Socialism for Dummies (right-wingers PLEASE watch for the love of god)

[ilaughatrightwingers]

Run time: 04:25 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f6yAp5UDMio   Posted on YouTube: May 27, 2010 By YouTube Member: MaoistRebelNews2 Views on YouTube: 1050   Posted on DU: September 25, 2010 By DU Member: ilaughatrightwingers Views on DU: 833

 
This is for all the people who don't understand what "socialism" (in the marxist sense) really is.

[wuvuj]

1. Pretty simplistic?

What he doesn't account for is that even with socialism....and like with a bucket of milk under a cow...the sh*t still rises to the top and tend to take more than their share.

But at least maybe the free invisible hand of capitalism...(free to steal in secret?)...is kept under check? But the invisible hands of socialist bosses need to get their cut though?

[ilaughatrightwingers]

2. We need

Instead of showing how much the government takes from your income in taxes, you should be told how much surplus value is taken from you by the boss. Maybe then we'd have a revolution by now.

[izquierdista]

3. That's why people get paid by the hour

Very difficult to calculate out surplus value for someone stocking store shelves or any non-manufacturing type activity. Even in manufacturing, the assembly line has made it so no one worker labors to make a finished product. If workers (and their unions) concentrate on hourly pay scales and benefits packages, the management can slide a whole lot of excess value past them.

[ilaughatrightwingers]

4. It's not just wages

In socialism, workers control their workplaces democratically. Under capitalism the workplace is controlled by the boss. Even if service jobs add little to no value to commodities a socialist system would ensure they are able to manage their workplace without the boss and have much more autonomy.

[wuvuj]

5. Somebody needs to get real...

...and do research on the few companies where the workers own them...and attempt to find out how much it really costs to run a company and how much of the profits the workers could fairly share? Probably been done to some extent.

[activa8tr]

6. Sorry, overly simplistic and contrived. Leaving out

much of the real and eventual costs.

State ownership of the profits does not guarantee an equitable distribution of them for the benefit of all, just as private ownership CERTAINLY does not either. A modified socialist/capitalist mix provides greater insurance of checks upon each, as long as both state and private ownership stay relatively equal in power to influence and jointly control. The problem in the USA, (unlike other mixed socialist/capitalist western democracies) is that the private ownership model has been given much greater power and influence over the balancing of the mix. A most recent example is the Supreme Court deciding that corporations have unlimited powers of free speech with their dollars in political campaigns, (again, unlike other modern democratic states in Canada, Europe, etc.)

Private capitalism DOES SERVE a purpose in modern democratic and free nations. The problem comes when their powers become too oppressive, gutting the abilities of the people in the democracy to control their nation's destiny through reasonable policies of taxation and setting of national priorities. This is exactly the battleground we see this fall in the "Bush tax cuts" debate, with big industry and billionaires fighting to keep the tax cuts permanent.

By and large, progressive Democrats understand these concepts and issues, and have a reasonable plan to balance private capitalist greed against the real needs of the average worker people. By and large, Republicans simply don't have a clue, and that includes all the Tea bagger folks, who are secretly funded (and made to fear socialism) by big money capitalists.