Socialism is based on the idea that we should use the vast resources of society to meet people’s needs.
It seems so obvious--if people are hungry, they should be fed; if people are homeless, we should build homes for them; if people are sick, the best medical care should be available to them. A socialist society would take the immense wealth of the rich and use it to meet the basic needs of all society. The money wasted on weapons could be used to end poverty, homelessness, and all other forms of scarcity.
There’s no blueprint for what a socialist society will look like. That will be determined by the generations to come who are living in one. But it seems obvious that such a society would guarantee every person enough to eat and a sturdy roof over their heads. The education system would be made free--and reorganized so that every child’s ability is encouraged. Health care would be made free and accessible to all, as would all utilities like gas and electricity. Public transportation would also be made free--and more practical and efficient. All of these basic needs would become top priorities.
A socialist society would not only take away the existing wealth of the ruling class, but also its economic control over the world. The means of production--the factories, offices, mines, and so on--would be owned by all of society. Under the current system, important economic decisions are left to the chaos of the free market and to the blind competition of capitalists scrambling for profits. Under socialism, the majority of people would plan democratically what to do and how do it.
Why do you say that? People like you who don't have anything of value in your life, people like you, who are just barely getting by & cannot plumb value in other people nor yourself, people like you who could enjoy a higher quality of life if it weren't for the concept of exorbitant profits by just the top 10% of extremely rich citizens in the United States.
I guess, if there were an ironic or even funny aspect of this very painful situation is that most people like yourself, don't even have the intellect or fortitude to even realize the situation or to attempt to do something about it.
I chuckle when I hear people, like yourself, who have nothing, actually DEFEND the ultra-rich & the system in place that allows the rich to get richer & you & your siblings have less & less as you grow old & tired.
bobevenson wrote:You're just a psycho-commie, nothing more and nothing less.
In your law-of-the-jungle utopia, as an old fart you would be left on the scrap heap. No veterans benefits for you, or old age pension. The workhouse perhaps? You yanks are such fucking morons. What you call 'socialist' societies are only evolved societies where no one starves and people are generally safe and secure with a roof over their heads. What the fuck is wrong with that?? God, so-called 'libertarians' really are the most fucked-up, self-centred, psychopathic turds on the planet.
You said a mouthful. The world looks at China as one of the five communist countries left in the world. Strangely enough, China, over the past 4 decades has overwhelmingly embraced the economic system of capitalism.
So...there you have it; Communist/capitalists. Your welcome.
I especially like the first sentence of the article: "Libertarianism (Latin: liber, "free") is a political philosophy that upholds liberty as its principal objective." I guess you disagree with that sentiment, huh?
bobevenson wrote:I especially like the first sentence of the article: "Libertarianism (Latin: liber, "free") is a political philosophy that upholds liberty as its principal objective." I guess you disagree with that sentiment, huh?
Which is exactly why I wrote, 'so-called 'libertarian''. It says the same thing for 'liberal', another word that you yanks have bastardized.
Last edited by vegetariantaxidermy on Thu Sep 17, 2015 11:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.
