Socialism might be neccasery for the future

[clarky003]

Depends on who you ask.

well if you ask me, and the majority of people with good moral's, then its not, and it quite possibly takes a bastard to not realise that .

Justifying our system as it stands isnt very ambitious, we strive for constant improvement, (most of us like to think that) in truth, big buisness like to keep things the same, they dont want change to upset there profits, unless its good change... its all egoic, material based status quo bullOshit. Id like out, but no one is willing to part with their material possesions for the sake of the benefit of the whole over the individual... and all it takes is an effort to shift our concious attitude towards each other.. but it seems that neanderthals still walk among us, because they dont seem to have the mental strength, will, or capacity to try.

 

[Bodacious]

there's something odd with those numbers, maybe you can help me understand, but how is it possible that 10% of 250 million people pays 80% of the revenue generated through income tax? if we say for argument's sake, the income tax total per year is 1 billion dollars; 80% or 800 million dollars of that is paid by 25 million people? and 200 million of the 1 billion collected is paid by 225 million people? that would mean that 25 million people a year are paying over 3 million in taxes per year? that makes no sense if you say the top 10% makes over $200,000 a year

Those figures are just income taxes and don't include corporate income taxes. They are just income taxes on the individual.

Here is a table of all the tax revenues collected by the US gov

They include:
Individual Income Taxes
Corporate Income Taxes
Social Insurance Taxes
Excise Taxes
Estate and gift taxes
Customs Duties
And misc recepts

 

[CptStern]

Look at the stock broker. He probably invested a great deal more in education than a police officer did. As it stands, with military service, it takes no college education whatsoever to become a police officer.

yes but we're talking about the stock broker having triple to 10 x the salary a police officer has, and he doesnt risk his life on a daily basis.

I'd think you as a soldier would understand that ..I mean why should the ceo's of haliburton be making money hand over fist in iraq when it's the soldier who's putting his neck on the line so that some ceo can buy his private beach house on some little island in the south pacific

 

[Bodacious]

yes but we're talking about the stock broker having triple to 10 x the salary a police officer has, and he doesnt risk his life on a daily basis.

I'd think you as a soldier would understand that ..I mean why should the ceo's of haliburton be making money hand over fist in iraq when it's the soldier who's putting his neck on the line so that some ceo can buy his private beach house on some little island in the south pacific

I don't know many CEOs that are 18-30, do you?

Second, that is what society dictates our soldiers are paid. Look at blackwater emplyees. (Blackwater are government mercenaries, security forces, etc.) They make hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Look at Pro sports players. The make just as much as CEOs and 10 times more than a stock broker and all they do is can shoot a basketball better than you or me.

There are always going to be social injustices like we have both described. I don't think anyone can justify that being underpaid to risk your life is fair. No matter how you look at it it will alwasy be unfair.

 

[Bodacious]

that makes no sense if you say the top 10% makes over $200,000 a year

I didn't catch that, forgive me.

That is why I said I wasn't sure.

The tax rate is a lot higher for people making 200k/year than someone who makes 10k/year.

 

[RZAL]

Heres a thought, lets do away with local/state and federal tax and replace the whole system with a federal sales tax. Your only taxed if you spend money, spend a little pay a little, spend a lot pay a lot. If the gov. goes broke lay'em off.







The Patriot “Freedom is not Free”

 

[Tr0n]

Heres a thought, lets do away with local/state and federal tax and replace the whole system with a federal sales tax. Your only taxed if you spend money, spend a little pay a little, spend a lot pay a lot. If the gov. goes broke lay'em off.







The Patriot “Freedom is not Free”

Hmmmm...What would be the downfalls of doing that?I know somethin bad would come out of it.

Please explain.

 

[seinfeldrules]

A little socialism isnt a bad thing. Look at the New Deal, it was the right thing for the right time.

 

[Bodacious]

Heres a thought, lets do away with local/state and federal tax and replace the whole system with a federal sales tax. Your only taxed if you spend money, spend a little pay a little, spend a lot pay a lot. If the gov. goes broke lay'em off.

The Patriot “Freedom is not Free”

This shortchanges the poor bigtime.

Here's why.

The poor have to spend a lot more of their income on material goods. The rich do not. The poor would pay a great deal more in sales taxes than the rich would.

 

[burner69]

There are always going to be social injustices like we have both described. I don't think anyone can justify that being underpaid to risk your life is fair. No matter how you look at it it will alwasy be unfair.

In capitilism, yes. Socialism aims to begin to break through these social injustices - so... socialism = better than capitilism for the majority, rather than the lucky minority.

 

[Bodacious]

In capitilism, yes. Socialism aims to begin to break through these social injustices - so... socialism = better than capitilism for the majority, rather than the lucky minority.

Begins to break through the social injustices? You tell Shaq he can only make as much as Miss jane the 1st grade teacher and he will never pick up a basketball again.

 

[CptStern]

shaq doesnt make anywhere near as much as the people who put him there in the first place. They're paid large sums of money because they bring in large sums of money for the owners

 

[RZAL]

Hmmmm...What would be the downfalls of doing that?I know somethin bad would come out of it.

Please explain.

I haven’t really studied the topic, only read a little on it. I think the libertarians support it. On face value it sounds good, off top of my head…. higher take home pay, lower prices for goods because companies wont being paying misc. taxes. Makes gov. a more responsible for passing laws effecting business and so fourth, since if the people do bad they do bad. Will help keep jobs from outsourcing to other countries, theres a long list of pros. I’ll have to search for more info, at work now and starting to get busy….

This shortchanges the poor bigtime.

Here's why.
The poor have to spend a lot more of their income on material goods. The rich do not. The poor would pay a great deal more in sales taxes than the rich would.

I haven’t heard that one, you maybe right in some ways, of course it would mean welfare reform along with gov reform. As far as the poor paying more in sales taxes it wouldn’t happen. The federal sales tax is a flat across the board tax, everyone pays the same. Its based on how much you spend, not how much you make. I don’t know all the details, have to go now talk later.



The Patriot “Freedom is not Free”

 

[burner69]

Begins to break through the social injustices? You tell Shaq he can only make as much as Miss jane the 1st grade teacher and he will never pick up a basketball again.

Shortens the gap. I didn't say earn as much as. If you do hard work, or important work, then you should get paid more.... just not a rediculous amount more, which is what's happening now.

 

[Bodacious]

I haven’t really studied the topic, only read a little on it. I think the libertarians support it. On face value it sounds good, off top of my head…. higher take home pay, lower prices for goods because companies wont being paying misc. taxes. Makes gov. a more responsible for passing laws effecting business and so fourth, since if the people do bad they do bad. Will help keep jobs from outsourcing to other countries, theres a long list of pros. I’ll have to search for more info, at work now and starting to get busy….

Companies paying misc taxes? Like what? A federal income tax won't eliminate a state's income tax.

I haven’t heard that one, you maybe right in some ways, of course it would mean welfare reform along with gov reform. As far as the poor paying more in sales taxes it wouldn’t happen. The federal sales tax is a flat across the board tax, everyone pays the same. Its based on how much you spend, not how much you make. I don’t know all the details, have to go now talk later.

A poor person spends more of their income than a rich person does and is therefore taxed more than a rich person is.

 

[satch919]

So how do you want to fix the system? So far all you have done is complained and not offered up a solution. Even with all the write offs business owners still pay a great deal of taxes on their income, a great deal more than poor people do.



Show me one person who lost their job because they "couldn't keep up with the taxes." What does that even mean?



Source? The enron CEO(or it could have been the accountant) got locked up for 10 years without possibility of parole. A lot of these other guys are getting caught as well, and its not cause they had too many write offs either, it is because they deliberatly lied about their income so they wouldn't go bankrupt.



Well no shit it takes a lot more than $9. Reread what I wrote. If you have good credit and a good idea you can get your business started. You have to start from scratch. Its not open a store one day a millionaire tomorrow. The people that are millionaires worked hard for their money, and they deserve every penny.

That is the risk of starting a business, and you reap the rewards of starting one. Thats capitalism.



Thats the risk. The ones who are successful prosper and the ones that don't have to try again. If you don't have the capitol to start, find the capitol. Everyone has the same opportuniteis that bill gates does.

See, you know Im right. The system does need to be regulated and fixed.

I can complain as much as I want. As an American citizen, I believe it is our duty to critique the system. Without it, bigger loopholes will arise. Besides, there isn't much I can do beyond writing to my representatives.(Which I've already done) How much influence does a 20 year old college kid have over our government? Little if any.

I don't have any specific solutions mainly because its not a huge interest of mine. I study law, not economics and taxes. However, analysts and government think tanks could come up with something. It would just take some time, money, and effort. Easier said than done though.

Again, I know business owners pay higher taxes but their revenue completely dwarfs that of what their taxed on. Include write offs and the taxes lower and the money that one keeps goes up. A poor/middle class person on the other hand pays high taxes no matter what and has little ways of bringing that number down. Its not balanced though. Percentage wise, i believe it is a little off. The poor and middle class has more to lose. The wealth of the elite is relatively secure.

About my comment on not being able to handle taxes. That was an exaggeration to show that its absurd to think that the rich could lose their jobs because of the high taxation. You made it sound like the rich were being mistreated so I countered that by implying how filthy rich these people are.

Now regarding the CEOs prosectution. Has Ken Lay served time? Has he even been punished? As you may or may not know, he's a personal friend of Bush and his energy buddies. He donated to charities and civic causes but was also involved in corruption. When the Senate Commerce Committee issued a subpoena to compel his testimony, he later refused to testify, citing his rights under the Fifth Amendment. Now, thats his right but it does sound a little suspicious. If he didn't have anything to hide why not try to clear his name? Andrew Fastow was the fall guy for Enron. Ken Lay knew about the corruption and all the evidence points to him.

Then there's WorldCom. Mr. Chief Executive Bernard Ebbers thought it would be better to manipulate financial results at his company to present the business in a better light to Wall Street analysts, investors and regulators during the stock market boom of the 1990s. What about the Rigas family who stole 3.1billion while working at Adelphia? Have these people done hard time? Will they? No. If you or me had robbed a bank and stole $200,000 we'd be in the prison system quicker than it took Ken Lay to get to trial. You know that and I know that. My law professor always says, "How much freedom can you afford?" Sadly, thats the truth.


Everyone has the opportunity that Bill Gates does huh? Tell that to the guy in front of the freeway on-ramp selling flowers or oranges. Thats like your parents saying, "Jimmy you could be the President of the United States. (Astronaut, Fireman, Policeman)" We all know its a nice thing to say but reality calls bullshit on that one. You make it sound like money is so readily available. If you know where to get free money with little effort, sign me up. I don't want to sound like an asshole but thats reality.

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

Socialism is thievery. Income tax is thievery. It is MY money, and I earned it. The government has no right to keep tabs on how much money a worker makes and then take a large chunk of it.

Capitalism works on merit. Every classified poor family here I've met owns good shelter, food, good entertainment (TV, often enough the kids have a video game system, etc), and are still classified below the 'poverty line'.

Either a national retail sales tax, which would eliminate the income tax and not apply to essentials such as food, or a flat tax so that there is not a disproportionate penalty (as it is, those who work harder are penalized harsher for it :/ )

 

[satch919]

Socialism is thievery. Income tax is thievery. It is MY money, and I earned it. The government has no right to keep tabs on how much money a worker makes and then take a large chunk of it.

I agree with you. I hate seeing my hard earned money taken away from me. However, how would we fund such services as fire, police, public schools, etc?

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

I agree with you. I hate seeing my hard earned money taken away from me. However, how would we fund such services as fire, police, public schools, etc?

National Retail Sales Tax

 

[satch919]

National Retail Sales Tax

Would that even be enough to cover everything? Even with the current taxes, we're still in huge debt. That may be due to the mismanagement of funds but thats largely out of our control.

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

Would that even be enough to cover everything? Even with the current taxes, we're still in huge debt. That may be due to the mismanagement of funds but thats largely out of our control.

23% Sales Tax to match current income tax takings.

Now, that seems like a large amount, but FIRST, take into account this.

Merchendizers and other sellers on average give 21% of the money received for items to the government in income taxes of their own. No longer do they have to pay income taxes, you'll see prices only increase marginally, and not at all for essentials such as food, and you'll no longer be paying income taxes. This also leads to the dissolving of the IRS and the government saves a TON of money every year in not having to deal with that.

 

[burner69]

Isn't there a European country that does this? I've heard about it... oh no... actually, it's the other way round... you get taxed a lot off your wages, but then nothing else is taxed at all... or something similar... I dunno

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

Eh that's what we'd be trying to get RID of, though.

The thing about the NRST is that the accountant lobbyist groups and whatnot will fight it tooth and nail, because they depend on a huge, cumbersome, complicated government tax system to make them their money. If people don't need to hire them to do their taxes, they lose out. So that's what always stalls things like this from coming into effect.

 

[RZAL]

The Fair Tax (HR-25)
National Sales Tax anyone? Tax is not my area of specialty so I’ll stay neutral on this issue. I will say I think our current system SUCKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


LET'S DEMAGOGUE THE FAIR TAX

“Perhaps you noticed that in quite a few congressional races around the country Democratic candidates have been attempting to frighten voters into believing that the evil Republican candidate is going to burden them with a horrible new tax. More specifically, the wicked Republican is going to add a 23% federal retail sales tax on everything they buy .. and this is in addition to all the other taxes they're already paying!

Effective politics? You bet! Can you imagine how frightened some middle or lower income American would be at the prospect of paying another 23 cents on the dollar for everything they bought? If I believed that a Republican was going to do such a thing ... hell, I"D vote for the Democrat. And there aren't many things that could cause me to vote for a Democrat. A threatened beheading might do it, but I'm not even sure about that.

The big problem with this particular Democratic campaign charge is that it is simply not true. It's a lie. Not only is it a lie, but every single Democrat who has made this charge against their Republican opponent knows it to be a lie. In the Boortz book, that makes these Democratic candidates, and that includes Congresswoman Denise Majette running for the U.S. Senate in Georgia, and Inez Tenenbaum who is running against Republican Jim DeMint in South Carolina, bold, intentional, premeditated liars.
I've been studying the Fair Tax proposal in its various forms for 20 years. I am convinced that this plan to replace virtually all personal and corporate taxes with a national retail sales tax would bring a period of transformation and economic growth to America such as has never been seen before. On top of that, it would be a financial boon to the poor and the middle class.

First ... A Brief Overview

You can learn all of the details of the Fair Tax play by clicking on this link. http://www.fairtax.org/ In case you don't have the time, here's your brief overview.

The Fair Tax (HR-25) would eliminate all personal corporate and personal federal income taxes. It would eliminate all federal payroll taxes, including Social Security and Medicare. The Death Tax ... gone. Capital gains taxes ... gone. Gift taxes ... gone. Excise taxes .. gone. In the place of all of those taxes we would have one national retail sales tax on all purchase at the retail level. This means you would get 100% of your paycheck. The amount you place into an investment .. not taxed. The amount you put into a savings account .. not taxes. Money you give to your kids ... not taxed, neither to you nor to them. You make a consumer purchase, you pay the federal sales tax.

One more thing. The Fair Tax plan calls for the repeal of the 16th Amendment. That's the Amendment that brought us the federal income tax.

When the Fair Tax plan was first being developed it was believed that in order to be revenue neutral ... that is, to make sure that there is no decrease or interruption in the flow of tax revenue ... the national sales tax would be around 23%. I'm led to understand that soon-to-be-released research will show that the actual tax would be around 20% or slightly less. Since I've already run the numbers, we'll stick to the 23% figure for the purpose of this essay. Call me lazy.
So ... let's get on to the Democrat's charges that these evil, wicked, mean and nasty Republicans are plotting a financial Armageddon for poor and middle income Americans.
What Happens to Poor and Middle Income Americans?
OK ... let's put on our sensitivity hats for a few minutes here and think of the consequences of the Fair Tax Act on our nation's poor, poor, pitiful poor. After all, they can hardly afford a 23% sales tax when they're living paycheck-to-paycheck in the first place, right?

Remember ... right now, for the most part, those whom we define as "poor" aren't paying any income tax anyway. In fact, many of them are getting checks from the government. The absurdly-named Earned Income Tax Credit, for example. So, how can these people survive if suddenly they're paying a 23% retail sales tax?

There's no doubt that any implementation of the Fair Tax would fail in short order if nothing were to change except that the poor would be paying today's prices for a gallon of milk or a loaf of bread, plus a 23% sales tax. But ... that would be far from the reality under the Fair Tax. Under the Fair Tax the poor won't only survive, they'll positively thrive! The Fair Tax could turn out to be the best poverty-fighting tool devised in this country since the concept of hard work.

Let's begin by considering two realities.

First, remember, please, that the poor, along with everybody else, will no longer have Social Security taxes or Medicare taxes withheld from their paychecks. Whatever they earn, they get on payday. For most of them this means an immediate 10 to 15% increase in their earnings.

Second. There's that 22% in imbedded taxes buried in the cost of all consumer goods. This isn't my figure; it comes from respected economists. That 22% is sitting there in virtually everything Americans have to buy.. and that includes poor Americans. As soon as the competitive forces of the free market work their magic, and they always do, consumers, including the poor, will be paying at least 20% less for virtually everything they buy, including the basics of food, clothing, shelter and transportation. Yes .. they'll have to pay the new national sales tax, but when you factor in the lower prices caused by the disappearance of the embedded taxes you'll see that the total price paid for consumer goods will remain very nearly the same.
So ... just considering these factors, the Fair Tax delivers a winning hand to people living in or near to what we call poverty. They get every penny they earn on payday, and when you factor in the Fair Tax and the lower prices, they're actually spending less of their money for a retail purchase than before.
A practical example: Let's pull out the calculators. Let's say that a single mother with two children spends $45 a week on groceries. The removal of the 22% embedded tax would bring the price of those groceries down to $35.10. The sales tax would be $8.07. This brings the total price to $43.17. That's less than our poor mother would have paid under today's tax system. This single mother, whom we'll consider "poor," has just received a 10% to 15% increase in her weekly paychecks, and she's paying less at the grocery story for her basic necessities! Does that sound like such a rotten deal to you?

At this point you should be thoroughly convinced that the Fair Tax would actually benefit, rather than harm the poor. But, then again, maybe not. Perhaps you were educated in government schools, or you're just hard to convince. Sit down. Here's where I close the sale.

The Rebate

The folks who wrote the Fair Tax plan knew that burdening the poor with a 23% retail sales tax would doom the plan from the outset. They decided to devise a way were nobody, rich or poor, would ever have to pay the sales tax on the basic necessities of life. So, under the Fair Tax plan every consumer will receive a credit to their checking account or to a debit card equal to the sales tax that person would be expected to pay on the purchase of the basic necessities of life for that month. The size of the monthly payment will be based on the government's published poverty levels for various sized households. Considering the number of checks and financial transactions of this type the feds undertake every single month, this is entirely "doable."
Here's an example of how the rebate payments would have worked in 2003.

You are now a married couple with two children. The Fair Tax Act sets forth a formula for computing the poverty level, based on government figures, which negates any marriage penalty. Under the Fair Tax Act in 2003 you would have been granted an annual consumption allowance of $24,240. This is what the government would assume you would have to spend during that one year to buy the basic necessities of life for your family. The sales tax on this amount would equal $5,575. The government will rebate this amount to you in 12 equal monthly installments of $465. It's clear .. you're better off, MUCH better off, under the fair tax plan.

But what about a single woman with one child? Her monthly rebate in 2003 would have been $232. The lowest rebate payment would be to a single person with no dependents. That person would receive $172 per month.
Now ... bear in mind, this rebate isn't only paid to the poor. It is paid to everyone, rich and poor alike. The purpose here is to make sure that no American has to pay the Fair Tax sales tax on the basic necessities of life. Unlike the present income tax system, the Fair Tax treats each and every person in this country exactly the same. This, of course, presents somewhat of a problem to politicians who like to use the tax code to foment class distrust or outright warfare.

OK ... let's add it up for America's lower income citizens:
1. They get their entire paycheck.
2. Even with the sales tax, and considering the drop in prices, they'll be paying essentially the same for everything they buy.
3. They get a check from the federal government every month to rebate any sales taxes they had to pay.

Though their tax returns aren't that complex, let's also include the time these the poor (all of us, really) will save by not having to keep tax records or file tax returns.
If you're looking for some reason to oppose the Fair Tax plan, you're going to have to find a better excuse than its effect on the poor.

The Democrats who are using sponsorship of the Fair Tax proposal against their Republican opponents know the real story. They also know that for the most part the media doesn't understand the plan and will make no effort to learn the truth. Print this, copy it, spread it among your friends. Expose the lies of Denise Majette and Inez Tennenbaum and other like them. This tax reform idea is simply too good to allow it to be destroyed by desperate campaign lies..(Neal Boortz) http://boortz.com/nuze/200410/10262004.html
http://www.fairtax.org/



The Patriot “Freedom is not Free”

 

[GhostFox]

Anyone who thinks that socialism is remotely a good idea scares the hell out of me. How such ignorance could exist in the world is beyond me. I'd rather be a Jew in Nazi Germany then live under socialist rule.

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

Anyone who thinks that socialism is remotely a good idea scares the hell out of me. How such ignorance could exist in the world is beyond me. I'd rather be a Jew in Nazi Germany then live under socialist rule.

You'd still be living in it.

 

[GhostFox]

You'd still be living in it.

While technically not, I understand what you are getting at. However I was refering more to the persecution and assured death in a concentration camp, rather then the prevailing socio-political climate in Germany at the time.

 

[clarky003]

socialisim is for certain kinds of people, those who are more inclined to work as a group, with individuality still, just a more selfless type of person.. its a more advanced society. You know for the more spiritual kind of person who is more pieceful and understanding. just generally someone who realises that life can still be enjoyed without having to be a egotistical self centered capitalist wanker who loves his car, pardon my French, but believe it or not Socialist types do exist and if the human mind keeps evolving it becomes more aware of the whole rather than the individual.. so you can choose not to be part of it, but Socialist society's will most likely be the kind of societies that will more readily accept the coming economic collapse and new energy revolution, global society is unstable on our present increasing energy demand for fossil fuel increasing the speed of diminishing resources, production will peak in the next 4 years sometime, then it goes downhill from there, and we havnt prepared for it, its only a matter of time no where near aslong as we optimistically think.

 

[burner69]

Anyone who thinks that socialism is remotely a good idea scares the hell out of me. How such ignorance could exist in the world is beyond me. I'd rather be a Jew in Nazi Germany then live under socialist rule.

You serious? Do you know anything about socialism?

To me it says a shot at shortening the gap between rich and poor, giving the people more power in politics, and London and Paris being called socials - yet you'd rather live in abject terror for your life...

EDIT: Rak, that's the funniest sig I think I've ever seen.

 

[GhostFox]

You serious? Do you know anything about socialism?

I do, however I do not think that you do. Socialism is about equality of the lowest common denominator. It's not about raising you up, but kicking you down. It's about making you sub-human, stealing induviduality.

yet you'd rather live in abject terror for your life

No, I would rather die and know that I am being killed for a reason, if an insane one, then have the very things that make me human stolen from me. The only thing scarier then socialism is that there are actually people in the world who think it could be a good thing, even for 1 second.

 

[RZAL]

I do, however I do not think that you do. Socialism is about equality of the lowest common denominator. It's not about raising you up, but kicking you down. It's about making you sub-human, stealing induviduality.

No, I would rather die and know that I am being killed for a reason, if an insane one, then have the very things that make me human stolen from me. The only thing scarier then socialism is that there are actually people in the world who think it could be a good thing, even for 1 second.

I'm with ya on that one. Didn't someone here say Socialism is bed partners with communism? just a step away, never further than arm reach. Seems to me that its a rather old ideal, started about the time of the hunters and gathers.

Oh don't listen to me, why can't we all me more like the smurfs?



The Patriot "Freedom is not Free"

 

[clarky003]

i guess it is hard to contemplate a world where people work for a common cause helping each other, betterment of the planet, the entire race, am I too small minded here?...

when I think of socialisim I think of the next generation, Star Trek, Utopian society, people brandish it from the first moment, 'oh no' it'll never work killing is in our nature ' we are still part civilised, part neanderthal' .. without having enemies 'my life has no meaning' Christianity emphasis's my belief of good versus evil, humans versus humans' thinking beyond that is not aloud, pettyness is for the strong minded' besides ill shoot you if you compromise my livelyhood, even if it means that people wont rejoice and unite, I just want to be rich and famous, and have a lovely car, and house so I can religiously rejoice with my morals that I hold so high'.

it goes something along the lines, of that, its quite painfully small minded and it restricts the growth and development of others.
but I might somehow be small minded thinking that in someone elses world ... who knows.. lol

human rights act: we are born free

 

[GhostFox]

human rights act: we are born free

Freedom is incompatable with socialism. So which is it?

 

[clarky003]

that all depends how you define freedom now doesnt it, but in my opinion a man is free if he is in the correct moral light. his life dedicated helping his peers and therefore helping his own life. Its unity, a common cause and freedom isnt sacrificed through co-operation, infact its enhanced.

but I suppose people are crafted from day 1 to think freedom is to personally prosper, and be vigilant to your own cause to create that freedom, freedom defined as owning material possesion, that you can claim as yours, to define your individuality, thats all a superficial illusion, we are all free anyway.

 

[GhostFox]

but in my opinion a man is free if he is in the correct moral light. his life dedicated helping his peers and therefore helping his own life.

You are free to your opinion, because this board isn't run by socialists. However your opinion is nonsensical. Freedom means that that man has the choice of being in the correct more light. Or not. That he has the option of helping his peers. Or not. Freedom is choice, not constraint.

but I suppose people are crafted from day 1 to think freedom is to personally prosper

No. Freedom is the ability to prosper personally if to want to. Or to fail. Freedom to amass huge somes of money if you so desire. Or the freedom to spend all that money on helping others. You cannot be free if the governemnt makes all of your decisions for you. You are a robot. There is no point in being alive.

 

[clarky003]

socialisim doesnt mean you still cant make a selfish decision , and say, nope i dont want to do that.. and theres nothing stopping you, so it is very free, its just the realisation that we would all benifit from a common direction/goal, not common decisions/choices on how to progress, thats where you read me wrong.

for example, everyones free choice still applies I wouldnt dare dispute that, but the basis of society maybe to endevour to better ourselves for the reason of global piece, or space exploration. like a goal that everyone can agree would be good for global society.

 

[GhostFox]

socialisim doesnt mean you still cant make a selfish decision

So you have the right not to pay taxes to help "humanity"? Or work at any job you choose for the salay you choose? Becuase if you think you can have those rights in a socialist state you are sadly mistaken.

I know you must be fairly young, and I really don't think you have much idea what socialism is. I would recommend you do some reading on the subject before you devote yourself to it.

 

[clarky003]

well i guess i can share my idealistic views if i want , *sigh*, my point is if you are a decent human being with a heart, it doesnt take a genius to figure out that a society like that would be needed to create global piece, you can choose to not be a part of it sure, Im sure loads would be very interested given the angst and strain of modern life ever increasing for the majority, technologies and invention would be more free to prosper, if a society like that can be brought together it can superceed the need for capitalisim, and power and profit. Im just thinking big, and broad and hopefully, thats all .. and for your information, cheeky, im 20.

 

[GhostFox]

Clarky, that is all well and good. I'm not questioning your opinion. You are entitled to it. The point I am trying to make is that what your idea is has nothing at all to do with socialism. That is what is confusing. Socialism has nothing to do with altruism. It is a form of government in which the state has total control over every aspect of your life. Extremist forms of government like socialism cause just about every single war. If you want world peace socialism would be your last choice.

Enlightened Self-Interest seems to fit close to what you are looking for. I.E. I give money to welfare not only to help people in need, but also to save myself even more money in the long run.

That is the only outlook with a chance of world peace. That is why MAD worked so well.

 

[clarky003]

whoa, i guess i really didnt know what socialism was getting it mixed with something else.. i guess thats why the convo was so confusing.

just the wrong use of word!, lol