Albert Einstein on socialism

[Tim the plumber]

Systems of law, order, and government have always been a very tricky subject for us humans, all through out our history, everywhere in the world. It’s always a careful and precarious juggling act between the equally legitimate ideals of individual liberty and freedom vs the need for social order, justice, and harmony. On one hand lies the freedom of anarchy, on the other the order of tyranny and ruthless oppression.

If we keep thinking those two extremes are our only two options, we will keep the pendulum swinging between two clearly unacceptable positions. The sweet spot seems to be somewhere in the middle of those extreme ideals. It may not be a perfect spot, as it may require some painful compromising between the ideals to make it happen. But hey, a lot of things in life are like that, like trying to decide how much time to spend with your family vs at work and career. There may not be perfect answers, but there are better and worse ones, smarter and dumber ones, depending on your circumstances and situation.

So the best “painful compromise” that we humans have come up with for this dilemma, after so many thousands of years of experimenting, is a system of representative democracy, with a string internal system of checks and balances, to regulate our affairs. Sure it’s not perfect. But it sure beats the alternatives of the two extremes, don’t you think?

Which describes the current state of the world.

If you want to see why I would very strongly oppose getting further into a single holistic world government then try readin the 3 body problem. A science fiction story by a Chineese author. The third book is the biggest eye opener. Never let the Chineese rule the world.

 

[Logician Man]

So Einstein joins other socialist geniuses to propose bad policies that foolish government leaders have tried and failed dozens of times in atheist nations of the world to no benefit to the learning disabled.

////// in atheist nations to no benefit to the learning disabled //// ?????

 

[Oborosen]

Why not Sweden?

Frankly?

Sweden is doing better, they've managed themselves quite well in all of this.
Despite having some issues with immigration and even their own economy (plenty have those two at this point). Though many of the social issues they face are from immigrants as well I believe. The gouging of some wages, to the new availability of different drugs that the immigrants are bringing in. This coupled with many of them not wanting to integrate, despite what people may see in centers. But I know that Stockholm still has several entire districts that police are just too afraid to go. Which couples with the rise of crime, though I have heard that officials intend to increase police forces offers, from 20k - about 25k or more.

I've heard talks of the housing market bubble just going completely flat and this coupled with the rising housing shortages, could spell disaster. Which when coupled to an increase in population can do more than that, though the population increase is currently having adverse effects on their healthcare as well.

One second - let me find some older links.
https://romanroams.com/en/5-social-problems-in-sweden/

https://www.quora.com/What-are-todays-biggest-problems-in-Sweden

In all honesty, I believe its the issues that have come up with immigration, that is spurring on more than most. I've heard about and seen video of news crews being chased out of the streets by immigrants not wanting to be filmed and the crime hasn't help in that regard either.

But at least Sweden doesn't have the same issues as Venezuela.
The inflation, the political corruption, starvation, medical conditions that are akin to preforming battlefield medicine.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/oct/19/venezuela-crisis-hospitals-shortages-barcelona-caracas

This is only touching the surface.

Sweden is a dream land in comparison at this point and I really hope it doesn't get that far.

 

[jnug]

Frankly?

Sweden is doing better, they've managed themselves quite well in all of this.
Despite having some issues with immigration and even their own economy (plenty have those two at this point). Though many of the social issues they face are from immigrants as well I believe. The gouging of some wages, to the new availability of different drugs that the immigrants are bringing in. This coupled with many of them not wanting to integrate, despite what people may see in centers. But I know that Stockholm still has several entire districts that police are just too afraid to go. Which couples with the rise of crime, though I have heard that officials intend to increase police forces offers, from 20k - about 25k or more.

I've heard talks of the housing market bubble just going completely flat and this coupled with the rising housing shortages, could spell disaster. Which when coupled to an increase in population can do more than that, though the population increase is currently having adverse effects on their healthcare as well.

One second - let me find some older links.
https://romanroams.com/en/5-social-problems-in-sweden/

https://www.quora.com/What-are-todays-biggest-problems-in-Sweden

In all honesty, I believe its the issues that have come up with immigration, that is spurring on more than most. I've heard about and seen video of news crews being chased out of the streets by immigrants not wanting to be filmed and the crime hasn't help in that regard either.

But at least Sweden doesn't have the same issues as Venezuela.
The inflation, the political corruption, starvation, medical conditions that are akin to preforming battlefield medicine.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/oct/19/venezuela-crisis-hospitals-shortages-barcelona-caracas

This is only touching the surface.

Sweden is a dream land in comparison at this point and I really hope it doesn't get that far.

Is Sweden's issue the oft mentioned and likely relevant European Refugee's issue or is it an Immigrants issue?

Europe's Refugees issue makes our complaints about Refugees pale in comparison.

 

[ataraxia]

For such a socialist system, that itself could fuel the flame of a problem. But in general, I believe it's the human condition that creates the most of them. Though to be honest, the only places that socialism could possibly survive is in a vacuum in my opinion.

I would rather stick with capitalism given the choice.

There is socialism in every single developed economy in the world today. There are no pure capitalist systems. That was abandoned by the end of the 19th century. It wasn’t because itwas working well.

 

[ataraxia]

Frankly?

Sweden is doing better, they've managed themselves quite well in all of this.
Despite having some issues with immigration and even their own economy (plenty have those two at this point). Though many of the social issues they face are from immigrants as well I believe. The gouging of some wages, to the new availability of different drugs that the immigrants are bringing in. This coupled with many of them not wanting to integrate, despite what people may see in centers. But I know that Stockholm still has several entire districts that police are just too afraid to go. Which couples with the rise of crime, though I have heard that officials intend to increase police forces offers, from 20k - about 25k or more.

I've heard talks of the housing market bubble just going completely flat and this coupled with the rising housing shortages, could spell disaster. Which when coupled to an increase in population can do more than that, though the population increase is currently having adverse effects on their healthcare as well.

One second - let me find some older links.
https://romanroams.com/en/5-social-problems-in-sweden/

https://www.quora.com/What-are-todays-biggest-problems-in-Sweden

In all honesty, I believe its the issues that have come up with immigration, that is spurring on more than most. I've heard about and seen video of news crews being chased out of the streets by immigrants not wanting to be filmed and the crime hasn't help in that regard either.

But at least Sweden doesn't have the same issues as Venezuela.
The inflation, the political corruption, starvation, medical conditions that are akin to preforming battlefield medicine.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/oct/19/venezuela-crisis-hospitals-shortages-barcelona-caracas

This is only touching the surface.

Sweden is a dream land in comparison at this point and I really hope it doesn't get that far.

Sweden’s immigration issues have nothing to do with socialism. They are the result of democracy. That is what the elect politicians decided to do. We could decide to do differently if they want. Do you want to get rid of democracy?

 

[Oborosen]

There is socialism in every single developed economy in the world today. There are no pure capitalist systems. That was abandoned by the end of the 19th century. It wasn’t because itwas working well.

I know that, though in all generality I refer to the open market and the ability to have a right to my own labor. Which is more the reason I keep this favor. While still knowing that even the US has some socialist programs that help grease the wheels of the country.

I'm off for now, duty calls and such.

 

[ataraxia]

Sweden is a capitalist economy. People own the means of production, are allowed to pursue and accumulate capital, for the most part set prices according to market forces, and trade globally. Sweden has some of the richest people in the world. like Steven Pederson who is worth 25 billion. Sweden is 15th on the economic freedom scale for their strong property rights and business, trade, and financial freedom.

Sure. But they have a government. Forget socialism or capitalism. We’re first just talking about whether government of any kind is a useful thing.

 

[ataraxia]

Sweden’s immigration issues have nothing to do with socialism. They are the result of democracy. That is what the elected politicians decided to do. They could decide to do differently if they want. Do you want to get rid of democracy?

 

[Luckyone]

Finland, Sweden, and New Zealand, all have capitalist based economies and rely on global capitalism for their survival. There are no actual socialist economies in the world because they all failed.

First of all, there is a big difference between Communism and Socialism. Communism has failed, Socialism has not, at least not in the form that is seen in Finland, Sweden and New Zealand. Those countries as considered Socialist but not in its true form as they also have a form of Capitalism.

Here is a link to an article worth reading that does explain the differences and how Finland, Sweden and New Zealand work. The bottom line is that there are other forms of government that work that are not all Capitalistic as we are or as Communistic as Cuba and Venezuela are.

https://www.thebalance.com/socialism-types-pros-cons-examples-3305592

 

[jonny5]

First of all, there is a big difference between Communism and Socialism. Communism has failed, Socialism has not, at least not in the form that is seen in Finland, Sweden and New Zealand. Those countries as considered Socialist but not in its true form as they also have a form of Capitalism.

Here is a link to an article worth reading that does explain the differences and how Finland, Sweden and New Zealand work. The bottom line is that there are other forms of government that work that are not all Capitalistic as we are or as Communistic as Cuba and Venezuela are.

https://www.thebalance.com/socialism-types-pros-cons-examples-3305592

Well again, they arent socialist. They are capitalist. If they were socialist they would fail as all others have. They rely on the economic freedom of capitalism to fund their socialist programs, same as the US.

 

[jonny5]

Sure. But they have a government. Forget socialism or capitalism. We’re first just talking about whether government of any kind is a useful thing.

The topic is socialism. I dont know of anyone who thinks 'govt' itself isnt useful. But thats nothing to do with economics.

 

[ataraxia]

The topic is socialism. I dont know of anyone who thinks 'govt' itself isnt useful. But thats nothing to do with economics.

Well, we were talking about international government as well. That was the second half of Einstein's proposal.

 

[ataraxia]

Well again, they arent socialist. They are capitalist. If they were socialist they would fail as all others have. They rely on the economic freedom of capitalism to fund their socialist programs, same as the US.

... same as all other developed economies in the world.

The issue is not that socialism is bad and capitalism is good. It's not that simple or black and white. The issue is how, given all the contingent situations and circumstances at hand in any given country, how they cleverly balance these two forces to create the most functional economies. It's like trying to figure out how much time to spend at work vs with your family.

As long as we keep thinking the "right answer" is one or the other in a pure way, we will keep the pendulum swinging between radical, impractical ideological extremes.

 

[veritas1]

You should follow your own advice and leave economics alone.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I wasn't aware that I'd been posting much on economics but I do know a good economy when i see it.

 

[Mach]

As long as we keep thinking the "right answer" is one or the other in a pure way, we will keep the pendulum swinging between radical, impractical ideological extremes.

Who is teaching people the nuanced version? A few college professors in the case of a few courses that some people get while pursuing a degree?

Meanwhile we have an entire political apparatus, flush with money, expertise, and highly motivated, to turn any issue they have a stake in, into a black and white issue, and then drive a wedge between the two colors.
I fear we aren't well-equipped for the current ideological battle.

 

[ataraxia]

Who is teaching people the nuanced version? A few college professors in the case of a few courses that some people get while pursuing a degree?

Meanwhile we have an entire political apparatus, flush with money, expertise, and highly motivated, to turn any issue they have a stake in, into a black and white issue, and then drive a wedge between the two colors.
I fear we aren't well-equipped for the current ideological battle.

Yes. You know what I think lead to this? Post-Cold War neurosis and paranoia.

For decades, Americans lived in fear of the Soviets. They lived in fear of potential nuclear holocaust. They lived in fear of geopolitical defeat. They lived in fear of being outdone in the space race. So all that bitter fear and anger led to us want to be everthing the Soviets weren't. Why do you think the US is the most religious developed nation on the planet, and developed the "In God We Trust" motto? That's right, because the Soviets were so staunchly atheist.

Same thing with their communist economic system. If they were communist, we were going to be so free market capitalist that it would make the heads of Pre-cold War Americans like FDR spin.

I really do think that if it wasn't for this sort of Cold War ideological backlash and paranoia against the Soviets, the culture and attitudes of the US would be much more similar to other western European countries today. The Cold War really messed with our heads. We are still having a hangover from it.

 

[Oborosen]

Sweden’s immigration issues have nothing to do with socialism. They are the result of democracy. That is what the elect politicians decided to do. We could decide to do differently if they want. Do you want to get rid of democracy?

I would agree with you completely, if it wasn't for Sweden trying to give everyone and yes, this does include the immigrants. A multitude of benefits, despite the strain it will most assuredly place on their economy. If you tell people that you are going to give them all of these benefits and then keep your boarders as open as they are trying to maintain. Then you will have more than a few people that are going to come in and take advantage of your generosity.

As for getting rid of democracy, maybe. A complete democracy would be a truly evil thing in my opinion. I abhor mob rule and would rather see a government be abrasive with itself from time to time, rather then bend to the majority so easily.

 

[SonOfDaedalus]

There is socialism in every single developed economy in the world today. There are no pure capitalist systems. That was abandoned by the end of the 19th century. It wasn’t because itwas working well.

Conservatives can’t understand this. They don’t even have a basic understanding of what the words socialism and capitalism mean. They just regurgitate the talking points they’ve been indoctrinated with.

I’ve never had an intelligent conversation with a conservative about socialism / capitalism. Whenever you hear a conservative complaining about socialism you know you’re dealing with someone with a very shallow understanding of the subject.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ataraxia]

I would agree with you completely, if it wasn't for Sweden trying to give everyone and yes, this does include the immigrants. A multitude of benefits, despite the strain it will most assuredly place on their economy. If you tell people that you are going to give them all of these benefits and then keep your boarders as open as they are trying to maintain. Then you will have more than a few people that are going to come in and take advantage of your generosity.

As for getting rid of democracy, maybe. A complete democracy would be a truly evil thing in my opinion. I abhor mob rule and would rather see a government be abrasive with itself from time to time, rather then bend to the majority so easily.

But surely how strict or lax the immigration policy of a country is going to be can be left up to democratic decision making, rather than be some inviolable national principle, shouldn’t it? Or is giving refuge and asylum to fellow humans escaping war, famine, persecution, etc... such an an egregious sin that such mushy humanitarian impulses should be guarded against by a constitutional safeguard?

 

[Oborosen]

But surely how strict or lax the immigration policy of a country is going to be can be left up to democratic decision making, rather than be some inviolable national principle, shouldn’t it? Or is giving refuge and asylum to fellow humans escaping war, famine, persecution, etc... such an an egregious sin that such mushy humanitarian impulses should be guarded against by a constitutional safeguard?

It can and it many cases it should.
Though with all things one must exercise caution, least fault, or injury will occur.

It's not egregious to take in those that are in need, nor is it such to do so for many humanitarian acts. But you and I both know that such an open boarder policy will lead to issues within the populace. There are those there that just want to take advantage of the system and do not care to assimilate, nor treat their new countrymen with the same care they have received.

I do like the peaceful self image that Sweden promotes for itself. Yet now they have new statistics of crime that I've basically never seen in other countries, outside my military service mind you. Grenade attacks, execution style shootings and if memory serves, acid attacks. Though the attacks are not just limited to Sweden, as one can find evidence of such event across the UK.

I hope they do well, I really do. But at this point I believe Sweden is suffering from its own generosity at this point. Many of these refugees don't even turn out to actually be refugees and many of the children they take in, aren't' actually children. As people will inevitably slip through the cracks and just get lost in the sea of bodies after passing the boarder.

This is just another strain that such a storied country does not need. I would like it if they could put everything on pause and straighten out their own system before continuing with their generosity.

 

[jonny5]

... same as all other developed economies in the world.

The issue is not that socialism is bad and capitalism is good. It's not that simple or black and white. The issue is how, given all the contingent situations and circumstances at hand in any given country, how they cleverly balance these two forces to create the most functional economies. It's like trying to figure out how much time to spend at work vs with your family.

As long as we keep thinking the "right answer" is one or the other in a pure way, we will keep the pendulum swinging between radical, impractical ideological extremes.

Socialism IS bad though. It takes rightful property from some and gives it to others. It seeks to force control of that property against the consent of the governed.

 

[jonny5]

Conservatives can’t understand this. They don’t even have a basic understanding of what the words socialism and capitalism mean. They just regurgitate the talking points they’ve been indoctrinated with.

I’ve never had an intelligent conversation with a conservative about socialism / capitalism. Whenever you hear a conservative complaining about socialism you know you’re dealing with someone with a very shallow understanding of the subject.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

With such a condescening attitude no wonder you cant have a conversation.

 

[ataraxia]

Socialism IS bad though. It takes rightful property from some and gives it to others. It seeks to force control of that property against the consent of the governed.

Early in the industrial revolution, there was no socialism. It was pure free market capitalism with no regulation or oversight. Every single country going through the process of industrialization, however, eventually learned that this was not sustainable. Things like the ever growing exploitation of child labor, or the rise of monopolies, led to situations where these countries were forced to develop regulations, oversight, and social safety nets, to prevent dangerous levels of social instability and dysfunction. Actually, it was exactly these commonsense measures which kept violent communist revolutions and worker revolts from overthrowing the capitalist system altogether.

The pure free-market capitalist system was not abandoned because it was working well.

 

[ataraxia]

With such a condescening attitude no wonder you cant have a conversation.

When talking with people who don’t know the difference between socialism and communism, or think that every single scientific organization on the entire planet is wrong and global warming is just a Chinese hoax, or that the earth is only 6000 years old, it’s hard not to sound condescending. Sorry.