I have proposals for the new country, Southern Sudan. What do you think?
As you all may know, Southern Sudan is about to officially become a sovereign state. I have some proposals for the new country that I'd like to run by the group. This seems like the perfect place to submit them. The first main thing I'd like to introduce is a new currency. For the purposes of this post, I'll call the currency SSK (Southern Sudan Krona). I have 2 propositions for the currency. 1. Currency introduction could go like the Euro. When the Euro was first introduces, the exchange was about 1.19 Euros to $1 (USD). So, when first introducing the SSK, the exchange rate could be 1.20 SSK = $1. Eventually as time goes on, the SSK will get stronger until it's equal and surpasses the USD in value. 2. The currency value could start off and remain low in value but high in quantity. Let's say....6.70 SSK = $1. It could be like Norway, where people make LOTS of money. Minimum wage could be like 200 SSK/hr. ($30). People will make lots of money but cost of living will also be pretty expensive. So a minimum wage salary for a month would be 32,000 SSK ($4800). That would give the people lots of purchasing power. Other things I'd like to get there are international chain restaurants, build the communications infrastructure with wired and wireless high speed internet connections and cell phone towers for smart phones, Wal-Mart type stores that have everything, and transportation networks (interstates, roads, paved streets). I'd also like to get in a modern banking system where people go to open accounts and make deposits, and are issued credit and debit cards for purchases. I'd really like to go there, submit my ideas, and have them let me help them make it the strongest, richest economy in Africa. Tell me what you think.
Current Events - 1 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
I think you're delusional.
Thursday, June 14, 2012
Thursday, June 7, 2012
Do you think America actually gives money to poor people in other countries?
Do you think America actually gives money to poor people in other countries?
Americans are regularly told by politicians and the media, that America is the world's most generous nation. This is one of the most conventional pieces of 'knowledgeable ignorance'. According to the OECD, the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, the US gave between $6 and $15 billion in foreign aid in the period between 1995 and 1999. In absolute terms, Japan gives more than the US, between $9 and $15 billion in the same period. But the absolute figures are less significant than the proportion of gross domestic product (GDP, or national wealth) that a country devotes to foreign aid. On that league table, the US ranks twenty-second of the 22 most developed nations. As former President Jimmy Carter commented: 'We are the stingiest nation of all'. Denmark is top of the table, giving 1.01% of GDP, while the US manages just 0.1%. The United Nations has long established the target of 0.7% GDP for development assistance, although only four countries actually achieve this: Denmark, 1.01%; Norway, 0.91%; the Netherlands, 0.79%; Sweden, 0.7%. Apart from being the least generous nation, the US is highly selective in who receives its aid. Over 50% of its aid budget is spent on middle-income countries in the Middle East, with Israel being the recipient of the largest single share. The purpose of 99% of foreign "aid" is to create foreign markets for US products, especially arms sales. Foreign aid aids the giver (America), not the recipient. The leaders get the money, not the people. Giving money to the people is both not useful to the US as well as rather impossible. There are no people driving up to villages with cash and handing townspeople money making sure to distribute it evenly. They give it to the government and or the rebel leadership to allot. Richer nations receive the most aid. 1 third of all American aid goes to Israel and Egypt. After that it goes to places like Columbia, Pakistan, Jordan etc... not Rwanda or Burundi or Botswana. When looking at how it's allotted by the US, it's clear that strategic considerations, political alignment and drug policy are the biggest considerations while the poorest nations receive the least if any aid. The U.N. Voting Record doesn't even count, if you can't do anything for the US. Sweden spends the majority of it's aid on places like Sierra Leone, Gaza & the West Bank and Liberia and the rest of Africa. When will Americans come out of their government / media induced coma and realize the propaganda that is fed them? Of course America doesn't give money to poor people. They don't even give any to poor dying Americans, why would they give it to a Botswanian? http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2006/10/08/bush_brings_faith_to_foreign_aid/ http://www.networkeurope.org/feature/sweden-cuts-foreign-aid-recipients http://www.vexen.co.uk/USA/foreign_aid.html "Below 50%" - 500 million. He's not worth 50 billion. Anyway, re-read, you're not getting it. "End the Fed" - Please no more self-delusional America speak about how we all mooch off America's generosity in defending us. We neither want nor need America's "protection". "Cracker" - The topic is foreign aid genius, not charities in America for Americans.
Politics - 11 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
I did not know that. Pretty shocking... but unsurprising.
2 :
Yes I do. At least in terms of individual donations to charity, and not purely government statistics like the ones you use. Americans (not government) give more to charity than any other nation in the world. So your lame attempt to denigrate Americans (for whatever reason) is laughable. Rant much? How does it feel to be a "Top Contributor" that's shown to be selective in their data, dishonest in it's presentation, exposed, and frankly outfoxed by a lowly level 1 with no avatar calling himself "cracker"? Must feel embarrassing.
3 :
Very surprising I did not know this.
4 :
When they stop rushing back and forth from their jobs so they can pay taxes.
5 :
bill gates donated $50 billion dollars for AIDS research, do you know of a man from denmark who gave that much money away.
6 :
We do give for our own gain but when you say Japan gives all that money I say yeah because they barely pay for their defense because the U.S. does. The bankers manipulated us into being world police and hegemony guardians, some countries benefit greatly while others get tyrannized. The U.S. provides defense and hits for half the world, the people allow it to happen because they don't know the wisdom of non intervention and are taught there is no other way.
7 :
Not surprising. I didn't know the exact numbers but I know that all the money the U.S. gives for aid is directly tied to helping U.S. interests worldwide. I suppose the reasoning is that such aid helps U.S. businesses and sets up stable markets so that the people can use them. Then again, it also tends to lead them into dependency, which does them no good. Thanks for the numbers. However, you seem to imply that Sweden, Denmark, and Japan give money to these poorer states out of some perceived charity. I would dispute that. When Sweden gives money to Sierra Leone, they are seeking after their interests just as much as the United States is by investing in Egypt or Israel or whereever. Don't think for a moment that they are doing it out of the kindness of their heart. Swedish interests may not be economic in nature, especially to places like Sierra Leone, but they are getting some benefit out of it, be it business, defense, or diplomatic. It may even be a prestige thing. To quote Lord Palmerston, a former British Prime Minister, "Nations have no permanent friends or allies, they only have permanent interests." Cheers! ©2009 SinisterMatt. All Rights Reserved.
8 :
I am not surprised as we just write a check and let some idiot decide who gets what , without conditions why write th check? We need to end all foreign aid!
9 :
That's a joke right they rather build their military then give to the poor
10 :
The American people donate more money than any single government on Earth to charity, including our own. Your numbers are just government aid, not the total of government and private aid. If you tell the whole story instead of cherry picking your numbers, then America is clearly the most generous nation on Earth.
11 :
not at all surprising.
Americans are regularly told by politicians and the media, that America is the world's most generous nation. This is one of the most conventional pieces of 'knowledgeable ignorance'. According to the OECD, the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, the US gave between $6 and $15 billion in foreign aid in the period between 1995 and 1999. In absolute terms, Japan gives more than the US, between $9 and $15 billion in the same period. But the absolute figures are less significant than the proportion of gross domestic product (GDP, or national wealth) that a country devotes to foreign aid. On that league table, the US ranks twenty-second of the 22 most developed nations. As former President Jimmy Carter commented: 'We are the stingiest nation of all'. Denmark is top of the table, giving 1.01% of GDP, while the US manages just 0.1%. The United Nations has long established the target of 0.7% GDP for development assistance, although only four countries actually achieve this: Denmark, 1.01%; Norway, 0.91%; the Netherlands, 0.79%; Sweden, 0.7%. Apart from being the least generous nation, the US is highly selective in who receives its aid. Over 50% of its aid budget is spent on middle-income countries in the Middle East, with Israel being the recipient of the largest single share. The purpose of 99% of foreign "aid" is to create foreign markets for US products, especially arms sales. Foreign aid aids the giver (America), not the recipient. The leaders get the money, not the people. Giving money to the people is both not useful to the US as well as rather impossible. There are no people driving up to villages with cash and handing townspeople money making sure to distribute it evenly. They give it to the government and or the rebel leadership to allot. Richer nations receive the most aid. 1 third of all American aid goes to Israel and Egypt. After that it goes to places like Columbia, Pakistan, Jordan etc... not Rwanda or Burundi or Botswana. When looking at how it's allotted by the US, it's clear that strategic considerations, political alignment and drug policy are the biggest considerations while the poorest nations receive the least if any aid. The U.N. Voting Record doesn't even count, if you can't do anything for the US. Sweden spends the majority of it's aid on places like Sierra Leone, Gaza & the West Bank and Liberia and the rest of Africa. When will Americans come out of their government / media induced coma and realize the propaganda that is fed them? Of course America doesn't give money to poor people. They don't even give any to poor dying Americans, why would they give it to a Botswanian? http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2006/10/08/bush_brings_faith_to_foreign_aid/ http://www.networkeurope.org/feature/sweden-cuts-foreign-aid-recipients http://www.vexen.co.uk/USA/foreign_aid.html "Below 50%" - 500 million. He's not worth 50 billion. Anyway, re-read, you're not getting it. "End the Fed" - Please no more self-delusional America speak about how we all mooch off America's generosity in defending us. We neither want nor need America's "protection". "Cracker" - The topic is foreign aid genius, not charities in America for Americans.
Politics - 11 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
I did not know that. Pretty shocking... but unsurprising.
2 :
Yes I do. At least in terms of individual donations to charity, and not purely government statistics like the ones you use. Americans (not government) give more to charity than any other nation in the world. So your lame attempt to denigrate Americans (for whatever reason) is laughable. Rant much? How does it feel to be a "Top Contributor" that's shown to be selective in their data, dishonest in it's presentation, exposed, and frankly outfoxed by a lowly level 1 with no avatar calling himself "cracker"? Must feel embarrassing.
3 :
Very surprising I did not know this.
4 :
When they stop rushing back and forth from their jobs so they can pay taxes.
5 :
bill gates donated $50 billion dollars for AIDS research, do you know of a man from denmark who gave that much money away.
6 :
We do give for our own gain but when you say Japan gives all that money I say yeah because they barely pay for their defense because the U.S. does. The bankers manipulated us into being world police and hegemony guardians, some countries benefit greatly while others get tyrannized. The U.S. provides defense and hits for half the world, the people allow it to happen because they don't know the wisdom of non intervention and are taught there is no other way.
7 :
Not surprising. I didn't know the exact numbers but I know that all the money the U.S. gives for aid is directly tied to helping U.S. interests worldwide. I suppose the reasoning is that such aid helps U.S. businesses and sets up stable markets so that the people can use them. Then again, it also tends to lead them into dependency, which does them no good. Thanks for the numbers. However, you seem to imply that Sweden, Denmark, and Japan give money to these poorer states out of some perceived charity. I would dispute that. When Sweden gives money to Sierra Leone, they are seeking after their interests just as much as the United States is by investing in Egypt or Israel or whereever. Don't think for a moment that they are doing it out of the kindness of their heart. Swedish interests may not be economic in nature, especially to places like Sierra Leone, but they are getting some benefit out of it, be it business, defense, or diplomatic. It may even be a prestige thing. To quote Lord Palmerston, a former British Prime Minister, "Nations have no permanent friends or allies, they only have permanent interests." Cheers! ©2009 SinisterMatt. All Rights Reserved.
8 :
I am not surprised as we just write a check and let some idiot decide who gets what , without conditions why write th check? We need to end all foreign aid!
9 :
That's a joke right they rather build their military then give to the poor
10 :
The American people donate more money than any single government on Earth to charity, including our own. Your numbers are just government aid, not the total of government and private aid. If you tell the whole story instead of cherry picking your numbers, then America is clearly the most generous nation on Earth.
11 :
not at all surprising.
Friday, June 1, 2012
How much would a profession like this make in norway?
How much would a profession like this make in norway?
If you happen to be a Finishing Contractor in Norway, as in freelance, would you be making a lot of money? Lets say u live outside of Oslo? Are people in this profession considered wealthy, or just have enough to feed a family of 2-3? As a Finishing contractor, and a strong believer of the Christian Faith, can he also be an elder of a church there? putting together financial and professional status...?
Other - Europe - 1 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
This company (Access Personnel AS) need an contractor, take contact with therese@access-personnel.no I bet you would make lots of money, and remember, that if you are working in Norway and get sick, you will still receive money and insurance.
If you happen to be a Finishing Contractor in Norway, as in freelance, would you be making a lot of money? Lets say u live outside of Oslo? Are people in this profession considered wealthy, or just have enough to feed a family of 2-3? As a Finishing contractor, and a strong believer of the Christian Faith, can he also be an elder of a church there? putting together financial and professional status...?
Other - Europe - 1 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
This company (Access Personnel AS) need an contractor, take contact with therese@access-personnel.no I bet you would make lots of money, and remember, that if you are working in Norway and get sick, you will still receive money and insurance.
Monday, May 28, 2012
I need help to translate english into french! Help me?
I need help to translate english into french! Help me?
Hey! Will you help me? I am supposed to translate this into easy french! Make it as easy as possible! No difficult words! Do not use any translator softwares! I want you to be a person who actually talks french! Here it is: - My mom does not like shopping. Instead she gives me the money so I can go shopping. She is very nice. She has short brown hair and brown eyes. My father is also nice. He always helps me with my homework. He also has brown hair, but he has blue eyes, not brown. He is a chef so he loves eating just as Marie. He plays the guitar with my everyday. - I miss the a little. In the beginning I missed them a lot, but I miss them less now. They call me almost everyday. My famille d'accueil is very nice to me and they treat me as one of them! I like that! Do you miss your family? - When my real parents told me that I was going to France to study I expected a lot of this place. New friends, new environment, new everything. Everything was just as I expected it would be. I have a lot of new friends, and I love this country. But it is hard to talk french, it is very hard! - It is hard because I have only learned it for three years now. But at least I try! What did you expect? - Why? - Thats it? - If you say so! - How is your sister from Norway? I have not spoken to her for a long time. - Yes, he is my bestfriend and he is very very nice. I miss him very much! --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I know it sucks, but please! I really need help! Merci beaucoup in advance! =)
Languages - 1 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
My mom = Ma maman = elle She likes shopping = Elle aime le shopping She does not like = Elle n’aime pas ____ She gives me = Elle me donne de l’argent To be = être (je suis, tu es, il/elle est – nous sommes, vous êtes, ils/elles sont. You have to memorize this) To have = avoir (j’ai, tu as, il/elle a – nous avons, vous avez, ils/ells ont. Memorize this) He loves eating = Il aime manger He plays the guitar = Il joue de la _____ I miss them = Je m’ennui d’eux A little = un peu In the beginning = Au début A lot = beaucoup Less = moins They call me = Ila m’appellent To me = avec moi At least = au moins http://www.wordreference.com/enfr/a%20lot You need to study this: • Auxiliaires : ÊTRE et AVOIR • Semi-auxiliaires : DEVOIR, POUVOIR, VOULOIR, SAVOIR, FALLOIR, ALLER, FAIRE • 1er groupe : –er > CHANTER –e, es, e, ons, ez, ent ( Tous les verbes sauf ALLER ) • 2e groupe : –ir > FINIR –is, is, it, issons, issez, issent • 3e groupe : –dre > RÉPONDRE –ds, ds, d, dons, dez, dent ; + Tous les autres verbes • Verbes pronominaux > SE lever – http://www.lepointdufle.net/present.htm Try to do it by yourself. Everyone learns from his mistakes
Hey! Will you help me? I am supposed to translate this into easy french! Make it as easy as possible! No difficult words! Do not use any translator softwares! I want you to be a person who actually talks french! Here it is: - My mom does not like shopping. Instead she gives me the money so I can go shopping. She is very nice. She has short brown hair and brown eyes. My father is also nice. He always helps me with my homework. He also has brown hair, but he has blue eyes, not brown. He is a chef so he loves eating just as Marie. He plays the guitar with my everyday. - I miss the a little. In the beginning I missed them a lot, but I miss them less now. They call me almost everyday. My famille d'accueil is very nice to me and they treat me as one of them! I like that! Do you miss your family? - When my real parents told me that I was going to France to study I expected a lot of this place. New friends, new environment, new everything. Everything was just as I expected it would be. I have a lot of new friends, and I love this country. But it is hard to talk french, it is very hard! - It is hard because I have only learned it for three years now. But at least I try! What did you expect? - Why? - Thats it? - If you say so! - How is your sister from Norway? I have not spoken to her for a long time. - Yes, he is my bestfriend and he is very very nice. I miss him very much! --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I know it sucks, but please! I really need help! Merci beaucoup in advance! =)
Languages - 1 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
My mom = Ma maman = elle She likes shopping = Elle aime le shopping She does not like = Elle n’aime pas ____ She gives me = Elle me donne de l’argent To be = être (je suis, tu es, il/elle est – nous sommes, vous êtes, ils/elles sont. You have to memorize this) To have = avoir (j’ai, tu as, il/elle a – nous avons, vous avez, ils/ells ont. Memorize this) He loves eating = Il aime manger He plays the guitar = Il joue de la _____ I miss them = Je m’ennui d’eux A little = un peu In the beginning = Au début A lot = beaucoup Less = moins They call me = Ila m’appellent To me = avec moi At least = au moins http://www.wordreference.com/enfr/a%20lot You need to study this: • Auxiliaires : ÊTRE et AVOIR • Semi-auxiliaires : DEVOIR, POUVOIR, VOULOIR, SAVOIR, FALLOIR, ALLER, FAIRE • 1er groupe : –er > CHANTER –e, es, e, ons, ez, ent ( Tous les verbes sauf ALLER ) • 2e groupe : –ir > FINIR –is, is, it, issons, issez, issent • 3e groupe : –dre > RÉPONDRE –ds, ds, d, dons, dez, dent ; + Tous les autres verbes • Verbes pronominaux > SE lever – http://www.lepointdufle.net/present.htm Try to do it by yourself. Everyone learns from his mistakes
Monday, May 14, 2012
How, by the following definition, is North Korea socialist/communist [it's long out of neccessity, sorry]?
How, by the following definition, is North Korea socialist/communist [it's long out of neccessity, sorry]?
And by extension, everything else people seem to recognise as socialist/communist? In this thread please use the definition below, for the sake of figuring if north korea is socialist/communist. If you are not going to do that, don't bother answering. This isn't a thread saying socialism will work, it's a thread challenging the commonly held views about what socialism is. First off, my views as a socialist do not mesh with the ideas of many who call themselves socialists; I have heavy disagreements with social democrats, democratic socialists, trotskyites, leninists, deleonists, maoists, and stalinists. Therefore the definition I give will not match their definition. Second, I would like to make clear that when I say socialism or communism, I use these two words to refer to the exact same thing, not as seperate ideologies or one as a transitional phase and the other as some obscure utopia. My definition of socialism/communism is a society in which the people themselves share ownership and control the land and the means of production, through direct democracy. Essentially it's the extension of democracy to every quarter of society, the home, the workplace, and the community at large. A socialist society can only exist when the vast majority of the world population wants it to; there is no buying a plot of land and forming your own commune, as socialism can't exist while capitalism does. The people themselves then establish the socialist society democratically, through a revolution. In a socialist society, the following should apply: The socialist society has no monetary or barter system, there is no money and no trade, a socialist society has a gift economy. The socialist society is leaderless, since leaders are inherently undemocratic. The people themselves are in charge, administrating through a global direct democracy. The socialist society is stateless. Essentially, state is the power to use force legally against people. Socialism can't work in a coercive system. As well the existence of a state would undermine a classless society. The socialist society is borderless and global. Socialism can't exist in one country, nor can it exist while capitalism exists. The socialist society is classless. There are no upper and lower classes, no elites and no poor, and there is no state. So your turn. Does north korea fit the definition above? Did the soviet union? Does china? How bout cuba, vietnam, or cambodia? Do France, Norway, Canada, Sweden, Denmark, or any of those european countries fit the definition? Does obama fit the above definition of socialism? Vinny, if you're going to answer, READ THE DEFINITION AND DEFINE BY THAT! Your own definition of communism is irrelevent here. Everyone in the world socialist movement has agreed upon the definition above. This question is subject to linking and reposting, to ensure the most answers. That's cool, L, I look forward to your answer. :)
Politics - 6 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
It's a totalitarianism.
2 :
North Korea is most certainly 100% communist because Kim Jong, a tyrannical dictator, and his national military controls the entire nation which confiscates most of the countries food supplies to feed themselves (why do you think their army is so big...because thats where all the food is). Kim Jong also personally controls imports/exports, manufacturing, etc. He also answers to no parliment, no governing council or court-type leveling system of any kind. Edit: Give this answer all the thumbs down you want, it wont change the truth.
3 :
Learn to Juche. Socialism and communism are stupid, outdated, white ideologies. Their mention annoys the fuck out of me. Juche idea it is they are!
4 :
No country that has ever existed and no person who has ever existed fits your definition of a socialist. When people say that Obama or North Korea are socialist, they are obviously not using your definition. They're using some other definition. You can't have useful discussions with others until everybody involved in the discussion agrees upon the definitions of key words, phrases, and concepts. Hope that helps.
5 :
Your definition of Socialism is incorrect.. that's the problem. Or to use Communism for a better example (since it's more concrete than socialism)... In Communism there is no private ownership. Instead a central entity controls all production and distribution of resources. Without that central entity, there is no way to maintain the structure and you'd end up with anarchy. And that is the downfall of all such systems.. so long as there is one central group given so very much control it will always end up corrupt and no longer acting solely in the best interests of the people. If there is no central entity (I use that term because it doesn't have to be a government), what is to stop someone from taking 5 iphones for free just because he wants to? Or how could you stop someone from requiring pine cones in order to receive a jar of peanut butter? If there's no central ruling group then there's no system to maintain order. In Socialism and Communism, someone always manages the resources to determine who gets what. That is precisely what causes those systems to turn into modern slavery.
6 :
Socialism, at its root, is about the emancipation of the masses. Working men and women, no matter one's race, ethnicity, culture, or sexual orientation, are at the heart of the socialist ideal. Only through the resilience of the proletariat can Socialism prevail over Capitalism and the upper tiers of society that it benefits. But this is not something that is achievable unless the majority discover the meaning and revolutionary ideal of class consciousness. The complete abolition of privately-owned property, along with the eventual disintegration of the state and all its bureaucratic foibles is the ultimate conclusion of this - global - class struggle. Worker's democracy, with the strength of the proletariat as its foundation could be the ideal solution to any possible vacuum left by the destruction of the state. When the means of production and distribution is sorted out and finally implemented, and true transparency in both the decaying of the state and democracy is achieved, the worker cannot fall into complacency and deem his work done. Socialism, as implemented by a single state, has been proven to be both unproductive, disastrous, and most importantly, counterrevolutionary. Stalin believed in Socialism in one State; Mao advocated eternal revolution; others implemented similar methods with terrible, repressive results. It can be argued that Socialism, once accomplished in a single state, is at once in danger from within and without by certain elements whose sole purpose is to undermine the victory of the proletariat and bring him/her back under the yoke of class oppression. This cannot be disregarded as foolish paranoia, nor simply as the replacement of one dictatorship with another. However, the methods utilized by the Russians, Chinese, N. Koreans, Vietnamese, and countless other states are both terrible and exploitative. A reign of terror has no place in Socialism - no matter the severity of the situation before it. Socialism, once organized into an efficient process of production and distribution, must eventually begin the process of dissembling the state into a borderless entity within which all who possess the ability to work, work to the best of their abilities for the betterment of the collective good. Held to such a standard, N. Korea (or the USSR, Cuba, Vietnam, China, etc.) do not even hold a candle to the true concept of Socialism or the equality of the masses. These states remained within the binds of class stratification and state bureaucracy - the very things Socialism rails against. When the state owns the means of industry, military, governance, and security, the people are left with naught but the very thing they originally overthrew. Not that they themselves are immediately aware of this; the state goes to such ridiculous and heavy-handed lengths to keep and maintain the perceptions of the people. A society built upon lies and deceit (produced by the very people they originally supported) is the very antithesis of Socialism. The DPRK is an especially special case, as it is one of the few self-described "socialist" states that hasn't fallen or economically transformed itself to hold off its own collapse. It is a state frozen in time. Kim Jong-il is a leader who was neither democratically elected or cares for the well being of his people. He lavishes himself and his government allies with Capitalist goods and services while the proletariat wilts beneath his heavy hand. He rails against imperialism whilst threatening the South with nuclear extermination. These truths are certain and indisputable; Kim Jong-il is about as Socialist as Obama - who isn't. However, with that being said, stateless Socialism still contains multiple issues and flaws that need addressing. For instance, who is to ensure the transparency and equality of the eventual classless society? Surely the state cannot be held in such a role; it would surely abuse its power. The only solution (in my mind) is to follow the paths of Democratic Socialism, with the eventual goal of a stateless, borderless, classless society. Socialism cannot be utilized without the power of democracy - how else will the people be heard and heeded. A state that's built beneath the crushing spirit of the proletariat, which follows the mandates of the masses, is an ideal that cannot be disregarded. The state's role (aside from its eventual disintegration) must be the mouthpiece of the worker, through which his/her needs are formulated and carried out. Lenin's Russia built its order of governance from the top to the bottom, with a central entity dictating to the organizations below it. The same cannot be repeated; the state must be on the receiving end of policy-making - not the other way around. A dictatorship of the proletariat over the state, so to speak. Now, I've rambled quite enough (I suspect at moments incoherently), but I hope I got some measure of my point across.
And by extension, everything else people seem to recognise as socialist/communist? In this thread please use the definition below, for the sake of figuring if north korea is socialist/communist. If you are not going to do that, don't bother answering. This isn't a thread saying socialism will work, it's a thread challenging the commonly held views about what socialism is. First off, my views as a socialist do not mesh with the ideas of many who call themselves socialists; I have heavy disagreements with social democrats, democratic socialists, trotskyites, leninists, deleonists, maoists, and stalinists. Therefore the definition I give will not match their definition. Second, I would like to make clear that when I say socialism or communism, I use these two words to refer to the exact same thing, not as seperate ideologies or one as a transitional phase and the other as some obscure utopia. My definition of socialism/communism is a society in which the people themselves share ownership and control the land and the means of production, through direct democracy. Essentially it's the extension of democracy to every quarter of society, the home, the workplace, and the community at large. A socialist society can only exist when the vast majority of the world population wants it to; there is no buying a plot of land and forming your own commune, as socialism can't exist while capitalism does. The people themselves then establish the socialist society democratically, through a revolution. In a socialist society, the following should apply: The socialist society has no monetary or barter system, there is no money and no trade, a socialist society has a gift economy. The socialist society is leaderless, since leaders are inherently undemocratic. The people themselves are in charge, administrating through a global direct democracy. The socialist society is stateless. Essentially, state is the power to use force legally against people. Socialism can't work in a coercive system. As well the existence of a state would undermine a classless society. The socialist society is borderless and global. Socialism can't exist in one country, nor can it exist while capitalism exists. The socialist society is classless. There are no upper and lower classes, no elites and no poor, and there is no state. So your turn. Does north korea fit the definition above? Did the soviet union? Does china? How bout cuba, vietnam, or cambodia? Do France, Norway, Canada, Sweden, Denmark, or any of those european countries fit the definition? Does obama fit the above definition of socialism? Vinny, if you're going to answer, READ THE DEFINITION AND DEFINE BY THAT! Your own definition of communism is irrelevent here. Everyone in the world socialist movement has agreed upon the definition above. This question is subject to linking and reposting, to ensure the most answers. That's cool, L, I look forward to your answer. :)
Politics - 6 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
It's a totalitarianism.
2 :
North Korea is most certainly 100% communist because Kim Jong, a tyrannical dictator, and his national military controls the entire nation which confiscates most of the countries food supplies to feed themselves (why do you think their army is so big...because thats where all the food is). Kim Jong also personally controls imports/exports, manufacturing, etc. He also answers to no parliment, no governing council or court-type leveling system of any kind. Edit: Give this answer all the thumbs down you want, it wont change the truth.
3 :
Learn to Juche. Socialism and communism are stupid, outdated, white ideologies. Their mention annoys the fuck out of me. Juche idea it is they are!
4 :
No country that has ever existed and no person who has ever existed fits your definition of a socialist. When people say that Obama or North Korea are socialist, they are obviously not using your definition. They're using some other definition. You can't have useful discussions with others until everybody involved in the discussion agrees upon the definitions of key words, phrases, and concepts. Hope that helps.
5 :
Your definition of Socialism is incorrect.. that's the problem. Or to use Communism for a better example (since it's more concrete than socialism)... In Communism there is no private ownership. Instead a central entity controls all production and distribution of resources. Without that central entity, there is no way to maintain the structure and you'd end up with anarchy. And that is the downfall of all such systems.. so long as there is one central group given so very much control it will always end up corrupt and no longer acting solely in the best interests of the people. If there is no central entity (I use that term because it doesn't have to be a government), what is to stop someone from taking 5 iphones for free just because he wants to? Or how could you stop someone from requiring pine cones in order to receive a jar of peanut butter? If there's no central ruling group then there's no system to maintain order. In Socialism and Communism, someone always manages the resources to determine who gets what. That is precisely what causes those systems to turn into modern slavery.
6 :
Socialism, at its root, is about the emancipation of the masses. Working men and women, no matter one's race, ethnicity, culture, or sexual orientation, are at the heart of the socialist ideal. Only through the resilience of the proletariat can Socialism prevail over Capitalism and the upper tiers of society that it benefits. But this is not something that is achievable unless the majority discover the meaning and revolutionary ideal of class consciousness. The complete abolition of privately-owned property, along with the eventual disintegration of the state and all its bureaucratic foibles is the ultimate conclusion of this - global - class struggle. Worker's democracy, with the strength of the proletariat as its foundation could be the ideal solution to any possible vacuum left by the destruction of the state. When the means of production and distribution is sorted out and finally implemented, and true transparency in both the decaying of the state and democracy is achieved, the worker cannot fall into complacency and deem his work done. Socialism, as implemented by a single state, has been proven to be both unproductive, disastrous, and most importantly, counterrevolutionary. Stalin believed in Socialism in one State; Mao advocated eternal revolution; others implemented similar methods with terrible, repressive results. It can be argued that Socialism, once accomplished in a single state, is at once in danger from within and without by certain elements whose sole purpose is to undermine the victory of the proletariat and bring him/her back under the yoke of class oppression. This cannot be disregarded as foolish paranoia, nor simply as the replacement of one dictatorship with another. However, the methods utilized by the Russians, Chinese, N. Koreans, Vietnamese, and countless other states are both terrible and exploitative. A reign of terror has no place in Socialism - no matter the severity of the situation before it. Socialism, once organized into an efficient process of production and distribution, must eventually begin the process of dissembling the state into a borderless entity within which all who possess the ability to work, work to the best of their abilities for the betterment of the collective good. Held to such a standard, N. Korea (or the USSR, Cuba, Vietnam, China, etc.) do not even hold a candle to the true concept of Socialism or the equality of the masses. These states remained within the binds of class stratification and state bureaucracy - the very things Socialism rails against. When the state owns the means of industry, military, governance, and security, the people are left with naught but the very thing they originally overthrew. Not that they themselves are immediately aware of this; the state goes to such ridiculous and heavy-handed lengths to keep and maintain the perceptions of the people. A society built upon lies and deceit (produced by the very people they originally supported) is the very antithesis of Socialism. The DPRK is an especially special case, as it is one of the few self-described "socialist" states that hasn't fallen or economically transformed itself to hold off its own collapse. It is a state frozen in time. Kim Jong-il is a leader who was neither democratically elected or cares for the well being of his people. He lavishes himself and his government allies with Capitalist goods and services while the proletariat wilts beneath his heavy hand. He rails against imperialism whilst threatening the South with nuclear extermination. These truths are certain and indisputable; Kim Jong-il is about as Socialist as Obama - who isn't. However, with that being said, stateless Socialism still contains multiple issues and flaws that need addressing. For instance, who is to ensure the transparency and equality of the eventual classless society? Surely the state cannot be held in such a role; it would surely abuse its power. The only solution (in my mind) is to follow the paths of Democratic Socialism, with the eventual goal of a stateless, borderless, classless society. Socialism cannot be utilized without the power of democracy - how else will the people be heard and heeded. A state that's built beneath the crushing spirit of the proletariat, which follows the mandates of the masses, is an ideal that cannot be disregarded. The state's role (aside from its eventual disintegration) must be the mouthpiece of the worker, through which his/her needs are formulated and carried out. Lenin's Russia built its order of governance from the top to the bottom, with a central entity dictating to the organizations below it. The same cannot be repeated; the state must be on the receiving end of policy-making - not the other way around. A dictatorship of the proletariat over the state, so to speak. Now, I've rambled quite enough (I suspect at moments incoherently), but I hope I got some measure of my point across.
Monday, May 7, 2012
why do americans feel they need an enormous military to feel safe?
why do americans feel they need an enormous military to feel safe?
http://www.globalissues.org/article/75/world-military-spending The United States spends 46.5% of the total global distribution of military expenditures. Yes, that's global, as in the entire world! ***My question is, does that enormous military budget make you feel safe? Does that protect your freedoms?*** Did you know that the US ranks 13th on the list that measures the quality of life for each country in 2005. Countries that ranked above the US include, Switzerland, Norway, Sweden, Australia, Italy, Denmark, and Singapore. These countries spend a fraction of what the US spends on defense and they are just as safe as we are. They also have the same freedoms we do as well. In terms of education the US is becoming a laughing stock. The US ranks 33rd in terms of reading, 27th in terms of math, and 22nd in terms of science. We used to dominate these categories in the past. http://www.geographic.org/country_ranks/educational_score_performance_country_ranks_2009_oecd.html If the US cut 1/4 of the military budget and put that towards education we might be able to crack the top 10 sometime in the near future. ***Does it bother you that the US spends so much money on defense when it could be used in much more useful areas?*** BTW I am an American
Polls & Surveys - 12 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
9/11 ring a bell?
2 :
because...war is on everyone's mind
3 :
Why do Canadians need bacon to feel safe?
4 :
When your country is bombed I will laugh at you.
5 :
ya it suxs, but im living a good life with a good education so really I have nothing to complain about. I am enjoy life to fullest and nothing you can say will change that.
6 :
im guessing most americans dont realize how much we spend on it,and since its never really in our faces over here, we dont think about it much? just my guess from what ive observed as an american
7 :
I didn't read anything you typed after the first line. I figure it's a bunch of gibberish. But to answer the original question - Having a bigger military is easier than having a better trained military. Maybe that's why it's so BIG.
8 :
I'm Australian so I'm happy my country ranked better then the USA \o/ Maybe it will make Americans learn their country isn't the capital of the world. Probably not though.
9 :
cus we are gay and everyone hates us.
10 :
why do u muslims need to suicide bomb to feel safe
11 :
Because were the baddest country in the world. I hate to think if you guys up there are attacked. Your military sucks. We would have to do the fighting for you.
12 :
Because other stupid countries try to attack us all the time, so we have to expand our military to protect the US.
http://www.globalissues.org/article/75/world-military-spending The United States spends 46.5% of the total global distribution of military expenditures. Yes, that's global, as in the entire world! ***My question is, does that enormous military budget make you feel safe? Does that protect your freedoms?*** Did you know that the US ranks 13th on the list that measures the quality of life for each country in 2005. Countries that ranked above the US include, Switzerland, Norway, Sweden, Australia, Italy, Denmark, and Singapore. These countries spend a fraction of what the US spends on defense and they are just as safe as we are. They also have the same freedoms we do as well. In terms of education the US is becoming a laughing stock. The US ranks 33rd in terms of reading, 27th in terms of math, and 22nd in terms of science. We used to dominate these categories in the past. http://www.geographic.org/country_ranks/educational_score_performance_country_ranks_2009_oecd.html If the US cut 1/4 of the military budget and put that towards education we might be able to crack the top 10 sometime in the near future. ***Does it bother you that the US spends so much money on defense when it could be used in much more useful areas?*** BTW I am an American
Polls & Surveys - 12 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
9/11 ring a bell?
2 :
because...war is on everyone's mind
3 :
Why do Canadians need bacon to feel safe?
4 :
When your country is bombed I will laugh at you.
5 :
ya it suxs, but im living a good life with a good education so really I have nothing to complain about. I am enjoy life to fullest and nothing you can say will change that.
6 :
im guessing most americans dont realize how much we spend on it,and since its never really in our faces over here, we dont think about it much? just my guess from what ive observed as an american
7 :
I didn't read anything you typed after the first line. I figure it's a bunch of gibberish. But to answer the original question - Having a bigger military is easier than having a better trained military. Maybe that's why it's so BIG.
8 :
I'm Australian so I'm happy my country ranked better then the USA \o/ Maybe it will make Americans learn their country isn't the capital of the world. Probably not though.
9 :
cus we are gay and everyone hates us.
10 :
why do u muslims need to suicide bomb to feel safe
11 :
Because were the baddest country in the world. I hate to think if you guys up there are attacked. Your military sucks. We would have to do the fighting for you.
12 :
Because other stupid countries try to attack us all the time, so we have to expand our military to protect the US.
Tuesday, May 1, 2012
Why do Americans look at socialism as a bad thing?
Why do Americans look at socialism as a bad thing?
Sure, a country that is entirely socialist is similar to communism, none of us want that. But socialized health care and education are excellent. Just look at the list of the top ten nations with the highest standard of living. Norway Sweden Canada Belgium Australia United States Iceland Netherlands Japan Finland The U.S. is only number 6! And guess what else? Every single nation on that list has socialized health care! Every single one! So clearly the nations with some socialist values are doing the best in the world. Somehow the U.S. managed to make its way onto the lower half of that list. If we gradually adopted socialized health care and education and gave up the middle east wars for oil we could eventually become like Canada. I don't mind paying 15% sales tax if it means that my entire family can have medical treatment and an education for free. So why do Americans act like socialism is evil? CAPITALISM is evil! Why should your government be entirely centered around money? Now, I don't think Obama is a socialist but he does have some policies that are similar to socialism and I am all for them! To the person who said capitalism made the U.S. the greatest country in the world: If its the greatest, why is it only #6 on the list for standard of living? To the person who referenced Hitler: Hitler was socialist but I'm not saying we should become 100% socialist. I'm saying take some socialist ideas, like healthcare and education, and apply them in a free society. Just because some socialists went bad doesn't make all of the principles of socialism bad too. To the person who said that the other countries are bankrupting themselves: Um, what about our trillion dollar deficit and failing stock market? We're doing worse than they are! Houses in foreclosure...lack of availiable credit... come on, WE are bankrupting ourselves. "Because not all of us are daddy's little princess who has a trust fund. Some of us want a piece of the pie, too, and not your grubby little scraps from your banquet table. Do you have a brain?" Uhm, I think you're confused. Socialism spreads the wealth between the rich and poor. Capitalism leaves the wealthy in control of most of the economy. You clearly do not understand socialism.
Politics - 25 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
Some of the best examples of the success of socialism is right here in the United States. We've built the worlds most powerful military from it. Our highway system is as marvelous and magnificent as the Great Wall of China or the Egyptian Pyramids. Our public school system has put man on the moon and eradicated some of the worlds most dreaded diseases. The best government is woven by the best threads from all ideals.
2 :
because the right swamps them with propaganda and they eat it up
3 :
And compare their medical care to ours. Big difference.
4 :
We have socialized education now and it's anything but excellent.
5 :
Those countries are bankrupting themselves. Socialism cannot sustain itself for very long.
6 :
Capitalism is evil?? Capitalism is what made this country the greatest country on Earth.......sure, purely evil! LMAO
7 :
um aren't you a bright one, Look up Hitler, he was socialist too until they changed the name to the Nazis party. the Jews will love Obama after he converts us
8 :
Um, because Socialism is a bad thing. The Government can't run a damn thing, and socialized medicine and education is atrocious. Capitalism is the only way to go.
9 :
I don't know, this is a good question and one that I have been asking myself. I think some degree of socialism is a good thing. I think we need more of a blend of economic theories and practices, not just capitalism. I think that the competitive nature of capitalism is good and has helped keep as on top for many years but there needs to be more social programs as well.
10 :
Big deal. You wouldn't want to live in Norway, Sweden, Canada, Belgium, Australia, (Belgium again for emphasis), Japan or Finland. Iceland might be OK. And the Netherlands maybe. Countries which are not on the list which have socialised health care include Malta, Cuba, a lot of African countries, and the UK. Health care does not work in any of those (with the exception of the UK, where it mostly does, but not as well as they make out.)
11 :
Socialism leads to communism. Pick up a history book. The USA has lost a LOT of lives by defending democracy and trying to defeat communism. Why would we ever welcome either of the two in this country when sio many have died to rid other countires of it?? I'm sick of this question and the brainless people who think it's okay to steal from those who work hard and give it to those who do nothing. France is trying to escape the grasp of socialism right now because they have no motivation to invest in business or to invent new technologies and they're falling behind in every category becauase socialism= no incentive to work hard. It's not good to teach people that the harder you work, that's just more that gets taken away from you.
12 :
Because not all of us are daddy's little princess who has a trust fund. Some of us want a piece of the pie, too, and not your grubby little scraps from your banquet table. Do you have a brain?
13 :
Well we already have socialized education but I agree with you. The problem is too many Americans have been programmed with the idea that everything socialist is bad. Its unfortunate that they don't realize that most of America is socialized. The roads, power, sewers, airports, military, police, fire, even some farms.
14 :
Go live there. Keep America capitalist. Norway is the world's 3rd largest oil producer, and has a population of just over 4 million. That's how Socialism works. It won't work here.
15 :
Obama will not start and is not for socialized health care. He wants to force employers of small business to pay for Health Insurance. And if they cannot then you can buy into and pay for out of your own pocket a health care plan. Everyone thinks that Obama is going to give them the world.
16 :
You do not have a clue what Socialism is, do you? You are operating on a false premise. All you need to do is study the workers paradises of the old Soviet Union, East Germany and look at that Garden of Eden to our south called Cuba to see Socialism at its best. Remember that East Germany had to erect a wall to keep citizens "in" because it was such a wonderful place to live and work
17 :
A slave was well kept. The slave had good food. The slave had nice living quarters. The slave had medical care. The slave was not overworked and never did without. But in the end, the slave was still a slave. Socialism is a form of slavery and all slavery is evil.
18 :
Basic socialism. You have twenty dollars in your pocket that you worked for. You have to give half of it too me, because I want it. Even though I am too lazy to work myself. That is what osama wants to do.
19 :
Problem is primarily that people are not educated on social ideals and mislabel socialism along with Stalin, Hitler and N. Korea. This breeds fear, panic and spreads misunderstanding. If people really knew what socialism was about they would not be so scared. The U.S. will never become a communist country (which is what most people are afraid of) and a few social ideals here and there could really help the U.S.
20 :
“Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery"- Winston Churchill
21 :
Obama doesn't say how socialistic he is going to be!!! How will he abuse his power? We don't know. He has no record! He has been caught in lies! I can't believe him if he says he isn't a follower of Rev. Wright's ideas, or Bill Ayers, or the plo supporter. I am not against a caring society, but American people give to the charity of their choice. Obama gave something like 3% of his income to charity. I make 30,000 and give a lot more than that. I don't need Obama telling me who to give to. The world depends on America to give and we can because of our capitalism. If Obama had a record of honesty and integrity, and told me how socialistic he wanted to go....then I would seriously consider him for President, but he doesn't and won't, so no thanks. I think he is running the biggest con in our history, and we will wake up and he will have control of the military and us.
22 :
I agree with the person above me ( harry). Socilised health care isnt bad and depends on how one government runs the ideas of socialism, it can be good or bad. Australia health care is excellent and it is socialised as you stated There has been recently this guy called Murdoch from America gave a lecture on our welfair system and says Australia is heading the wrong path. Just because we have extensive and higher welfare for our citizens. Capitalism is great for the economy, but Capitalism also widens the gap between the rich and the poor ( and no where else in the world except America is the biggest example of this - 5% of the US population controls 95% of the economy - how is this good , I wonder ? ). Even in my university, there have been lots of conferences and visited seminars on socialism and what it really is. It certainly did not sound as " evil and screwed up " as people think/ or are made to think it is. The AUS goverment tried to sell the health care systemt to private companies and this encountered great criticism and opposes from the australian people. However , we have to follow double-tax system which is quite high. The higher the salary, the higher the tax , 100,000 AUD income earns about 40% tax. But something has got to give, thats why we have great health care benefits where the govt ( taxpayers ) pay most of the time and subsidies and medical schemes are very welcome and effective in Australia.Almost all Australians have govt funded medicare card. Dcotors do not turn patients away if the patients dont have a " private " medi card.
23 :
First of Hitler was not a socialist, that's simply wrong. He used the name, that's it There's a good explanation about that issue in my answer here. http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Ajrocq3pTl8lBdGbUjgUXPfty6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20081030110028AAs8hyQ&show=7#profile-info-1RZSUSMRaa Now to answer your question. Socialism has been demonized during the cold war and linked to the atrocities of stalinsim. Americans fear any leftward movement and the hard right would prefer to see any government program abolished. They are social darwinists who see the paranoia of Americans about socialism as an ally to make the USA even more free market fundementalist. Universal healthcare exists in every industrialized country except the US, that's not socialism. The GOP and McCain know they're lying when they call Obama a socialist. McCain is not confused, he's deliberately lying. When asked directly he acknowledged Obama isn't a socialist admitting this is just another line to distract voters of the issues that are important to them. http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=-2ZGnM2oku8 Some 160 years ago, Karl Marx wrote, "A specter is haunting Europe, the specter of communism." He was describing the mood of fear and trepidation in the European ruling classes on the eve of the great revolutionary wave of 1848, even though the number of conscious revolutionary socialists was still a relative handful. If the specter of socialism today haunts the American ruling class, despite decades in which socialism has been subjected to an unrelenting campaign of slander and vilification, it is likewise because the profit system faces a new period of revolutionary upheaval. http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/oct2008/pers-o23.shtml
24 :
America today is a combination of many different ''isms''..If one were to asked to define America.. I would say we are a country which purports CAPITALISM,,but is backed by the government.. Eg., What is the govt. doing right now with American taxpayers money,,if not bailing out the greedy capitalist who have put America and even the WORLD at risk to bankruptcy,,because of their greed !! And cry Govt..is the problem !! Yet,,who do they RUN to,,to correct their greed?? What America NEEDS is Capitalistic Socialism !! Pure and simple..The best of the things which America has provided its citizens,,and the world for generations,,thru taxes and proper ''watchdog attitudes towards big business,,and the upkeep of America and the providing of services and education which made America what it has BEEN in the past.. Its when Big Business is allowed to BUY the Govt. thru Big Businesses Lobbyists,,and the Big Business Party takes TOTAL control of the country,,and does what it pleases,,is when you get what America is now going through !! We the People have allowed this to happen,,and the results are catastrophic !! The only people who are satisfied with what America is now,,is those who RAPED us,,and HAVE all those profits secured in bank accounts and out of the country,,while taxpayers are left to clean up their mess..Yet,,even with that,,they still don't want to pay taxes to fix the roads,,repair the infrastrurcture,,and even provide PUBLIC EDUCATION..Thats why they want vouchers..ANYTHING THATS A SOCIAL ENTERPRISE,,they despise !!Social Security,,they would love to privatize that and medicare !! With out social programs,,And assistance to those who DON'T have the silver spoon in their mouths,,the average person would NEVER get the chance to make it,,OR even have a security parachute of SS in their retirement years..Think About it !! Obama wouldn't have gotten where he is today,,without the systems of assistance in place in America when he was coming up.. And Health care has become obscenly expensive,,due to insurance companies greed !! Its all about Businesses takeover of our country,,and what WE THE PEOPLE ARE WILLING TO SWALLOW !! SOLOMON
25 :
Why, indeed? I think because the word itself evokes fear that freedoms that make our lives comfortable will be taken away. Socialism is not a concept that is really understood or taught as a viable form of government. People do not realize that social security and many other federal programs are a form of socialism which do work. It is ignorance. Thanks for this posting.
Sure, a country that is entirely socialist is similar to communism, none of us want that. But socialized health care and education are excellent. Just look at the list of the top ten nations with the highest standard of living. Norway Sweden Canada Belgium Australia United States Iceland Netherlands Japan Finland The U.S. is only number 6! And guess what else? Every single nation on that list has socialized health care! Every single one! So clearly the nations with some socialist values are doing the best in the world. Somehow the U.S. managed to make its way onto the lower half of that list. If we gradually adopted socialized health care and education and gave up the middle east wars for oil we could eventually become like Canada. I don't mind paying 15% sales tax if it means that my entire family can have medical treatment and an education for free. So why do Americans act like socialism is evil? CAPITALISM is evil! Why should your government be entirely centered around money? Now, I don't think Obama is a socialist but he does have some policies that are similar to socialism and I am all for them! To the person who said capitalism made the U.S. the greatest country in the world: If its the greatest, why is it only #6 on the list for standard of living? To the person who referenced Hitler: Hitler was socialist but I'm not saying we should become 100% socialist. I'm saying take some socialist ideas, like healthcare and education, and apply them in a free society. Just because some socialists went bad doesn't make all of the principles of socialism bad too. To the person who said that the other countries are bankrupting themselves: Um, what about our trillion dollar deficit and failing stock market? We're doing worse than they are! Houses in foreclosure...lack of availiable credit... come on, WE are bankrupting ourselves. "Because not all of us are daddy's little princess who has a trust fund. Some of us want a piece of the pie, too, and not your grubby little scraps from your banquet table. Do you have a brain?" Uhm, I think you're confused. Socialism spreads the wealth between the rich and poor. Capitalism leaves the wealthy in control of most of the economy. You clearly do not understand socialism.
Politics - 25 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
Some of the best examples of the success of socialism is right here in the United States. We've built the worlds most powerful military from it. Our highway system is as marvelous and magnificent as the Great Wall of China or the Egyptian Pyramids. Our public school system has put man on the moon and eradicated some of the worlds most dreaded diseases. The best government is woven by the best threads from all ideals.
2 :
because the right swamps them with propaganda and they eat it up
3 :
And compare their medical care to ours. Big difference.
4 :
We have socialized education now and it's anything but excellent.
5 :
Those countries are bankrupting themselves. Socialism cannot sustain itself for very long.
6 :
Capitalism is evil?? Capitalism is what made this country the greatest country on Earth.......sure, purely evil! LMAO
7 :
um aren't you a bright one, Look up Hitler, he was socialist too until they changed the name to the Nazis party. the Jews will love Obama after he converts us
8 :
Um, because Socialism is a bad thing. The Government can't run a damn thing, and socialized medicine and education is atrocious. Capitalism is the only way to go.
9 :
I don't know, this is a good question and one that I have been asking myself. I think some degree of socialism is a good thing. I think we need more of a blend of economic theories and practices, not just capitalism. I think that the competitive nature of capitalism is good and has helped keep as on top for many years but there needs to be more social programs as well.
10 :
Big deal. You wouldn't want to live in Norway, Sweden, Canada, Belgium, Australia, (Belgium again for emphasis), Japan or Finland. Iceland might be OK. And the Netherlands maybe. Countries which are not on the list which have socialised health care include Malta, Cuba, a lot of African countries, and the UK. Health care does not work in any of those (with the exception of the UK, where it mostly does, but not as well as they make out.)
11 :
Socialism leads to communism. Pick up a history book. The USA has lost a LOT of lives by defending democracy and trying to defeat communism. Why would we ever welcome either of the two in this country when sio many have died to rid other countires of it?? I'm sick of this question and the brainless people who think it's okay to steal from those who work hard and give it to those who do nothing. France is trying to escape the grasp of socialism right now because they have no motivation to invest in business or to invent new technologies and they're falling behind in every category becauase socialism= no incentive to work hard. It's not good to teach people that the harder you work, that's just more that gets taken away from you.
12 :
Because not all of us are daddy's little princess who has a trust fund. Some of us want a piece of the pie, too, and not your grubby little scraps from your banquet table. Do you have a brain?
13 :
Well we already have socialized education but I agree with you. The problem is too many Americans have been programmed with the idea that everything socialist is bad. Its unfortunate that they don't realize that most of America is socialized. The roads, power, sewers, airports, military, police, fire, even some farms.
14 :
Go live there. Keep America capitalist. Norway is the world's 3rd largest oil producer, and has a population of just over 4 million. That's how Socialism works. It won't work here.
15 :
Obama will not start and is not for socialized health care. He wants to force employers of small business to pay for Health Insurance. And if they cannot then you can buy into and pay for out of your own pocket a health care plan. Everyone thinks that Obama is going to give them the world.
16 :
You do not have a clue what Socialism is, do you? You are operating on a false premise. All you need to do is study the workers paradises of the old Soviet Union, East Germany and look at that Garden of Eden to our south called Cuba to see Socialism at its best. Remember that East Germany had to erect a wall to keep citizens "in" because it was such a wonderful place to live and work
17 :
A slave was well kept. The slave had good food. The slave had nice living quarters. The slave had medical care. The slave was not overworked and never did without. But in the end, the slave was still a slave. Socialism is a form of slavery and all slavery is evil.
18 :
Basic socialism. You have twenty dollars in your pocket that you worked for. You have to give half of it too me, because I want it. Even though I am too lazy to work myself. That is what osama wants to do.
19 :
Problem is primarily that people are not educated on social ideals and mislabel socialism along with Stalin, Hitler and N. Korea. This breeds fear, panic and spreads misunderstanding. If people really knew what socialism was about they would not be so scared. The U.S. will never become a communist country (which is what most people are afraid of) and a few social ideals here and there could really help the U.S.
20 :
“Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery"- Winston Churchill
21 :
Obama doesn't say how socialistic he is going to be!!! How will he abuse his power? We don't know. He has no record! He has been caught in lies! I can't believe him if he says he isn't a follower of Rev. Wright's ideas, or Bill Ayers, or the plo supporter. I am not against a caring society, but American people give to the charity of their choice. Obama gave something like 3% of his income to charity. I make 30,000 and give a lot more than that. I don't need Obama telling me who to give to. The world depends on America to give and we can because of our capitalism. If Obama had a record of honesty and integrity, and told me how socialistic he wanted to go....then I would seriously consider him for President, but he doesn't and won't, so no thanks. I think he is running the biggest con in our history, and we will wake up and he will have control of the military and us.
22 :
I agree with the person above me ( harry). Socilised health care isnt bad and depends on how one government runs the ideas of socialism, it can be good or bad. Australia health care is excellent and it is socialised as you stated There has been recently this guy called Murdoch from America gave a lecture on our welfair system and says Australia is heading the wrong path. Just because we have extensive and higher welfare for our citizens. Capitalism is great for the economy, but Capitalism also widens the gap between the rich and the poor ( and no where else in the world except America is the biggest example of this - 5% of the US population controls 95% of the economy - how is this good , I wonder ? ). Even in my university, there have been lots of conferences and visited seminars on socialism and what it really is. It certainly did not sound as " evil and screwed up " as people think/ or are made to think it is. The AUS goverment tried to sell the health care systemt to private companies and this encountered great criticism and opposes from the australian people. However , we have to follow double-tax system which is quite high. The higher the salary, the higher the tax , 100,000 AUD income earns about 40% tax. But something has got to give, thats why we have great health care benefits where the govt ( taxpayers ) pay most of the time and subsidies and medical schemes are very welcome and effective in Australia.Almost all Australians have govt funded medicare card. Dcotors do not turn patients away if the patients dont have a " private " medi card.
23 :
First of Hitler was not a socialist, that's simply wrong. He used the name, that's it There's a good explanation about that issue in my answer here. http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Ajrocq3pTl8lBdGbUjgUXPfty6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20081030110028AAs8hyQ&show=7#profile-info-1RZSUSMRaa Now to answer your question. Socialism has been demonized during the cold war and linked to the atrocities of stalinsim. Americans fear any leftward movement and the hard right would prefer to see any government program abolished. They are social darwinists who see the paranoia of Americans about socialism as an ally to make the USA even more free market fundementalist. Universal healthcare exists in every industrialized country except the US, that's not socialism. The GOP and McCain know they're lying when they call Obama a socialist. McCain is not confused, he's deliberately lying. When asked directly he acknowledged Obama isn't a socialist admitting this is just another line to distract voters of the issues that are important to them. http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=-2ZGnM2oku8 Some 160 years ago, Karl Marx wrote, "A specter is haunting Europe, the specter of communism." He was describing the mood of fear and trepidation in the European ruling classes on the eve of the great revolutionary wave of 1848, even though the number of conscious revolutionary socialists was still a relative handful. If the specter of socialism today haunts the American ruling class, despite decades in which socialism has been subjected to an unrelenting campaign of slander and vilification, it is likewise because the profit system faces a new period of revolutionary upheaval. http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/oct2008/pers-o23.shtml
24 :
America today is a combination of many different ''isms''..If one were to asked to define America.. I would say we are a country which purports CAPITALISM,,but is backed by the government.. Eg., What is the govt. doing right now with American taxpayers money,,if not bailing out the greedy capitalist who have put America and even the WORLD at risk to bankruptcy,,because of their greed !! And cry Govt..is the problem !! Yet,,who do they RUN to,,to correct their greed?? What America NEEDS is Capitalistic Socialism !! Pure and simple..The best of the things which America has provided its citizens,,and the world for generations,,thru taxes and proper ''watchdog attitudes towards big business,,and the upkeep of America and the providing of services and education which made America what it has BEEN in the past.. Its when Big Business is allowed to BUY the Govt. thru Big Businesses Lobbyists,,and the Big Business Party takes TOTAL control of the country,,and does what it pleases,,is when you get what America is now going through !! We the People have allowed this to happen,,and the results are catastrophic !! The only people who are satisfied with what America is now,,is those who RAPED us,,and HAVE all those profits secured in bank accounts and out of the country,,while taxpayers are left to clean up their mess..Yet,,even with that,,they still don't want to pay taxes to fix the roads,,repair the infrastrurcture,,and even provide PUBLIC EDUCATION..Thats why they want vouchers..ANYTHING THATS A SOCIAL ENTERPRISE,,they despise !!Social Security,,they would love to privatize that and medicare !! With out social programs,,And assistance to those who DON'T have the silver spoon in their mouths,,the average person would NEVER get the chance to make it,,OR even have a security parachute of SS in their retirement years..Think About it !! Obama wouldn't have gotten where he is today,,without the systems of assistance in place in America when he was coming up.. And Health care has become obscenly expensive,,due to insurance companies greed !! Its all about Businesses takeover of our country,,and what WE THE PEOPLE ARE WILLING TO SWALLOW !! SOLOMON
25 :
Why, indeed? I think because the word itself evokes fear that freedoms that make our lives comfortable will be taken away. Socialism is not a concept that is really understood or taught as a viable form of government. People do not realize that social security and many other federal programs are a form of socialism which do work. It is ignorance. Thanks for this posting.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)