November 14, 2012
-
The Effects of Socialism
I have a question for liberals, and I realize that the answer is going to vary, but I keep hearing all this talk of class warfare and talk about “the rich paying their fair share.” Actually the “rich” pay their share and most other people’s, but hypothetically, how much more should the rich have to pay before you guys are satisfied?
The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people’s wealth to spread. Western Europe is now learning that lesson the hard way.
Yes, you really are all Greece, but not in any ways that are good.
Bunch of idiots…
What disturbs me about this picture is how some of these people are wearing chafiyehs. I know that the left really loves Islam, and seems to think it is this great religion of peace and freedom, but to the Muslims the leftists are just dhimmis and war booty.
When I was a kid, specifically when I was less than seven years old, I had no understanding of where money came from. Sometimes my parents would say, “we need to get some cash” and they would go into the nearby grocery store and get some from one of the registers. In my childish wisdom I concluded that money came from the grocery store, and that all one had to do was be a grownup to go in and get it. Of course when I shared those thoughts with my parents they quickly explained to me where the money actually came from, so that notion was quickly dispelled, and I had not even made it to middle school yet.
Now, all of the Obamanites and other leftist followers need to understand that money does not grow on trees or in grocery stores. Money is only worth something if it has to be earned. Why? Because money has no value of it’s own, it’s only a symbol (sort of like Obama). But unlike Obama, money is symbolic of goods and services. The idea is that you can exchange money for an item or a job that you want someone to do. Some jobs are worth more than others, as are some items. So you can demand more and more pay, you can leave your job and go around town wrecking things, putting on stupid masks, getting beat up by the police, etc., but printing more money is only going to drive down the value of the currency because even though there is more currency in circulation the amount of actual wealth in the economy has remained the same. Demanding that the government takes more money from the producers and give it to you will not help either, because eventually you run out of wealth to spread, and more immediately the employers cannot afford to retain as many employees or pay them as well.
So to sum it up, printing more money does not help, and redistrubuting money does not help. The best thing is to create an environment that is business friendly, and let competition control prices and wages.
If we keep going the way we are going we will end up like Europe. So you liberals can call us greedy, racist, etc., but the fact is we actually have a more grown up understanding about how wealth is generated.
Comments (13)
No mention of the fact that much of the economic mess within Europe was caused by American corporate greed on Wall Street? Why is that?
Socialism is the institutionalization of stealing. The beneficiaries of the theft will then develop an endless appetite for the stolen goods.
Societal collapse is then inevitable.
No mention of the fact that your wonderful US of A socialised your banks. Here we are, Canada, a country the USA mistakenly claims is socialist, yet not a single dime of government money went to Canadian banks. Why is that? Because we are immune to certain American business practices. During the meltdown of 2008, caused by the AMERICANS, which created a ripple effect all across Europe, had very little effect on my country due to our stringent financial regulations (see FASCISM). Many liberals in Canada before 2008 demanded our government make it that much easier to allow Canadians to become homeowners. Our government said ‘hell no. If you cannot afford it, you ain’t getting it.’ Socialism is responsible for some of the mess in Europe, but the majority of the blame may rest upon the shoulders of American capitalism. Bloody hell, you Americans were REWARDING CEO’s for bankrupting your companies to the tune of millions. Your country rewarded failure. That left many of us Canadians puzzled.
@PrisonerxOfxLove - No mention of the ‘stealing’ of billions by the czars of Wall Street? They are innocent, right? Capitalism is always good, yes? The CEO’s of many corporations blinkered your government into handing out TAXPAYER dollars, for their own personal gain. You know it and I know it. Now THAT is true theft.
“Societal collapse is then inevitable.”
@PrisonerxOfxLove - Where were you in 2008, dumbass, when the CAPITALISTS destroyed so many economies with the staggering theft of entire countries?
Silence. I thought so. Dumbasses.
“Most
importantly, Reagan’s work with Democratic house leader Tip O’Neill to
implement historic tax, social security and immigration reforms — and
Clinton’s collaboration with Republican house leader Newt Gingrich to
reduce government spending, lower taxes on investment, implement
“consensus deregulation,” and reform welfare — fueled the greatest
economic boom in world history from 1982 to 2007. As business investment
grew, so did the job market and the number of Americans paying taxes,
confirming what President Kennedy said “is a paradoxical truth that…the
soundest way to raise [tax] revenues in the long run is to cut [tax]
rates now.”
If
the current “recovery” had merely performed as well as the average of
all post-World War II recoveries, current US GDP would be $1.2 trillion
larger and 7.9 million more Americans would have jobs. Americans have
been denied this prosperity because of unprecedented levels of
government spending, job-killing regulation, and crony capitalism –
partisan policies which large majorities of business leaders in two
recent surveys (Business Roundtable and National Federation of
Independent Business) say hurt them.”
“Only one class profited from the crisis, and even those who took a blow
(though one could hardly call it such, given their enormous wealth)
want for nothing. Except, perhaps, another personal jet. The logic is
clear: We need money. Who has the money? The ruling class.
If we want to go so far as to base our judgment on moral or ethical
grounds, again the reasons are clear. The economic crisis was not, as
some may say, the result of this-or-that action of this-or-that
individual or firm. It was, instead, an historical process that unfolded
year after year. The ingredients that mixed to produce such a horrid
dish, however, all came from the same pantry. Who had the will and power
to deregulate hazardous markets? Who had the will and power to push for
tax cuts, evade taxes and commit tax fraud? Who had the will and power
to effectively assault the unions?
Who actively engaged in criminal (or at the very least unethical)
activities that ignited and compounded the global economic crisis?
Finally, who had the will and power to demand taxpayer money in the form
of a bailout, which was never seen nor heard from again? It was not the
teachers nor the coal miners. It was the wealthy.”
Profited from it? They CAUSED it.
There is also the fact that the majority of those protestors are GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES. Typically, liberal socialists. They too are a cause of many economic problems with their constant demands for more and more money. They receive far higher pay, far greater vacation periods, far, far better pensions (most employees of capitalist firms these days don’t even get pensions at all) than their capitalist (see private enterprise) brethren. Governments in Europe have decided to do the right thing and scale back all of that shit to make them more equal to their private-sector counterparts. THAT is why they are protesting. They have enjoyed the golden goose for far too long.
@PrisonerxOfxLove - Yep
@CanuckFascist - Obama has taken us many steps closer to socialism, which was his agenda and the agenda of his party all along. I have been criticial of Barack Osama since he first ran for president. I have given the man no peace, as have many of my fellow conservatives. We all know he’s a socialist.
That being said, what you are talking about is crony capitalism, not capitalism. The left is infamous for rewarding failure and sloth, whether it is a corporate bailout to a loyal sponsor, or welfare money for people who think they have other things to do besides work.
Even if the economies in Europe are closely tied with the US, they still bear the blame for their own failure. The fact is socialism has been eating at the economic structure there for a long time. They thought the EU would help, which is simply socialism on a larger structure, but instead it hurt some countries, like Greece, whose domestic industries were undersold by large EU industries. They waste a lot of money on welfare and entitlement spending in Europe, and especially on immigrants who have no business being there in the first place.
My point with this entry is that when you continually operate by spreading the wealth you eventually run out of wealth to spread. All these protesters are either government workers or union workers. They are clearly idiots, with no understanding of how the economy works, but who, like you said, want more pay and more time off even though they are already getting more than everyone else. The money isn’t there anymore, so they decide to leave their jobs and bitch, which only makes things worse. This is the situation that is coming to the US. As our government institutes policies to establish the type of socialist economy they have in Europe, we are going to end up running out of money just like they have, and the government will have to take austerity measures (like they have) and we will also have riots.
@Ambrosius_Augustus_Rex - Uh, I hate to tell you this, but the USA ALREADY has run out of money, and it is as capitalist a country as one can get. The USA now owes its continued existence to a communist regime, an irony which I find to be extremely amusing.
@CanuckFascist - Our government ran into deficit during the Bush era, but not because of capitalism. It ran into deficit because of irresponsible spending. Bush was a liberal socialist economically, even though internationally he was a war hawk. Then we got Obama, who is a full on communist, and he took the Bush deficit and doubled it because of his irresponsible spending. Now he wants to institute full on socialism, and even campaigned on it, but even if he completely broke all of the rich, including all the corporations, and all his queer friends in Hollywood, it would still not be enough to do more than scratch the Federal deficit. What he needs to do is cut entitlement spending and reduce the size of government, but not socialist can ever do that. Once China stops loaning our government money then we are going to have a Europe type situation.
Fortunately us conservatives don’t live in the major cities, typically, so when the idiots riot they will only wreck the own stuff, and if they try to leave the cities and come out into our areas we will be waiting for them with our guns and dogs.