Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

efarrer wrote:

Dude, you are aware that Socialism isn't an alternative to Democracy, yes?

My money would be on no.

You could be a Nazi too, I guess.

Orkeosaurus wrote:It's the country right below us, duh. Don't you study maps?

Actually I meant the phrase on the coin. Ignoring the obvious idiocy of the speaking Mexican statement.

I can't read it, because I'm not Mexican, can't you see my flag (the computer one)?

Fateweaver wrote:The country below us is Texas. Bah. I thought you were edumacated Orkeo.

I thought Texas was part of the US. I might be wrong though.

Also, I think you mispelled "educated". You should probably remember too spell check.

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:This is the trouble with Orkeo...you can never be sure when he's just taking the piss.

Why would I be on my computer if I was taking a piss?

Orkeo wrote:I can't read it, because I'm not Mexican, can't you see my flag (the computer one)?

Honestly is there some sort of award we can give Orkeo,he has truely been the high point of this whole thread.

FITZZ wrote: Honestly is there some sort of award we can give Orkeo,he has truely been the high point of this whole thread.

I have drawn a picture of his face on my hand, and am currently french-kissing it.

That should be reward enough.

Ew don't do that I don't want to be gay.

'Hand-Orkeo' has no say in the matter...

:(

well Orkeo,at least Alba is ONLY kissing it.

Albatross wrote:'Hand-Orkeo' has no say in the matter...

And Orkeo is topped, so to speak.

Hand Orkeo must submit....

pombe wrote:Now, I understand that your question is based on hyperbole and that you wanted to take an extreme case to make a point, but are you saying that it wouldn't work?

As an accountant who’s spent most of his professional life preparing budgets for various government bodies, and having read countless public submissions I can tell you one basic truth about the public’s idea of government expenditure – they have absolutely no idea what they’re talking about. Most don’t read the budget and rely on second and third hand anecdotes (mostly apocryphal). The rest will attempt to read the budget, but are incapable or unwilling to read it accurately and use it to make nonsense charges.

Not knowing how money needs to be spent isn’t the fault of the average guy on the street - he doesn’t have the time to read through thousands of reports and submissions that are part of every budget process. He shouldn’t be expected to read the engineering reports detailing future roadworks requirements. He shouldn’t be expected to read the assessment of future infrastructure replacement, indicating the reserves needed to ensure future sustainability. He might have read in the paper that health advances have made a new machine available to improve cancer treatment, and he might be outraged that no machines are being purchased in next year’s budget, but he wouldn’t know that such machines have been sought and won’t be available for purchase for 18 months.

The public deserves a say in how their money is spent – they elect politicians on their behalf. That’s what representative democracy is.

JEB_Stuart wrote:To be fair Whatwhat, the US has a longer history of being anti-socialist then the Cold War. Even in the early 20th Century there was a large amount of anti-socialism in the US. Sure Eugene Debbs had started to attract followers, but most Americans are far too individualistic to buy into the whole "group" notion...

Yeah, the US reaction to the October Revolution is a pretty clear example that the US had a strong anti-Socialist focus. They piled funding into support of the Whites during the civil war. Then again, the famine relief provided by the US to the USSR in the ‘20s probably allowed the USSR to survive… so it’s a complicated thing.

The critical response to the New Deal also contained a lots of charges of socialism, so it isn’t as though labelling progressive campaigns socialist is a new thing. Probably the biggest change is how omni-present the political debate is these days, while we’ve got 24 hour news and constant internet updates we don’t have much more political substance, so there’s a lot more space to fill with political rhetoric like complaining about socialism.

Fateweaver wrote:The whole "take a number" thing is BS. It's BS at the DMV or anywhere else, it's BS at a clinic.

If I walk into a clinic in pain because my arm is broken I should be admitted right away, not made to wait behind 15 other people their to get weight loss meds or diabetes meds or anything that CAN wait a few hours.

What? What made you decide that universal health meant that there could be no priority system for emergency cases?

Fateweaver wrote:I know. Guns are illegal in Oz so we should ban guns too.

No, they aren’t. At some point you’re going to have to learn of the world outside of political rhetoric, where ‘handguns purchased for self defence and semi-automatic rifles outside of those required for farming are no longer legal’ is a very different thing to ‘guns are banned’.

FITZZ wrote: well Orkeo,at least Alba is ONLY kissing it.

There are worse things on earth than making out with Alba... depending on the Alba in question, of course.

These should answer some more questions about socialism:

Orkeosaurus: Killer of threads.

Orkeosaurus: Saviour of Threads

Orkeosaurus wrote:

efarrer wrote:

Dude, you are aware that Socialism isn't an alternative to Democracy, yes?

My money would be on no.

You could be a Nazi too, I guess.

Orkeosaurus wrote:It's the country right below us, duh. Don't you study maps?

Actually I meant the phrase on the coin. Ignoring the obvious idiocy of the speaking Mexican statement.

I can't read it, because I'm not Mexican, can't you see my flag (the computer one)?

Fateweaver wrote:The country below us is Texas. Bah. I thought you were edumacated Orkeo.

I thought Texas was part of the US. I might be wrong though.

Also, I think you mispelled "educated". You should probably remember too spell check.

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:This is the trouble with Orkeo...you can never be sure when he's just taking the piss.

Why would I be on my computer if I was taking a piss?

Tx is a whole 'nother country. Ask Frazz.

You need to learn to speak Mexican Orkeo so you can communicate with the 10's of millions more illegals that will come into this country to take part in our BS healthcare program.

Here's another good video to help you learn some things.

Orkestra wrote:Orkeosaurus: Saviour of Threads

If I wanted banality I would watch children talk to each other or go to 4chan.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Frazzled wrote:25% of the population is doesn't speak English either whats your point?

And the other 75% speaks it poorly. What's your point?

Whats yours?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

Orkeosaurus wrote:

Shuma wrote:ALL COUNTRIES THAT CURRENTLY EXIST ARE IN SOME WAY SOCIALIST. THE TERM IS DEBASED AND OVERTLY BROAD TO THE POINT OF MEANINGLESSNESS.

America isn't socialist. We're a democracy.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

efarrer wrote:Though of course you are aware North Korea's not actually a socialist state.

It's a dictatorship.

Dude, you are aware that Socialism isn't an alternative to Democracy, yes?

Thats kinid of the crux of the argument yes?
You don't view it that way. Many here do. Freedom vs. government control. Socialism is a word for government control.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

ShumaGorath wrote:

Orkestra wrote:Orkeosaurus: Saviour of Threads

If I wanted banality I would watch children talk to each other or go to 4chan.

thats trolling. If I were Modding this thread you'd be getting private messages about now. If you don't like the thread don't post.

Thing is though Frazz, Socialism can sit quite happily with Democracy, if that's what the people want.

The whole crux of this thread is why wouldn't you want your Government to have things in place to help you when your down?

Actually you think that is the question. It is not.

I restate. Others disagree and believe socialism is a word for government control. The more socialist, the further you are down the government control spectrum.

I have to admit in place where I see it invoked heavily, state control is pretty onerous.

Frazzled wrote:Actually you think that is the question. It is not.

I restate. Others disagree and believe socialism is a word for government control. The more socialist, the further you are down the government control spectrum.

I have to admit in place where I see it invoked heavily, state control is pretty onerous.

Except that's not how it actually works

Socialism and capitalism are both forms of economic systems, each in it's pure form at opposite ends of the scale.
Dictatorship and Democracy are both political systems, both at either end of the scale.

A socialist democracy is just as likely as a capitalist dictatorship.

No.

efarrer wrote:

Frazzled wrote:Actually you think that is the question. It is not.

I restate. Others disagree and believe socialism is a word for government control. The more socialist, the further you are down the government control spectrum.

I have to admit in place where I see it invoked heavily, state control is pretty onerous.

Except that's not how it actually works

Socialism and capitalism are both forms of economic systems, each in it's pure form at opposite ends of the scale.
Dictatorship and Democracy are both political systems, both at either end of the scale.

A socialist democracy is just as likely as a capitalist dictatorship.

Well, I agree that a socialist democracy is as unlikely to happen as a capitalist dictatorship. The focus of socialism, and most socialist reforms, is caring for the people, and making sure they are ok. This becomes an issue when the people realize that no matter what they do, they'll be ok because the government will take care of all of their needs. At that point you get a codependent populace, one that gradually loses individual initiative and drive. This may take several generations to show, but whatever democracy you started with will quickly become at best a republic, as a large block of people stop voting or examining the issues before they vote.
This loss of autonomy, individuality and eventually the drive for freedom is what Americans fear. It is irrational, since anyone worried about such a fate has the basic morale fiber to avoid it, but that doesn't decrase its power. I imagine that if all of my needs were cared for, I would care far less about what our government was doing. That's why we don't let people too young to work vote.

My point, such as it is, is that taking away the need for effort and initiative will deprive a democracy of the interested voters it needs to continue being anything resembling the will of the people. Whether the government controls the people or not is irrelevant if they have no will to stand against you.

Places like Norway are socialist by the democratic choice of the people. The government is merely the agent for carrying out the people's wishes. The government is strong and is able to pass laws with a socialist purpose because it has the support of the people.

Kilkrazy wrote:Places like Norway are socialist by the democratic choice of the people. The government is merely the agent for carrying out the people's wishes. The government is strong and is able to pass laws with a socialist purpose because it has the support of the people.

Thats what North Korea says too. The people's wishes is just a point of view. At the end of the day its still someone with power telling those without power what to do.

US government was designed so that government wouldn't have the power to interfere in the first place.

Gitzbitah wrote:Well, I agree that a socialist democracy is as unlikely to happen as a capitalist dictatorship.

Are you saying capitalist dictatorships are rare? That's just wrong. Off the top of my head the following have all had capitalist dictatorships at one time - Cuba, Chile, Ecuador, Brazil, Venezuela, Argentina.

Right now China is opening its markets and turning to a capitalist economy while maintaining party control.

My point, such as it is, is that taking away the need for effort and initiative will deprive a democracy of the interested voters it needs to continue being anything resembling the will of the people. Whether the government controls the people or not is irrelevant if they have no will to stand against you.

I can tell when I'm ill informed. I don't have a wide knowledge of foreign governments or economics. To me, the principles underlying capitalism and a dictatorship seem irreconcilable as those between a socialist state and a democracy. That being said, I wasn't aware of any of the examples you have pointed out. I think I'll just withdraw from discussing this particular political theory. I don't the real world knowledge necessary for a vigorous debate. I will be watching with interest though- thanks to sebster and killkrazy for broadening my horizons.

Gitzbitah wrote:I can tell when I'm ill informed. I don't have a wide knowledge of foreign governments or economics. To me, the principles underlying capitalism and a dictatorship seem irreconcilable as those between a socialist state and a democracy. That being said, I wasn't aware of any of the examples you have pointed out. I think I'll just withdraw from discussing this particular political theory. I don't the real world knowledge necessary for a vigorous debate. I will be watching with interest though- thanks to sebster and killkrazy for broadening my horizons.

Not a problem, mate. If you have some time down the track I'd recommend reading about Pinochet's Chile. It's the classic example of a democratic socialist government being overthrown by a right wing coup, in between torturing and killing fellow citizens Pinochet brought in a range of capitalist reforms.

Milton Friedman made an interesting point about capitalism/socialism and democracy/dictatorship. He said that while it was plenty easy to have a capitalist dictatorship, it wasn't really possible to have a socialist democracy. The fact that you require the government's employment for all of your needs forces too much conformity on the populace, even if the government is not actively attempting to do so, and this stasis means the government will slowly slide into corruption and social totalitarianism. The lack of difference in income also makes it impossible for a new thinker to recieve the patronage of someone with the power to spread a new idea. Then there's the inherent power of the centralized bureaucracy.

Of course, this is a criticism of the Marxist "government controls all of the means of production" socialism, not of Scandinavian style "taxes and public services are very high" socialism. Scandinavian countries are really about a 50-50 mix of state and private economic power.

sebster wrote:

The rest of us realise the right amount of government can increase the power in the hands of the average citizen. For instance, open access to education allows someone born to impoverished parents to have a profession. The idea that any increase in government is a decrease in freedom is lazy, lazy thinking.

I guess we're just ignorant hicks here compared to you enlightened lot. The poster asked for US views. I supplied some. I didn't need to attacked by you self styled enlightened people (excuse me I had to throw up a little on that one). Oh well so much for this thread.

This thread is wonderful.. ive knocked plenty of lols out on the way.