• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Socialism as a failed experiment right here in the good ol' U.S.

Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
20,915
Reaction score
546
Location
We can't stop here this is bat country!
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Since everyone just ignored me in the "What is socialism," thread I figured I'd just start a new one so here's a little known fact that you never learned in your history books:

Did you know that in the very begining of this country we experimented with socialism? It's true! Long before Karl Marx was even born, the original contract that the pilgrims had entered into with their merchant-sponsors in London called for everything they produced to go into a common store, each member was entitled to one common share. All of the land they cleared and the houses they built belonged to the community as well. Well what happened? Bradford who had become governor of the colony realized that collectivism was a failed experiment, because the most creative and industrious people had no incentive to work any harder than anyone else, unless they could utilize the power of personel motivation. So Bradford assigned a plot of land to each family to work and manage, thus invoking the power of the market place.
 

Kelzie

The Almighty
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
13,534
Reaction score
1,000
Location
Denver, CO
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
Trajan Octavian Titus said:
Since everyone just ignored me in the "What is socialism," thread I figured I'd just start a new one so here's a little known fact that you never learned in your history books:

Did you know that in the very begining of this country we experimented with socialism? It's true! Long before Karl Marx was even born, the original contract that the pilgrims had entered into with their merchant-sponsors in London called for everything they produced to go into a common store, each member was entitled to one common share. All of the land they cleared and the houses they built belonged to the community as well. Well what happened? Bradford who had become governor of the colony realized that collectivism was a failed experiment, because the most creative and industrious people had no incentive to work any harder than anyone else, unless they could utilize the power of personel motivation. So Bradford assigned a plot of land to each family to work and manage, thus invoking the power of the market place.
Did you know Thomas Jefferson was a socialist? Crazy guy he was...

Besides, a lot of socialist today (NOT ALL, I know) consider themselves Social Democrats, aka euro-socialists. I think getting rid of private property is dumb, and I consider myself a socialist.
 
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
20,915
Reaction score
546
Location
We can't stop here this is bat country!
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
I'm all for equality and all that, however I have to say that self reliance is the only way in which a person can get ahead in this world, think about it, if one relies on the gov't for money where then is their incentive to work hard to get out of their current impoverished conditions or to better themselves so that their children may have a better life and hence more opportunies for the generation that follows and the one after that? And I'll go one step further in saying that this financial reliance becomes dependency on the state and this in turn gives the state more power to control the masses who rely on them to give them money thus the welfare state becomes the very catalyst for the states power. This creates a never ending cycle in which the impoverished peoples stay impoverished and thus can not get off of their rung on the socio-economic ladder because of their continual dependence on the gov't and they in turn pass this ideology of dependence onto their children thus forever trapping the poor in their impoverished condition which inturn has the consequence of keeping those in power to stay in power.
 

Kelzie

The Almighty
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
13,534
Reaction score
1,000
Location
Denver, CO
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
Trajan Octavian Titus said:
I'm all for equality and all that, however I have to say that self reliance is the only way in which a person can get ahead in this world, think about it, if one relies on the gov't for money where then is their incentive to work hard to get out of their current impoverished conditions or to better themselves so that their children may have a better life and hence more opportunies for the generation that follows and the one after that? And I'll go one step further in saying that this financial reliance becomes dependency on the state and this in turn gives the state more power to control the masses who rely on them to give them money thus the welfare state becomes the very catalyst for the states power. This creates a never ending cycle in which the impoverished peoples stay impoverished and thus can not get off of their rung on the socio-economic ladder because of their continual dependence on the gov't and they in turn pass this ideology of dependence onto their children thus forever trapping the poor in their impoverished condition which inturn has the consequence of keeping those in power to stay in power.
Whoa, slow down killer! I think the government providing the people with all their income is also a bad idea. I agree, I think that if a person doesn't have to work, in many cases they won't. With that said, I'm going to pick three of a long list of things a think the government should provide:

1. national health care-I think it's ridiculous that we don't have this. As if only the people that can afford it deserve to be healthy.

2. free higher education-I think this would go a long way to making sure everyone has the opportunity to make the most of themselves, not just the ones who can afford it.

3. living wage for the unemployed/poor-Let me comment before you go crazy. ;) I think that we should provide for the people who don't have a job, provided they are looking, or have a reasonable explanation for why they're not. If they won't work, they obviously have no interest in being a part of society, so society has no interest in them. I also think either minimum wage needs to be raised, or we should provide money to the single mother of three who works at McDonalds and barely scrapes by.
 
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
20,915
Reaction score
546
Location
We can't stop here this is bat country!
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Kelzie said:
Whoa, slow down killer! I think the government providing the people with all their income is also a bad idea. I agree, I think that if a person doesn't have to work, in many cases they won't. With that said, I'm going to pick three of a long list of things a think the government should provide:

1. national health care-I think it's ridiculous that we don't have this. As if only the people that can afford it deserve to be healthy.

2. free higher education-I think this would go a long way to making sure everyone has the opportunity to make the most of themselves, not just the ones who can afford it.

3. living wage for the unemployed/poor-Let me comment before you go crazy. ;) I think that we should provide for the people who don't have a job, provided they are looking, or have a reasonable explanation for why they're not. If they won't work, they obviously have no interest in being a part of society, so society has no interest in them. I also think either minimum wage needs to be raised, or we should provide money to the single mother of three who works at McDonalds and barely scrapes by.
1. The nationalized health care system in Canada doesn't work people have to wait months to recieve inadequate treatment and in many cases don't recieve treatment at all.

2. I, as a student, actually agree with this one, however, there are lots of federal loans that one can get, take me for example I'm a high school drop out who got my GED and after working manual labor from the ages of 16-20 I decided that I didn't want to do it for the rest of my life and opted to get my GED and to attend community college with the assistance of federal loans, after graduating from the community college I started at a 4 year university here at USF where I am currently enrolled as a JR majoring in poli sci with a 3.5 GPA and aspirations of going to law school. So, if I can do it any one can I mean the major reason why people don't go to college is not the cost it's because they simply don't want to make the 4 year commitment, it's the instant gratification mantality, the I want it and I want it now generation.

3. Historically speaking raising the minimum wage has actually hurt employment rates because if you heighten the minimum wage the companys will be less inclined to hire inexperienced workers, I for one would rather have a low paying job than no job at all, furthermore, the majority of people working at minimum wage jobs are people new to the work force, such as, high school students, or people working part time, I mean the starting wage even at a grocery store, such as, publix is like 7.00 per hour.
 

128shot

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 19, 2005
Messages
1,258
Reaction score
31
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I was going to comment on your post Trojan, I just forgot sorry.


anywho.


Ok, I want to put something up on the table...

situation: The mother goes through a divorce and takes in the kids because she is angry at the father for whatever, even though he was a good father to his kids, even though she can't afford. Should she actually be able to take in these kids knowing she can't afford it?
 

Kelzie

The Almighty
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
13,534
Reaction score
1,000
Location
Denver, CO
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
Trajan Octavian Titus said:
1. The nationalized health care system in Canada doesn't work people have to wait months to recieve inadequate treatment and in many cases don't recieve treatment at all.
People use this a lot, without actually looking into it. You wait for months for non-essential treatments. Like getting braces. If you have a heart attack, and need a triple by-pass, they don't put you on a waiting list. And I have never read a single report about Canada providing inferior medial treatment.

Trajan Octavian Titus said:
2. I, as a student, actually agree with this one, however, there are lots of federal loans that one can get, take me for example I'm a high school drop out who got my GED and after working manual labor from the ages of 16-20 I decided that I didn't want to do it for the rest of my life and opted to get my GED and to attend community college with the assistance of federal loans, after graduating from the community college I started at a 4 year university here at USF where I am currently enrolled as a JR majoring in poli sci with a 3.5 GPA and aspirations of going to law school. So, if I can do it any one can I mean the major reason why people don't go to college is not the cost it's because they simply don't want to make the 4 year commitment, it's the instant gratification mantality, the I want it and I want it now generation.
Really? I think it's the cost. And you're a lucky one. Both my parents make a decent income, but won't pay for my college, so I'm going to be paying back over 50K by the time I get done with law school (what type of law are you going into?). Does that sound like an equal playing field to you, when some rich kids can start saving his money instead of paying off loans when he's done with college?

Trajan Octavian Titus said:
3. Historically speaking raising the minimum wage has actually hurt employment rates because if you heighten the minimum wage the companys will be less inclined to hire inexperienced workers, I for one would rather have a low paying job than no job at all, furthermore, the majority of people working at minimum wage jobs are people new to the work force, such as, high school students, or people working part time, I mean the starting wage even at a grocery store, such as, publix is like 7.00 per hour.
Historically speaking, I don't give a rat's a**. Just because it's not easy doesn't mean we should force people to work for low paying jobs that they can't support their family off of. And I for one, would rather employers take some personal responsibilty and realize that these are human beings they are employing, and not numbers. And we'll still need that workforce, regardless.
 

Kelzie

The Almighty
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
13,534
Reaction score
1,000
Location
Denver, CO
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
128shot said:
Ok, I want to put something up on the table...

situation: The mother goes through a divorce and takes in the kids because she is angry at the father for whatever, even though he was a good father to his kids, even though she can't afford. Should she actually be able to take in these kids knowing she can't afford it?
Not too familiar with divorce law, ehh?

First, a mother can not "take" the kids if the father is a good parent.

Second, if one parent has custody, the other has to pay child support.

And last, no judge would ever give the children to the mom if she couldn't afford them.
 

128shot

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 19, 2005
Messages
1,258
Reaction score
31
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
then kids who have familys while they're still working minimum wage shouldn't have a family, its completely foolish.

and..

whats wrong with somebody having an advantage? I have an experience advantage over others, thats why I would get hired at a job. Is this not an advantage?


Ugh, child support is another vile thing that rips one persons life apart...
 

Kelzie

The Almighty
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
13,534
Reaction score
1,000
Location
Denver, CO
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
128shot said:
then kids who have familys while they're still working minimum wage shouldn't have a family, its completely foolish.
No, there's more to it then that. Like in my case, my mom couldn't afford us, but my dad didn't want us, so the judge awarded her custody. We got by just fine on his child support and welfare while she went to school so she could provide us with a better life.

And I personally agree that people shouldn't have kids until they can afford them. But there's so much more to it than that. What if thet lose their job? What if the could afford one, but they had twins. The list goes on...The point is, it happens, and taking someone's child away because they are poor, even though they love them, is so incredibly cruel I can't even believe you are suggesting it.

128shot said:
and..

whats wrong with somebody having an advantage? I have an experience advantage over others, thats why I would get hired at a job. Is this not an advantage?.
Nothing wrong with having an advantage. I'm talking about making sure everyone has opportunity to become advantaged.

128shot said:
Ugh, child support is another vile thing that rips one persons life apart...
Spoken like someone who's never had to live off it. :roll:
 

128shot

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 19, 2005
Messages
1,258
Reaction score
31
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
At the core, the meaning is still the same, someone is always advantaged over someone else somehow, weither or not you have to pay off a loan is one, but as I've always looked at life..

"debt has more in common with fear rather than risk, therefore, to get rid of debt, you must take a risk"

I'd prefere to live by that, personally....

Oh, and have you ever had to pay child support? I think not. try having 65% of your check taken away and thats BEFORE taxes, then, come and tell me its not horrid on the person who has to pay it. you're the one complaining about mothers who have to work 2 jobs to make it, what about fathers who end up paying child support and work 3 just to live!
 
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
20,915
Reaction score
546
Location
We can't stop here this is bat country!
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Kelzie said:
People use this a lot, without actually looking into it. You wait for months for non-essential treatments. Like getting braces. If you have a heart attack, and need a triple by-pass, they don't put you on a waiting list. And I have never read a single report about Canada providing inferior medial treatment.



Really? I think it's the cost. And you're a lucky one. Both my parents make a decent income, but won't pay for my college, so I'm going to be paying back over 50K by the time I get done with law school (what type of law are you going into?). Does that sound like an equal playing field to you, when some rich kids can start saving his money instead of paying off loans when he's done with college?



Historically speaking, I don't give a rat's a**. Just because it's not easy doesn't mean we should force people to work for low paying jobs that they can't support their family off of. And I for one, would rather employers take some personal responsibilty and realize that these are human beings they are employing, and not numbers. And we'll still need that workforce, regardless.
Health care question answer here's a report: http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=15034

How am I the lucky one I'm going to have to pay back my loans as well but the loans are there and available to anyone who wants them.

Yes, I do think it's fair that people can start saving money because their parents are rich because their parents probably worked very hard to give their children greater opportunities this go's back to the first response post that I made about working hard to give the next generation better opportunities. Now let me ask you, would it be fair to take away the earnings of the people who worked very hard to achieve them and give them to someone who hasn't?

And finally like I said the majority of people working for minimum wage are younger, either students or are working part-time.
 

Kelzie

The Almighty
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
13,534
Reaction score
1,000
Location
Denver, CO
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
128shot said:
At the core, the meaning is still the same, someone is always advantaged over someone else somehow, weither or not you have to pay off a loan is one, but as I've always looked at life..
Humans are not equal, by nature. But what is wrong with providing everyone equal opportunity to succeed?

128shot said:
Oh, and have you ever had to pay child support? I think not. try having 65% of your check taken away and thats BEFORE taxes, then, come and tell me its not horrid on the person who has to pay it. you're the one complaining about mothers who have to work 2 jobs to make it, what about fathers who end up paying child support and work 3 just to live!
Are you WHINING about having to support your child?!? I believe you were the one who implied that if a person can't afford a child, than they shouldn't have one. And what is your solution, the dad pays whatever he wants, while the kid starves to death? Brilliant. Wonder why our government hasn't thought of it...
 

Kelzie

The Almighty
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
13,534
Reaction score
1,000
Location
Denver, CO
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
Trajan Octavian Titus said:
Health care question answer here's a report: http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=15034

How am I the lucky one I'm going to have to pay back my loans as well but the loans are there and available to anyone who wants them.

Yes, I do think it's fair that people can start saving money because their parents are rich because their parents probably worked very hard to give their children greater opportunities this go's back to the first response post that I made about working hard to give the next generation better opportunities. Now let me ask you, would it be fair to take away the earnings of the people who worked very hard to achieve them and give them to someone who hasn't?

And finally like I said the majority of people working for minimum wage are younger, either students or are working part-time.
That article is crap. Like this: " in 2003 the average Canadian waited more than four months for treatment by a specialist once the referral was made by a general practitioner". So what? You know what most of those referrals are probably for? Dermatologists. I'm really not bothered that the state choses to spend their resources elsewhere for four months. And this: "shortest median wait was 6.1 weeks for oncology (cancer) treatment without radiation" The serious cancers require radiation. My sister had a little tumor on her leg for years before she had it taken off. She's fine. The author uses examples of things that sound horrible, like cancer, when really if they were bad, they would have been treated. Tell me, can you find anyone who has actually died while waiting for treatment?

You can't deny that if college were free, more people would go. All I think is fair is that everyone have the same opportunity to succeed. That is one of the principles our country was founded on. You cannot succeed today without a college degree. So why is fair that only the people who can afford to go can get it?
 

128shot

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 19, 2005
Messages
1,258
Reaction score
31
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Kelzie said:
Humans are not equal, by nature. But what is wrong with providing everyone equal opportunity to succeed?



Are you WHINING about having to support your child?!? I believe you were the one who implied that if a person can't afford a child, than they shouldn't have one. And what is your solution, the dad pays whatever he wants, while the kid starves to death? Brilliant. Wonder why our government hasn't thought of it...

Sure, lets play the guilt card, as usual...

For his child, and what if he can't even see his child? hell, his child doesn't even live with him anymore.

If anything, they should lower the percent they take out of someone's check, its insane.

We do have equal oppotunity, if you look at it. you don't have to be out of debt to cease an oppotunity...
 

Kelzie

The Almighty
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
13,534
Reaction score
1,000
Location
Denver, CO
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
128shot said:
Sure, lets play the guilt card, as usual...

For his child, and what if he can't even see his child? hell, his child doesn't even live with him anymore.

If anything, they should lower the percent they take out of someone's check, its insane.

We do have equal oppotunity, if you look at it. you don't have to be out of debt to cease an oppotunity...
Listen, there is no such thing as the guilt card. If I said that driving was evil, would you feel guilty about it? Probably not. And yet you feel guilty now. Why is that? Maybe because you know that what you are complaining about is selfish and hurts someone that not only are parents obliged to provide for once they were born, but it hurts someone that any decent parent should be thrilled to provide for. Let's take a concesus of the parents on this site, and ask them if they would make their child suffer because they don't want to support them. Actually, we probably don't have to. I at least already know the answer.

However, if a person looks at college, thinks "I can't afford it", and doesn't go, that is an opportunity that he is missing to make something of himself.
 

128shot

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 19, 2005
Messages
1,258
Reaction score
31
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I don't feel gulity, i still think child support, certainly at these high percentage rates, is horriendous.

It should be worked out mutually between the parents no ?


I just thought you flipped it over to make me feel guilty. I get that with alot of people i argue with, so I did pre-judge that statement because of some pre-notions I have. Sorry.
 

Kelzie

The Almighty
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
13,534
Reaction score
1,000
Location
Denver, CO
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
128shot said:
I don't feel gulity, i still think child support, certainly at these high percentage rates, is horriendous.

It should be worked out mutually between the parents no ?


I just thought you flipped it over to make me feel guilty. I get that with alot of people i argue with, so I did pre-judge that statement because of some pre-notions I have. Sorry.
I flipped over it cause my dad constantly b*****d over having to pay child support. I'm sorry if some dads find it inconvienient, but as someone who once relied on that child support to eat, I say tough luck.

It's at whatever rate is necessary to provide the children with a decent living. And they take into account how much each parent could pay. For intance, my dad paid 75%, because he had a much higher paying job than my mom did. That extra 25% hurt him a lot less than it would have for my mom to pay 50%.

Have you ever dealt with people going through a divorce? They don't even agree on things they really do agree on. You think they'll agree on who can afford the most child support? That's why the courts do it.
 

128shot

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 19, 2005
Messages
1,258
Reaction score
31
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
My uncle has been through a divorce, and my moms soon to be husband has been through a divorce..

then there are countless relatives, and friends.....

My family in general hasn't had too many first marriages to work out all that well.


I think some point down the road, they should re-configure their child support, as I've seen with most of these divorces, they do learn to tolerate each other and stay civil around each, sometines, they're even friends on some basis.

I understand your view point, and thats why you were a bit hostile, and I can't blame you...

I just think 65% is insane in most cases, thats for sure...
 

Kelzie

The Almighty
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
13,534
Reaction score
1,000
Location
Denver, CO
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
128shot said:
My uncle has been through a divorce, and my moms soon to be husband has been through a divorce..

then there are countless relatives, and friends.....

My family in general hasn't had too many first marriages to work out all that well.


I think some point down the road, they should re-configure their child support, as I've seen with most of these divorces, they do learn to tolerate each other and stay civil around each, sometines, they're even friends on some basis.

I understand your view point, and thats why you were a bit hostile, and I can't blame you...

I just think 65% is insane in most cases, thats for sure...
I don't know about the 65%. Is it a figure from some study, or is it just someone you know who had to pay it?

My dad paid like 11% of his income, after taxes, and it still drove him nuts.
 

128shot

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 19, 2005
Messages
1,258
Reaction score
31
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
most of my family pays over 20, I know a couple who pay 60 and 65%..

I don't see how rates can get that high, my parents did the calculations on how much it cost to raise me WITH all the goodies I got, it came out to 200K...

so, whats 65% of 70K?
 

Kelzie

The Almighty
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
13,534
Reaction score
1,000
Location
Denver, CO
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
128shot said:
most of my family pays over 20, I know a couple who pay 60 and 65%..

I don't see how rates can get that high, my parents did the calculations on how much it cost to raise me WITH all the goodies I got, it came out to 200K...

so, whats 65% of 70K?
Either somebody's lying to you, or they have like eight kids they are paying child support on. That's 45K a year. My dad paid 12K for me and my sister, and that was 75% of our living expenses.
 

128shot

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 19, 2005
Messages
1,258
Reaction score
31
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
They keep reaping and raving that its 60-65%, so I can't quote any other numbers than that.




Isn't the biggest flaw in socialism armed revolution?
 

Kelzie

The Almighty
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
13,534
Reaction score
1,000
Location
Denver, CO
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
128shot said:
They keep reaping and raving that its 60-65%, so I can't quote any other numbers than that.




Isn't the biggest flaw in socialism armed revolution?
Maybe it's cause they have to pay 60-65% of the total child support? Like my dad paid 75%? 45K a year for what, two kids, is insane. There are families of four that live quite comfortably off that.

What? Armed revolution? Heard of any revolts in Western Europe lately?
 

128shot

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 19, 2005
Messages
1,258
Reaction score
31
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
just quoting direct marxism, but like with any idea, it often times strays away from the core founder in favor of more sutiable pursuits...


I wouldn't call you a marxist socialist, you have more in common with other less extreme socialist point of views..

Maybe, I dunno much about certain particular divorces...
 
Top Bottom