Topic: Why do people in USA fear socialism so much? (Read 34853 times)

Margaret Thatcher on Socialism- "Eventually you run out of other people's money".

Actually, the USA doesn't fear anything. It can't. It is words on paper. Words on paper don't have emotions. The fear is in the people who use government against us, so they can rape and plunder us and make profit. They fear they might lose their control, and the profits will drop off.

The USA fears anything which will interfere with how the government is run. To fear socialism, or terrorism is a way to justify military spending. Fear is a tool! 

My dad used to tell me that the symptoms of tiredness and laziness are very similar. Look at our faces. Do you see fear? Or is it anger?

Take from the middle class and give to the poor is simply an excuse to take from middle class slaves and give to the rich.

They are still given private monopoly status by the local governments.

Wasn't meant to refute anything.

Was meant to explain that, with something that is so extremely important in the lives of everyone like electricity is, government seems to be needed to smooth out the "humps" that the power companies might place on the flow of electricity at a reasonable price to everyone.

The thing that is really happening is that the government is being regulated by the power companies behind the scenes so that they are, at times, raking in undue profits. The government also winds up making the power companies into a monopoly. Yet the people are led to believe by this system that they have control over the power companies, which they do NOT!



EDIT: This is socialism being operated behind the scenes, in a land where socialism is not allowed formally.

Interesting stuff. I don't think it refutes anything i said though does it? Just an interesting aside?

Ever been to a Corporation Commission (called by different names in different States) meeting? They are State run agencies that control how much the private electric companies charge for the electricity (among other things). Their people are often elected by the popular vote, but sometimes are appointed. Once the officials get into office, you have to trust that they are doing the best job that they can to make sure that the power companies are getting enough pay for the electricity that they sell, so they can adequately meet expenses. You also have to trust that are not allowing the power companies to overcharge the people - like NASA charges $100 for a $15 wrench.

Sure, these officials can be impeached (fired) from office if they are screwing either the power companies or the people. And, sure, there are citizen watch-dog groups that are constantly trying to keep an eye on the whole operation. But there is a whole bunch of bribery going on. And being government directed, there's always going to be a bunch of waste and misappropriation of funds.

Electricity is almost entirely privately provided in the united states. Maybe the hoover damn is an exception? Maybe a few others? Pretty rare if it exists at all. Look at your electricity bill sometime. See who you are paying it to. It will probably be a private corporation.

I totally agree.  But you can't help the stupidity of mob mentality.  It's the same stupidity that elects presidents for how they say what they are saying instead of what they actually say.  Gore was "boring".  That's a really stupid reason to ignore brilliant ideas.

As for as socio-economic models go, there's nothing wrong with Socialism.  In fact, models of socialism exist all over in the US.  Just consider all the publicly owned utility services like electricity.

Well ok so my example described socialism and you seem to be describing mercantilism. Yes i think its true that most people would not support either your example or mercantilism. It should be noted that you definitely did not describe capitalism. Under capitalism every person is free to eat any where every they like assuming they can afford it, and if they all eat at the same restaurant than its because each and every individual personally chose to eat at the restaurant at the same time that the others made the same choice.


Yea of course. If you want to help someone than do it. I don't think there is a libertarian anywhere who would suggest that anyone should be violently prohibited from helping someone who needs help. We just dont think that alice should be allowed to threaten violence against bob because charly is down on his luck. If alice wants to do something to help charly than she can give away some of her own property, and if bob wants to do something to help than he can give away some of his own property, but alice has no right to force bob to give away his property to charly.

Most people don't like the idea of the wealthiest among them being the one dictating what, where and when they eat either. Can you really have a democratic society with widespread inequality?


Working hard doesn't ensure you'll have enough to live. Sometimes life sucks and you need help.

would you like to work hard in life and get some or all of it taken away because someone else doesn't work as hard as you.

And you still don't have that idea, right? But if you do, you really ARE out of touch.

Exactly. There is a huge difference between voluntary economic cooperation in a small setting, and forced participation in a huge, unwieldy system which deprives individual members of their economic rights.

There are some of the many reasons:

1) Economic freedom/free markets have created one of the most prosperous periods in human history, not just for the US, but for the world. The US however, benefited more than many other countries because it took the idea so far.

2) We want to be responsible for, and free to manage our finances how we please. As far as I am concerned, no matter how much you feel socialism is a good idea, I have the right to live my life as I see fit as long as I don't encroach on the rights of others.

3) Socialism results in people taking less risks because they are no longer entitled to the full reward, which reduces innovation and return on investments.

4) Socialism encourages people to work less, and places the burden of funding the government (which also must become much larger and more expensive to operate a socialism system) on fewer and fewer people. This is because the net reward for work falls as government benefits help people who are either not working or are working less than they should be and people who are working lose part of the reward through taxes.

5) Increased government regulation of businesses discourages investment and makes some potentially profitable businesses impossible to operate profitably. Unneeded employees must be hired just to deal with bureaucratic requirements.

6) The only way for socialism to work is if the government uses force on it's citizens. You cannot take money from people, close down businesses that don't align with government goals, and force people to comply with economic policies without the threat of violence. This is why economically repressed countries like China and North Korea also have low personal freedom. If the government granted citizens personal freedom, they would be more likely, if not guaranteed to demand and even fight for the rights to their own property.

That being said, over the past century America has become more and more socialist. It has happened slowly because a large part of the population does fear socialism, but to paraphrase a famous quote, the American people, by and large are strongly in favor of socialist ideas as long as the word socialist is not used. That is why the American welfare state has seen so much growth, and sure enough, our economy has seen more and more problems as this welfare state has continued to usurp the free market.

Really? Man i must be out of touch. I had no idea that it was normal for a group of work colleagues to go out to eat and threaten to murder the wealthiest among them unless he agrees to pay for their lunches as well. I really need to get out more.

Couldn't be more wrong if you tried, but thanks for the laugh.  Not all fascist regimes are socialist and not all socialist countries are fascist.  Fascism is typified by extreme nationalist views and socially repressive governments.  Their economic views aren't necessarily related.

I like socializing.