The Chronicle of the Horse
MagazineNewsHorse SportsHorse CareCOTH StoreVoicesThe Chronicle UntackedDirectoriesMarketplaceDates & Results
 
Page 1 of 10 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 197
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul. 11, 2000
    Location
    Way down south in the land of Sugar Cane
    Posts
    956

    Default Liberal, socialism, etc.

    Do you think this country is heading towards Socialism? As more and more of our society appears to become dependent on the government for necessities it would seem that at some point the scale would tip and socialism would take over completely.

    Some parties link the rise of liberalism with socialism, is that a valid association?


    3 members found this post helpful.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul. 31, 2007
    Posts
    14,888

    Default

    Define socialism and liberalism first, please.

    I say that because those tags get hurled around without any obligation to agree on them. So what makes someone a Socialist? Does favoring Head Start programs make one a Socialist....which might mean Communist.... which might mean Pinko Commie?
    The armchair saddler
    Politically Pro-Cat


    10 members found this post helpful.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep. 7, 2009
    Location
    Lexington, KY
    Posts
    16,668

    Default

    You know, you really have to ask, when and why did socialism become a dirty word. Many of us equate socialism with communism. It's not the same thing.

    Here's an interesting article that might help explain what socialism really is:

    http://tellthetruthonthem.com/?page_id=269
    "We can judge the heart of a man by his treatment of animals." ~Immanuel Kant


    14 members found this post helpful.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug. 14, 2000
    Location
    Clarksdale, MS--the golden buckle on the cotton belt
    Posts
    18,262

    Default

    Nothing wrong with a tilt towards Socialism. Most of the rest of the Western World is Socialist to a greater or lesser degree, and they aren't headed for doomsday.
    "I'm a lumberjack, and I'm okay."
    Thread killer Extraordinaire


    17 members found this post helpful.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb. 6, 2007
    Posts
    1,485

    Default

    I saw this explanation on Facebook and I think it's does pretty well in explaining the difference between the two.

    SOCIALISM
    You have 2 cows.
    You give one to your neighbor

    COMMUNISM
    You have 2 cows.
    The State takes both and gives you some milk


    21 members found this post helpful.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov. 18, 2010
    Location
    california
    Posts
    3,865

    Default

    I think a definition is necessary since I have heard many republicans state that having federal taxes makes this country a socialist nation. I think many of us don't want to explain the need for government in a society, again.


    5 members found this post helpful.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul. 3, 2012
    Posts
    1,789

    Default

    I think we are already fairly *socialist*. And that isn't necessarily a bad thing. Pooling monies to get better things or improve things is a good thing.

    I don't like our trend towards communism (as defined simply, above). More and more people are allowing themselves to become dependent on the government. It's a gradual increase but increasing none the less. Once enough people are in that dependent status, the government, then, can have all the cows and determines how much milk the citizens can get. As it stands now, too many citizens own cows for that too work. The system has to be brought down economically and socially until hardly any citizens can have cows unless the government supplies them. The citizens will be allowed to care for the government's cows.

    This is what I fear will happen over the next few generations.


    8 members found this post helpful.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan. 26, 2010
    Posts
    5,439

    Default

    Well, I think we ought not be allowed to use names and such, but rather define what you mean. I am a conservative, which means I think we need to stop spending so much money, cut our military massively and get out of everyone's business, stop subsidizing corporations, get out of everyone's business that does not harm others (as in gay marriage, legalize pot) tie government salaries to performance, help thy neighbor (as in provide basics in education and healthcare) and so on, tax churches like the big businesses they are, ban all religion in politics, etc.

    The people who call themselves "conservative" now seem to be fascists by definition. Socialism seems to be what the god of the Bible intended, but religious people seem more fascist. I don't know what liberal means. It seems to be what I would call conservative--you act like an adult and take care of the people around you and take on your fair share of the burden in life so you don't put it on others.

    I think we have a lot of sophisticated brainwashing going on to convince people to do what they know is not right and to go against what is good for them.


    28 members found this post helpful.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov. 18, 2010
    Location
    california
    Posts
    3,865

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ezduzit View Post
    I think we are already fairly *socialist*. And that isn't necessarily a bad thing. Pooling monies to get better things or improve things is a good thing.

    I don't like our trend towards communism (as defined simply, above). More and more people are allowing themselves to become dependent on the government. It's a gradual increase but increasing none the less. Once enough people are in that dependent status, the government, then, can have all the cows and determines how much milk the citizens can get. As it stands now, too many citizens own cows for that too work. The system has to be brought down economically and socially until hardly any citizens can have cows unless the government supplies them. The citizens will be allowed to care for the government's cows.

    This is what I fear will happen over the next few generations.
    We are all dependent on the government. Roads, bridges, water supply (not everyone but most), sewer, police, fire, social security, medical professionals (must pass state boards to be able to practice)and many others. I am always shocked by the idea that the citizens must not depend on government, we all do. Furthermore, if all citizens had to read the infrastructure reports they would demand that more money be put into the aging systems that we rely on such as pipelines and the aging bridges. That is something to fear.


    12 members found this post helpful.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov. 6, 2001
    Location
    Fairfax
    Posts
    1,696

    Default

    Socialism does not work. Take a look at the economic health and stability of Europe, or lack of stability that is.

    Helping your neighbor is to be encouraged, but the government taking your stuff to hand to your neighbor is destructive. It is a disincentive to the folks who work hard, and an encouragement to those who do not. When government redistributes, folks who receive feel entitled and folks deprived of their hard earned property feel taken. When neighbors help out, the helper feels good, and the person helped generally feels a responsibility to make the most out of the hand up.

    Our modern educational system is training the next generation that the government is the only way to help folks up from poverty. That's a prescription for disaster. The best way to help folks out of poverty is to have a thriving economy, a good educational system, neighbors helping neighbors, and a culture of personal responsibility. In the end, it takes personal motivation to improve your lot in life and a government check in no way way addresses the basic problem.

    Communism, fascism, socialism are different faces of the same problem. Give me capitalism coupled with strong independent social institutions like various churches and civics organizations any day. Unfortunately, liberalism in this country has for over 100 years been working hard to shake the role of social institutions and strengthen the socialist bent in our government. Double trouble.


    24 members found this post helpful.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Nov. 18, 2010
    Location
    california
    Posts
    3,865

    Default

    Well, how well did capitalism work for Wall Street in 2008 ? "Double trouble" how soon we forget...


    10 members found this post helpful.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jul. 31, 2007
    Posts
    14,888

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AffirmedHope View Post
    I saw this explanation on Facebook and I think it's does pretty well in explaining the difference between the two.

    SOCIALISM
    You have 2 cows.
    You give one to your neighbor

    COMMUNISM
    You have 2 cows.
    The State takes both and gives you some milk
    This discussion is going to go into the shitter if we start by taking out working definitions from FaceBook.
    The armchair saddler
    Politically Pro-Cat


    8 members found this post helpful.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jul. 31, 2007
    Posts
    14,888

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stolen virtue View Post
    Well, how well did capitalism work for Wall Street in 2008 ? "Double trouble" how soon we forget...
    But something that looks like Socialism in broad strokes worked really well for the banks and General Motors. We certainly do practice socialism for "too big to fail" corporations. My sense is that Socialism was never designed to protect the largest and most powerful sectors of society (except indirectly by keeping things stable).
    The armchair saddler
    Politically Pro-Cat


    1 members found this post helpful.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jul. 11, 2000
    Location
    Way down south in the land of Sugar Cane
    Posts
    956

    Default

    Instead of defining Socialism, how about making the question a little more clear. Do you think too many people depend on the government now for things they should be providing for themselves? Do you think the trend is for more dependence to the government to supply all that you need?

    If someone is physically or mentally disabled and unable to provide for themselves then they definitely should get assistance but some people that should be able to provide for themselves have become dependent on the government for their whole lives.

    The government has gone from providing the basics necessities of life (food, housing, etc.) to providing things like cell phones.

    On a tangent note, have you noticed that several of the politicians that tout the 'redistribution of wealth' are quite wealthy and yet they don't redistribute their own wealth. Some of them RARELY give non political donations. I think this is ironic. If the redistribution of wealth is so vital then why not start with yourself and lead by example?


    13 members found this post helpful.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jan. 26, 2010
    Posts
    5,439

    Default

    I agree, "capitalism" with the backing of strong tax free institutions like churches are what got us where we are today. Whatever you want to call it, it is the recipe for the disaster we got into.

    And, I so agree on our infrastructure. I keep seeing more more and more reports of just how bad it is, from bridges to sewer and water systems. I live where the capitalist company PGE made money and the gas pipe blew up a neighborhood. I'm sure we're going to be hearing a lot more about failing bridges. What about the people in New Orleans and the water systems to keep them from flooding? How does that get paid for? Who paid for the clean up in the gulf when the capitalist company spilled the oil? I heard the report last night about the capitalist owner of Carnival is not paying for the billions of dollars in the clean up, rescue, whatever for the cruise ships that are failing because the law allows the loophole that the very rich can get into.

    There are no easy answers. Putting simplistic names to big ideas doesn't solve anything. It's just a way of name-calling and not actually answering any questions.

    I wrote this before yours, Bopper.

    I agree that there is always corruption. But, things like the cel phones aren't as stupid as they look. I heard something about how there are so many used cel phones thrown away, it's basically free, and it's a way to "find" people you have no way to otherwise.

    And I totally agree on the politicians thing. It has changed dramatically. Now they are all very wealthy. The problem is, they make the laws, and won't do things like make laws we WANT them to make about themselves. That part of it is what is out of control. And if they leave politics, they now get paid the big bucks to be a lobbyist because of all of their contacts. I think the key to this is to somehow tie in government pay to effectiveness, make lobbyists illegal, repeal the Citizens United decision and ALL political donations go into ONE pot to be shared by ALL, and, I don't know what.


    6 members found this post helpful.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Nov. 6, 2001
    Location
    Fairfax
    Posts
    1,696

    Default

    I haven't forgotten anything. First, our real estate bubble was in part caused by government policy that encouraged unwise lending. Then the problem was compounded with gov intervention using taxpayer dollars to bail out bad businesses. That is not capitalism. We should have let the weakest go bankrupt. Instead, our gov is now printing money and driving a new bubble in the stock market.

    Capitalism has flaws, but it's better than the rest. And if the government stops mucking with it, it works better....


    17 members found this post helpful.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Nov. 18, 2010
    Location
    california
    Posts
    3,865

    Default

    Yes, the bailouts worked. But the US got to the crisis through pure capitalism with no government oversight, just like Enron when the company created power blackouts to get their power purchase contracts approved with higher rates. It is really sad that there are people who say capitalism is the only good economic system, 2008 was not that long ago and we still are feeling the effects.

    Ignorance is just so sad.


    8 members found this post helpful.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Nov. 6, 2001
    Location
    Fairfax
    Posts
    1,696

    Default

    I'm not going to call you ignorant. I'm sure you are not. Neither am I. We just disagree. People that disagree with you are not stupid, they generally have a different perspective based on education or experience. We all need to learn from each other and meet on the middle. Hard to do when you assume folks who disagree with you are unable to offer anything to the conversation.


    24 members found this post helpful.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Nov. 18, 2010
    Location
    california
    Posts
    3,865

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jr View Post
    I haven't forgotten anything. First, our real estate bubble was in part caused by government policy that encouraged unwise lending. Then the problem was compounded with gov intervention using taxpayer dollars to bail out bad businesses. That is not capitalism. We should have let the weakest go bankrupt. Instead, our gov is now printing money and driving a new bubble in the stock market.

    Capitalism has flaws, but it's better than the rest. And if the government stops mucking with it, it works better....
    Do some homework, real estate loans on margainal property and owners were not required to be identified, they were not required to be on the books because there was no requirement to disclose, that is capitalism with no regulations. The weakest had the most impact on our economic holdings-TOO BIG TO FAIL- the consequences would have been dire for this nation, think Greece.

    "government printing money" this is why everyone needs to take courses in economics. This government is not creating a stock bubble, corporations are holding onto their cash, they are not investing into their infrastructure, employees or expanding hence their stocks go up.


    3 members found this post helpful.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Nov. 6, 2001
    Location
    Fairfax
    Posts
    1,696

    Default

    You've cherry picked your facts, buts that's okay. I'm happy to read your posts and agree with some of your points and disagree with others.

    I love it when folks say that conservatives are by definition, the closed minded ones.


    15 members found this post helpful.

Similar Threads

  1. Listen Up You Liberal Dems!!
    By twotrudoc in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: Nov. 22, 2012, 12:56 PM
  2. The liberal media cover up of Benghazi?
    By jetsmom in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 354
    Last Post: Nov. 8, 2012, 11:47 PM
  3. Fun naming thread.. liberal use of the word Puck
    By horse-loverz in forum Hunter/Jumper
    Replies: 53
    Last Post: Nov. 18, 2011, 11:06 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •