Socialism explained.

[Visna]

As it may already be known there is a good deal of debate in the US regarding Obama's tax plans. I found this on Youtube, and it does a great job of explaining what it is Obama might be attracted to about the ideas of a state more in line with a wellfare state than one run by the principles of unrestricted capitalism.



Discuss.

[The Dude]

It's probably the best Daily Show report, ever.

[Dr. Croccer]

Hmm... Baconaise....

[Thorn777]

Amerikah wont go Swedish...But the jolly and naive idea of "unrestricted capitalism" being da best is dead for sure.

[PacSubCom]

America is not unrestricted capitalism, and Sweden is indeed quite capitalistic. America is a plutocracy, whereas in Sweden the plutocrats have not fully succeeded (Yet. Not that they are not trying). Sweden is maybe more democratic, which directly results in the "socialisms" the Daily Show is describing.

[Thorn777]

America is not unrestricted capitalism, and Sweden is indeed quite capitalistic. America is a plutocracy, whereas in Sweden the plutocrats have not fully succeeded (Yet. Not that they are not trying). Sweden is maybe more democratic, which directly results in the "socialisms" the Daily Show is describing.

Indeed, but the ideology was strong and growing in the US, and fertilized by globalization it dragged especially Europe and Japan along that did not want to go under due to competition, therefore disbanding more and more of their institutionalized social efforts. Even in Sweden there was a breakdown of social achievements, and not everyone there is so lucky to work for a company like Scania.

I do believe that movement was stopped the hard way now, because it showed that it ruins us quicker and on a larger scale then thought. Politicians cant sell any more of that stuff now, as we pay the financial-gurus salary directly.

Maybe something good can come of all this, and maybe its better the bubble bursted now then later.

[Bovril]

Oh no: Free health care, fiscal responsibility, political pluralism, lower rates of poverty, mental illness, job disatisfaction, obescity and crime!

What is America becoming. Great report.

[Fibur]

Oh no: Free health care, fiscal responsibility, political pluralism, lower rates of poverty, mental illness, job disatisfaction, obescity and crime!

What is America becoming. Great report.

Frightful, isn't it?

[Thorn777]

For "them" it isn't scary, its just to gay, elitist and unamericen.

[Salem1]

What? no, don't help the Americans, who shall I laugh at in that case?

[Orko]

that was nice.

[Phier]

[Bovril]

But if its a general rather than a beggar that's fine?

[Burnum]

But if its a general rather than a beggar that's fine?

Don't you know anything? People are only poor because they are lazy, if they worked hard enough will would be able too sustain themselves.

P.S: Universal health care is only going to be used by Society's Dregs, because all the productive members of society have health care and Corporations are more ethical and efficient then the stupid inefficient government.

P.P.S: Michael Moore is Communist Traitor, who is attempting too brainwash Good honest Americans. The Daily Show is also a vehicle for Communist propaganda.

P.P.P.S: All hail Lord Reagan, our savior.

[Desperado †]

Don't you know anything? People are only poor because they are lazy, if they worked hard enough will would be able too sustain themselves.

Firstly, your statement is obviously incorrect. People are not only poor because of laziness - if a tsunami randomly comes and destroys my house and my job and I am left poor and homeless, it is to no account because of my laziness.

And this is the cause of poverty in most situations. Not laziness, but being in a bad situation that is not of your causing and beyond your control. Often people are born into these situations. If I was born into a poor area in a capitalist country, it could often be near impossible to get out of this pit of poverty. Because I'm in a poor area the schools wont be that great and because I'm poor I can't afford better schooling. I hence have little chance of getting a skilled job, and will probably end up in a heavy labour, low paying job. The fact that the companies are not moderated by the government means that the common worker has little rights, and I cannot get a higher pay. The fact that health care is not free means that any disease I catch, or injury I get (which are both quite likely considering the area I live and my job) cannot be treated, and will only make my situation worse, and possibly even loose me my job. None of this poverty is due to my laziness - I was born into a poor family in a poor area, and it was near impossible to dig myself out of my poverty.

Capitalism is a great idea, but it cannot function fairly without certain socialist elements, such as free health care and free, good education. Complete capitalism is only fair if we are all born with equal opportunities, which we aren't. Some people are born into rich families in rich areas, some people are born into poor families in poor areas, some people are born with severe disabilities, some people are born without. The fact is that within capitalist countries there are lazy rich people, who will be lazy and rich for the entirety of their lives, and hard-working poor people, who will be hard working and poor for the entirety of their lives. Some poor people are poor for being lazy, many rich people are rich for being hardworking, but saying that poor people are only poor because they're lazy is ridiculous.

Unless capitalism contains the socialist elements of free healthcare, available and more than adequate for all, and free education, available for all and good enough to gain nearly any job, capitalism is severely unfair. There are various other socialist features that can make a capitalist country fairer, such as good social services and equal crime control in all areas, but I believe the ones listed above to be the most important factors, and am proud that Britain upholds an adequate free health service, and a fairly fair state education up to the age of eighteen.

[Ketchup]

Capitalism is a great idea, but it cannot function fairly without certain socialist elements, such as free health care and free, good education. Complete capitalism is only fair if we are all born with equal opportunities, which we aren't. Some people are born into rich families in rich areas, some people are born into poor families in poor areas, some people are born with severe disabilities, some people are born without. The fact is that within capitalist countries there are lazy rich people, who will be lazy and rich for the entirety of their lives, and hard-working poor people, who will be hard working and poor for the entirety of their lives. Some poor people are poor for being lazy, many rich people are rich for being hardworking, but saying that poor people are only poor because they're lazy is ridiculous.

QFT

Sadly, this is what many people can't understand.

[Fibur]

Firstly, your statement is obviously incorrect. People are not only poor because of laziness - if a tsunami randomly comes and destroys my house and my job and I am left poor and homeless, it is to no account because of my laziness.

And this is the cause of poverty in most situations. Not laziness, but being in a bad situation that is not of your causing and beyond your control. Often people are born into these situations. If I was born into a poor area in a capitalist country, it could often be near impossible to get out of this pit of poverty. Because I'm in a poor area the schools wont be that great and because I'm poor I can't afford better schooling. I hence have little chance of getting a skilled job, and will probably end up in a heavy labour, low paying job. The fact that the companies are not moderated by the government means that the common worker has little rights, and I cannot get a higher pay. The fact that health care is not free means that any disease I catch, or injury I get (which are both quite likely considering the area I live and my job) cannot be treated, and will only make my situation worse, and possibly even loose me my job. None of this poverty is due to my laziness - I was born into a poor family in a poor area, and it was near impossible to dig myself out of my poverty.

Capitalism is a great idea, but it cannot function fairly without certain socialist elements, such as free health care and free, good education. Complete capitalism is only fair if we are all born with equal opportunities, which we aren't. Some people are born into rich families in rich areas, some people are born into poor families in poor areas, some people are born with severe disabilities, some people are born without. The fact is that within capitalist countries there are lazy rich people, who will be lazy and rich for the entirety of their lives, and hard-working poor people, who will be hard working and poor for the entirety of their lives. Some poor people are poor for being lazy, many rich people are rich for being hardworking, but saying that poor people are only poor because they're lazy is ridiculous.

Unless capitalism contains the socialist elements of free healthcare, available and more than adequate for all, and free education, available for all and good enough to gain nearly any job, capitalism is severely unfair. There are various other socialist features that can make a capitalist country fairer, such as good social services and equal crime control in all areas, but I believe the ones listed above to be the most important factors, and am proud that Britain upholds an adequate free health service, and a fairly fair state education up to the age of eighteen.

Seconded and +rep for this post. I couldn't have said it better.

[MathiasOfAthens]

Firstly, your statement is obviously incorrect. People are not only poor because of laziness - if a tsunami randomly comes and destroys my house and my job and I am left poor and homeless, it is to no account because of my laziness.

And this is the cause of poverty in most situations. Not laziness, but being in a bad situation that is not of your causing and beyond your control. Often people are born into these situations. If I was born into a poor area in a capitalist country, it could often be near impossible to get out of this pit of poverty. Because I'm in a poor area the schools wont be that great and because I'm poor I can't afford better schooling. I hence have little chance of getting a skilled job, and will probably end up in a heavy labour, low paying job. The fact that the companies are not moderated by the government means that the common worker has little rights, and I cannot get a higher pay. The fact that health care is not free means that any disease I catch, or injury I get (which are both quite likely considering the area I live and my job) cannot be treated, and will only make my situation worse, and possibly even loose me my job. None of this poverty is due to my laziness - I was born into a poor family in a poor area, and it was near impossible to dig myself out of my poverty.

Capitalism is a great idea, but it cannot function fairly without certain socialist elements, such as free health care and free, good education. Complete capitalism is only fair if we are all born with equal opportunities, which we aren't. Some people are born into rich families in rich areas, some people are born into poor families in poor areas, some people are born with severe disabilities, some people are born without. The fact is that within capitalist countries there are lazy rich people, who will be lazy and rich for the entirety of their lives, and hard-working poor people, who will be hard working and poor for the entirety of their lives. Some poor people are poor for being lazy, many rich people are rich for being hardworking, but saying that poor people are only poor because they're lazy is ridiculous.

Unless capitalism contains the socialist elements of free healthcare, available and more than adequate for all, and free education, available for all and good enough to gain nearly any job, capitalism is severely unfair. There are various other socialist features that can make a capitalist country fairer, such as good social services and equal crime control in all areas, but I believe the ones listed above to be the most important factors, and am proud that Britain upholds an adequate free health service, and a fairly fair state education up to the age of eighteen.

QFT

Great post.

Also have to ask yourselves why do people oppose this. Some of the opposition oppose it because they honestly believe that it will be a disaster for the country, that tax payers will be overtaxed and society will crumble to an influx of people seeking benefits. Then there are those who oppose it because it effects them personally. Like the rich, they don't want to pay more in taxes even though the extra 50 dollars a month will barely dent their billions they earn. The opposition claims that small businesses will crumble due to higher taxes. This is also false, instead they use the small business claim as politicians running for office will use the cut taxes promise. Reagen cut taxes for the rich, but he did not cut the programs those taxes provided for, our education system is a mess and our health care system can not sustain our citizens. When a patient who does not have insurance is brought into the ER who pays for it. If government insurance replaced private there would be no overhead cost, the system would be run by the health department not congress, profits would not be driven to corporate heads and funds would not need to be spent on claims and expensive trials.

[Enemy of the State]

But if its a general rather than a beggar that's fine?

No, absolutely not. People against socialism are not automatically jingoist neocons.

[Phier]

But if its a general rather than a beggar that's fine?

First it wouldn't be 'a general' as that would imply he is lining his pocket.

What it would be is the armed forces, and defense is a legitimate function of the federal government, unlike wealth redistribution for votes.