mass starvation was the result. And where there is starvation, there is plague. After 2 1/2 years, the leaders of the colony decided to abandon their socialist mandate and create a system which honored private property. The colony survived and thrived and the abundance which resulted was what was celebrated at that iconic Thanksgiving feast.

As my friend Reuven Brenner has taught me, history is a series of experiments: The Human Gamble. Some gambles work and are adopted by history and some do not and should be abandoned by it. The problem is that the human gamble only works if there is a record of experimental outcomes and if decision makers consult that record. For many years, the story of the first failed commune of Plymouth Bay was part of the collective memory of American students. But Progressive Education found that story unhelpful and it has fallen into obscurity, which explains why (as I alluded to before) a well-educated establishment figure like Jared Bernstein would be unaware of it.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Socialism bad, very bad.

GAlanFInk

The only people who want Socialism are the people who know nothing about it.

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

I used to tell my students they should read the Communist Manifesto. Only about 33 pages or so.
When you cut out all the filler and bombast it is the way a functional family operates. The very young, very old and infirm taken care of and those in between working to keep things going. A family has mutual love to keep everyone doing their part. And that doesn't always work.
When a group gets bigger and not everyone knows or is related to everyone the system breaks down. I further told them that even if the entire population was angels it might not work. After all, Lucifer was the chief of the angels.

Socialism as described in the Manifesto and elsewhere sounds like the perfect way to live. The only real problem is "It Doesn't Work".

sb Loc: Florida's East Coast

Well, there is socialism, and then there is socialism. Meaning that there are various forms. And just like there are and have been many capitalistic nations who have been led by dictators, there have been many socialist nations led by dictators. (Even in the case of Venezuela, the Hugo Chavez rule brought health care and literacy to most of the citizens of Venezuela - they were still poor and hungry, though...) But socialism also includes that like Bernie's "Democratic Socialism" - which you will see in places such as Sweden - where people are very happy, by the way. The United States has been partially socialist for decades. If you consider socialism as the government providing social services for the populace - think about Social Security, Medicare, National Park lands, and public education. All of them socialist. Many socialist programs are what the GOP wants to get rid of. Even stop funding socialist programs such as Meals-on-Wheels, Planned Parenthood, Medicaid, etc. Many of these programs help ALL Americans (or our grandmas or grandchildren) and are very, very popular. Not only do they make this a nice country in which to live, given that the US has one of the greatest divides in the world between rich and poor (Google GINI Index), they probably also help prevent a violent uprising by the poor. Justice Thurgood Marshall once said: "I enjoy paying my taxes, because it is through my taxes that I live in a civilized society". Food for thought.

Bazbo Loc: Lisboa, Portugal

Did your instruct your students that communism and socialism are not the same? I ask because you seem to ben a little confused on the subject.

Bazbo Loc: Lisboa, Portugal

It is not an either/or question. It is a sliding scale.

This country has had forms of socialism since the beginning. Boston Commons, for example, did not start as as a public park for yuppies and tourists to stroll around and eat an over-priced lunch.


Anyone who attempts to reduce the question to a stark binary understands neither socialism nor the history (and current state) of our own country.

An adult conversation could be had on where on the sliding scale our country should be...but a debate of "socialism vs. not socialism" is a conversation for hyperventilating fools. Perfect for the Attic.

green Loc: 22.1749611,-159.646704,20

I could do without the big bank bailouts and corporate subsidies... but other than that our country would be unrecognizable without socialist programs and organizations...

mail me your list, LOL ...ooops wait, the post office, damn!

PalePictures Loc: Traveling

Your premise is flawed.
Most of these things would have existed without socialism.
Cell phones exist because of government?
The Internet would not have existed without socialism?
Your computer would not have existed without socialism?
A power grid was created by Tesla and JP Morgan without socialism..... Spontaneous based on need and demand.
Steal was created without socialism.....Spontaneous based on need and demand
A bridge across the Mississippi River was spanned without socialism....Spontaneous based on need and demand
The automobile was create with out socialism....Spontaneous based on need and demand
The pipeline infrastructure was built without socialism. Rockefeller....Spontaneous based on need and demand
No question that a government needs to exist. One would arise if it did not exist.
You can have a society that has little or no federal income tax to support large federal institutions.
An excise tax is minimally invasive to prevent taking by force of law(stealing) from the working man.
Roads could be built and maintained with a fuel tax(excise). Theoretically they are.
Public education could all be private. I would argue that it would be more diverse and specialized to individual choices.
A public education does not equate to an education.
Michael Dell did not complete college.
The real argument is not about socialism (Yes or No)
The idea of the founding fathers was what system would best support individual liberty.
Socialism runs completely counter to individual liberty.
Look at how many time the founders spoke of Liberty in their writings.
I have never heard a socialist talk of individual liberty.
Socialism has many flavors and degrees.
True capitalism is an unknown ideal.
The closest any state has ever come to True capitalism was in 1780 or so in the U.S.
Individual liberty has slowly eroded from that point forward.
"A government does not become a tyranny through sudden usurpations but by gradual encroachment"
James Madison (Paraphrased)
What has been happening from the founding is Tyranny by vote, Tryanny by the majority, Tyranny by Democracy itself."
This concept in the above statement is why the founders created a Democratic Republic
The overriding idea of the founders was what system of government would best preserve INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY.
The End Game was Individual liberty not Democracy....

green Loc: 22.1749611,-159.646704,20

you would have really loved the robber barron days of our country... when a man with a passion and a little capital could make as much money as he wanted, unfettered by government or even a conscience.

...was it great for America that Rockefeller owned 90% of the oil pipelines after forcing out the competition?

PalePictures Loc: Traveling

I have no problem with you paying your taxes.
Apparently you have no problem telling other people what is good for them either.(By vote)
Life was pretty civilized in 1776 after we kicked George's butt and banned everything but excise taxes.
Tell me how Meals on Wheels, Planned Parenthood benefit me?
Now tell me what price I must pay to get that benefit?
Are you saying that voluntary organizations would not exist to do such things.
They already do. You can go to most any city in the nation and go to the Salvation Army and get a meal.
Maybe your neighbor would help you or your church...They certainly would have more to give if they paid less in taxes. You would not have the overhead of giant government machine.
No question that there is no utopia.
Here's a little reminder of the cost of giving people what you think is good for them.
http://www.usdebtclock.org/

John_F Loc: Minneapolis, MN

I dispute that Social Security and Medicare are socialism. In both one pays into a fund, which is to be leveraged by investment. One fund is for retirement which makes it to be like any orher retirement plan. Medicare operates the same; investment leveraging, not unlike any other health plan. The element that many conservatives dislike is that both mandate saving current earnings for the future use - how dare givernment tell me how to handle my money they say. Where things began to derail was Congress' restricting investment to Federal securities that were held to de-minimis earnings while the rest of the investment community was roaring - think 1945 - 1995. These actions by Congress in no small part enabled the winning of the Cold War. That our national language is English and not Russian can be chalked up to reduced earnings by Social Security and Medicare savings. It is payback time.

PalePictures Loc: Traveling

The Robber Barron days myth was dispelled back in the 50's
There is no text books even under liberal that refers to the Movers of society as the Robber Barrons anymore.
Only in context of that was what they were called by the politicians at the time to gain more power.

Rockefeller refined gas so Henry ford could build cars that used gas.
Ford made cars so cheap that the common man could buy them.
Rockefeller hurt Rail because of his method of transporting oil was much much cheaper.
Rockefeller owned 90% of oil pipelines because he had revenue from the original oil pipelines that he took the risk to build with money he had accumulated from discovering oil.
He forced people out because he could deliver oil cheaper. He did not use the coercive power of the state to do so.
He like Carnegie purchased companies and made the owner wealthy.
You apparently have a skewed view of force.
No one was forced to work in a steal mill. It was voluntary hard work....
No one was forced to work for Rockefeller, It was better pay than working in a steal mill.
Henry ford created mass production and created the assembly line with a 40 hour work week for those that didn't want to work 50 hours.
Typically what happened historically is that a problem would occur in capitalism. The government would intervene long after the problem was resolved.
Short haul long haul rail comes to mind with antitrust.
Capitalism is not perfect. There is no other system that is better for providing the greatest good for it's people.

PalePictures Loc: Traveling

Both systems are forced by the state. You can not opt out of Social Security or Medicare.
The fact that we can bare arms and having thousands of Nukes is why we will never speak Russian.
I assure you the founding fathers did not have Duck hunting in mind when they gave it's citizens the right to bear arms.
Because we have hundreds of millions of Arms we are pretty much guaranteed not to be ever invaded by a foreign force.
I say...How dare anyone tell me what is good for me. I should have the right to choose.
How dare anyone force me to buy something I do not want.
Welcome to Obamacare......Inch by Inch Individual liberty erodes.

boberic Loc: Quiet Corner, Connecticut. Ex long Islander

Name 1 purely socialist country that has come up with more innovations than capitalist countries. You can't because free markets economies are simply much more dynamic than controlled economies. Free markets reward competition socialist economioes thwart competition. The historical socialist countries--Russia--China now have vibrant economies because they have used free market principles to drive their economies. Steadfast socialist countries--Venezuela-cuba-N.Korea continue to fail.