Airforceone

Many people use the term socialism to describe behavior in which a government takes a larger role in the economy. The term socialism is not used accurately and it would be helpful for people to have an actual example of socialism in order to have a clear understanding of this economic theory in the US.

Let me try to simplify socialism. The US is a social democracy which is to say we are a free market, capitalistic society that have social programs and social services. The US creates these agencies or programs to protect all people. But the control of goods and services are contracted out to our Capitalist.. The US government does not control the manufactoring of goods and services that’s controlled by our capitalist.

We are not socialist in the Classic Marxist sense. Which means the government controls the agency, the labor of all goods and services. But that has not stopped the right wing from claiming that socialism has evolved into something different. (BY SAYING THE US IS SOCIALIST ITS JUST NOT TRUE.) But there is nothing more feared by the right wing than socialism. But there hypocrisy is evident because the government does not control the flow of goods and services they purchase goods and services that allow our capitalist to thrive.

Just using a simple example but imagine our government will give money to poor people so they don’t starve. (THE RIGHT SHOUTS OUT SOCIALISM) Then give tax payer funds in the billions of dollars to multi billion dollar corporations. Do we hear the same shouts (THAT THIS IS SOCIALISM) But it’s okay we are still a capitalist nation, because in America you can still make billions of dollars, recieve giant tax cuts, and not pay your employees enough to survive on. Then hand them billions in subsidies and not feed the poor.

But another way to put socialism is taxpayer funds used collectively to benefit society as a whole, despite income. I guess to the right wing this is a horrible idea.

So in an attempt to enlighten our OPP bloggers let’s just take a few examples as to how democratic and republican socialism ties in into the public sector to support our capitalist. (The goverment is not in the manufactoring business if it was then we have pure socialism and we are not.

1) Military/Defence this is the largest and most funded socialist program in the World today. It operates thanks to our tax payer dollars and protects the country as a whole. From billion dollar corporation to the richest citizens to the homeless we are all protected. This is socialism. You can not deny that’s socialism (GOVERNMENT CONTROLLED) (TAX PAYER FUNDED)

Now let’s take it a step further which most people are not aware of 50% of this massive military budget goes to private contractors (OUR CAPITILIST) so a government socialist agency that t***sfers funds to our capitalist.
Private industry supported thru our socialist agency. Lockheed Martin $36 billion, Boeing $24 billion, General Dynsmics $12 billion, Northrop Gruman $10 billion. Just these 5 agencies received over $100 million last year. We purchase all our weapons from our capitalist. So do we live by Socialism/ Capitalism. Yes we do. If it was pure socialism the government would also control manufactoring.

Trump spent his campaign claiming these corporations were overcharging our military, and promised to get it under control. But it turned out to be good news for the contractors because no new regulations and Trump increased the contractor budget by 25%. Another failed Trump promise.

You can also compare the same logic to a number of goverment agencies. Highways and roads are taxpayer funded controlled by the government. Socialist programs that benefit all people and our capitalist. Can you imagine telling GE or the auto industry build your own roads. How about police departments all controlled by the state and local governments utilizing tax payer funds that also support our capitilist by handing out contracts to the private sector for goods and services. If the government had control over the gun manufacturers then that’s pure socialism.

I can show hundreds of examples of socialism in this country (POSTAL SERVICES) (GARBAGE COLLECTOR) (FARM SUBSIDIES) socialism shows up in just about every agency in this country.

So we are a capitalistic society with social programs to protect all people and our capitalist. If this government ever started to open manufactoring to compete against our capitalist then that would be pure socialism.

If you want an example of pure socialism just look at North Korea no stock market for capital investments, every factory opened is 100% control by Kim Jong-Un all profits go directly to the government. He controls all labor. That’s socialism

steve66613

Whew! You might want to get a middle school sociology text and study the government chapter. “Profits going to the government” has nothing to do with the central government owning/controlling the means of production. The term “profits” is not associated with socialism...in any way.

Probably, the closest to “socialism” we’ve been, is when Obama federalized the auto industry. IMO, he tried the bail-out to see how offended the public might be.....and, they weren’t.

Our constitution does not support any form of socialism.

son of witless

What you fail to grasp is that the more the government does for people the greater the cost. That cost has to be extracted through taxes from the private sector. The government provides essential services that cannot be supplied privately such as policing and defense.

WW1 and WW2 allowed big government to get bigger. It did not surrender back all of it's power and revenue streams when those wars ended. As more and more of the economy becomes part of the public sector, the private sector that ultimately pays for everything gets smaller. Over the last century that has become a real burden.

elledee

wh**ever the gov. gives you it has to take from someone else......

Airforceone

Obama never socialized the Auto industry if gave them a loan of which was paid back.
Bush gave the two big to fail a subsidy so they didn’t go bankrupt.

Just about every agency in our federal goverment has a piece of socialism. But the goverment does not control the goods and services it receives.

Military is tax funded agency under goverment control. That’s socialism, but the government does not control the manufactoring of the goods and services it receives. The government agency is a piece of socialism the goods and services is capitalism.

You have to understand pure socialism versus pure capitalism

RT friend Loc: Kangaroo valley NSW Australia

If people really wants to know what Socialism is then go back in prehistory and see how it began.

Hi. Reality buffs, this is just after the missing link, my heart goes out for the fat and lazy for surely they had their dev**ees, and represented the original Socialists, I mean what good were they for chasing game or digging for roots let alone collecting berries, having babies was another matter.

And something else the Socialists were good for particularly the male ones was being in the race against really fast Wilde animals.

I suppose it was realised that humans could win as soon as the slowest was puffed out whereby the wild animals would leave off and take a break.

So you could say the evolution of Civil Society was paved by the fat and lazy to be in the end a sure bet that the race would be won and wild animals henceforth, - Behold !!! become redundant.

Trump and white supremacism is probably only a prehistoric regurgitation.

Sorry about that Trump fans' but I wrote a really good answer on Quora (Terry Loder) on Quora Terry is my second name, maybe OPP will delete this post because I know you're not allowed to publicise other platforms, I accept that but Quora is a Search engine and can benefit OPP, but that's not up to me.

The question I was, asked to answer, which I'm pushing here because that's where the prehistory angle came to me from is *" How do we recognise if someone wants to be 'alone' or feels 'lonely and is depressed'? What kind of body language and talks indicate either of the conditions?.

steve66613

I do, in fact, understand socialism....especially “pure”.....and none of what you describe is even, remotely akin to socialism.

Also, I said “close” to socialism (regarding the bailout). Remember: obongo was controlling enough to suggest the firing of management.

Would you prefer “pure” socialism?

Canuckus Deploracus Loc: North of the wall

Fascinating read...

Every government in the world needs to fund itsq military and infrastructure... Such necessities fall outside the realm of Socialism/Capitalism... Though a good point referencing the military's reliance on the private sector...And the waste that results from it....

I believe the line that needs to be clarrified is "How much government control constitutes socialism as a political ideology?".

Airforceone

No exactly my point this country is no where near pure socialism but this country has elements of socialism. We are a democracy based on a capitalistic economy with social programs. But when we use tax dollars to support our capitalist Is that not a form of capitalism

Airforceone

I understand our constituion does not address socialism because most of our founding fathers came from 100% socialism but it does support social programs. Did the constitution intend to create a 100% Capitalism form of government.

Our Constitution is a framework that established the basic principles of government and leaves the brushstrokes and details to the institution it created ( US Of America) Our constituion has survived for the very simple reason that it’s flexible and lacks specific details and has permitted it to change with new patterns of living and new standards.There are many people today who feel the constituion should be interpreted today as it was in 1789, but had it not been allowed to grow and change while preserving our governmental structure, it would long ago have been unworkable.

If it is tax payer funded it is a form of socialism.

So let’s look at what pure socialism really is.
An economic system which the production and distribution of goods and services are funded and controlled by the people rather than private enterprises.

Now our tax dollars are used to fund certain agencies under government control. These agencies use our tax dollars to purchase goods and services. But the key is we turn these funds over to private enterprises. (Which stimulates our economy through our tax dollars.) is that not socialism/Capitalism

We have a $3.7 trillion budget every year and a large portion of our budget ends up in the hands of private enterprises. The federal government is the largest stimulations of our economy. Yes we do regulate where these funds go. So are we 100% socialism or capitalism no we are not but what this country took was positive aspects of socialism and capitalism to maintain our economy.

The only programs that I can think of in this country that are socialism is Medicare and SS tax payer funded and managed. Now do we know how many people want to repeal SS and Medicare

Airforceone

Steve I am not advocating pure socialism by no means. If you want pure socialism just look at North Korea. Every piece of goods and services manufactured in that country is controlled by the government and they have no stock market.

I am attempting to get people to understand that Tax payer dollars stimulate the economy and the capitilist maintain and grow the economy. Our system of goverment is a combination of socialism and Capitalism.

son of witless

What you fail to realize that there is a limit to the good that government stimulation can do. Money that government spends can only come from two sources. First it can borrow money. It must either pay that back or create new money, which devalues the currency and hurts everyone. Venezuela is the most extreme example where inflation hit 1.37 million percent last year.

The second source is taxes. Every cent the government spends then must come out of the private economy first. So you advocate taking money out of the economy, and then putting it back in under government direction. You obviously believe that government officials are better at allocating resources for economic growth than the private sector is.