AOC: A Society With Billionaires Cannot Be Moral

[JonNC]

Well, some may say that but they are more “socialist” than the US. They have more social programs, which is what AOC and the “Justice Democrats” are pushing for.

Why? The evidence is social programs have increased our debt, have not reduced poverty, and have Effectively destroyed the black family.
Not sure how that equals “justice”.

People make “socialism” into a scary word, they think of the USSR or China, but that is totalitarian socialism. Social Security, Medicare, and public education are “socialist” programs.

Socialism is not a scary word, but is is a failed and destructive economic system. Public education is not a socialist program. Socialism is not defined something government does. It is defined as government ownership or strict control of the means of production.
That said, the three you mentioned are in either financial distress or failing to live up to expectations. That’s not a good endorsement.

They rely on taxes to benefit the society as a whole, even though many individuals do not receive (nor will ever) benefit from direct services or money in relation to the taxes they pay. think of it this way: our military, in itself, is a socialist program.

Again, you are conflating the role of government to defend the people ( provide the general defense) with government control or ownership of the means of production. The military is a government function. And even there, military arms are created and manufactured by private corporations and businesses. They sell them to the government via contract. A socialist state merely confiscates the means of production.

Conflating the proper role of government with socialism is a dangerous threat to individual rights.

 

[OneSheep]

Why? The evidence is social programs have increased our debt, have not reduced poverty, and have Effectively destroyed the black family.
Not sure how that equals “justice”.

You have a point, but it takes a while for people to learn what works and what doesn’t. Keep your voice up, and let’s get the system changed.

Socialism is not defined something government does. It is defined as government ownership or strict control of the means of production.

Not if its democratic socialism:

Democratic socialism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Again, you are conflating the role of government to defend the people ( provide the general defense) with government control or ownership of the means of production.

Actually, I did not. I was saying that the military is a social service in that it provides an indirect benefit for the citizenry, just like public education, regulatory agencies, social security, and medicare.

Our Church is not against any of these, nor the means of funding.

 

[OneSheep]

No, more where the nominee promises phones for all, tuition for all, etc. Altho McGovern (1972) did promise $1000/person if he were elected.

It won’t happen if you and I have a say in it Annie! I like the idea of having a more just society, but giving money without being earned is untenable. Okay, not in the case of education up through highschool, but college kids can do community service to “earn” at least a big portion of their tuition.

Does that make sense to you?

 

[JonNC]

You have a point, but it takes a while for people to learn what works and what doesn’t. Keep your voice up, and let’s get the system changed.

50 years and trillions of dollars? That’s a rather steep learning curve.
Maybe it is the old saying about doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.

Not if its democratic socialism:

Maduro is democratic socialism.
Chavez was democratic socialism

As Madison said, democracy is the right of the people to choose their own tyrant. To take the means of production against the ownerships’ will requires authoritarian rule.
Democratic socialism is just another way of saying authoritarian socialism.

 

[JonNC]

Actually, I did not. I was saying that the military is a social service in that it provides an indirect benefit for the citizenry, just like public education, regulatory agencies, social security, and medicare.

Our Church is not against any of these, nor the means of funding.

Actually, you are.

 

[Theo520]

Maduro is democratic socialism.
Chavez was democratic socialism

As Madison said, democracy is the right of the people to choose their own tyrant. To take the means of production against the ownerships’ will requires authoritarian rule.
Democratic socialism is just another way of saying authoritarian socialism.

The problem is they subverted democracy’s ability to self correct, so they stayed in power by corrupting democracy.

 

[JonNC]

JonNC:

Maduro is democratic socialism.
Chavez was democratic socialism

As Madison said, democracy is the right of the people to choose their own tyrant. To take the means of production against the ownerships’ will requires authoritarian rule.
Democratic socialism is just another way of saying authoritarian socialism.

The problem is they subverted democracy’s ability to self correct, so they stayed in power by corrupting democracy.

But that’s what democracy does. It always corrupts itself because it lacks the limits on government that a constitutional republic such as ours has.

 

[RCIAGraduate]

Yes but they do have stronger safety nets and a wide provision of public goods, if you are person who is struggling it seems like governments in Europe are more likely to help you than the US. Furthermore, it seems that certain European (and perhaps other countries in Asia) models offer a more secure base of security, stability and comfort rather than the US where things seem so risky and unstable. due to not as generous safety net/social programs; you may not have to worry about going bankrupt due to medical issues, you don’t have to worry about incurring debt to attain a career, etc. In comparison, life in America it seems like an extraneous burden especially if more can be done to help the people. It’s hard not to be in favor of such a deal and I’m actually appealed by the model come to think about it. May I hear counter-arguments from you and others?

 

[JonNC]

Yes but they do have stronger safety nets and a wide provision of public goods, if you are person who is struggling it seems like governments in Europe are more likely to help you than the US.

I see no evidence of that. Again, the general government has spent $20+ trillion on the social safety net since the 1960’s.
Furthermore, why is it in the purview of government to do that? Obviously, they’re doing a lousy job.

Furthermore, it seems that certain European (and perhaps other countries in Asia) models offer a more secure base of security, stability and comfort rather than the US where things seem so risky and unstable. due to not as generous safety net/social programs; you may not have to worry about going bankrupt due to medical issues, you don’t have to worry about incurring debt to attain a career, etc.

Again, this country has provided a safety net that has left us trillions of dollars in debt. How does that make us more secure.

In comparison, life in America it seems like an extraneous burden especially if more can be done to help the people. It’s hard not to be in favor of such a deal and I’m actually appealed by the model come to think about it. May I hear counter-arguments from you and others?

You do recognize that the tax rates in those countries are significantly higher, and not for the wealthy.

 

[petra22]

because it lacks the limits on government that a constitutional republic such as ours has.

Use to have??? Will we ever have that again?

 

[JonNC]

JonNC:

because it lacks the limits on government that a constitutional republic such as ours has.

Use to have??? Will we ever have that again?

Doubt it. The constitution is being continually degraded.

 

[Annie]

Hi OneSheep,

I found this article about local initiatives and thought that this is the sort of activity people could agree was helpful to poor people.

I think work/study programs, etc have a place too, along with a lot of other good ideas.

I also recognize that there are some people programs such as these can not help, so I’m not saying that these programs alone would solve the problems of poverty.

 

[OneSheep]

Thanks. What we all agree on is that the current system is fraught with problems. If some government funding went toward the kinds of efforts described in that article, we might be able to turn things around.

Takes money, but not necessary more taxes. Reallocation of funds.

 

[Ridgerunner]

With perhaps three very minor exceptions, all have lower income rates per annum. Most are considerably lower than ours.

All have much higher tax rates.

All have food prices that are about double, relative to income, what they are in the U.S.

All have fuel prices far higher than ours.

What’s not to like?

 

[qui_est_ce]

My cousin, who is French and lives in Chartres, was appalled that we don’t turn off the shower water while we are soaping up. It’s expensive to heat up water! I don’t think I want to live like that.

 

[DENNYINMI]

Keep in mind the government is a (corporate) person. It contains an enormous concentration of wealth. somehow I think these people want to increase that concentration.

It was amazing how may persons that comprise “the government” can’t go one month without falling into hardships.

Government shut downs have a way of bringing that out.

More than a few were begging for the government to reopen while in fear of what they were going to do insomuch as mortgage, even food.

Simply put, I disagree with your critique of the enormous concentration of wealth. Any “wealth” on the part of our government comes from us, the people. (Corporations and their lobbyists are another can of worms)

The main strange thing to me was the necessity and emergency in securing our borders, land and sea…Yet would not make an exception to pay the very persons doing just that.

 

[OneSheep]

With perhaps three very minor exceptions, all have lower income rates per annum

Data? This is not what I have heard or experienced at all. Plus, it is very common for them to be paid for a “13th month” and/or get a whole month off. What I am finding out with a cursory look is that top salaries are higher here, and bottom salaries are higher in Europe.

What is definitely agreed on is that people get a lot more vacation time in Europe. The work is less intense there. People get to live.

And yes, it is more expensive overall to run a business where you have to have people filling in for those on vacation, but that is a sacrifice European workers are willing to make.

All have much higher tax rates.

Absolutely. They channel their money through non-profit government to take care of higher education, health insurance, and other needs that we pay for through for-profit corporations.

And we get far less for our taxes because most of our income tax goes toward our military.

All have food prices that are about double, relative to income, what they are in the U.S.

Higher, but not double, from what I’ve seen. Data?

All have fuel prices far higher than ours.

Our fuel taxes do not cover the cost of our infrastructure. If they did, we’d be seeing much higher taxes. But now that EV’s are on the rise, fuel taxes themselves would not be fair.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Data? This is not what I have heard or experienced at all

It’s true, no matter how one counts the income. They just make less in Europe, by and large, and most by quite a bit less.

List of countries by average wage - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Possibly they get more vacation time in Europe. Personally, I like working, but that’s me. I find it satisfying to provide goods and services people need. Self-entertainment pales beside that. But others undoubtedly feel differently about it.

Absolutely. They channel their money through non-profit government to take care of higher education, health insurance, and other needs that we pay for through for-profit corporations.

And we get far less for our taxes because most of our income tax goes toward our military.

You’re quite right that more of our taxes go to the military. But they’re still lower than in nearly every European country and we defend them as well as ourselves. The only thing that keeps the Russians off the English Channel is the U.S.

It’s true that they pay for a lot of things through taxes that we pay out of pocket. In Europe, you pay for other people’s medical education and malpractice insurance with your taxes. In the U.S. you pay it after the fact through your insurance premiums. But to be absolutely honest with you, I would rather work my tail off to educate my own children and grandchildren than to educate someone else’s who does not want to work hard to accomplish it for his own. Why should I? I don’t buy my neighbor’s tires, either. If I want to work more to pay more for Michelins than he wants to work to pay for Yokohama, why shouldn’t I be allowed to do that? Does anybody really think the government is going to pay for education other than at community colleges? In Europe they weed kids out and send the ones they don’t think worthy of university education to trade schools. Is that the model we want here?

What infrastructure are you talking about? My state has extremely low fuel taxes. Maybe it could have better roads, but they’re better than in Kansas where the fuel taxes are higher, and certainly better than in Arkansas. (With apologies in advance to Kansans and Arkansans) And my state does not allow deficit spending. So the fuel tax is paying for the roads except, of course, for the federal highways.

The last thing I read about food prices appeared to be about double. But that was as a percentage of income, not prices per se. Of course, European countries have VAT taxes on food that we don’t have, and they can be high. And when the average wage in FRance is about $17,000 less than here, even food at the same price is a higher percentage of income.

 

[OneSheep]

They just make less in Europe, by and large, and most by quite a bit less.

Your data only shows income after taxes.

malpractice insurance

Europe, thank goodness, is a little less crazy about lawsuits. The lawyer lobby there is not as powerful as it is here.

But to be absolutely honest with you, I would rather work my tail off to educate my own children and grandchildren than to educate someone else’s who does not want to work hard to accomplish it for his own.

I’m with you on this, but many people in our society work their tails off just to keep from being homeless, let alone get a higher education. I’m all for working for ones education, but there are limits to what people can do.

Does anybody really think the government is going to pay for education other than at community colleges?

Well, maybe. I’m sure that many thought community college being paid for by taxes was also a bad idea, but here it is.

In Europe they weed kids out and send the ones they don’t think worthy of university education to trade schools. Is that the model we want here?

“Worthy” is not an arbitrary concept in such “weeding out”. Good grades are mostly about effort, so kids have to work hard to get into free higher education. If they get weeded out but eventually decide to work hard for a higher education, there are schools that they can pay for just like here.

I am definitely in favor of steering kids to education that suits their drive and skill, and “weeding out” the ones who don’t show competence and effort in certain areas. Educating kids who don’t have this is a waste of resources.

What infrastructure are you talking about? My state has extremely low fuel taxes

Ours has low taxes, especially in comparison to Europe, and our roads are pretty awful in many places.

The last thing I read about food prices appeared to be about double

I guess I’d need to see the data. I remember food being expensive, but not double, when we were there.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Your data only shows income after taxes.

No. There are charts that show that, but not the one I cited.

Europe, thank goodness, is a little less crazy about lawsuits. The lawyer lobby there is not as powerful as it is here.

I agree. Med mal suits are a terrible cost added to medical care.

I’m with you on this, but many people in our society work their tails off just to keep from being homeless, let alone get a higher education. I’m all for working for ones education, but there are limits to what people can do.

It’s not as difficult as many think to get an education. We all think in terms of sending our kid to Notre Dame or even Mizzou and think it’s expensive. Well, if it’s either of those, it is expensive all right, but half or it at Mizzou is room and board and Notre Dame is private.

I can think of four companies right now that will send a person to get an associate’s degree and pay for it if the person show aptitude and attitude.

Sorry about your roads.