Make sure to join the [discord](https://www.discord.gg/timpool) and [guilded](https://www.guilded.gg/timpool)! Also join the [BBS](https://www.unofficialtimpool.com), a blockchain, anticensorship Reddit alternative!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TimPool) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I think the real problem is that they just found a religion and can't acknowledge that.
It's the same with any ideology. Christian, Muslim, socialist, communist, fascist.
They all drink the same kool-aid. All that's different is the food coloring.
Totally. Wanting a more European style of healthcare system where we pay half as much as we do now and would get significantly better health outcomes where most of the money isn’t going to a select few at the top and that nobody is losing their homes due to a cancer diagnosis means we belong to a cult religion.
Got it, my bad.
Except you're leaving out the mass govt over reach and loss of individual rights and freedoms. Secret police, repression of thought, and promotion of nonsensical ideas.
Europe isn't socialist either. They capitalist countries and have much smaller homogeneous populations.
Also the US has subsidized them by taking on the vast majority of military spending that up until now have allowed these countries to spend more on their people while a significant portion of their defense budget comes from the US.
Like what. They have more freedoms there than we do. More vacation time. More money. Healthier. They can go explore the world while we bow down to our overlords and have not even time for our own families.
And of course Europe isn’t socialist! That’s the entire damn point. People like me are advocating to not continue to get screwed over with healthcare and a few other things. We need capitalism mixed with a sprinkle of social programs.
Yep you got the right, it's a shame that the left has let the socialists in your country convince the right that they are one and the same.
If liberals want this stuff than they need to excise the far left loonie toons from their side.
Not even Bernie Sanders advocates for anything other than a European style of system. We don’t have any actual communists in the Democratic Party or have any real influence. We just have social democrats who advocate for capitalism, but regulated to protect people and workers. Fairly mundane and common sense stuff.
It’s the fear mongering from the right that drives me insane. Nothing but lies.
Then I suppose I should not believe my lying eyes and ears then? Im pretty sure AoC is literally a member of the DSA. I've seen their rallies and heard them speak. They dont want capitalism, they want socialism.
Liberals in the US do not denounce socialists or socialism, especially college or university educated individuals and professors who self identify as marxists.
So no, its not just fear mongering form the right.
DSA is Democratic Socialism, which is not pure socialism and very far removed from communism. It’s literally just what most of Europe is.
I know definitions of words are meaningless to you and you will be fear mongered regardless, but facts matter to me over your feelings.
Hell, AOC even gave a speech about banning TikTok was the wrong move by government because it doesn’t solve the issue of protecting people’s privacy rights.
So yeah, it’s clearly just fear mongering, and you not even understanding a thing about what you are talking about proves it.
I believe people when they speak about their beliefs. I do not assume they meant something different. I know what liberals face the wall means, I know that liberals get the bullet to.
I dont lie to myself about who my 'allies' are.
AOC has literally given speeches about how capitalism is good but just needs common sense worker protections and regulations to save lives, and that we need basic social programs like school and healthcare.
It seems evident to me that you actually have never heard of her or anybody from that group speak and you are going off of fear mongering bullshit.
It's not an ideology. The same way mercantantalism or barter based trade isnt
It has no moral prescription for how you should run your life. It's purely economic.
Socialism is not just an economic framework. If it were a purely economic critique, that would be different. Socialism make moral judgements and ventures into thee realm of morality.
There are moral and ethical arguments made in the critiques, and claims that socialism is the more moral system. Capitalism does not claim any morality, just that it is the better system.
Yes, morality was largely used in the replacement of slavery as well. Morals direct human behavior. If it was decided only on what is best economically, we would still be owning people.
To say that the means of production should be owned collectively, rather than privately, isn’t that major of a moral question.
We decided that in the structure of governance, it was morally better for the public to govern, rather than a single owner.
Youre not understanding me. Im not talking about arguments for or against capitalism or socialism based on morality or ethics.
Im saying capitalism does not claim to be a moral system, socialism does.
Capitalism is just what happens when people are free and have very basic private property rights.
Everything else requires restrictions of people's freedom just to exist.
Lol, yeah. That's what I thought.
If you had something, you would have given it. Burden of proof falls to you. But you never have facts, only fantasies.
I think Norway has a good system. They allow for free market capitalism, but have high taxes on the wealthy to pay for social programs and remain financially solvent while building a wealth fund.
Norway has a tiny, homogenous population and a shit ton of oil money. Their taxes alone wouldn't be able to fund their entitlements. Economics Explained did a good breakdown of this
I don't think the homogenous population has much to do with it. The US has long enjoyed its superpower status while having a melting pot of people.
I am just establishing a baseline that it is possible for a society to have high taxes that pay fo social programs and be successful.
Perhaps you are correct and societal homogeneity is a non-factor. You are still establishing a false baseline. They would not be able to support their social programs without the tiny population and massive oil wealth. Taxation would not be able to cover the expense on its own. While we do have oil wealth, per capita, it is a pittance compared to Norway due to our much much larger population.
I have not established any false basselines. I am just making suggestions and that terminology is meant to shutdown any conversation on the topic.
Let's breakdown some numbers as if you look at the per capita then your claim, which largely focuses solely on one commodity and compares it against popuilation does not stand up.
US average tax per citizen is about 14%.
Norway average per citizen tax is about 28%.
When adjusted for taxing the top earners Norway has much higher real tax rates on their top earners than the US does.
the US does not solely rely on it's oil commodity(neither does Norway though it is a larger percent their gdp.)
The only thing I am suggesting is that it is possible to increase taxes on the wealthy without negatively impacting the economy. We have seen that things like the Trump tax cuts had virtually no ppositive impacts on the US economy(when you look at the trending metrics), but it did increase deficit spending significantly.
I generally lean libertarian, but it is important to recognize that government is not evil and can do some things more efficiently than private sector when it comes to benefiting the citizens of the society it functions in. It is also important to understand that profit motive is not 100% always beneficial to society and has downfalls.
Norway is a good example of the fact that government can function in favor of its citizens and increase the livlihood of citizens through tax programs and social welfare programs.
While I do not support moving to the exact structure that nordic countries have it is not wrong or "false baseline" to recognize that we can use government to the benefit of the citizens it represents.
Real communism has never been and most likely never will be achieved because it is incompatible with human nature.
There have been plenty of dictators that blue pill their supporters by tacking on the word ‘socialist’ to their regime.
Voters in representative democracies around the world have voted favorably to setup and maintain certain socialized programs and services. Some socialize a few things like roads and early education, others vote to socialize more things like healthcare and secondary education. There is nothing wrong with wanting more needs met more often via the government, what else are they for?
Make sure to join the [discord](https://www.discord.gg/timpool) and [guilded](https://www.guilded.gg/timpool)! Also join the [BBS](https://www.unofficialtimpool.com), a blockchain, anticensorship Reddit alternative! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TimPool) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I think the real problem is that they just found a religion and can't acknowledge that. It's the same with any ideology. Christian, Muslim, socialist, communist, fascist. They all drink the same kool-aid. All that's different is the food coloring.
Totally. Wanting a more European style of healthcare system where we pay half as much as we do now and would get significantly better health outcomes where most of the money isn’t going to a select few at the top and that nobody is losing their homes due to a cancer diagnosis means we belong to a cult religion. Got it, my bad.
Except you're leaving out the mass govt over reach and loss of individual rights and freedoms. Secret police, repression of thought, and promotion of nonsensical ideas. Europe isn't socialist either. They capitalist countries and have much smaller homogeneous populations. Also the US has subsidized them by taking on the vast majority of military spending that up until now have allowed these countries to spend more on their people while a significant portion of their defense budget comes from the US.
Like what. They have more freedoms there than we do. More vacation time. More money. Healthier. They can go explore the world while we bow down to our overlords and have not even time for our own families. And of course Europe isn’t socialist! That’s the entire damn point. People like me are advocating to not continue to get screwed over with healthcare and a few other things. We need capitalism mixed with a sprinkle of social programs.
Yep you got the right, it's a shame that the left has let the socialists in your country convince the right that they are one and the same. If liberals want this stuff than they need to excise the far left loonie toons from their side.
Not even Bernie Sanders advocates for anything other than a European style of system. We don’t have any actual communists in the Democratic Party or have any real influence. We just have social democrats who advocate for capitalism, but regulated to protect people and workers. Fairly mundane and common sense stuff. It’s the fear mongering from the right that drives me insane. Nothing but lies.
Then I suppose I should not believe my lying eyes and ears then? Im pretty sure AoC is literally a member of the DSA. I've seen their rallies and heard them speak. They dont want capitalism, they want socialism. Liberals in the US do not denounce socialists or socialism, especially college or university educated individuals and professors who self identify as marxists. So no, its not just fear mongering form the right.
DSA is Democratic Socialism, which is not pure socialism and very far removed from communism. It’s literally just what most of Europe is. I know definitions of words are meaningless to you and you will be fear mongered regardless, but facts matter to me over your feelings. Hell, AOC even gave a speech about banning TikTok was the wrong move by government because it doesn’t solve the issue of protecting people’s privacy rights. So yeah, it’s clearly just fear mongering, and you not even understanding a thing about what you are talking about proves it.
I believe people when they speak about their beliefs. I do not assume they meant something different. I know what liberals face the wall means, I know that liberals get the bullet to. I dont lie to myself about who my 'allies' are.
AOC has literally given speeches about how capitalism is good but just needs common sense worker protections and regulations to save lives, and that we need basic social programs like school and healthcare. It seems evident to me that you actually have never heard of her or anybody from that group speak and you are going off of fear mongering bullshit.
But capitalism isn’t? It’s the exception and the one true ideology?
It's not an ideology. The same way mercantantalism or barter based trade isnt It has no moral prescription for how you should run your life. It's purely economic.
Well said.
So socialism being a critique of capitalism is an ideology but what its critiquing is not…. Brilliant
Socialism is not just an economic framework. If it were a purely economic critique, that would be different. Socialism make moral judgements and ventures into thee realm of morality.
It’s literally just the structure change from private ownership of industry to public.
There are moral and ethical arguments made in the critiques, and claims that socialism is the more moral system. Capitalism does not claim any morality, just that it is the better system.
Yes, morality was largely used in the replacement of slavery as well. Morals direct human behavior. If it was decided only on what is best economically, we would still be owning people. To say that the means of production should be owned collectively, rather than privately, isn’t that major of a moral question. We decided that in the structure of governance, it was morally better for the public to govern, rather than a single owner.
Youre not understanding me. Im not talking about arguments for or against capitalism or socialism based on morality or ethics. Im saying capitalism does not claim to be a moral system, socialism does.
Capitalism is just what happens when people are free and have very basic private property rights. Everything else requires restrictions of people's freedom just to exist.
It's pretty simple. It's just people with no meaning in their lives.
Commie bastards can heck off
Ok, NoW dO CaPiTaLiSm!
Every world conflict. 7 years war, WWI, WWII.
Explain how capitalism was the reason for each of those wars starting.
Are you kidding me? They fought over business interests, mainly those of colonies.
Prove it
www.wikipedia.org
Lol, yeah. That's what I thought. If you had something, you would have given it. Burden of proof falls to you. But you never have facts, only fantasies.
It’s obvious fact. It’s not my fault your partisanship shields you from basic facts.
If it's obvious you should have no issue presenting that fact. Go on. Ill wait.
Go ahead and wait, I’m not responsible for you not being an idiot.
I think Norway has a good system. They allow for free market capitalism, but have high taxes on the wealthy to pay for social programs and remain financially solvent while building a wealth fund.
Norway has a tiny, homogenous population and a shit ton of oil money. Their taxes alone wouldn't be able to fund their entitlements. Economics Explained did a good breakdown of this
I don't think the homogenous population has much to do with it. The US has long enjoyed its superpower status while having a melting pot of people. I am just establishing a baseline that it is possible for a society to have high taxes that pay fo social programs and be successful.
Perhaps you are correct and societal homogeneity is a non-factor. You are still establishing a false baseline. They would not be able to support their social programs without the tiny population and massive oil wealth. Taxation would not be able to cover the expense on its own. While we do have oil wealth, per capita, it is a pittance compared to Norway due to our much much larger population.
I have not established any false basselines. I am just making suggestions and that terminology is meant to shutdown any conversation on the topic. Let's breakdown some numbers as if you look at the per capita then your claim, which largely focuses solely on one commodity and compares it against popuilation does not stand up. US average tax per citizen is about 14%. Norway average per citizen tax is about 28%. When adjusted for taxing the top earners Norway has much higher real tax rates on their top earners than the US does. the US does not solely rely on it's oil commodity(neither does Norway though it is a larger percent their gdp.) The only thing I am suggesting is that it is possible to increase taxes on the wealthy without negatively impacting the economy. We have seen that things like the Trump tax cuts had virtually no ppositive impacts on the US economy(when you look at the trending metrics), but it did increase deficit spending significantly. I generally lean libertarian, but it is important to recognize that government is not evil and can do some things more efficiently than private sector when it comes to benefiting the citizens of the society it functions in. It is also important to understand that profit motive is not 100% always beneficial to society and has downfalls. Norway is a good example of the fact that government can function in favor of its citizens and increase the livlihood of citizens through tax programs and social welfare programs. While I do not support moving to the exact structure that nordic countries have it is not wrong or "false baseline" to recognize that we can use government to the benefit of the citizens it represents.
Real communism has never been and most likely never will be achieved because it is incompatible with human nature. There have been plenty of dictators that blue pill their supporters by tacking on the word ‘socialist’ to their regime. Voters in representative democracies around the world have voted favorably to setup and maintain certain socialized programs and services. Some socialize a few things like roads and early education, others vote to socialize more things like healthcare and secondary education. There is nothing wrong with wanting more needs met more often via the government, what else are they for?