Topic: Ron Paul: Who's Opposing The Socialists Attack on Capitalism? (Read 411 times)

"Socialism: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done"

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/socialism


Socialism is the introductory stages of Communism, both based in Marxist theory. They are indistinguishable except in scale and progression. Socialism is designed to be a delivery mechanism for Communism. Maybe before advocating for an ideology you should actually know something about it.

jes abundance and why should they degrade themselves under a captialist that wants to threat them like money earning cattle for private wealth gains?
its not that socialist banking doesnt, work, in socialism there is also capitalism, just a social one.
you dont understand that

Millenials, grew up in abundance, have not studied basic economics, become easy pray for socialists...

Millenials, grew up in abundance, have not studied basic economics, become easy pray for socialists...

Exactly what I said.
Cuba is communist not socialist.
Know the difference.

Replace all your "socialism" by "communism" and I would fairly agree with you.

Move to Cuba

Ahahahahahah
Oh god what the hell dude? You're completely broken braindead xD

You have serious problems registering the difference between reality and theory, or in your case fantasy. Your little hippie commune system does not scale up to a national level. There will always be representatives. Even if technology allowed it pure Democracy is shit and is not desirable, it is nothing more than mob rule where individuals have no rights. Nothing good comes of it.

False. A bureaucrat decides if you can open it or not, most often he will deny it because he has the power and you don't. Most business disappear or go underground, since they would violate a decree or "law" anyway. Those few with enough money to bribe can usually manage to get their permit, so it becomes a privilege for few to run a business in a socialist state. Quite the opposite of what socialists preach, ironically.

Socialists want the almighty State to intervene everything, and overwhelm society with so many rules and regulations, even if you tried to follow to the letter it would take years to get anything done. It is a system that removes entrepreneurial stimulus and replaces it with bribe and corruption.

Then what, want to hire a worker? Can't hire it for few hours, must be all 8, can't work 2 or 3, hast to be all 5. Cannot work more than 8 hours, else you have to pay him double. You can't fire the worker if your business is going bad, you have to sink with him, etc, etc.

Hiring a worker is too difficult and expensive under socialism, and this is only the tip of the iceberg. Socialism is a true Pandora box once you open, your country can go from being the most rich to the most poor. Socialism is a corruption machine.

If i haven't lived it myself, i would have never understood Milton Friedman's quote:
Of course reading books and watching classes of Austrian Economics gave me the clear answer, Mises book is the definitive answer to Socialism.

Education in economy is the answer.

A beureacrat deciding what workers can do is a hallmark of capitalism.  Under soialism, the entire community would decide together what they will produce based on needs of the community. 

You keep talking about what "socialists want" but show me socialists who want that.  As a socialist, I've never met them.  Of course someone who only learns about socialism from capitalists will grow to hate socialism.  Instead of letting capitalists tell you what socialists want and what socilaism is, maybe you should start with primary sources. 

https://www.socialistpartyusa.net/principles-points-of-agreement

Socialism is not mere government ownership, a welfare state, or a repressive bureaucracy. Socialism is a new social and economic order in which workers and consumers control production and community residents control their neighborhoods, homes, and schools.  The production of society is used for the benefit of all humanity, not for the private profit of a few. Socialism produces a constantly renewed future by not plundering the resources of the earth.

If that's not the best example of confusion between communism and socialism I don't know what it is.

You understand that in a socialism state, not only is the free market not gone, but creating a company is both easier and less risky?

"If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand."

start your own business, something socialism would never let you to do...

In socialism the free market is gone and replaced by a State institution that decides everything from prices, to what you can work in and when, therefore the power to freely choose is taken away from the people and given to the bureaucrats.

Communism is even more democratic than democratic socialism.  Coming from someone who has lived on an actual commune.

There is no such thing as democratic socialism. Democratic Socialism is just re-branded Fabian Socialism. All forms of Socialism are on the spectrum of Communism and based on Marxist theory. It is a system designed to create more of itself until a full Communist state is attained.

There is no such thing as democratic socialism. Democratic Socialism is just re-branded Fabian Socialism. All forms of Socialism are on the spectrum of Communism and based on Marxist theory. It is a system designed to create more of itself until a full Communist state is attained.

Ah, so only 1% can start a shop now? Only 1% can do freelancing? Only 1% can buy stocks, forex or crypto and earn a living from it? Are you still living in late 19th century? I suppose only the wealthy get to ride the train too?

Free healthcare, free education, free housing, free food, free gasoline, where does it end? Why bother working when the State is in the obligation to provide all? And how does that State gets wealth to keep everything running? And who gets to watch that wealth is used according to plan? Oh it all works perfectly, nobody treats it bad because its public ownership... Reality: everyone treats it like garbage "because its not mine, I don't care if it breaks". Now extend that disease to society... What you own you care for, what you don't own you don't care. The "New Man" is not coming, ever. Socialist countries do not freeze in time by choosing, they no longer have the means to renew. If something breaks it might be the last time you had that thing.

In real socialism you do not own anything, and you can't start a shop, it belongs to the State. And only the State decides if a shop there is worth having, and who is going to run it, and what prices should have and what wage you will earn. At the end of it, it would have been better to stay at home than waste your time with such a miserable pay that you end working for free for the State, and sometimes even paying for the "privilege".

The reason you defend socialism is because it sounds so pretty from your theoretical utopian point of view, but you haven't lived in the results from it. You point to free healthcare, but real socialism doesn't end there. It takes everything from you, destroys it, and then blames "others" from all the failures.

Starvation in China's Mao? Imperialists. Starvation in Sung's Korea? Imperialists. Starvation in Castro's Cuba? Imperialists. Yet all the surrounding "capitalist" countries with the "masses of poor exploited workers", happen to be well fed and living worried on things like: When its the next drama episode coming out?, or the new "shiny new toy", will i be able to afford it? Should i get a second part time job to buy it? While someone in the socialist countries wonders if the bar soap will hold for the next year before he/she might (or might not) get to obtain the next one...

When someone mentions me socialism, image of stagnation and misery is what comes to mind. I don't need to imagine it, unlike the theoretical socialists living in wealthy nations like most of you are, all i need to do is go outside...

Why do you think it failed in Venezuela with all that Oil that would make it perfect for the socialist experiment to "finally work"? After all, the others were poor countries and surely couldn't afford those dreams; but Venezuela could right? Nope, they broke the State oil company. The socialist machinery leads to corruption, and a new super elite and wealthy class, this time protected by the state (just like the old monarchies) emerges under the guise of "socialism" while the masses die outside the palace/presidential villa. The irony is that a similar country, with an actual monarchy (The Saudis) actually got much better results. Because unlike real socialism, they didn't mess with the market.