Let's Discuss Socialism

[Al-O-Meter]

Good post... I used to be against socialized medicine, but I've openly warmed up to it. The problem is that once more socialized the care goes down and wait times like in Canada are astronomical. That and I don't trust our government to run anything properly.

You are wise not to trust the government. The reason for the high cost of our medical system is the government. For proof, you need to look no further than to the states trying to end abortion before the Dobbs decision. Their very effective tactic was to make abortion clinics subject to the same regulations other medical facilities had to abide by. In states where that was done, nearly all abortion clinics went out of business. The United States has created a regulatory regime in the medical services market segment so onerous that it serves to screen out competition in the busy markets and makes compliance by rural hospitals economically unfeasible.

The Affordable Care Act did nothing to address the fundamental issue driving the rise in medical costs. It only hid the costs by building a pipeline from the national debt directly into the coffers of the giant medical service providers. A socialized system in the United States would only make the ACA obfuscation more robust.

 

[SteakNEggs]

You are wise not to trust the government. The reason for the high cost of our medical system is the government. For proof, you need to look no further than to the states trying to end abortion before the Dobbs decision. Their very effective tactic was to make abortion clinics subject to the same regulations other medical facilities had to abide by. In states where that was done, nearly all abortion clinics went out of business. The United States has created a regulatory regime in the medical services market segment so onerous that it serves to screen out competition in the busy markets and makes compliance by rural hospitals economically unfeasible.

The Affordable Care Act did nothing to address the fundamental issue driving the rise in medical costs. It only hid the costs by building a pipeline from the national debt directly into the coffers of the giant medical service providers. A socialized system in the United States would only make the ACA obfuscation more robust.

Let's not forget the massive contributions big pharma throws at our politicians. Why exactly does Pfizer need to contribute to something like 220 different lawmakers?

This is why I was astonished people like @Saint Cy of JFC didn't even for a second question the vaccine. These people trust a company that buys politicians and has a monopoly on live saving drugs? Absolutely insane to me. Would socialized medicine fix this? Potentially, but again you really think they and the politicians are going to lose the massive money and power? Hell no.

 

[JimLes]

Let's not forget the massive contributions big pharma throws at our politicians. Why exactly does Pfizer need to contribute to something like 220 different lawmakers?

Why does anyone need to contribute to different lawmakers and why do lawmakers need contributions to begin with?

That's probably a bigger issue to fix.

 

[Al-O-Meter]

Why does anyone need to contribute to different lawmakers and why do lawmakers need contributions to begin with?

That is core to our system and identity. Freedom of Speech is the first amendment of our constitution, and the Citizens United v. FEC court case upheld that money is speech with regards to the first amendment.

Repealing the first amendment isn't going to happen. Until voters get smarter, educate themselves on every issue, and universally engage in voting, this is the system we've got. Money buys elections and big corporate interests supply money.

 

[PJF]

View: https://x.com/LibertyCappy/status/1818034800810250646

 

[SteakNEggs]

Why does anyone need to contribute to different lawmakers and why do lawmakers need contributions to begin with?

That's probably a bigger issue to fix.

Yeah no argument here.

 

[Rubashov]

View: https://x.com/LibertyCappy/status/1818034800810250646

Yes happens to all countries with universal health care. Right now I'm posting from the bus shelter I live in cause of Medicare... Now the CIA and the state department wouldn't have anything to do with the chaos in Venezuela would they?

 

[Douchebag K]

I’d reply but I’m too busy enjoying a tropical holiday that my own self sacrifice, dedication and saving has pid for. So sod off peasants.

Kidding. I’ll reply with a few thoughts when I get time. I wouldn’t even pretend to understand these systems in full, although I do have some clear opinions. And like someone else stated I have many mixed viewpoints that lean both ways.

But first can someone draw the line for me between socialism and communism ?? Serious question And not Rubashov with his 5 page thesis on the topic, just a clear distinction.

Also is anyone for full communism ?

 

[Douchebag K]

Ok so. 1. I like cheese.

Now I’d like to point out I don’t profess to know anything like all the detail of all these factors in the US because I live in one of the better, fairer countries on earth. We have a public health system funded by a 1.5 % ? Levy on our personal income tax. As well as a private health system for those who prefer that, although once you make over a certain amount you’re financially pretty much forced to take out private cover. I certain think it’s monstrous that if you can’t afford health care you don’t receive it, that just seems inhumane. And the control and corruption of big pharma over the health care industry in the US is despicable.

Similarly we have compulsory % contribution from employers to retirement funds only to be accessed upon retirement which is a great thing.

We had free tertiary education from the early 70s until the late 80s, replaced with a government run higher education contribution scheme which is basically a load only indexed to CPI I think that is a good balance between people contributing but having the chance to access University education based on merit

I don’t know a lot about public housing so I can’t really comment

I do think Australia is crazily over governed. The amount of our taxes that are wasted by bloated government departments that are almost universally incompetent and inefficient is eye waterying. So I am in favour of a good amount of social services being rooted in Government but if we could have then run a lot more efficiently somehow that’d be great. I have come to really not appreciate people in the public service who mostly never ever pay for any mistakes made as opposed to those of us running small businesses who do. Government jobs here are crazily cushy and easy street compared to a lot of the private sector.

Welfare / social security I favour although I really believe that incentive to work and achieve is vital for the human spirit. I would err on the side of there being a significant advantage to having a job even a lower paying one compared to being fully in benefits

And so the same as far as government should control the means of production / industry as little as is practically possible. People should have incentive to do things, achieve things for themselves as much as is possible in principle

I’ll leave it at that. Hope that makes sense ?? Happy to have anything pointed out / questioned

 

[LogGrad98]

Ok so. 1. I like cheese.

Now I’d like to point out I don’t profess to know anything like all the detail of all these factors in the US because I live in one of the better, fairer countries on earth. We have a public health system funded by a 1.5 % ? Levy on our personal income tax. As well as a private health system for those who prefer that, although once you make over a certain amount you’re financially pretty much forced to take out private cover. I certain think it’s monstrous that if you can’t afford health care you don’t receive it, that just seems inhumane. And the control and corruption of big pharma over the health care industry in the US is despicable.

Similarly we have compulsory % contribution from employers to retirement funds only to be accessed upon retirement which is a great thing.

We had free tertiary education from the early 70s until the late 80s, replaced with a government run higher education contribution scheme which is basically a load only indexed to CPI I think that is a good balance between people contributing but having the chance to access University education based on merit

I don’t know a lot about public housing so I can’t really comment

I do think Australia is crazily over governed. The amount of our taxes that are wasted by bloated government departments that are almost universally incompetent and inefficient is eye waterying. So I am in favour of a good amount of social services being rooted in Government but if we could have then run a lot more efficiently somehow that’d be great. I have come to really not appreciate people in the public service who mostly never ever pay for any mistakes made as opposed to those of us running small businesses who do. Government jobs here are crazily cushy and easy street compared to a lot of the private sector.

Welfare / social security I favour although I really believe that incentive to work and achieve is vital for the human spirit. I would err on the side of there being a significant advantage to having a job even a lower paying one compared to being fully in benefits

And so the same as far as government should control the means of production / industry as little as is practically possible. People should have incentive to do things, achieve things for themselves as much as is possible in principle

I’ll leave it at that. Hope that makes sense ?? Happy to have anything pointed out / questioned

Good response. I am also in favor of all of those things you outlined. I also think government in general is bloated, here as well, and that government jobs tend to be cushy, although people seem to genuinely hate them at nearly every level. One thing I think we need to abolish is income tax returns, and have the government just send out tax statements. That is a huge drain on Americans in general. I am fully in favor of funding health care for all and for funding retirement for all. It really isn't complicated, tie it all directly to index funds and leave it the **** alone. That last part is a huge problem here, politicians love putting their fingers in every pie. And they need to break the stranglehold the medical and pharma industries have on Americans in general.

Even with all that fixed and in place, it still isn't really socialism. Especially the way the right tends to run on and on about it. It is their biggest boogey-man though. Oh no, she is a socialist, she is in favor of not bankrupting people for health issues, I guess that means we are in favor of it, what? Stupid ****ing morons.

 

[Safetydan]

Ok so. 1. I like cheese.

Now I’d like to point out I don’t profess to know anything like all the detail of all these factors in the US because I live in one of the better, fairer countries on earth. We have a public health system funded by a 1.5 % ? Levy on our personal income tax. As well as a private health system for those who prefer that, although once you make over a certain amount you’re financially pretty much forced to take out private cover. I certain think it’s monstrous that if you can’t afford health care you don’t receive it, that just seems inhumane. And the control and corruption of big pharma over the health care industry in the US is despicable.

Similarly we have compulsory % contribution from employers to retirement funds only to be accessed upon retirement which is a great thing.

We had free tertiary education from the early 70s until the late 80s, replaced with a government run higher education contribution scheme which is basically a load only indexed to CPI I think that is a good balance between people contributing but having the chance to access University education based on merit

I don’t know a lot about public housing so I can’t really comment

I do think Australia is crazily over governed. The amount of our taxes that are wasted by bloated government departments that are almost universally incompetent and inefficient is eye waterying. So I am in favour of a good amount of social services being rooted in Government but if we could have then run a lot more efficiently somehow that’d be great. I have come to really not appreciate people in the public service who mostly never ever pay for any mistakes made as opposed to those of us running small businesses who do. Government jobs here are crazily cushy and easy street compared to a lot of the private sector.

Welfare / social security I favour although I really believe that incentive to work and achieve is vital for the human spirit. I would err on the side of there being a significant advantage to having a job even a lower paying one compared to being fully in benefits

And so the same as far as government should control the means of production / industry as little as is practically possible. People should have incentive to do things, achieve things for themselves as much as is possible in principle

I’ll leave it at that. Hope that makes sense ?? Happy to have anything pointed out / questioned

We all hate inefficiency. But the answer to that for some people seems to be "government programs in service of your average citizens are inefficient so let's get rid of them. But, also let's keep the inefficient programs that serve the military-industrial complex, corporations, and the wealthy."

I'm with you. we need to commit to allowing the government to provide for things where economic externalities exist, and increase the level of transparency and, accountability of government. Government should work in service of the citizens, right now it seems like the opposite.


I think I might be the only one open to pure socialism I.E. Communism in the distant future. I believe this is only acheivable in a post-scarcity society. --> Star-Trek

 

[LogGrad98]

We all hate inefficiency. But the answer to that for some people seems to be "government programs in service of your average citizens are inefficient so let's get rid of them. But, also let's keep the inefficient programs that serve the military-industrial complex, corporations, and the wealthy."

I'm with you. we need to commit to allowing the government to provide for things where economic externalities exist, and increase the level of transparency and, accountability of government. Government should work in service of the citizens, right now it seems like the opposite.


I think I might be the only one open to pure socialism I.E. Communism in the distant future. I believe this is only acheivable in a post-scarcity society. --> Star-Trek

I could live in the Star Trek universe. The thing I have a hard time seeing is the post-scarcity part. Nature, by its very nature, is scarce. And people are plentiful. And there will always be people who want more than everyone else. And those who want more who have the means to go get it. I know in the Star Trek universe those like that are portrayed more as a military faction, but I have a hard time seeing you not having businessmen and political leaders with more ambition than others. Sometimes they portray that in Star Trek as well. Even take Picard and his family vineyard. You don't think he has neighbors that covet his land, and his resources, not even a little bit? I find that hard to fathom. Could be I am just stuck in 21st century thinking, but even if you go back thousands of years we have evidence of the haves and have-nots in society. So the businessman and the politician amassing wealth and power have been a central part of pretty much all societies we have record of for millenia now. Not sure how that would all change in a few hundred years, regardless of the technological advancements or the reduction of scarcity.

But that said, I would love to live in the Star Trek universe, sign me up!

 

[Safetydan]

I could live in the Star Trek universe. The thing I have a hard time seeing is the post-scarcity part. Nature, by its very nature, is scarce. And people are plentiful. And there will always be people who want more than everyone else. And those who want more who have the means to go get it. I know in the Star Trek universe those like that are portrayed more as a military faction, but I have a hard time seeing you not having businessmen and political leaders with more ambition than others. Sometimes they portray that in Star Trek as well. Even take Picard and his family vineyard. You don't think he has neighbors that covet his land, and his resources, not even a little bit? I find that hard to fathom. Could be I am just stuck in 21st century thinking, but even if you go back thousands of years we have evidence of the haves and have-nots in society. So the businessman and the politician amassing wealth and power have been a central part of pretty much all societies we have record of for millenia now. Not sure how that would all change in a few hundred years, regardless of the technological advancements or the reduction of scarcity.

But that said, I would love to live in the Star Trek universe, sign me up!

You're not wrong. It's hard to imagine a future so different from our current circumstance. I'll plead guilty as charged to being optimistic about the future of humanity. I'd like to think that a better world/galaxy exists for us after I'm long dead.

 

[LogGrad98]

You're not wrong. It's hard to imagine a future so different from our current circumstance. I'll plead guilty as charged to being optimistic about the future of humanity. I'd like to think that a better world/galaxy exists for us after I'm long dead.

Maybe you would like to read this book I have for you here. About a dude in a toga. Will change your world-view and post-world-view at the same time.

 

[Rubashov]

I’d reply but I’m too busy enjoying a tropical holiday that my own self sacrifice, dedication and saving has pid for. So sod off peasants.

Kidding. I’ll reply with a few thoughts when I get time. I wouldn’t even pretend to understand these systems in full, although I do have some clear opinions. And like someone else stated I have many mixed viewpoints that lean both ways.

But first can someone draw the line for me between socialism and communism ?? Serious question And not Rubashov with his 5 page thesis on the topic, just a clear distinction.

Also is anyone for full communism ?

You're a ****ing idiot.

 

[Rubashov]

I’d reply but I’m too busy enjoying a tropical holiday that my own self sacrifice, dedication and saving has pid for. So sod off peasants.

Kidding. I’ll reply with a few thoughts when I get time. I wouldn’t even pretend to understand these systems in full, although I do have some clear opinions. And like someone else stated I have many mixed viewpoints that lean both ways.

But first can someone draw the line for me between socialism and communism ?? Serious question And not Rubashov with his 5 page thesis on the topic, just a clear distinction.

Also is anyone for full communism ?

There isn't an essential difference between communism and socialism, however in most countries that have been communist have been single party dictatorships. This isn't always true however the communist party has been in power regionally in northern Italy and nationally as part of coalitions without the country being a single party state or that being a party aim. In terms of economics there is no prescribed path for socialism or communism, historically it has differed from country to country. I suppose it really has to do with the party itself and the communist international, most communist parties were either Moscow or Beijing aligned and therefore were organised and funded as a global movement with nominally central control. (Again this wasn't always the case) Socialist movements tended not to be organised as strictly as this.

Ok so. 1. I like cheese.

Now I’d like to point out I don’t profess to know anything like all the detail of all these factors in the US because I live in one of the better, fairer countries on earth. We have a public health system funded by a 1.5 % ? Levy on our personal income tax. As well as a private health system for those who prefer that, although once you make over a certain amount you’re financially pretty much forced to take out private cover. I certain think it’s monstrous that if you can’t afford health care you don’t receive it, that just seems inhumane. And the control and corruption of big pharma over the health care industry in the US is despicable.

Similarly we have compulsory % contribution from employers to retirement funds only to be accessed upon retirement which is a great thing.

We had free tertiary education from the early 70s until the late 80s, replaced with a government run higher education contribution scheme which is basically a load only indexed to CPI I think that is a good balance between people contributing but having the chance to access University education based on merit

I don’t know a lot about public housing so I can’t really comment

I do think Australia is crazily over governed. The amount of our taxes that are wasted by bloated government departments that are almost universally incompetent and inefficient is eye waterying. So I am in favour of a good amount of social services being rooted in Government but if we could have then run a lot more efficiently somehow that’d be great. I have come to really not appreciate people in the public service who mostly never ever pay for any mistakes made as opposed to those of us running small businesses who do. Government jobs here are crazily cushy and easy street compared to a lot of the private sector.

Welfare / social security I favour although I really believe that incentive to work and achieve is vital for the human spirit. I would err on the side of there being a significant advantage to having a job even a lower paying one compared to being fully in benefits

And so the same as far as government should control the means of production / industry as little as is practically possible. People should have incentive to do things, achieve things for themselves as much as is possible in principle

I’ll leave it at that. Hope that makes sense ?? Happy to have anything pointed out / questioned

The Medicare levy changes with your earnings, bastard thing cost me 5k this year.

Public housing has been in steady decline since the 80s with government not investing in the sector.

Depends on department some are better than others, for instance I think the tax payer would save a fortune is the NDIS was administered by the DHHS instead of private businesses intent on ripping off the tax payer at every opportunity due to lack of oversight. Theres a great argument that Telecom should have continued to operate a monopoly in telecommunications, in a country this size, with a small population and high living standards ensuring that all citizens have as far as possible equal access to the digital highway was always going to be expensive. And in the end of the day the taxpayer was going to have to pay for it because the market won't, (this is exactly what happened with the NBN) Telstra nee Telecom, once they were privatised by Howard dropped plans for an optic fibre national network (which they had already started was gonna cost about 3 billion instead of 30) due to costs to shareholders. If the taxpayer is going to pay for it, why shouldn't they own it and derive full financial benefit from it? Instead we left Optus (Singtel) use it at subsidized costs, when Singtel is itself a government monopoly and Australian companies do not get reciprocal access to their economy.

I find you faith in markets disturbing.

 

[Al-O-Meter]

But first can someone draw the line for me between socialism and communism ?? Serious question

Socialism is a centrally planned economic system with a mechanism for the people to have representation in the economic command structure. All socialism is a command economy, but not all command economies are socialism.

Communism is a type of socialism where the command and control of the economy is facilitated via state ownership of all property. All communism is socialism but not all socialism is communism.

 

[PJF]

Where it starts:


View: https://x.com/RobProvince/status/1820113997234094333

 

[The Thriller]

There have been some really informed posts in this thread. I’d just like to add that Americans might have a different perspective if they could ever leave their own country and visit others for a while. In particular, Scandinavian and Western European countries. It’s pretty arrogant to think that we’ve got everything figured out perfectly here when other countries might have a superior system of government, health care, education, and transportation. It’ll also add that one can learn a lot from (failed) countries in South America where irresponsible capitalism has taken its toll on both humans and the environment.

 

[The Thriller]

Oh, and health care should be a right. It’s ****ing insane to normal humans with half a brain to think that legally I have a right to own more guns than the militaries of some countries yet go bankrupt because I or someone in my family gets sick. Like… what the **** are we even doing?