Obama Phone ?

[Lohman446]

Well that's pretty interesting. I've never heard that distinction, I'm going to have to brush up on my Karl Marx readings (some day).

Look at what Stalin did in what he called communism (and Trostsky did not exactly have clean hands under Lenin either). Either you put into the collective effort or you were removed from the collective.

Referencing what is being done today as socialism gives socialism a bad name. The USSR might have been labeled communist but it was at most socialist in practice.

What is being done today by the welfare state is not socialism.

[maniacmechanic]

Look at what Stalin did in what he called communism (and Trostsky did not exactly have clean hands under Lenin either). Either you put into the collective effort or you were removed from the collective.

Referencing what is being done today as socialism gives socialism a bad name. The USSR might have been labeled communist but it was at most socialist in practice.

What is being done today by the welfare state is not socialism.

socialism , communism , marxism , I'm not really interested in living under any of them , I prefer LIBERTY & FREEDOM

I live in South Florida , I've talked to a few Cubans that lived under Castro , I haven't met any that want to go back

[Lohman446]

socialism , communism , marxism , I'm not really interested in living under any of them , I prefer LIBERTY & FREEDOM

I live in South Florida , I've talked to a few Cubans that lived under Castro , I haven't met any that want to go back

Oh I agree. Anytime you have to build walls to keep your best and brightest in you are doing something wrong.

That being said these welfare programs are not socialism and they give socialism a bad name.

[dahoeb]

socialism , communism , marxism , I'm not really interested in living under any of them , I prefer LIBERTY & FREEDOM

Pretty much sums it up. Socialism-lite, socialism, totalitarianism, and communism are all the anti-thesis of what made the country great, and I want no part of any of them.

And to take it a step further (though many might disagree with this opinion), any society that takes from one class of people and redistributes to others ( the progressive income tax system), arbitrarily decides winners and losers in a "free market", (US Auto, Goldman Sachs, "green energy" etc) or instigates class warfare (the 99%, fat cats, Wall St. vs Main St., etc) is in the infant stage of something worse, whatever that might be. Hopefully more people see the light.

[Lohman446]

Pretty much sums it up. Socialism-lite, socialism, totalitarianism, and communism are all the anti-thesis of what made the country great, and I want no part of any of them.

And to take it a step further (though many might disagree with this opinion), any society that takes from one class of people and redistributes to others ( the progressive income tax system), arbitrarily decides winners and losers in a "free market", (US Auto, Goldman Sachs, "green energy" etc) or instigates class warfare (the 99%, fat cats, Wall St. vs Main St., etc) is in the infant stage of something worse, whatever that might be. Hopefully more people see the light.

That has been historically true for a very long time. The moment a society begins to feed on itself the social fabric will break down. The progressive tax system, TAKEN ALONE, is not a disastor. If it were used to finance a government within limits it would be defensible. However when it is used to finance individual lifestyles of choice it becomes a concern.

Lets take one of the basic functions of government: common defense. Pretend government did nothing else. Within these limited conditions a progressive income tax system is in fact defensible. Obviously a limited government has other valid roles as well - in this case one can still defend a progressive income tax system. It only becomes a problem when the government is operating outside of its boundaries.

[RogueFactor]

Woman hoards "30" Government Life line phones or Obama phones

[Ando]

That has been historically true for a very long time. The moment a society begins to feed on itself the social fabric will break down. The progressive tax system, TAKEN ALONE, is not a disastor. If it were used to finance a government within limits it would be defensible. However when it is used to finance individual lifestyles of choice it becomes a concern.

Sig worthy....if only.

I'll have to find another place to put it.

[AmyM]

I want in on this

So, I was in a store that accepts EBT as payment. Guy walks in, looks like an oil tycoon, loads up a cart full of soda, chips, and candy. Of course he uses his government assistance card to pay... then loads up his "food" in his Escalade, and drives off. The cashier looks at me and says "Do you know who that guy is?"

Listen, I didn't know the guy, but i bet his boots alone cost more than the cashier makes in a month.

She said that's the biggest drug dealer in the city...

I'm tired of this BS socialism

[Ando]

So, I was in a store that accepts EBT as payment. Guy walks in, looks like an oil tycoon, loads up a cart full of soda, chips, and candy. Of course he uses his government assistance card to pay... then loads up his "food" in his Escalade, and drives off. The cashier looks at me and says "Do you know who that guy is?"

Listen, I didn't know the guy, but i bet his boots alone cost more than the cashier makes in a month.

She said that's the biggest drug dealer in the city...

I'm tired of this BS socialism

I know this all too well. I too am from Tx. Lived down by the border around Brownsville area, biggest **** hole ever IMHO.

We call those guys 'Mafioso". What they do is buy peoples food stamps on a 4 to 1 trade (4 stamps / $1) and the people go buy drugs with the $$$ which I'm sure you know where that money is going right back too

So their families starve and the drug dealers get richer. Then Tx. went to this stupid card which just made it easier for the dealers. Now they send the strung out people with a grocery list to get their produce for them.

There's no stopping it.

[Lohman446]

So, I was in a store that accepts EBT as payment. Guy walks in, looks like an oil tycoon, loads up a cart full of soda, chips, and candy. Of course he uses his government assistance card to pay... then loads up his "food" in his Escalade, and drives off. The cashier looks at me and says "Do you know who that guy is?"

Listen, I didn't know the guy, but i bet his boots alone cost more than the cashier makes in a month.

She said that's the biggest drug dealer in the city...

I'm tired of this BS socialism

Aside from participating in the social welfare system isn't a drug dealer really an example of capitalism?

I almost said pure capitalism but as Adam Smith defined capitalism the buyer and seller had to be free to enter and exit the market place and I am not sure that an addict qualifies.

[El Zilcho]

I guess I have to ask AmyM, have you ever been to a Socialist country? How do you define Socialism? Additionally, if this article is correct I would say that a rate of fraud of 1% or less is something that I can live with if there are people out there that are getting help that actually need help.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/03/08/food-stamp-fraud-increasingly-sophisticated-despite-reports-drop-in-cases/

[Lohman446]

I think very few people actually understand the Marxist concepts of socialism. They have simply become accustomed to the knee jerk "OMG thats socialist" reaction. Socialism and social welfare programs are not one in the same.

Please understand that my comments are not intended as defenses of socialism or communism. While I think they are neat ideas in theory they have been shown, repeatedly, to be utterly useless in practical application especially at a government level.

[El Zilcho]

I think very few people actually understand the Marxist concepts of socialism. They have simply become accustomed to the knee jerk "OMG thats socialist" reaction. Socialism and social welfare programs are not one in the same.

Please understand that my comments are not intended as defenses of socialism or communism. While I think they are neat ideas in theory they have been shown, repeatedly, to be utterly useless in practical application especially at a government level.

Not a confrontational response but how would you define People's Republic of China?

[Lohman446]

Not a confrontational response but how would you define People's Republic of China?

As being odd. The People's Republic of China is socialist in nature in that the means of production or (generally) owned by the state. To me that is the important element of socialism that is missed in the "OMG its socialist" responses. Socialism, as considered by Marx and practiced by Stalin, did not accept when people simply did not put into the good of the system and expected to collect from it.

The oddity of China is that they practice capitalism on the world stage - that is to say the act as a capalistic entity when procurring and selling products. That being said I don't see any way a socialist state would avoid this.

However I also beleive that any state that has to stop the free flow of information or make emmigration of its best and brightest illegal or unduly complicated has ultimately failed to allow individuals the rights of autonomy that are due each person.

Perhaps utterly impractical at a government level was an overreach. However I beleive it has required utilitarian practices that violate personal autonomy and are ultimately immoral. I beleive any system requiring such an immoral action cannot lest indefinetly.

[dahoeb]

Just to pursue this interesting discussion:

I think the reason most people simply refer to the redistribution of wealth or any other "nanny state welfare program (ex. universal healthcare) as "socialist" is simply because they (and I, for that matter) lack a more easy way to describe what that type of system is without writing a Master's Thesis on political science.

Even when one asks Google, "What is socialism?" it will tell you, "A political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole". It may not be precise to what our good friend Marx advocated or it might be missing the key detail you describe ("you must put into the system to take out") but I think the meaning and definition has simply been morphed by society or evolved to suit the times.