Why do you feel socialism is bad?

[Nimeniton]

The obvious answer boys and girls is check our shores,the whole world wants to come here…and most seem to over our open borders.

Really - Do Hispanics really count as the whole world? Despite the USA’s poor social security and health systems. Despite the fact that your nation has so many enemies? Do you really think we are all queuing up to live in your country? Do Hispanics really count as the whole world? I was under the impression that most people want to emigrate to Finland. The highest tax in Europe; the best education system in the world news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/education/4073753.stm Canada was third and the USA is no where to be seen. You might enjoy this pdf on the dumbing down of the US education system. There again you may not. deliberatedumbingdown.com/. I will grant that the USA has bigger armed forces than any other country in the world.

So what do you think of the socialist set up of the apostles.The Christians who sold their houses and lands gave it to the apostles and they distributed to those who had need.

So are you a Catholic or a Capitalist?

 

[sedonaman]

… It is a group or national responsibility to the individuals that cannot pay. Trying to duck this responsibility is selfish and very ungodly.

This is judgmental and presupposes that the responsibility is not currently being met.

Saying that people are uninsured is not the same as saying they are not getting any medical care at all, which is what the socialists want us to think who keep saying that 47 million [or some large number] are uninsured.

My wife is an ER nurse, and she says that the ER cannot turn anyone away. If they cannot pay and must be admitted, they are stabilized first and then transferred to the local county hospital. She told me so many stories of drug abusers coming in for treatment and not paying that I finally told her to stop telling them to me. Many who cannot pay know this and also use the ER as their primary physician, even for minor problems [the woman who sat on a tack comes to mind]. This is a very inefficient allocation of scarce resources.

On the other side, I personally know two cases in which the uninsured needed brain surgery, and the state paid for the operations. Cases like these are conveniently omitted by those who spread the propaganda that “47 million [or some large number]” are without health care, want the government to rule our lives, and use it as just one more excuse.

“In order to reduce the cost of health care, the government would have to operate the system more efficiently than the market does. I can’t think of anything the government operates more efficiently than the market.” – Thomas Sowell

 

[sedonaman]

…

So are you a Catholic or a Capitalist?

This is a false dichotomy. Why do you think they are mutually exclusive?

 

[Katrina5]

The governemtn has not relinquished ownership of the 392 public park lands which it currently owns.

Did you see Ken Burns special on National Parks on PBS? If they weren’t owned by the government, they would be so commercialized that there would be more advertising and trash than trees, water, and rocks.

Oh, wait. You probably don’t watch PBS, because It’s Public, right?

 

[Fidelis_Unus]

Hello there! I’m a supporter of the United States becoming a socialist democracy, and having systems such as socialized health care.

Looking over this forum, most (if not all) of the members are strongly anti-socialist. Why?

Note: I do understand that abortion is evil if not done for (both physical and mental) medicinal reasons. If abortion is not funded, at all, would you be in favor of it?

Interesting, you cask a question and throw in a brief little comment about one the most highly contested issues of our time, then decide … well, let’s talk about that later, but only after pulling all the old superfluous arguments (rape, etc.). Abortion is wrong, period, and there are many very good threads that deal with the abortion issue if you are really searching for Truth.

In terms of socialism, Fr. Corapi says it far better then I ever could:
"At a time when it surely seems that capitalism has run amuck and poised the world on the edge of economic ruin, the temptation is very strong for the pendulum to swing too far left into the failed and immoral territory of socialism. Historically pure socialism has never worked, philosophically it cannot work, and morally it is inherently evil (because it undermines the right of private property ownership, an inherent human right) and hence should not be given a chance to work.

The response might be that what we have at the moment isn’t pure socialism. The problem is that the moment is incredibly fluid and the direction toward a more radical form of socialism under way with frightening speed. Unless, of course, you believe the politicians and their appointees whose stock-in-trade has become lies, deception, and self-interest.

The common error is to think that socialism helps the poor and disenfranchised. As Pope Leo XIII pointed out as long ago as 1891 in his Encyclical “Rerum Novarum”, socialism does not help the poor. Rather, it reduces everyone to the same lowest common denominator of poverty and misery, while at the same time drying up the very sources of capital."

Socialism also goes completely against the concept of Subsidiarity, which is, incidentally, a fundamental principle of European Union law, though its roots are in Catholicism.

 

[Fidelis_Unus]

Sweden is not a Socialist country.

Apples and oranges in comparing the U.S. to Sweden.

Sweden’s population is 9 million.

The U.S. is over THREE HUNDRED million.

Sweden is a monarchy, a governmental structure very far from socialism and from the American ideal that all people are created equal.

“The problem with Socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money…” M. Thatcher

The Swedes were Vikings. They conquered many countries with legendary brutality, including taking over half of the Roman empire. Their richness came from the spoils and deaths of many weaker civilizations. There history is rife with examples of how they put money ahead of all else. They hid under so-called neutrality when the Nazi’s were killing jews, all the while making concession to Hitler all the while continually making concessions to Hitler and, later, supported Napoleon. Not a country whose example I care to follow, thank you. I don’t care how rich they are.

One reason they’re doing well is that they have tremendous natural resources, unlike most of the rest of the world. They also have one of the highest tax rates anywhere. There is a great paper on the EU versus US, which shows that the average worker only receives 40% of his income after taxes.

How a country develops, financially, geographically, historically, socially, etc is far to complicated to be able to simply point at one country as so-called proof of a statement.
Rather than continue to throw out specific countries, you chose to posted Social Justice, let’s talk about the concepts and why a concept is good/bad, shall we?

 

[Fidelis_Unus]

In our Catholic tradition, health care is a basic human right. Access to health care should not depend on where a person works, how much a family earns, or where a person lives. Instead, every person, created in the image and likeness of God, has a right to life and to those things necessary to sustain life, including affordable, quality health care. **This teaching is rooted in the biblical call to heal the sick and to serve “the least of these,” **our concern for human life and dignity, and the principle of the common good. Unfortunately, tens of millions of Americans do not have health insurance. According to the Catholic bishops of the United States, the current health care system is in need of fundamental reform.

(sigh)
Time and time again people here say that no one should be denied access to healthcare and I many agree that the healthcare system needs work. It is the overhaul of the health insurance industry, at the expense of taxpayers, while losing control of important decisions (e.g. whether our money will be used to kill another human being against our morals) that is the crux of this social issue. Forcing a revamping of a private industry on us, particularly at such a tremendous cost and taking over how it is run (government control) is anti-American and that comment about how the cost of not doing something is too great? Bull. The cost of doing this is going to cripple us for generations to come, without (might I had) torte reform, where our greatest expense lies.

If fact, you above post tells exactly why we should be against this. No one should use be able to take our money and kill a baby, I don’t care what the justification.

Im not from the US im from the UK. Even the Conservatives in the UK would never dream of getting rid of our NHS,if they tried to do that nobody would vote for them. Also why do you say you vote life,the Republican party were in office for 8 years and never made abortion illegal,so whats the difference between them or the democrats? To make my position clear i am against abortion.

This tiresome comment comes up again and again, as well. This is an issue in the courts, not something that the President or even Congress can change. Even if they could, you are talking about a Republican president and a Democratic congress. It’s obfuscation, anyway, and not helpful to the topic at hand.

 

[sedonaman]

…
Also why do you say you vote life,the Republican party were in office for 8 years and never made abortion illegal,so whats the difference between them or the democrats?
To make my position clear i am against abortion.

This is a fair question and deserves a fair answer. The Supreme Court made anti-abortion laws unconstitutional; therefore it would take a constitutional amendment to overturn that decision [known as *Roe v. Wade]. Here’s what the constitution says about how to amend it:

Article. V.

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.

As you can see, the super majorities required make it so difficult as to be almost impossible. No one political party could do it without super majorities in both houses and the states. The Republicans didn’t have such majorities in the time period you reference.

To answer your second question, the difference between Republicans and Democrats is the difference between life and death for 50 million babies.

 

[sidbrown]

Poverty and abortion are not separate issues! I do not think that we should start with feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, and housing the homeless.

Let’s start with opposition to abortion. There are many who praise Mother Theresa for her work with the poor. However, they do not share her opposition to abortion. Failure to understand her opposition to abortion is also a failure to understand her work for the poor. The two concepts are inseparable.

From a moral perspective not all issues are qualitatively equal. Some values carry more weight than others. Some values are more fundamental than others. There is justification for placing more emphasis on some issues than other issues, and there is justification for placing more emphasis on some issues at certain times.

Socialism has a split personality. On one hand it promotes the forced redistribution of wealth through government intervention. On the other hand, it supports the murder of the poorest of the poor, unborn human people.

I thought that they had abortion rights in capitalist countries such as the USA, for example. It is not true that you have abortions only in socialist countries.

 

[sidbrown]

The obvious answer boys and girls is check our shores,the whole world wants to come here…and most seem to over our open borders…

Have you ever spoken to anyone who lives in France or Austria or Japan? I guess not.

 

[sidbrown]

Did you see Ken Burns special on National Parks on PBS? If they weren’t owned by the government, they would be so commercialized that there would be more advertising and trash than trees, water, and rocks.

Oh, wait. You probably don’t watch PBS, because It’s Public, right?

I would say that Ken Burns is right and it definitely does promote the general welfare for the governemtn to won the National Parks. This is a good example of how governmental policies can promote the general welfare as mentioned in the US Constitution.
As far as watching TV, I don’t watch too much TV generally. On occasion I will look at Nova or Discovery or EWTN.

 

[DanteAlighieri]

My use of the word socialism is not meaning communism that eastern Europe and the USSR had.

When I use the word socialism I am talking about social programs within a captialist society, that address the health care and educational needs of all of its citizens.

No man can serve two masters. One cannot be for the poor and be against social programs that help them. God is not mocked!

The true priests of the Lord and true Christians, support socialism because their heart is for the people. They don’t turn their back on Jesus.

On judgement day Jesus will say, “What you did to the least of these you did to Me!”

One does not “mock” God by opposing bloated, inefficient, and (at worst) corrupt governmental programs that do not do charitable work nearly as well as private institutions do. Period.

The best thing the government can do for what you (mistakenly) believe to be “socialism” is get out of the way. Poverty and hunger will not be gotten rid of through taxation; they will be ever present. The best thing to do is to encourage people to give directly to organizations who already do such work – or even better, to do the work themselves!

Jesus did not say, “What you paid through the government for the least of my brothers…” He said “What you DID”.

The Catholic Church ROUNDLY rejects socialism because it weakens the charitable spirit and the sense of autonomy that individuals have. In other words, it makes MANDATORY that which should be VOLUNTARY, and thus removes any semblance of LOVE from it.

Peace,
Dante

 

[GodLovesTheSpek]

Socialism is like a huge bribe: the bait of equality, health, charity, and standard of living is dangled in front of the poor, unhealthy, unwary, forgetful, deceived, and greedy. Socialists lie in wait for the people to bite and take the bait. Then the people get yanked into a monstrous, monopolistic governmental system that is nearly impossible to get rid of once the falsehoods are realized.

 

[sidbrown]

Socialism is like a huge bribe: the bait of equality, health, charity, and standard of living is dangled in front of the poor, unhealthy, unwary, forgetful, deceived, and greedy. Socialists lie in wait for the people to bite and take the bait. Then the people get yanked into a monstrous, monopolistic governmental system that is nearly impossible to get rid of once the falsehoods are realized.

Persanlly, I would not want unfettered capitalism where children of 12 and 13 year old are working for slave labor wages in factories 80 hours per week. The government has to pass and enforce laws to promote and provide for the general welfare so that this type of enslavement of children in factory work does not occur.

 

[sedonaman]

Persanlly, I would not want unfettered capitalism where children of 12 and 13 year old are working for slave labor wages in factories 80 hours per week. The government has to pass and enforce laws to promote and provide for the general welfare so that this type of enslavement of children in factory work does not occur.

Are these still problems? Do tell.

 

[GodLovesTheSpek]

Explain it to the Jewish, Nazi war prisoners, the victims of “The Great Leap Forward” and “Holodomor”. They won’t cite Capitalism as a cause.

Now explain that to the former Soviets, cult of Maoists, the cult of Kim Jong-il, and the Nazis – that’s what they wanted and got it.

No one benefited from the Socialistic policies and tens of millions of people were killed and continue to die.

 

[sidbrown]

Are these still problems? Do tell.

As governments expanded their powers to promote the general welfare, these problems have become less frequent, but they still do exist today. This shows that governments must always be vigiliant and continue to pass more legislation which will provide for and promote the general welfare of all, but especially the poor and disadvantaged in our society.

 

[GodLovesTheSpek]

The Soviets expanded their power (which they believed they owned) to enact the policies that led to Holodomor.

The so-called People’s Republic of China expanded their power to enforce and “promote” “The Great Leap Forward”.

One should really read about these events and see what socialism leads to. All for the good of the people?

 

[tjm190]

As governments expanded their powers to promote the general welfare, these problems have become less frequent, but they still do exist today. This shows that governments must always be vigiliant and continue to pass more legislation which will provide for and promote the general welfare of all, but especially the poor and disadvantaged in our society.

“I had a headache, and I took a pill and started to feel better. Therefore, I should take the entire bottle.”

We have unemployment insurance (which, by the way is a good example of people not trying to become employed when they can get free stuff), welfare, and food stamps.

Is it fun to live like that? No- if you’re burdening society, you shouldn’t live like someone who isn’t. You need a strong incentive to make your own way.

 

[ComputerGeek25]

As governments expanded their powers to promote the general welfare, these problems have become less frequent, but they still do exist today. This shows that governments must always be vigiliant and continue to pass more legislation which will provide for and promote the general welfare of all, but especially the poor and disadvantaged in our society.

This is just a bunch of handwaving that doesn’t answer the question or back up your claim that social welfare (specifically where the government gives people money) programs are good.