socialism

[Acebass]

By definition it is not all that bad but, like with capitalism, it's the human element that screws it up...


socialism


general term for the political and economic theory that advocates a system of collective or government ownership and management of the means of production and distribution of goods. Because of the collective nature of socialism, it is to be contrasted to the doctrine of the sanctity of private property that characterizes capitalism. Where capitalism stresses competition and profit, socialism calls for cooperation and social service.

http://education.yahoo.com/reference/encyclopedia/entry/socialis

[sam sarrha]

1. the worst aspects of Socialism.. are just anti socialism propaganda

unless we embrace socialism and work hard to make it work ..we are doomed

it is the capitalists that are afraid of socialism.. it is a much better system.

like public water, sewer, police, fire depatrments.. public schools, librarys, ya know all the good things in life..

Capitalism is victim an inherent phenomenon.. the Iron Law of Oligarchy.. = vested interests always take over and it becomes a Plutocracy and Democracy then ends in a Fascist takeover. there is no way to avoid it, this is what is happening right now.

[Acebass]

5. "Public it's our's/Private it's theirs"...

Creed kills all!...

I'm reading "The Fox In The Hen House" this is an awesome book...

It crazy how we let them turn our opinions with catch phrases. People hear you talk about socialism and they thing your some kind of wierdo...It's the concept people, the key is everyone has to be on board!...

[JanMichael]

35. Thank you. What you've stated is true. For one the Russian Revolution...

...was attacked and sabotaged by Capitalist nations AND Trotskities (Which is documented by an American who was employed to help get the mining industry going again).

This went on for the first couple of decades after the Revolution which empowered Stalin. This helped nobody and hurt everybody.

I'll take cooperation (without exploitation) over competition (With exploitation) any day.

[Acebass]

39. Well said!...

[lvx35]

2. We can see the fruits of belligerent capitalism today.

I was reading the CIA world fact book last night. Did you know that communist China has 10% of their population below the poverty line, while we have 12%? And here we are owing them zillions of dollars, with them about to surpass as as the #1 economic superpower, sitting around talking about what a failure communist/socialist systems are...Ever get the feeling you've been had?

[Zynx]

4. China is not a Communist nation anymore.

It keeps the name, but its economic policies are much closer to fascist now with a free market economic system producing enormous profits for government cronies.

[TomClash]

9. Ding! Ding! Ding! Ding! Ding!

We have a winner! :thumbsup: :hi:

[lvx35]

10. But it is!

That's just the thing. The Communist party controls China in fact and in deed. I'm certainly not saying they are somebody we want to be just like, but the tenants of socialism are in place: Strong centralized government, social services, etc. Economic policies are in place to keep wealth in China, while in the USA economic policies let large corporations outsource all their work just for the personal benifits of the CEO, putting a lot of money into the hands of foreign workers and bleeding wealth from America! If we want to compete with China we need to take the strengths of their system and leave the bad stuff behind.

[Zynx]

14. Ha!

According to 1998 data, the top 10% control 30.4% of the income and the bottom 10% have 2.4%. That's almost as bad as it is here. Some socialist country that is. It's corporations are structured almost exactly the same way they are here except that they are nominally government owned. China is not some worker's paradise or a socialist model. If anything it is almost the perfect model of a fascist state:

1. Intensely nationalistic
2. Strong Central Government
3. Severely limited human rights
4. Large military
5. Capitalistic economic system controlled by party bosses

Every segment of fascism is in place except for the name.

[lvx35]

31. I don't buy the fascism bit.

Let me ask, who is it that has invaded two countries that weren't attacking us this century? Who belligerently waved flags and cheered while it happened? Who has military spending so big that it dwarfs Chinas though they are 1/4th the size? Who set a human rights example by advocating torture to the world? US, that's who...so don't you think the pot is calling the kettle black here?

But you are right with points 2 and 5, I want to make my point regarding what I think we should learn from China:

China: Powerful market players subject to control of nation state to ensure they serve the interests of the nation state.

America: Powerful market players CONTROLLING the nation state to ensure they serve the interests of the powerful market players.

There is a huge difference here. We've got two oil company CEOs in the white house, and American troops fighting for the interests of big oil in Iraq while americans get GOUGED at the pump by the same companies. Corporate control is NOT helping the welfare of members of the American nation, while control of the market by the nation state does appear to be helping the people of china in a big way. Maybe we should take some notes! :)

But maybe you're right; the proof is in the pudding here. China having a smaller percent people below the poverty line is an indicator of a trend...and if a trend were to contine where china achieved a higher standard of living than us, higher healthcare etc while economically whipping our ass and being involved in 0 agressive wars, then why should be sit around on our asses in our warmongering banana republic bitching about them?

[Zynx]

48. Oh yes, because I want to be sooooo like China.

Yeah. That's the ticket. Their economic growth is only possible because of the massive amount of foreign investment they receive from our companies and investors. They would not invest in China at such a rate unless the government was very very friendly to business, which it is.

[JanMichael]

36. True to a point and probably the end result of Deng's policies.

There are still efforts to create sustainable cooperatives but the State Capitalists have the power and they won't relent.

[rucky]

71. sounds familiar. n/t

[Acebass]

8. On a daily basis!...n/t

[long_green]

3. We say things like "it's the human element that screws it up"

because we live under a system where the worst elements of humanity are catered to.

Let's change to a system that embraces the best of us. Then, we can criticize capitalism by saying "it's inhuman."

[Acebass]

7. Greed is their creed!...

Capitalism depends on it!...

[mntleo2]

6. Socialism IS Here ~ For The Rich

...the only difference between real socialism such as what they have in Europe is that they are a democratic socialism so EVERYONE benefits, while here only the rich benefit. We pay the taxes, they benefit from and spend it.

My 2 cents

Cat In Seattle

[Acebass]

11. Thanks...but you can keep the 2 cents...

you'll need every penny for gas!...

[converted_democrat]

81. You are soooo on the mark.. Look at the oil industry as a perfect

example.. They get billions of tax dollars for research and development, and huge tax breaks at a time that they are making record profits.. They socialize the cost, and privatize the profits..

[Warpy]

12. Socialism can work but is slow to respond to changing demand

While demand changes slowly in things like health care and municipal water and the electrical grid and law enforcement, socialism does a good job. However, the centrally planned consumer goods manufacturing we've seen in some socialist experiments produced clunky, shoddy and just plain unfashionable goods. Capitalism does a much better job of responding to things that change quickly, like clothing fashions. A mixed system is the best, offers the greedy the lure of capitalism and the lazy the illusion that little will be expected from them in the public sector. As one system fails to provide what the public needs (like capitalism and our failed healthcare system), it can be moved into the other.

This is a messy system, one size will never fit all, and nothing is ever written into stone. However, it also doesn't depend on the perfection of the human race to work.

[Zynx]

15. Capitalism is the most powerful economic engine ever tested.

Deng found that out and put it in place in China because Maoist Communism was such a massive failure.

The question is what you do to regulate it and make sure massive inequities don't develop.

[Acebass]

18. Capitalism is the answer...

Only to those who can afford it...You see it happening everyday. Captialism only serves the wealthy, like a pyramid scheme those who got in first win...

With money you can buy enough free speech to brain wash anyone...

[Zynx]

30. That's why it must be regulated and significant taxes must be put in place

[Iris]

42. but to many who espouse capitalism, taxes are socialist.

They don't want to pay taxes. That's the whole point. They believe taxes are a dis-incentive.

[Acebass]

61. Taxes are an investment in our country...

so far the controllers of those investment funds have mismanaged things...we can correct that this November!...


Vote...often!... :)

[TahitiNut]

13. Many Americans prefer antisocialism.

:eyes:

[Acebass]

16. It's because they don't really understand the ideology...

Socialism in it's purest form is what our constitution is bases on. The government running the country, and the people running the government...

It's just when you mix in greed that things get so screwed up...If the capitalist of big business could look at social programs as beneficial, and realize that there are things, for moral reasons, that you shouldn't make a profit on...

I feel about capitalism like Norquist feels about government. It should be small enough to put in a tiny box and only brought out when nessesary...

[TahitiNut]

23. Antisocial Personality DIsorder is an Axis II mental condition in DMS-IV.

:shrug: It's a GOP constituency, too.

[rman]

50. Most Americans prefer govt funded social programs,

such as universal healthcare - it is exactly those kinds of programs that are decried by the RW as being socialist.

[Acebass]

56. I just can't figure it out...

All these countries around us have universal health care in one form or the other...
I work at a big hospital, we buy from countries that have universal health care...
If there is something inherently wrong with their health care systems, but they can provide for their countries needs then why don't we all sit down and figure out what's wrong with them and devise a plan to fix it (as long as it's not privatizing it).

[ProgressivePatriot]

17. May I direct you to a site??

Take a look at the Democratic Socialists, of which, I am a proud member.

http://www.dsausa.org/dsa.html

[Acebass]

19. Thank you so much...

I've bookmarked that for later...

[happydreams]

20. How about Democratic Socialism?

Socialism is simply the people's control over the means of production. Seems to me like a logical extension of political democracy--people control of politics (ideally that is).

[Acebass]

25. First we have to seperate Business from Government...

Government should operate for the benefit of the masses and at times in direct conflict with business...

[DTinAZ]

26. Democratic Socialists of America

Here's a link:

http://www.dsausa.org

"The Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) is the largest socialist organization in the United States, and the principal U.S. affiliate of the Socialist International."

I'm considering joining.

DT

[Acebass]

34. Someone else gave me that link too...

I like the idea and am looking into it...

[Acebass]

40. I put a link over at "The Switch" too...n/t

[happydreams]

77. Thanks for the link. Its strange how the Right paints Socialism

as somehow anti-democratic when in fact it has its own specifically democratic version. :crazy:

[rucky]

72. It's a myth that they're mutually exclusive. n/t

[deutsey]

75. That would be me. Funny how in the US, DS is never mentioned as being

part of the political spectrum.

It's either American capitalism or or Soviet communism.

[happydreams]

78. Exactly. The myth of a dichotomy and how it serves the power

elite is most interesting. Whenever Communism is brought up it evokes images of Gulags which is actually Sovietism. But you never hear about the crimes of the corporatists in quite the same way.

[Jigarotta]

21. socialism is only allowed for the northern hemisphere.

those brown people down there ( the ones with the resources that the norde salivate over) are communists or terrorists. always an 'ist'.

[0007]

44. Isn't that the truth?

[rman]

51. Socialism in northern hemisphere is being broken down though;

privitization of healthcare, threats of privitization of social security, etc.

[Jigarotta]

76. true, it was only a matter of time before our 'turn'. nt

[tkmorris]

22. A hybrid system seems the answer

Anything that is a basic human need should be socialized, at least at it's lowest level. Capitalism works best for "wants", things you don't NEED, but desire to have.

Health care, housing, food (for basic subsistence), transportation, and so forth are examples of things that should all be socialized to some degree.

[Acebass]

27. It would put us on equal footing with the rest of the world...

Right now as with the Reagan years, the economy is good only because the rich are making money...
With money comes power, and that power must be controled and monitored...

A person should never be allowed to use capitalism to achieve power, thats why if someone is able to sell something at a huge profit benefiting from the capitalistic part of our society they should be taxed for it in order to support the social programs...

[tkmorris]

29. Couldn't agree more

And will add that not taxing ridiculously large inheritances is profoundly stupid. How exactly does Paris Hilton benefit society again?

[Acebass]

33. Oh thats a subject in itself...

Did you know just 18 families are pushing to repeal the estate tax...we can't let that happen!...

[1932]

54. Things, the delivery of which isn't improved by compeition, seem

to be better provided through the government.

LIke, for example, train transportation. It would be a waste of resources to lay two or three train tracks next to each other, and if you only have one, the owner has a monopoly. It seems best to have the government provide the train tracks and, perhaps, the communter trains, so that an effective rail system can be run as a way to make other parts of the private economy more fruitful.

Also, private health care doesn't make so much sense to me. If the health industry needs sick people to make money, but society needs healthy people to make other parts of the economy as fruitful as possible, it seems to me that competion can't really be the mechanism for delivering health care. The incentive would have to be to have as FEW sick people as possible (and, therefore, to make it unprofitable) if you wanted the best functioning society and economy.

[Acebass]

58. Why do I have 5 waste removal companies vying for my business...

Coming through my neighborhood stinking up the place , can't get around for all the garbage trucks, when one municipal company would do!...

[1932]

62. Yes. How does competition improve garbage collection?

And couldn't those wasted resources be put to much better use?

[Acebass]

66. They could all have a job I would assume...

It's not that the waste doesn't need to be picked up...
once a week by one truck would be fine, then the public could also have a say in how it was disposed of at the source...
I've just got this vision of all those garbage companies stashing all our refuse somehwere illigal and one day, like "Ghost Busters" the grid's going to overload and then what...

[Acebass]

24. What people don't understand is ...

With a socialist society we would have Universal Health care, We would own our utilities and life's necessities. I wouldn't be pissed because some German company owns my Gas and Lights and just upped my bill 60%.

Those services we depend on for our lives would be there for us, and not controlled by their market value...

If you must experiment with capitalism do it with frisbees or hula hoops...

[Xithras]

28. The answer to the problems of capitalism is more capitalism

I heard Robert F Kennedy Jr make a speech once, and he made that point well. The problem with our current system is that it really isn't capitalistic. We currently privatize the profits of industry, but we socialize the costs.

The answer isn't to socialize everything, it's to make sure that those taking the profits actually PAY the true costs of any damage that their profiteering generates. If someone wants to cut a forest, make sure they replant an equally diverse forest in its place. If they want to build a factory, make sure they are capturing and filtering out any pollutants they generate. If they want to lay off 5,000 workers, make they pay the cost of retraining and re-employing those people. We don't need the GOVERNMENT to do it, we need to make sure that those making the profits are properly paying for any damage they are causing. Our current system of privatizing profit and socializing costs is damaging to our environment and our society.

[Acebass]

32. Thats not a bad concept...

However socializing basic needs for human existence is essential...my freezing to death because it's not economically feasible to heat my home is not acceptable...

[Xithras]

41. Oh, I'm not saying that everything should be privatized.

I have no problem with municipally controlled resources AS LONG AS private companies are permitted to compete with them. My beef with socialized countries like France is that it's practically impossible to launch any kind of meaningful competition against the state-controlled industries. If your city or state wants to offer some kind of government service that brings heating fuel into your home, I have no problem with that. If Joe down the street figures out how to offer you the same service for half the price, he should be able to do that too.

[Acebass]

43. True...as long as that is a fixed price...

and not the ol bait and switch...I would like to think we as a society could come up with innovative ideas within a socialist based environment...
Greed is the driving force in capitalism and invariable it's downfall...

[Xithras]

45. Greed is the driving force in corporatism, not capitalism.

One of the big problems I see with many on our side of the political fence today is that many on the left confuse capitalism and corporatism. Capitalism is NOT inherently about greed. Capitalism is about the pooling of resources to create beneficial entities and products that wouldn't otherwise be possible. Capitalism is about free competition and reasonable profit. We've lived in a corporatist society so long, though, that most people don't seem to know the difference anymore.

The problem we see today is excessive profit-taking, and it ISN'T capitalistic. In a truly capitalistic society, any company attempting to greedily gouge its customers would quickly be overthrown by competitors offering the same products at lower prices. In a free market capitalistic system, greed is kept in check by competition.

The problem we have today is corporatism. In corporatism, the law actually REQUIRES those running it to make as much profit as possible. If Corporation X begins gouging customers and competing Corporation Y refuses to do the same, the shareholders can throw the CEO of corporation Y out of office and have him criminally charged because he is deliberately undermining the shareholders profits. Even worse, if Corporation X really wants to dominate the market, they merely need to buy all the shares to Corporation Y and take it over. The concept of competition keeping prices in check goes out the window under this corporatist model.

What we have in the US today is corporatism, not capitalism. To return to a fair capitalist society, we need to:

A) Prohibit corporations from owning one another. This actually WAS illegal for a long time, but pocket lining corporatists got the law changed.

B) Force corporations to internalize all business costs. No subsidies, no leaving messes for taxpayers, no government bailouts, no polluting.

C) Revoke corporate personhood. It's a travesty that corporations get the same rights that citizens do.

Do these, and you'll break the back of corporatism...returning capitalism to its rightful place. Capitalism is the most efficient means to create new industry and jobs, and genuine capitalism ban be both benevolent and GOOD for society.

[Acebass]

52. This is true, but...

With capitalism you will have stock holders, there's no way that the common man, in this day and age, can accrue the captital needed to go into business, and that pressure coupled with greed will always be it's downfall...

Without restrictions and monitoring Capitalism will always be driven by greed the key is to keep it in check...

Capitalism and social services don't mix at all. Thats why governement should serve the masses even if in direct conflict with business...

[Solon]

46. That makes no sense...

From a logical point of view, muninciple control of local utilities is REQUIRED for a simple reason, they are "natural" monopolies, you could, theoritically, have 2-3 Natural Gas, Water or Power Companies compete for the same neighborhood, but do you really want 2-3 times the amount of Pipes or lines required to go under your home or above your roof? No of course not, that's why deregulation and privatization is so BAD, monopolies HAVE no competition, so most cities and counties do it in one of two ways. The first is total ownership by the town or county that the utility services, and the second is partially owned by the government, and partially owned by independent investors, with a limit put on profits. The oddball that is somewhat new are utility co-ops, which are utility companies that are literally owned by their customers and employees, usually set up as either total non-profits or a cap put on profits. My grandmother is a member of one of these, gets cut a check every December because they keep on being below budget.

[Acebass]

59. My gas and electric company is owned by a German co...

I saw the other day where they were messing around trying to buy Spains electric, now I know that to a robber barron that looks like good business but to us citizens it's not helping lower my utility bill...

The things that we need to support our lives and livleyhood should be owned and controled by the people who depend on them!...

[Solon]

80. Heck, check out what happened in my area...

OK, to give the lay of the Land, my City is about 30 miles from St. Louis, a city of about 120,000 people or so. The Missouri River separates us from St. Louis county and city. We had our own muninciple/county owned gas company, St. Charles Gas, St. Louis has a "Mixed" Gas company Laclede Gas, the number two example in the post above. OK, a few years ago, my city sold off St. Charles Gas Company to Laclede, at around the same time, St. Louis city voted to deregulate Laclede, relaxing the rules on Profit margins, stuff like that. The result is the doubling of prices for everyone in the area, across the board, PER YEAR.

We lost local control of our Gas Utility company entirely, we can't vote with our dollars, unless we want to freeze to death during the winter, and our city and county has little control over them. The most they could probably do is buy back our utility, there are no lines shared between Laclede/St. Louis, and Laclede/St. Charles because of Geography, no one would build a pipeline beneath the Missouri River, its too damned big and would be expensive. This is but one example of deregulation, and what the loss of local control will happen to a local monopoly. Fuck taking private contractors for this stuff, they would act WORST than Laclede does now, and St. Louis, under pressure from its own people, are trying to reassert control over Laclede.

[KingFlorez]

37. Nothing works with bad leaders

Socialism only works with freedom and democratic principals along with good management.

[Acebass]

38. We can fix that this fall!...n/t

[adwon]

47. It wouldn't work anyway

If America magically became a socialist republic overnight, would there really be a fundamental change? Sure, you'd have some bread and circuses in the form of various social benefits, but would there any change to the leadership? Nope. In this brave new world, class distinctions would endure for the simple reason that they predate the system. There's no radical change involved, just the same cast of characters with different job titles. Why? Unless one sets out to change the actual social system to a meritocracy, all that results is a bunch of Ivy League grads calling each other 'comrade' instead of 'Mr.'

Rather than chase a silver bullet fantasy, I'd suggest thinking of ways to change the informal byways of society. Ban legacy preferences at any schools that accept federal funds. Perhaps a tertiary-level voucher system with rigorously enforced tuition and cost-of-living caps...link it to acceptance of federal funds; if the school receives them, the government sets the price it can charge. The fundamental difference between schools on the university level is name recognition and money (both endowments and cost). Chip away at those differences and it may become possible to level out the ridiculous differences in prestige which continue to plague us.

Somewhat ironically, I'm thinking of a former professor of mine who idolized Gramsci while I write this. I suspect that changing the informal means rather than the formal means would be a lot more effective in producing a meritocratic society. I realize that meritocracy doesn't necessarily fit into this discussion, but it's always been the ideal in my mind.

[Acebass]

55. I disagree...

I believe we start with Health care, and work toward our utilities and anything that works for the publics good and welfare. Once we have this in place and indoctrinated to think about public good instead of profit and lose then we can let the capitalism animal out to see how they react, but you keep them on a short leash so you can rein them in if they start trouble...

I do agree that if federal funds are used there should be no discrimination as to how they are dispersed. In fact I believe that if your business is for profit you shouldn't get any public funds.

[adwon]

74. You missed my point

I'm not talking about capitalism vs socialism or any other ism. The same people who have power, at any level and in any form, today would be the same holding such power if all you do is change the veneer of government. You can throw health care and the rest at the lower strata, but how have you affected their chances to rise to the highest stratum?

Let me try an analogy. You can decide to call your dog a cat, but will that label change stop the dog from chewing your shoes and pissing on the carpet? Changing the name doesn't change the nature.

[Blue_State_Elitist]

49. Socialism implies a complete turn of the wheel.

Nearly every aspect of society as we know it would have to change to a certain degree, most importantly education and socialization. Instead of being taught to respect the value of money, people would instead be raised to respect the value of societal cooperation and to work for the benefit of the nation as a whole. Socialism, in theory, works perfectly under these conditions, but whether it could ever happen in the US short of absolute economic collapse as a result of capitalism's contradictions is a different story.

[Acebass]

53. We are not far from that collapse now...

The facade is that the economy is going great and everyone is prospering...LIE!...

[Walt Disney]

57. In a perfect world, socialism would be the way to go.

After all, isn't that what they have in heaven? :)

But since this ain't heaven, I have to go with capitalism. Because in an imperfect world, the best we can do is choose the economic system most compatible with freedom.

[LiberalPartisan]

65. I'm with you.

I'm an unapologetic capitalist - a democratic capitalist if you will - meaning I believe in the necessesity of government regulation to compel business to behave in a manner consistent with democratic ideals. Unfettered capitalism is an unteneble system in the long run and one that must collapse due to its own excesses.

[Walt Disney]

82. Yes, the government must make every effort to make the playing

field level and keep the players honest. Still, the benefits of competitive capitalism far outweigh the occasional Enron or Worldcom scandals.

[Acebass]

68. Capitalism isn't freedom...

In some cases, such as "For Profit Prisons", it's actually slave labor...

[Walt Disney]

84. In government run prisons the people being incarcerated are not free

either. Moreover, I really don’t have a problem with requiring prisoners to work. Anything that helps offset the cost of institutionalization should be considered part of repaying their debt to society.

On the other hand, if you are concerned about the treatment of prisoners, you should have a look at how they are treated in communist China.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/4921116.stm

http://www.american.edu/TED/prisonorgans.htm

[Canadiana]

60. A socialist world

could be eutopian and amazing in many ways. However it will never happen. Humans are still animals and nearly all our goals stem from an inherent desire to pass down our genes and have our offspring do the same. This means more money, protect YOUR family, more power etc. I'm not saying it's morally right...perhaps we will evolve beyond this. But our animal instincts still manifest themselves in a selfish way. It's too bad but it's true.

[Acebass]

64. I can relate...

However I believe that if we keep that window open and strive to reach it we stand a better chance of making it...

Motivation for me is striving for your dreams with no regard to your reality...


"Some may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one. I hope some day you'll join us, and the world will live as one!"...

[ima_sinnic]

67. animal instincts include cooperation, sharing, and "altruism"

studies of Florida Jays, I believe, found that some young birds would delay flying from the nest until all siblings had gone, they would help raise their own siblings and then depart. This helps to ensure maximum survival of all. Primates stay in groups and rear children together, food is shared, etc. Crows call other crows when they find food, etc. etc. Primitive humans lived together in clans and worked together to find food, and shared what they had.

[Acebass]

69. Mankind is the only species that Kills and Screws for fun...

that could say a lot about it...LOL

[Canadiana]

70. True

The things you listed were not true altrusim though. Altruism is actually doing something detrimental to YOURSELF in order to help someone else. You were speaking more of mutualism. Altruism does happen in nature, but rarely.

Male lions actually kill cubs so they can get their female mate pregnant quicker. As another poster said, humans are worse in the way that some hurt for fun.

Either way, after studying the biology of sex...it seems that's what it all comes down to sadly. Passing on genes. It can explain many, many things in this world. (Not 'evil' acts though...eg. sexual abuse).

Have you ever seen two gigantic male sea lions fight for dominance? It is one of the most violent scenes in nature I have ever seen.

[killbotfactory]

63. A mixed economy seems to be the way to go

Give democratic control over necessities, and ease that control over things which aren't.

Things that are basic necessities (like heatlh care) shouldn't be run by people who put profit over all other considerations, the result of which ends up being people dieing for no reason other than poverty. Things that aren't (like most entertainment) it doesn't matter, no one is going to die because they can't afford to see a new movie.

Frankly, anyone who has a problem with paying taxes to help old people live in dignity, have their neighbor get treated by a doctor, or help pay for the kid down the street to receive an education is a short-sighted asshole.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_socialism

[Greyhound]

79. Agreed. n/t

[Acebass]

73. It could be a metaphor ...

or the words of 'Chancy Gardner'... :)

Unrestrained greed means the ruin of the great woods and the drying up of the sources of the rivers.

– Theodore Roosevelt, on clear-cutting of forests, while governor of New York, quoted in his biography Theodore Rex by Edmund Morris (2001)

[mdmc]

83. yes