Attention Forum Socialists

[Shady]

These are the products of your policies!

Greek bonds rated 'junk'

BBC

Spain downgraded as Europe debt crisis widens

AP

Europe debt crisis spreads to Portugal

AP

Britain confronts debt of Greek proportions

MSNBC

Enough is enough!!!! :angry:

[Handsome Rob]

Aren't you going to put the United States on that list?

[Shady]

Aren't you going to put the United States on that list?

They will be soon. Technically their debt and deficit levels aren't at the same levels as the others. Although Obama's quickly making it happen with is European-socialization of America.

[bloodyminded]

These are the products of your policies!

Greek bonds rated 'junk'

BBC

Spain downgraded as Europe debt crisis widens

AP

Europe debt crisis spreads to Portugal

AP

Britain confronts debt of Greek proportions

MSNBC

Enough is enough!!!! :angry:

I think you're making two errors, both related. First of all, Obama is not a socialist.

But ok, that argument can go round and round forever, so here's a better one: many of the posters here whom you deem "socialists" most likely are not.

Myself, for example. Just like, to guess at a number, 90% or more of North Americans, I consider myself a capitalist, but with a belief in certain "socialist" (broadly termed) ameliorative properties to diminish some of capitalism's harsher effects.

And virtually everyone, no doubt yourself included, feels the same way. The difference is only a matter of degree, not of basic philosophy.

[Jack Weber]

I think you're making two errors, both related. First of all, Obama is not a socialist.

But ok, that argument can go round and round forever, so here's a better one: many of the posters here whom you deem "socialists" most likely are not.

Myself, for example. Just like, to guess at a number, 90% or more of North Americans, I consider myself a capitalist, but with a belief in certain "socialist" (broadly termed) ameliorative properties to diminish some of capitalism's harsher effects.

And virtually everyone, no doubt yourself included, feels the same way. The difference is only a matter of degree, not of basic philosophy.

Yeah,but is'nt easier for two dimensional thinkers like Shady(and Mr.Canada) to brand people "Socialists" because it confirms in their minds that they are right and anyone who disagrees with them are wrong?

[bloodyminded]

Yeah,but is'nt easier for two dimensional thinkers like Shady(and Mr.Canada) to brand people "Socialists" because it confirms in their minds that they are right and anyone who disagrees with them are wrong?

Certainly! Hell, lots of feel like taking this low road at times, during some of these debates. But we choose not to do so.

[BubberMiley]

It's also works well if you aren't quite bright enough to grasp more than the most basic elements of economic and political theory. You form a few simple boxes in your imagination, file everything accordingly, and voila--a half-baked, extremist, but altogether rudimentary concept of the world.

Edited April 29, 2010 by BubberMiley

[Sir Bandelot]

Yet Canada did far better than the US in the recent "toxic loans" crisis.

[Shady]

Come'on guys, step up to the plate, and take responsibility for the policy you endorse. All of you are champions of the ever expanding welfare state. In fact Bubber wants to make government funded vacations for citizens a human right. Again, more expansion of government, a larger role of government, and an ever increasing need for higher taxes to pay for more government programs.

What's happening in Europe is the culmination of European socialist policies over the last several decades. "Free" healthcare for everyone. "Free" pensions for everyone. 4 day work weeks. 12 - 16 weeks of paid vacation. A retirement age of only 60 years of age. A cradle to grave social safety net that's ever expanding, needing larger and larger chunks of the economy to keep afloat. And higher and higher taxes on the "rich."

I hear a lot about so-called unfettered free markets, but I haven't heard much about unfettered government expansion. We need to draw a line in the sand, or else we'll end up like our European counterparts.

Again, all of you need to look at Europe. They've done everything you love and cherish, and it's bankrupted them! Leave us the hell alone, it's got to stop! :angry:

[eyeball]

Come'on guys, step up to the plate, and take responsibility for the policy you endorse. All of you are champions of the ever expanding welfare state.

As opposed to those who are champions of the ever expanding warfare state?

What's happening in Europe is the culmination of European socialist policies over the last several decades.

Apparently you can thank North American military intervention for what's been happening in Europe over the last several decades. I thought this was a good thing.

Edited April 29, 2010 by eyeball

[Smallc]

Come'on guys, step up to the plate, and take responsibility for the policy you endorse.

Shady....give it up. Liberals in Canada don't endorse high debt levels and neither (generally) do New Democrats. This isn't Greece (not even close), and it's not going to be. Quit trying to paint we "socialists" as something we aren't/

[Smallc]

I hear a lot about so-called unfettered free markets, but I haven't heard much about unfettered government expansion.

Then you're obviously deaf.

[BubberMiley]

In fact Bubber wants to make government funded vacations for citizens a human right.

See, that's why you're so easy to make fun of. You don't understand what people say, but you think that you do.

[Jack Weber]

Shady....give it up. Liberals in Canada don't endorse high debt levels and neither (generally) do New Democrats. This isn't Greece (not even close), and it's not going to be. Quit trying to paint we "socialists" as something we aren't/

Please Shady,do us all a favour and try to grasp the concept that just because someone is not a Friedmanite,it does'nt make them some hammer and sickle socialist...

Things are a little more nuanced than that...

[Shady]

Please Shady,do us all a favour and try to grasp the concept that just because someone is not a Friedmanite,it does'nt make them some hammer and sickle socialist...

Things are a little more nuanced than that...

A socialist isn't tantamount to a communist. But it's interesting that you think so.

[Sir Bandelot]

A socialist isn't tantamount to a communist. But it's interesting that you think so.

And as I pointed out earlier, an unregulated market also faces risk of collapse. We just saw that happen in the USA.

Globalization is another important factor. These faltering economies are connected to others, which exacerbates the damage they cause when one is in trouble. In globalization when they are strong, they are all strong but when they are weak, the are all weak. Then the risk is the whole house of cards can come down in one fell swoop. And that's bad, mkay?

So it seems the best system is a good blend of capitalism, and some protections ie. safety net so there is a bottom, below which we cannot fall. As a result we may not be able to climb quite so high as others do, but that is the trade-off we must make, in order to be RESPONSIBLE.

Edited April 30, 2010 by Sir Bandelot

[Jack Weber]

A socialist isn't tantamount to a communist. But it's interesting that you think so.

Actually,I don't think so...I just assumed you did..

You surprised me!!!You do actually have some semblence of a grasp of ideological nuance!Kudos!!!

[Jack Weber]

And as I pointed out earlier, an unregulated market also faces risk of collapse. We just saw that happen in the USA.

Globalization is another important factor. These faltering economies are connected to others, which exacerbates the damage they cause when one is in trouble. In globalization when they are strong, they are all strong but when they are weak, the are all weak. Then the risk is the whole house of cards can come down in one fell swoop. And that's bad, mkay?

So it seems that only a good blend of capitalism, and some protections ie. safety net so there is a bottom, below which we cannot fall. As a result we may not be able to climb quite so high as others do, but that is the trade-off we must make, to be RESPONSIBLE.

It's instructive to understand that Spains problems come from a real estate boom(bubble),bust and a resulting construction bust.

Hmmm...Where have we seen that before????

By the way,your last paragraph is spot on!The Friedmanites never want to adit this because they would have to admit that not only is their economic ideology fatally flawed,but it's really just another wealth redistribution system.It just sends all that wealth back towards the top,into the hands of the few.

[Bonam]

And as I pointed out earlier, an unregulated market also faces risk of collapse. We just saw that happen in the USA.

Regulation is one thing, and consistent with capitalism. A free and efficient market, for example, should not have monopolies. A government can take on itself the role of preventing monopolies, via regulation. Similarly, the government can impose other regulations designed to ensure the efficiency of the market. For example, limits on the risks that banks can take, to ensure that companies, investors, and individuals have confidence in the banking system. Additionally, another valid role of government is to have a legal system which holds people accountable for the agreements (contracts) they make.

When people advocate "pure capitalism", we are not talking about anarchy. A government still has many valid roles. It's just that that role does not include actually participating in the economy, rather, it is to do with regulation, defense and security, and legal processes.

So it seems the best system is a good blend of capitalism, and some protections ie. safety net so there is a bottom, below which we cannot fall. As a result we may not be able to climb quite so high as others do, but that is the trade-off we must make, in order to be RESPONSIBLE.

I agree that there needs to be some basic social safety net, simply from a pragmatic and aesthetic point of view. In that regard, I am not a pure capitalist. However, it is a matter of degree. My view is that we should not have people starving to death or freezing to death on the streets, but that's where my view of what a valid social safety net should provide ends.

[bloodyminded]

At any rate, those who are most richly rewarded by the "capitalist" system are capitalists of convenience only. They demand an interventionist state (and buy it, through political campaigns and lobbying) that will help them when their casino mentality gets them into hot water...no doubt clutching their copies of Ayn Rand as they denounce socialism for anyone but the "too big to fail."

[Shady]

And as I pointed out earlier, an unregulated market also faces risk of collapse. We just saw that happen in the USA.

There are no unregulated markets. The collapse of the European Union is a direct result of European socialism. The kind of socialism you people admire and seek for Canada.

It's instructive to understand that Spains problems come from a real estate boom(bubble),bust and a resulting construction bust.

Spain's economic woes are a direct result of its long experiment with European socialism. Bigger government, doing more things, spending more money. And liberal endeavors such as these...

But a new study of Spain’s renewable energy initiatives has found that creating green jobs actually destroys jobs in other sectors — and most of the time doesn’t lead to permanent employment.

The study, which was directed by an economics professor at Juan Carlos University of Madrid, found that every green job created by the Spanish government destroyed an average of 2.2 other jobs, and that only 1 in 10 were permanent.

AP

The day of reckoning is upon us. And all of you forum socialists need to wake up to facts. Your constant insistence of larger government, providing more and more, complemented with higher and higher taxes is a complete and utter failure.

Once again the old adage rings true. Socialism is great, until you run out of other people's money.

[Michael Hardner]

Once again the old adage rings true. Socialism is great, until you run out of other people's money.

It's a "forced tithe" that delivers a better life to those at the bottom. Have a look at the worst parts of American cities, and you'll see how bad things can get under pure capitalism.

[Shady]

It's a "forced tithe" that delivers a better life to those at the bottom. Have a look at the worst parts of American cities, and you'll see how bad things can get under pure capitalism.

How are you making life better for those at the bottom, if you're bankrupting the entire system that pays for it? And how exactly are you making life better for people at the bottom by trapping them into a lifestyle of government dependency?

American cities have been run by liberal democrats practicing socialist policies for decades and decades. Higher and higher taxes, larger and larger spending. And things don't get better, they get worse. Do you know how many trillions of dollars has been spent on the so-called war on poverty? Have you ever heard of Johnson's "great society?" How long do you plan on doing something that fails until you try something different? 100 years? 200 years? How long?

[Michael Hardner]

How are you making life better for those at the bottom, if you're bankrupting the entire system that pays for it? And how exactly are you making life better for people at the bottom by trapping them into a lifestyle of government dependency?

Bankrupting the system is a function of whether the system is designed so that it is adequately funded to support its programs.

"lifestyle of government dependency" is a term that I can't easily dissect. I would say people at the bottom are dependent, and the question is more about what they're getting out of the entire system.

American cities have been run by liberal democrats practicing socialist policies for decades and decades. Higher and higher taxes, larger and larger spending. And things don't get better, they get worse. Do you know how many trillions of dollars has been spent on the so-called war on poverty? Have you ever heard of Johnson's "great society?" How long do you plan on doing something that fails until you try something different? 100 years? 200 years? How long?

Johnson's great society did have an immediate impact on poverty. Rather than talking absolute dollars (yes, programs cost billions and trillions over years) maybe we can compare spending in the US versus, say, Sweden and compare life at the bottom of the ladder for those from those countries.

How long ? I don't know what you're asking. How long what ? How long should governments mitigate the effects of poverty in society, and to what degree ? I guess the answer is that it depends. I don't think relative poverty is a problem, but there is another kind of bottom line that needs to be managed there. It's a question of values, really.

[eyeball]

And all of you forum socialists need to wake up to facts. Your constant insistence of larger government...

You're full of crap.

The fact is I've never once insisted we have larger governments and you'll never find a single post of mine that say's what you've claimed.