Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

@Clifford Franklin, you are correct...America has never truly been a purely capitialist country.

Right now America is a hodge-podge of socialism, crony capitalism, and corporate welfare.  Of those three, the latter two are viewed as good and somehow the first is viewed as bad.  Why is that?  It's because 90%+ of all wealth flowing up to the top 5% is viewed as good.  Conversely, when wealth flows down to the people who actually work to make it happen, that is somehow "bad" and/or "wrong."

Again, most of society never criticizes a rich person for demanding ever higher profits.  But as soon as those at the bottom demand a wage they can live on--that's somehow outrageous and unacceptable.  SMH.

 
Big Red 40 said:
Lots of talk here about financial aspects of Cortezs proposals, but i was noticing a few that wouldn't cost a thing. They are just common human decency. 
Click to expand...


Also true.  But we can't have common decency and treating everyone with a basic level of courtesy, dignity, and respect though...that's the devil's socialism talking there.  

:ahhhhhhhh     :D

 
Free-markets have lifted way more people up than socialism, that is economic reality.  Capitalism gets a bad wrap because folks often blame it when they should be blaming corporatism. Obviously we do need some safety-nets as a society, a mixed economy to an extent. As far as healthcare goes where we went awry wasn't in not handing it to the government but handing it to insurance companies. Government deciding how healthcare is allotted and executed is far from ideal but inevitable massive medicare expansion will beat the expensive Frankenstein system we've built.

As far as Jesus goes yes he lit into some guys but he never told the apostles to gank the guy's stuff and redistribute it amongst themselves as they saw fit. He would probably be considered an anarcho-socialist by today's standards. But at the end of the day what Jesus, Moses, Buddha, Muhammad, or freaking Lord Xenu would say doesn't matter in terms of how to successfully run a country.

 
TheSker said:
I fully realize it's an internet message board and we all "know people" who are the exception.

My original statement was chopped anyway......I said capitalism provides an opportunity.  I did not say "if x, then y".

Does a socialistic system offer incentive for productivity?  That's probably my main question.
Click to expand...
Give a read to the definition of democratic socialism - the short answer to your question is yes.  Incentive is increased (or not) based on increased productivity.

Socialism's mantra is, "From each according to his ability, to each according to his contribution." Everyone in society receives a share of the production based on how much each has contributed.  That motivates them to work long hours if they want to receive more.

Workers receive their share after a percentage has been deducted for the common good. Examples are transportation, defense, and education. Some also define the common good as caring for those who can't directly contribute to production. Examples include the elderly, children, and their caretakers.

Socialism assumes that the basic nature of people is cooperative. That nature hasn't yet emerged in full because capitalism or feudalism has forced people to be competitive. Therefore, a basic tenet of socialism is that the economic system must support this basic human nature for these qualities to emerge.

These factors are valued for their usefulness to people. This includes individual needs and greater social needs. That might include preservation of natural resources, education, or health care. That requires most economic decisions to be made by central planning, as in a command economy.
Click to expand...


edit:  posted this before I scrolled through and saw Big Red 40's Democratic Socialism comments - he nailed it.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Well at least people are being open and honest about their desires for socialism and/or democratic socialism. It's much better to call these things what they are rather than acting like it's not some radical departure from what this country was founded on and what it has stood for for so many years. I won't say our system hasn't devolved and doesn't need to be tweaked, heavily in some cases but it should be easier as long as we know exactly how certain groups or individuals want to change things.

 
Comfortably Numb said:
Well at least people are being open and honest about their desires for socialism and/or democratic socialism. It's much better to call these things what they are rather than acting like it's not some radical departure from what this country was founded on and what it has stood for for so many years. I won't say our system hasn't devolved and doesn't need to be tweaked, heavily in some cases but it should be easier as long as we know exactly how certain groups or individuals want to change things.
Click to expand...
That's the entire reason the 1st Amendment exists - to allow open discussion about our policies and politics.

I think we need socialism in parts of our society and economy like law enforcement, fire fighting (cue teachercd complaining), the military, infrastructure (roads, bridges, airports), etc. The discussion shouldn't be about whether capitalism or socialism is good or bad or whatever - it should be about what policies we should implement to solve our problems and make our society and country a better place for us. Various "-isms" can give us ideas to form these solutions and to debate their merits, but none of the "-isms" will ever be the end-all, be-all for all of our issues.

 
I agree . And while you, and I, and many on this board may understand that I don’t think millions of Americans do . They are conditioned to be scared,  and fiercely reject anything associated with the word socialism . I think If it’s explained enough, in the right way, it may ease those fears , and help them realize that these concepts are actually beneficial to them, and could improve their lives . 

 
Danimal said:
Free-markets have lifted way more people up than socialism, that is economic reality.  Capitalism gets a bad wrap because folks often blame it when they should be blaming corporatism. Obviously we do need some safety-nets as a society, a mixed economy to an extent. As far as healthcare goes where we went awry wasn't in not handing it to the government but handing it to insurance companies. Government deciding how healthcare is allotted and executed is far from ideal but inevitable massive medicare expansion will beat the expensive Frankenstein system we've built.

As far as Jesus goes yes he lit into some guys but he never told the apostles to gank the guy's stuff and redistribute it amongst themselves as they saw fit. He would probably be considered an anarcho-socialist by today's standards. But at the end of the day what Jesus, Moses, Buddha, Muhammad, or freaking Lord Xenu would say doesn't matter in terms of how to successfully run a country.
Click to expand...
The bold is true.  It is the free market that drives innovation.  We don't hear of American companies stealing Chinese or Russian technology - it is always the other other way around.  Yes, I'm sure there is some company 'espionage' that goes on but as a rule, it is American technology that is the target.  

 
Danimal said:
Free-markets have lifted way more people up than socialism, that is economic reality.
Click to expand...
They have? Human civilization existed for thousands of years before free-markets. And early hunter-gatherers were a form of "primitive communism", so socialism has been around a very long time and definitely improved the human condition. You may be correct, but it's definitely not obvious.

Your argument about separating corporatism from capitalism and needing mixed economies is one I agree with though.

TGHusker said:
The bold is true.  It is the free market that drives innovation.  We don't hear of American companies stealing Chinese or Russian technology - it is always the other other way around.  Yes, I'm sure there is some company 'espionage' that goes on but as a rule, it is American technology that is the target.  
Click to expand...
The government invested heavily in R&D for decades including the money to tackle basic building blocks of physics and chemistry upon which most if not all of "free market innovation" is based. Take the modern smart phone: the transistors, GPS, wireless comms, internet protocols, and touch screen were all invented under government programs. Apple obviously put those things together and did some nice integration and user experience, but it took both social and corporate R&D to make that happen.

I don't know that other countries stealing US tech is indicative of free-market vs socialism driving innovation as much as the largest economy in the world is driving the most innovation.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
knapplc said:
What's the primary message of Jesus?
Click to expand...
I suppose there are a lot of possible answers to that question. Some may say the Golden rule; love others as yourself. Some may say it is the salvation message. What I was referring to by "primary" (sorry, I may have used primary incorrectly) was the overarching theme of socialism contained in Jesus' teachings.

 
Comfortably Numb said:
I suppose there are a lot of possible answers to that question. Some may say the Golden rule; love others as yourself. Some may say it is the salvation message. What I was referring to by "primary" (sorry, I may have used primary incorrectly) was the overarching theme of socialism contained in Jesus' teachings.
Click to expand...


Jesus didn't invent those ideas/ideals. They can be found in philosophical tenets that pre- and post-date Jesus, as well as religions that pre- and post-date his time. So atheist Socialists who embrace loving one another, caring for the less fortunate, feeding & clothing the poor & hungry... they're just embracing basic human ideals.

I wouldn't think humans doing those things is really that much of a head-scratcher.

 
Back
Top