Socialism would be great

[Syrinx]

Everyone gets necessities. And you can get rich! Merry Christmas!

[Steepler0t]

1. I am so sick of that word being so looked down upon in ignorance in this country

Some things never change


but



Some Socialism sounds great as long as it is transparent Democratic and accountable to us.

Merry Christmas!

[aikoaiko]

10. self-delete

edited to add: sorry, I meant to reply to the original poster.

[SanCristobal]

15. That is an awsome old-timey picture,

I saved that to the picture folder as soon as I saw it.

[tblue]

34. Yeah, that is awesome! Too bad so few Americans get it.

[SoCalDem]

17. Word-smiths & propagandists have ruined the word

True socialism "could" work (in theory), but in practice, it has usually morphed into something else.

Human nature pretty much dictates that anyone who rises to the top of ANY organization will have a fair amount of ego and guile...or they would not have risen to the top..

Along the way, their plan often change, and once they arrive that that "power seat" ,it's usually not long before they start looking after numero uno and the close friends & family first. Once that happens, it's over for the rest of the people.

In the US, socialism had to be attached to ANY populist movement in order to scare the moneyed class, and the people who were not paying that much attention. By demonizing the philosophy, and holding up a few radicals for scrutiny, they cast aspersions on the whole idea.

There are still people today who view trade unions as 'socialist'. It's no accident that communinsm is often used interchangeably with socialism, even though they are not the same at all. People don't like things they don't understand, even if the unknown could be the best thing they could have.

[proud2BlibKansan]

2. I don't know about the rich part

[rman]

5. how about,

we'd be not poor.



Year End Report On Global Inequality
Deeply Unequal World
Sam Pizzigati | December 20, 2006
Editor: Emily Schwartz Greco, IPS
Foreign Policy In Focus
www.fpif.org

Some people, at year's end, like to spread holiday cheer. The world might do better, suggests a landmark new report from the United Nations University in Helsinki, to start spreading wealth. The new study--the first ever to tally, for the entire world, all the major elements of household wealth, everything from financial assets and debts to land, homes, and other tangible property--finds some $125.3 trillion worth of wealth about in the world, as of the year 2000.

If that wealth were divided in perfectly equal shares among all the world’s 3.7 billion adults, every adult on Earth would hold a net worth of just under $34,000 in U.S. dollars, according to The World Distribution of Household Wealth report.

Most Wealth in Few Pockets

In real life, says this new report, released by the United Nations University’s World Institute for Development Economics Research, half the world’s adults hold under one-tenth that modest sum, less than $2,161. The vast bulk of the world’s wealth, the study observes, sits “highly concentrated” in the pockets of a relative few. How concentrated? The richest 5 percent of the world’s adults--minimum net worth, $150,145--hold 70.6 percent of the world’s wealth. The richest 1 percent--minimum wealth, $514,512--hold 39.9 percent of the world's wealth all by themselves, 13,000 times more than the entire bottom 10 percent.

<snip>

Super-Rich Not Counted

How accurately do all these global numbers reflect the actual distribution of the world’s household wealth? If anything, notes the UN University study authors, their report understates just how unequal the world’s wealth distribution has become. Their base survey data, they explain, “do not reflect the holdings of the super-rich.”

<snip>

Governing for the Elite

Governments that reflect these extreme inequalities in power, the World Bank economist added, tend to govern not in the public interest, but in the interest of wealthy elites.

<snip>

http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/3819

[Hippo_Tron]

3. I'm a firm believer in a mixed socialist/free market system

And I have no problem calling it socialism if people want it.

The free market has the potential to create great wealth for a nation. The problem is that alone the free market does a horrible job of distributing it, especially since people are not angels and are inherently interested in themselves first. In the era of corporations, socialism is necessary to preserving the middle class. The middle class was the driving force behind the French Revolution and has been essential in the creation and preservation of pretty much every liberal democracy in history.

[John Q. Citizen]

4. Yep, a mixed market works very well for the most people . We need to return.

[eridani]

20. The issue of ownership of the means of production--

--has no actual relationship to planned vs. market economies. I'm not in favor of state ownership--I think that everyone should own his or her own means of production, whether as an individual or collectively.

[cool user name]

25. It's called free market socialism (or just socialism)

Most people make the mistake of thinking socialism has to be state planned or centralized. That's not true.

[Selatius]

32. People always confuse "free market" with the idea of "capitalism"

Capitalism and socialism are descriptors of the state of ownership of resources. In pure capitalist societies, the resources are owned by a few people. In pure socialist societies, the resources are owned by many people. Then there are an infinite number of combinations in between the two poles. Whether or not there is competition in the marketplace has no bearing on whether a country is socialist or capitalist in the distribution of resources. Just because a country is moving heavily towards socialism does not necessarily mean it is moving towards abolishing the free market. Anarchists and other libertarian socialists invariably push market socialism compared to state socialists.

[cool user name]

37. Thank you. See my post above.

[tblue]

40. And people say the French don't have the guts to fight

I don't see Americans pulling out the guillotine.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

6. My husband says

Capitalism looks great on paper, but it doesn't work in practice because of the greed of a few for unlimited wealth.

Communism looks great on paper, but it doesn't work in practice because of the greed of a few for unlimted power.

Socialism doesn't look so great on paper, but it works because it takes into account the greed that apparently is inherent in humankind.

[tblue]

41. Except for the enlightened, who try to transcend inherent greed

These are the heroes you read about in the history books. When was the last time someone
was called a hero for their capitalist/colonialist/free market exploiting ways?

[donsu]

7. yes, socialism is not a dirty word, neither is secular

nt

[brook]

8. I happened to see

Muhammad Yunus giving his acceptance speech for the Nobel Prize last night. He has the right idea on the balance between capitalism and socialism.

Here

[roamer65]

9. Managed capitalism is the ticket.

It's term I give to the mix of socialism and capitalism, for instance, in Venezuela. It's the best bet going forward.

[Hardpan]

30. yeap

[aikoaiko]

11. What would socialism mean for Americans -- just a tweaking of the tax rates

to fund a few more program?

:shrug:

[LZelig]

19. Power...

It would mean representation in congress for the average man, the average worker, instead of corporations buying and controlling the majority of politicians of both political parties. A stronger voice for the average American would lead to livable wages for all, affordable health insurance (not for profit), investment and jobs geared towards rebuilding America's infrastructure - public transportation, less dependence on fossil fuels - less funding for, and less emphasis on the military and related killing-machine industries, less abusive working conditions (slavery) throughout the global corporate world. In short, power/representation of the people, translates into real world funding of OUR interests. US, the people, the society (the socialists.)

[aikoaiko]

43. representation in congress for the average man, the average worker -- how so?

How would socialism change the type of representatives we have now?

[Solo_in_MD]

12. Socialism is clearly not an acceptable term in the US

but moreover, there is not a hi viz success that can be demonstrably understood by the C&W listening masses. Find one and the issue would be gone.

[roamer65]

23. Managed capitalism.

I have used "socialism" and gotten grimaces. I say the same things and call it "managed capitalism" and people agree and nod.

[Hardpan]

28. yeah, but isnt that what we have now?

[Selatius]

33. Somewhat, but we're moving towards laissez-faire capitalism now.

A report came out in the last couple of weeks, and it compared the US to Japan as well as the wealth concentration of the world. In relative terms, ordinary people had roughly the same purchasing power in the US and Japan; however, in Japan, the bottom 90 percent own 60 percent of the wealth of the country. In the US, the bottom 90 percent own just 30 percent of the wealth of the country.

[Cleita]

35. Laissez-faire isn't good.

I believe it leads to imperialism because the people at home aren't doing well, so they start trying to raid or conquer other nations and appropriate their assets.

[Hardpan]

26. Nope!

[Syrinx]

44. several examples in Western Europe

That's the area I would like to see the US emulate.

[mdmc]

13. peace and low stress

:kick:R

[Steepler0t]

14. "One of the most overlooked influences upon contemporary, Western, left-wing thought"

"Third Way"

Socialism that actually worked.

[Morgana LaFey]

22. The term has been polluted.

I don't know if it was ever a good one, or pure. But it's been used by fascists (Fascism is a Third Way between Capitalism and Communism), and by the obsessively corporatist DLCers including Clinton (whose particular brand of Third Way-ism stunk to high heaven, if you ask me) and other Neo-Liberals (esp. in Great Britain).

So I find myself nearly retching when confronted by the term as something we should embrace, or something in ANY way "good."

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

16. No Thanks.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

21. Oooga booga red menace! Sweden bad! Texas good!

[Name removed]

29. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[KingFlorez]

39. LOL

[baldguy]

18. We already have socialism.

It's just the large, multi-national corporations that benefit, though.

[Hardpan]

self delete

[Hardpan]

27. LOL!! So true !!

[roody]

24. I work in a socialist institution, public school.

I was educated in one too, public university. My best friend gets his health care in a socialist institution, VA medical.

[Cleita]

31. Isn't it weird that all the anti-commies don't realize that

the only reason we are a sort of literate society is because of the public education system and the fact that we have public libraries.

[baldguy]

36. The GOP tries to de-fund public libraries every chance they get.

And they've spent the last 30 yrs trying to end publicly-financed education.

[Cleita]

38. I know..............sigh!

[NoPasaran]

42. I grew up under socialism

I was an army brat. It was alright.