~ The Case For Socialism ~

How should society be organised, if at all?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
Hobbes' Choice
Posts: 8363
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am

Re: ~ The Case For Socialism ~

Post by Hobbes' Choice » Mon Apr 11, 2016 7:05 pm

Gore Vidal once said that the US economy was based in free enterprise for the poor and socialism for the rich.

Right now the rich receive trillions in corporate handouts; bailouts and tax breaks. The theory is that wealth will trickle down. This is so obviously bullshit. The poor just get pissed on, if they are lucky, whilst the rich hold on to the wealth and ferret it away in off-shore accounts.

It would be a fare better system to just give all the subsidies to the poor. The poor do not tend to save. They spend. They spend at shops run by people who buy shit from other people and the wealth bubbles-up enriching the entire economy.

What is not to like?

User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 5571
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm

Post by henry quirk » Mon Apr 11, 2016 7:08 pm

"And this is where objective morality breaks down."

That which doesn't exist can't break down.

#

"Who is deserving?":

My perspective: the very young who have no caretakers; the very old who can no longer care for themselves; the damaged who are incapable of fending for themselves.

Everyone else who can but won't: starve.

Now, as I say, this is 'my' perspective...you, I'm sure, would be more generous (with some one else's cash).

#

"It would be a fare better system to just give all the subsidies to the poor"

It would be a far better system is rich folks took care of themselves, if those folks who cannot got help, it those who can are left alone, and if elected employees did the work assigned and shut the fuck up.

*shrug*

Obvious Leo
Posts: 4007
Joined: Wed May 13, 2015 1:05 am
Location: Australia

Re: ~ The Case For Socialism ~

Post by Obvious Leo » Mon Apr 11, 2016 8:20 pm

Hobbes' Choice wrote:Gore Vidal once said that the US economy was based in free enterprise for the poor and socialism for the rich.
Interestingly this is also the model the Chinese have chosen to adopt. It works moderately OK for a little while provided the economy is rapidly expanding but it all ends in tears when the rate of GDP growth starts to slow down. Then the rich pull up the drawbridge and hide with their booty. At the moment the world is awash with cash but instead of it being invested in future growth it's just being shuffled around as people try to make money merely out of making money. Capitalism on a global scale is nothing more than a gigantic Ponzi scheme, although on the local scale it still serves the needs of society well enough if adequately regulated.

bobevenson
Posts: 7349
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 12:02 am
Contact:

Re: ~ The Case For Socialism ~

Post by bobevenson » Mon Apr 11, 2016 9:06 pm

Obvious Leo wrote:Capitalism on a global scale is nothing more than a gigantic Ponzi scheme.
I'm not calling you nuts or anything, but I'd like to hear where the fuck you ever heard that from!

Obvious Leo
Posts: 4007
Joined: Wed May 13, 2015 1:05 am
Location: Australia

Re: ~ The Case For Socialism ~

Post by Obvious Leo » Mon Apr 11, 2016 9:23 pm

bobevenson wrote:
Obvious Leo wrote:Capitalism on a global scale is nothing more than a gigantic Ponzi scheme.
I'm not calling you nuts or anything, but I'd like to hear where the fuck you ever heard that from!
As a matter of fact this is a widely held view amongst many of the world's leading economists who correctly predicted the GFC of 2008 as a direct consequence of it. Furthermore since the underlying Ponzi mechanism has not been dealt with by any of the global regulatory authorities since this event these same economists are of the view that exactly the same thing will happen again, except next time it'll be even worse. Dig a hole in your backyard and fill it up with cans of beans, Bob, because the shit's about to hit the fan.

User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 5571
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm

Post by henry quirk » Mon Apr 11, 2016 10:56 pm

The current iteration of capitalism does suck but onky to the degree it's been removed from the open/unregulated/unprotected/free market.

bobevenson
Posts: 7349
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 12:02 am
Contact:

Re: ~ The Case For Socialism ~

Post by bobevenson » Tue Apr 12, 2016 1:27 pm

Obvious Leo wrote:As a matter of fact this is a widely held view amongst many of the world's leading economists who correctly predicted the GFC of 2008 as a direct consequence of it. Furthermore since the underlying Ponzi mechanism has not been dealt with by any of the global regulatory authorities since this event these same economists are of the view that exactly the same thing will happen again, except next time it'll be even worse. Dig a hole in your backyard and fill it up with cans of beans, Bob, because the shit's about to hit the fan.
I'm just trying to figure out if there's anything at all in your above comment that's not pure, unadulterated bullshit.

User avatar
Bill Wiltrack
Posts: 5468
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:52 pm
Location: Cleveland, Ohio, USA
Contact:

Re: ~ The Case For Socialism ~

Post by Bill Wiltrack » Tue Apr 12, 2016 2:10 pm

.




Look, I must step-in as a defacto type of Moderator here for a minute. I enjoy spirited argument and defense of philosophical ideas and positions upon my threads but you must not devolve into name-calling and aggressive and demeaning labeling of a another's thoughts - at least upon my threads.


PLEASE extend the same amount of respect and admiration to each other as you normally extend to me.

Put each other on that higher plain and begin from there.

Thank you.






.

bobevenson
Posts: 7349
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 12:02 am
Contact:

Re: ~ The Case For Socialism ~

Post by bobevenson » Tue Apr 12, 2016 2:22 pm

Please, Wiltrack, quit acting like you're on some kind of pedestal!

User avatar
Hobbes' Choice
Posts: 8363
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am

Re:

Post by Hobbes' Choice » Tue Apr 12, 2016 2:23 pm

henry quirk wrote:The current iteration of capitalism does suck but onky to the degree it's been removed from the open/unregulated/unprotected/free market.
You have that EXACTLY backwards.
Do you really think it was regulation and protection that led to the Global Financial Crisis of 2008?
Last edited by Hobbes' Choice on Tue Apr 12, 2016 5:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
SpheresOfBalance
Posts: 5397
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 4:27 pm
Location: On a Star Dust Metamorphosis

Re:

Post by SpheresOfBalance » Tue Apr 12, 2016 2:45 pm

henry quirk wrote:"if people are hungry, they should be fed"

Those who can't feed themselves mebbe deserve a hand, but, those who can but don't get nuthin'.

#

"if people are homeless, we should build homes for them"

Those who can't shelter themselves mebbe deserve a hand, but, those who can but don't get nuthin'.

#

"if people are sick, the best medical care should be available to them."

Those who can't care for themselves mebbe deserve a hand, but, those who can but don't get nuthin'.

#

"A socialist society would take the immense wealth of the rich and use it to meet the basic needs of all society."

In a true socialism, there would (eventually) be no rich folks. Who, in their right mind, will continue to amass wealth only to have it taken away (over and over)? Eventually, even the most compassionate will tire of supporting strangers and will stop producing.

#

"The money wasted on weapons could be used to end poverty, homelessness, and all other forms of scarcity."

When A no longer has a big stick, B is sure to skull fuck A.
And so you know that surely you would. Common for one that totes a shotgun; the real reason it's carried.

You really wanna end scarcity?

Build atomic powerplants and make nano-fabrication a reality.
Nuclear anything, a fools game! M.A.D.!
Solar, the only 'real' alternative that is a forever free solution, or at least several billions of years until we need to start worrying about moving on, plenty of time for humans to finally grow up and see the importance of this thread, and be intelligent and knowing enough to actually, move on. Unless we keep making the same dumb selfish mistakes. We would be oh so powerful together, cooperating, if we actually took care of one another, instead of forever stroking ourselves; the current state of affairs.



Cheap, plentiful power and 'building' food addresses the problem without catering to parasites or punishing the productive.
Me, me, me, cries the guy with a shotgun!
I believe you've gone over the edge there a little bit, because you are strictly thinking in black and white terms. When in fact, concerning the human condition, there are only ever shades of gray.

User avatar
SpheresOfBalance
Posts: 5397
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 4:27 pm
Location: On a Star Dust Metamorphosis

Re: ~ The Case For Socialism ~

Post by SpheresOfBalance » Tue Apr 12, 2016 2:48 pm

Hobbes' Choice wrote:Gore Vidal once said that the US economy was based in free enterprise for the poor and socialism for the rich.

Right now the rich receive trillions in corporate handouts; bailouts and tax breaks. The theory is that wealth will trickle down. This is so obviously bullshit. The poor just get pissed on, if they are lucky, whilst the rich hold on to the wealth and ferret it away in off-shore accounts.

It would be a fare better system to just give all the subsidies to the poor. The poor do not tend to save. They spend. They spend at shops run by people who buy shit from other people and the wealth bubbles-up enriching the entire economy.

What is not to like?
Good Job, Kudos!

User avatar
SpheresOfBalance
Posts: 5397
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 4:27 pm
Location: On a Star Dust Metamorphosis

Re:

Post by SpheresOfBalance » Tue Apr 12, 2016 2:57 pm

henry quirk wrote:"And this is where objective morality breaks down."

That which doesn't exist can't break down.

#

"Who is deserving?":

My perspective: the very young who have no caretakers; the very old who can no longer care for themselves; the damaged who are incapable of fending for themselves.

Everyone else who can but won't: starve.

Now, as I say, this is 'my' perspective...you, I'm sure, would be more generous (with some one else's cash).

#

"It would be a fare better system to just give all the subsidies to the poor"

It would be a far better system is rich folks took care of themselves, if those folks who cannot got help, it those who can are left alone, and if elected employees did the work assigned and shut the fuck up.

*shrug*
The epitome of a selfish man that just doesn't get it! Doesn't know what humane means, thus framing themselves as belonging to a subclass of human. One that doesn't understand the potential power of being a great "species," not there simply being a few self stroking fools peppered here and there, that may get lucky once in a while, actually serving someone other than themselves.

User avatar
SpheresOfBalance
Posts: 5397
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 4:27 pm
Location: On a Star Dust Metamorphosis

Re: ~ The Case For Socialism ~

Post by SpheresOfBalance » Tue Apr 12, 2016 3:02 pm

Obvious Leo wrote:
Hobbes' Choice wrote:Gore Vidal once said that the US economy was based in free enterprise for the poor and socialism for the rich.
Interestingly this is also the model the Chinese have chosen to adopt. It works moderately OK for a little while provided the economy is rapidly expanding but it all ends in tears when the rate of GDP growth starts to slow down. Then the rich pull up the drawbridge and hide with their booty. At the moment the world is awash with cash but instead of it being invested in future growth it's just being shuffled around as people try to make money merely out of making money. Capitalism on a global scale is nothing more than a gigantic Ponzi scheme, although on the local scale it still serves the needs of society well enough if adequately regulated.
Ponzi, OK! I was thinking more of a pyramid scheme; Simpatico!

User avatar
SpheresOfBalance
Posts: 5397
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 4:27 pm
Location: On a Star Dust Metamorphosis

Re: ~ The Case For Socialism ~

Post by SpheresOfBalance » Tue Apr 12, 2016 3:04 pm

bobevenson wrote:
Obvious Leo wrote:Capitalism on a global scale is nothing more than a gigantic Ponzi scheme.
I'm not calling you nuts or anything, but I'd like to hear where the fuck you ever heard that from!
Asks one, of something shining it's light in their eyes!

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests