Thank you General. Ox you can't buy rocket launchers here either. taxing the wealthy has been shown to hurt economies because people simply setup operations elsewhere or they stash money in tax havens. Just look at all the businesses fleeing Canada because of their high tax rate. Now instead of getting a little bit of money they'll get nothing. NOTHING! Also communism is a form of socialism. You're lying by saying communism isn't a form of socialism. Socialism is an umbrella term. There are lots of different types of socialism and communism is one of them. You're going to have to specify your form of socialism or I'm going to call you a commie or a nazi. Your pick.

Edited 1/23/2016 01:40:33

Instead of attacking each other and the rich let's focus on some solutions for the "people barely scraping by". Higher Productivity.

In order for people to enjoy more goods and services, we have to produce more goods and services, and that means more capital — both physical and human. Faster computers, more efficient machines, improved delivery techniques, and more efficient methods for synthesizing drugs all enable each worker to produce more wealth than he could otherwise, and businesses need no encouragement from the government to pursue any of those strategies. Thanks to the profit and loss system, businesses have an automatic incentive to do more with less, because in the short run this will increase their profits. However, as their competitors also adopt the same innovations, those profits are competed away and instead translate into both higher wages for workers and lower prices for consumers, which also contributes to an increased standard of living.

It's important to note that this process of maximizing efficiency in order to produce more with less is a positive-sum game, unlike the zero-sum (or negative-sum) game of redistribution through minimum wage laws or unions. That means that new wealth is created where there was none before, rather than simply moving existing wealth from one person or group to another. Only through this kind of positive-sum activity can the standard of living increase throughout society over time. There are policies that government officials can pursue that help to maximize productivity gains, but there is no magic wand that they can wave to make everyone richer by fiat. Economic growth is a dynamic process that cannot be planned or controlled from the top down.

hen most socialists would be happy. Socialism isn't communism, and there is a point where we stop taxing the rich. But we've not reached that point yet. For now, fuck the rich.

Ox my main question is why not communism? What makes you so eager to have a partial redistribution of wealth but not a complete redistribution of wealth? In other words what (to you) makes socialism correct but communism incorrect? There must be a logical reason why you don't want communism but you do want socialism. I don't think I understand that dividing line for most socialist thinkers.

+1 Jai

because they're fundamentally opposed. Its like saying why not radical islam and a representative republic?

Personally, I think a mixed system of both works well. That's actually what America is, we have parts of both socialism and Capitalism in our Constitution and laws

Where's socialism in the constitution?

Jai, one of these days I am gonna take all of your massive posts and create a lecture series for my future students at IU or Harvard XD

America is becoming more and more Socialist by the Generation

there is no pure socialism in the constitution. The Concepts however can be found sometimes just like with capitalism. actually, modern socialism cant be found in the constitution, i should have said that

A lot of the modern socialist components have been artificially created within the constitution. The legalization of the income tax for example, which original Republicans held as an unconstitutional. New Deal policies were also artificially made constitutional by FDR's supreme court. In a different time any one of FDR's policies would have been struck down.

Income tax and the 17th amendment were the beginning of the end for this country

I perfectly summed up this whole thread in 10 seconds.

Pure socialism is stupid, because there is no natural incentive to work. Pure free-market capitalism is stupid, because there is nothing to stop uncompetitive collusion and exploitation. The only proper economic system is somewhere between the two. Most people agree with this, they just disagree on where between the two is the optimal position. By the way, does anyone actually think Obama is a communist? Hell, Bernie Sanders isn't even a proper communist!


Also, to respond to Jai, for me, a government should ensure that its citizens can live safely. Some programs enable those who cannot work (due to a physical disability or another problem) to do something other than beg and/or starve to death. I happen to think that these programs are a good thing (yay not starving!) but these programs are a form of socialism. If we go all the way to communism, there is no incentive to work, which would be terrible. So I would in no way advocate communism, but I think certain socialist policies are very good things.

Finally, to respond to ripper, why would you assume he's communist when he claims he likes socialism. By that logic, you support a smaller government, so I'll decide you're an anarchist. Or, anyone who says they have a religion can be assumed to be a Muslim terrorist who's trying to kill you.

"Wait, that's the Pope I just killed in 'self defense'? How can you blame me, he didn't specify his religion!"

Edited 1/23/2016 02:43:36

Free market capitalism has the best track record. With which policies do you agree Pierr?

Edited 1/23/2016 02:40:45

I agree with facets of each ideology. Free market capitalism tempered by socialist policies will always produce a better result than either pure free-market or communist polices alone, in my opinion.

Some programs enable those who cannot work (due to a physical disability or another problem) to do something other than beg and/or starve to death

Yeah okay this I agree with. If you have a legitimate mental, physical, or physiological disability that prevents someone from working full-time or in complete capacity I would support social safety nets to provide them an adequate standard of living. Other than though, the entitlement programs of the US are highly bloated.

... steal from the rich it's criminal. But stealing from the poor? That's capitalism.” - Jacob Frye (Assassin's Creed Syndicate).

such ebin maymay sirsalty. muh vidya quotes such deep filosofy. Also if they're poor then how did the wealthy become wealthy by stealing from them? wouldn't they become middle class? Also in what way are the wealthy stealing from people? Are they sneaking into peoples houses at night and taking shit. Because statistics show that poor people are more likely to steal.

Edited 1/23/2016 02:56:57

English motherfucker do you speak it ?