Joe_Cavalry All Day Every Day

Well as far as high school students who can't read...public schooling...mass education...socialist policy. We've turned into the farthest thing from a true capitalist society. Most of our policies have over time adopted big government style. The policies that all have failed have involved government and have been as a result of the rise of progressivism.

The tax laws we have here do not favor the rich...they are proportionate tax systems. The rich should "help pay" because it is the right thing to do. Charity. This whole thing does back to a loss of morals. The problem with socialism, communism, fascism or anything other ism that doesn't being with capital, is that they all favor the ones in power, so essentially you are promoting a system that is more exclusive than the one one you're arguing against. I would much rather have a wealthy business man taking all the money than, say, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Mussolini or whoever else. Founders once again; the system is also flawed because who regulates the governing? No one. They end up in power forever because there isn't a stable system. Socialism and Communism are the results of an unsatable system in which a ruler says, "I can help". Hmm...sound like Obama. The governing are concentrated and subject to the same things as any one man. Further, they are positions of excessive wealth. Benjamin Franklin understood that political positions offering wealth were automatically flawed.

Please explain capitalist sbatoge? The first country to successfully, and not fully, use capitalism is the United States and that country, in 200 years, propelled itself to the most prosperous nation on earth. A feat that takes most countries thousands of years and most never get there. Even under crippled capitalism, our nation still did this. Tell me that would've happened under a Socialist system. Those parables mentioned are completely correct. Competition isn't evil!!!! who comes up with this stuff? oh yeah, the text books, written by Marxists. All fellow Americans should start educating themselves about what this place is about and stop getting it from these textbooks and teachers who...wait for it...WORK FOR THE GOVERNMENT.

I would argue further that it is in our interest to find the easiest way to accomplish a task, as that is usually the most efficient. Capitalism is the only econimic and social system where human nature is allowed to take effect. If these impoverished people you are talking about need help, let MY religion help them, let MY money help them, let MY morals be MY guide to, as the example of the fisherman puts it, teach one how to fish.

If no one on earth feels that they should help anyone else, well it is their fault and simply their demise. No one can get anywhere without help, I agree completely, however, help, as you mention, should come because it is the right thing to do not because a government can dish it out. The thing everyone forgets is that when a government gives somebody a thing, they are taking it from somewhere else. Socialism and Communism are in essence systems that promote theft. Capitalism, on the other hand, takes into account morals. The money isn't taken from someone else, it is simply un-owned and there for the taking.

As previously stated, it should be because it is the right thing to do to give charity or teach someone how to run a business. Once again back to the founders; they understood that strong morals were the keys to an efficient and good society. The three things they wanted in schools: knowledge, religion and MORALITY (EVERYONE READ THE 5000 YEAR LEAP!!!). We have lost our sense of morals because increassingly people have relied on government and we no longer have a need for charity, its only take take take. That, my friends, is not moral.

We have a proportionate tax system already do we not? And what's happening to it? People aren't happy. I'm not confused, I'm stating the facts. Although it might be possible, it doesn't and never will happen. If the means of production are privately owned the money is still going to the government and it is still being redistributed, as I said, through social programs (i.e. by the State). Suppose the means are collectively owned, the funds are still being redistributed by the State and the means are owned by the State...this is Marx's Communism. When tax money is used to fund things that go to other people it is redistribution. I can't see any way to argue that?

It isn't working in Europe...at all. Greece and Ireland have been bailed out. Portugal and Spain will follow. The UK as well. Sweden according to many economists is a ticking time bomb, for they cannot afford their programs for much longer. Their programs cannot fund themselves. Germany is the only place where is is working in Europe, however, they're set up the same way so its probably a matter of time.

They're one in the same. Your money is my money so I can take your money when I don't have as much as you, therefore I'm redistributing your wealth to me. Correct? But...its not me or you who's redistributing, it is the State who owns the means, at least in the real world. Socialism leads to wealth redistribution and wealth redistribution is Socialism, they can't be separated. You can't have a free market but have everyone own everyone elses money. Granted the wealth redistribution in Socialism isn't in the form of money but in handouts and benefits. The distribution occurs in taxes. I pay for your unemployement. Correct? (that was an example, not saying you're unemployed)

Do you think, then, that any government, Socialist or not, could adequately distribute resources to their population? You cannot keep a population happy by destributing what is rightfully one's to another. Social justice has to come in the form of charity otherwise it isn't truly just, because some way or another the surplus is being taken from somebody.

This also is just form of idealism and does not actually work. Socialism does squish everyone to the middle, in the form of capped salaries and high taxes. There is only so much money to be made because you can't make more that your neighbor. Where in the world has everyone in the population been millionaires (Sweden is economically capitalist by the way). In a socialist system, or any system focusing on social justice in the real world, there isn't prosperity save those in the governing body, becuase that is who those systems favor. Under what system has every modern dictator risen to power?

Yes, everyone should try to work hard and work together to achieve or accomplish anything. (mass education sounds like indoctrination by the way). The fact is that the real world does not work with idealistic views of anything because there are always those who don't want to work that take advantage of the "A students" who do. In virtually every country that socialism has been implemented it has caused the same problems:

A populous dependant on their government, an extinguishing of innovation due to lack of competition (which is not evil despite what proponents of social justice theorists suggest), lowered standards of living and a general as well as generally unhappy people.

And to the student who challenged the teacher, it is clearly not working in the U.S. nor has it worked anywhere and nor will it ever. That is the fact.