Colonel Sanders Defines "Socialism"

[zoogs]

I don't know about this analogy, but I do think income inequality is an issue that affects everybody in the end. The U.S. isn't the worst in the world. Unfettered, it would be a lot worse. As is, it could stand to be reduced substantially. It's a social responsibility and we all share this country. It's increased significantly in the past five or six decades and I'd like to see that trend reverse for everyone's sake. We don't want to live in a country where wealth is so concentrated in the few. We especially don't want to live in one where wealth density is wielded as a weapon to effectively disenfranchise those who don't have it.

 

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/12/19/global-inequality-how-the-u-s-compares/

 

 

 

It’s not that taxes and social-insurance policies in the U.S. have no redistributive effect. (...) However, the OECD data show that U.S. tax and spending policy does relatively little, compared with its peers in the developed world, to reduce inequality ...

 

We take our country's greatness for granted here, but there are really a lot of areas where we need to be catching up to the rest of the developed world, and a lot of challenges in the way of getting there.

[Mavric]

I welcome all so-called socialism deniers to sign their Social Security checks over to me, Gawd knows I've earned it. PM me.....

Kind of explains a lot with this quip. As of the money just appears or of thin air.

[NUance]

I just thought this belonged here: LINK

 

[TGHusker]

I do like the chicken. You are making me hungry - just in time for lunch. Corn pass some over to me after you pay for it. Thanks

 

One quick thought on the analogy - the person who goes out an buys the chicken has also invested risk and money to secure the chicken. He should expect a 'reward' or gain on his investment and taking the risk.

[cornographic]

 

 

Extremely poor analogy, metaphor, whatever you want to call it. Misses the point almost entirely. I'll take care of my real brother......however the metaphorical brothers might be on their own. As my dad used to say "I didn't take him to raise and he's no tax deduction of mine"

Maybe you could compose a better one.

 

I suppose you and your dad went to private schools, right? For consistency's sake....

 

I could compose an extremely better one but I'm not going to the effort for your sake.

 

I have no idea what your point about private schools is. Probably makes about as much sense as your bucket of chicken BS.

 

BTW, I don't deny that we are already knee deep in socialism in this country, if that's what you're getting at. Not liking it and realizing it exists are not mutually exclusive conditions.

 

Happy trolling.

 

I don't think you can, but whatEVA...

 

Uh, who's trolling who's thread? Anyway, I feel your pain, honest, it must be hard on you, I know you were whining the other day about your trials and tribulations as a small biz owner. "So many bosses" and what not.

[cornographic]

I don't know about this analogy, but I do think income inequality is an issue that affects everybody in the end. The U.S. isn't the worst in the world. Unfettered, it would be a lot worse. As is, it could stand to be reduced substantially. It's a social responsibility and we all share this country. It's increased significantly in the past five or six decades and I'd like to see that trend reverse for everyone's sake. We don't want to live in a country where wealth is so concentrated in the few. We especially don't want to live in one where wealth density is wielded as a weapon to effectively disenfranchise those who don't have it.

 

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/12/19/global-inequality-how-the-u-s-compares/

 

 

 

It’s not that taxes and social-insurance policies in the U.S. have no redistributive effect. (...) However, the OECD data show that U.S. tax and spending policy does relatively little, compared with its peers in the developed world, to reduce inequality ...

 

We take our country's greatness for granted here, but there are really a lot of areas where we need to be catching up to the rest of the developed world, and a lot of challenges in the way of getting there.

Income inequality actually is the worst in the USA compared to any other country(http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/15/income-inequality-wall-street_n_3762422.html). Bernie is the only guy out their addressing the issue head on.

[cornographic]

I do like the chicken. You are making me hungry - just in time for lunch. Corn pass some over to me after you pay for it. Thanks

 

One quick thought on the analogy - the person who goes out an buys the chicken has also invested risk and money to secure the chicken. He should expect a 'reward' or gain on his investment and taking the risk.

I said, in the analogy, that "everybody chips in" to buy the chicken. As to your appetite, I'll prolly be rolling out my "pigs in a blanket" analogy soon, stay tuned .

[TGHusker]

 

I do like the chicken. You are making me hungry - just in time for lunch. Corn pass some over to me after you pay for it. Thanks

 

One quick thought on the analogy - the person who goes out an buys the chicken has also invested risk and money to secure the chicken. He should expect a 'reward' or gain on his investment and taking the risk.

I said, in the analogy, that "everybody chips in" to buy the chicken. As to your appetite, I'll prolly be rolling out my "pigs in a blanket" analogy soon, stay tuned .

 

Can't wait to hear it. I raised plenty of pigs as I grew up on the farm in SD.

[cornographic]

 

 

I do like the chicken. You are making me hungry - just in time for lunch. Corn pass some over to me after you pay for it. Thanks

 

One quick thought on the analogy - the person who goes out an buys the chicken has also invested risk and money to secure the chicken. He should expect a 'reward' or gain on his investment and taking the risk.

I said, in the analogy, that "everybody chips in" to buy the chicken. As to your appetite, I'll prolly be rolling out my "pigs in a blanket" analogy soon, stay tuned .

 

Can't wait to hear it. I raised plenty of pigs as I grew up on the farm in SD.

 

Yeah, I tried to pull some pork one time, but he fought back....;-o

[Scratchtown]

Socialism in the classroom. Everyone has heard it....

 

An economics professor at Texas Tech said he had never failed a single student before but had, once, failed an entire class. The class had insisted that socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer. The professor then said ok, we will have an experiment in this class on socialism. All grades would be averaged and everyone would receive the same grade so no one would fail and no one would receive an A.

After the first test the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy. But, as the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too; so they studied little ...

The second Test average was a D! No one was happy. When the 3rd test rolled around the average was an F. The scores never increased as bickering, blame, name calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for anyone else. All failed to their great surprise and the professor told them that socialism would ultimately fail because the harder to succeed the greater the reward but when a government takes all the reward away; no one will try or succeed.

In my opinion, and I know what socialism is on a very basic level. So I'm not going to try to throw out a bunch of stuff that isn't true, for lack of knowledge on the subject. I'm going to assume that middle class americans would be better off in this instance. The concept of income equality or inequality...does this mean that everyone is suppose to make the exact same amount, regardless of job/career? As I'm trying to have thoughts come through my head I think about the students I have and the difference socio economic status' they come from. There is a very wide range. I don't know how much I like having income equality forced on to the people. This, coming from someone who is and will be "low-end" to average middle class their entire life. We may sneak into the high end by the end of our lives if we both get masters degrees (me and the wife)...anyway that's not the point. I've always thought that people should be brought up to suppress the feelings of greed and nurture the quality of humility and grace.

 

In 2012 the total personal income was 13.4 billion dollars ($13,401,868,693). The United States population in 2012 was at 314.1 million.

 

Math says that each person should then get $42.66. I mean that's the only way it is "fair" by that term. I'm not well versed in economics so, someone without being an a-hole or smartass want to explain this "Socialism" thing to me. I'd would like a pro point of view and a con, please.

 

Thanks.

[cornographic]

Socialism in the classroom. Everyone has heard it....

 

 

An economics professor at Texas Tech said he had never failed a single student before but had, once, failed an entire class. The class had insisted that socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer. The professor then said ok, we will have an experiment in this class on socialism. All grades would be averaged and everyone would receive the same grade so no one would fail and no one would receive an A.

After the first test the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy. But, as the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too; so they studied little ...

 

The second Test average was a D! No one was happy. When the 3rd test rolled around the average was an F. The scores never increased as bickering, blame, name calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for anyone else. All failed to their great surprise and the professor told them that socialism would ultimately fail because the harder to succeed the greater the reward but when a government takes all the reward away; no one will try or succeed.

 

In my opinion, and I know what socialism is on a very basic level. So I'm not going to try to throw out a bunch of stuff that isn't true, for lack of knowledge on the subject. I'm going to assume that middle class americans would be better off in this instance. The concept of income equality or inequality...does this mean that everyone is suppose to make the exact same amount, regardless of job/career? As I'm trying to have thoughts come through my head I think about the students I have and the difference socio economic status' they come from. There is a very wide range. I don't know how much I like having income equality forced on to the people. This, coming from someone who is and will be "low-end" to average middle class their entire life. We may sneak into the high end by the end of our lives if we both get masters degrees (me and the wife)...anyway that's not the point. I've always thought that people should be brought up to suppress the feelings of greed and nurture the quality of humility and grace.

 

In 2012 the total personal income was 13.4 billion dollars ($13,401,868,693). The United States population in 2012 was at 314.1 million.

 

Math says that each person should then get $42.66. I mean that's the only way it is "fair" by that term. I'm not well versed in economics so, someone without being an a-hole or smartass want to explain this "Socialism" thing to me. I'd would like a pro point of view and a con, please.

 

Thanks.

 

Well, to understand socialism/capitalism more fully, it requires a class analysis. In capitalism, you basically have the owning/investor/business/capitalist class and the working/middle class--"The People". Capitalism concentrates the wealth to the former, that's the point of it: the owning class controls the surplus value, the profits. The latter basically rents himself/herself out to the capitalist for a wage/salary, which, in general, is kept as low as possible by the capitalist so the latter can concentrate as much wealth as possible to themselves. The capitalists are always seeking a working class population that offers the lowest cost of labor, thats why they are always moving overseas.

 

Currently, ~62 people own more wealthy than 50% of the world's population(~3.5 Billion people). That's the most extreme e.g of income inequality and what has people up in arms. The extreme wealth at the top erodes any chance @ democracy and tends toward fascism.

 

Anyway, if you are seriously interested in the subject, I highly recommend taking the time to listen to economist RD Wolff's weekly "Economic Updates". He's the best source I know of. If you listen to 20+ of them, or so, you will get a clear picture. Michael Parenti is great too, in a more philosophical sense and you can find vids of him on YTube.

 

http://www.rdwolff.com/articles/audio

 

As to class room dynamics, well, thats up to teachers and students to decide. Ideally, rather than setting students against one another in stark competition, it's aim should be to encourage and bring out the initiative of each student, especially the ones that struggle. Have the "best" ones help out the struggling ones, for e.g. As to "how much should people make", again, that is up to the people to decide, but, unfortunately, the people in the current system often don't have much say in it, but that's why they form unions.

[JJ Husker]

 

 

 

Extremely poor analogy, metaphor, whatever you want to call it. Misses the point almost entirely. I'll take care of my real brother......however the metaphorical brothers might be on their own. As my dad used to say "I didn't take him to raise and he's no tax deduction of mine"

Maybe you could compose a better one.

 

I suppose you and your dad went to private schools, right? For consistency's sake....

 

I could compose an extremely better one but I'm not going to the effort for your sake.

 

I have no idea what your point about private schools is. Probably makes about as much sense as your bucket of chicken BS.

 

BTW, I don't deny that we are already knee deep in socialism in this country, if that's what you're getting at. Not liking it and realizing it exists are not mutually exclusive conditions.

 

Happy trolling.

 

I don't think you can, but whatEVA...

 

Uh, who's trolling who's thread? Anyway, I feel your pain, honest, it must be hard on you, I know you were whining the other day about your trials and tribulations as a small biz owner. "So many bosses" and what not.

 

Hey, I've got a suggestion for you. Maybe for the next month or so you could try responding on topic, with comments that make sense. You know, just see how that approach works for awhile. Or, just continue with how you've been doing. Doesn't really matter to me, I just hate to see people proceed in a manner that will make others want to discount everything that person says.

[cornographic]

 

 

 

 

Extremely poor analogy, metaphor, whatever you want to call it. Misses the point almost entirely. I'll take care of my real brother......however the metaphorical brothers might be on their own. As my dad used to say "I didn't take him to raise and he's no tax deduction of mine"

Maybe you could compose a better one.

 

I suppose you and your dad went to private schools, right? For consistency's sake....

 

I could compose an extremely better one but I'm not going to the effort for your sake.

 

I have no idea what your point about private schools is. Probably makes about as much sense as your bucket of chicken BS.

 

BTW, I don't deny that we are already knee deep in socialism in this country, if that's what you're getting at. Not liking it and realizing it exists are not mutually exclusive conditions.

 

Happy trolling.

 

I don't think you can, but whatEVA...

 

Uh, who's trolling who's thread? Anyway, I feel your pain, honest, it must be hard on you, I know you were whining the other day about your trials and tribulations as a small biz owner. "So many bosses" and what not.

Thanks for that.

[Moiraine]

I'm not too knowledgeable on the subject either. But I see anything that we have that's paid for by taxes and used by the public as forms of socialism. E.g. road repair, the fire department, medicaid. I'm not pro pure socialism and Bernie is a democratic socialist. I want everyone to have their basic needs (e.g. health care) met, and I want the super rich to pay more taxes since most are unwilling to pay fair wages, and do anything they can to make things cheaper, like have children in China make their goods. I don't want everyone to have an equal amount of $ no matter how much or little they work. I think the super rich should still have a lot more $ than the others. It's incentive for people to work hard. But if those people are unwilling to help out society and continue to pay employees as little as possible when they have more $ then they could ever possibly use in their lives, their children's lives, and their grandchildren's lives, they should be taxed more and those taxes should go to the super poor. Yes, that's wealth re-distribution, and I have no problem with that. There isn't one person on this planet that's worth 300 times more than another human, but right now that's how it works.

[cornographic]

I'm not too knowledgeable on the subject either. But I see anything that we have that's paid for by taxes and used by the public as forms of socialism. E.g. road repair, the fire department, medicaid. I'm not pro pure socialism and Bernie is a democratic socialist. I want everyone to have their basic needs (e.g. health care) met, and I want the super rich to pay more taxes since most are unwilling to pay fair wages, and do anything they can to make things cheaper, like have children in China make their goods. I don't want everyone to have an equal amount of $ no matter how much or little they work. I think the super rich should still have a lot more $ than the others. It's incentive for people to work hard. But if those people are unwilling to help out society and continue to pay employees as little as possible when they have more $ then they could ever possibly use in their lives, their children's lives, and their grandchildren's lives, they should be taxed more and those taxes should go to the super poor. Yes, that's wealth re-distribution, and I have no problem with that. There isn't one person on this planet that's worth 300 times more than another human, but right now that's how it works.

Yep, good post. The deal is with the working class is one rents one's labor/skill for a wage while the owners take all the spoils. Well, you can "work hard", work your ass off your whole life as a wage/salary worker and guess what, still be poor or just getting by. It's the difference between ownership and labor.