We already live in a socialistic world

Labeling communism as socialism doesn't change the fact of what it really is.


Also, no one actually owns their "own property". No one really owns anything, including their wages. First of all, we're taxed on what we earn. Then we're taxed again (a couple of ways) on what we purchase. And just try not paying the taxes on your house and the property on which it sets - - you'll quickly find out who really owns it. Ditto for your car - don't wanna pay the taxes at the time of purchase? Well then, you're without a car.


We already live in a socialistic world in many ways, people just refuse to realize it so they go along with it without saying a word in their own defense.


Don't get me totally wrong - we have many freedoms other countries do not have, but no country in the world is truly "free". Evidently NK knew that a long time ago and wanted to throw it in our American faces even back in the 1930's, 1940's and 1950's. Then LBJ finished throwing it in our faces in the mid 1960's.


Cullen Kehoe Added Feb 10, 2019 - 4:42am
Life, liberty, property (Locke). These were the ideals of the Enlightenment upon which the U.S. Declaration of Independence and Constitution are based on. 
You're saying nobody actually owns their property? Do they own their life and liberty? 
Jeffry Gilbert Added Feb 10, 2019 - 5:45am
Do they own their life and liberty? 
Not according to the shitheads with badges, their bureaucratic masters or the POS lawmakers in service to the banksters in every single country on the planet. 
Jeffry Gilbert Added Feb 10, 2019 - 5:46am
One senses the author is just fine with the way things are. 
Webmaster Added Feb 10, 2019 - 6:15am
The more people gather in megacities, the closer they get to socialism. It is impossible to live surrounded by millions of people and not to comply with millions of conventions, not to pay hundreds of payments and dozens of taxes. The city itself is a socialist phenomenon.
John Minehan Added Feb 10, 2019 - 6:24am
"The more people gather in megacities, the closer they get to socialism. It is impossible to live surrounded by millions of people and not to comply with millions of conventions, not to pay hundreds of payments and dozens of taxes. The city itself is a socialist phenomenon."
Interesting point, "socialist phenomenon" or at least an inherently collectivist one.
Ever read Floating City by Venkatesh? 

Webmaster Added Feb 10, 2019 - 7:04am
No, I have not read this book but now will surely try as its topic seems to be current and modern one. If there is talk of New York, then if I am not mistaken, it was there where an absolutely "abnormal" for America socialist movement represented by AOC arose. In such a way  American socialism did not grow in the countryside, but in a megacity, which for some time was even called the capital of the world.
John Minehan Added Feb 10, 2019 - 8:22am
Prior to 1976 or so, in the run up to the 1977 Mayoral Race, NYC was even more obviously socialist. 
A good book about that is Ladies and Gentlemen, The Bronx Is Burning.
Webmaster Added Feb 10, 2019 - 8:35am
Thanks, I`d like to read about it as much as possible. The popularity of socialism usually grows with an increase in the number of poor people, so it is possible that impoverishment of the population has reached New York.
John Minehan Added Feb 10, 2019 - 8:52am
But, at a certain point, things get bad enough it recedes, as in NYC during that period.
Spartacus Added Feb 10, 2019 - 8:53am
We already live in a socialistic world in many ways, people just refuse to realize it 
No.  We do realize it.  We realize, quite begrudgingly,  that the government takes about 30% of our lives and our children's lives away each year.  
Webmaster Added Feb 10, 2019 - 9:16am
Socialists have always a lot to promise including so called bright future. They never carry out what they promise but it is enough to get power. Lenin cheated both peasants and workers with his slogan "Land - to the peasants and plants - to the workers". Peasants not only did not get land but the Bolsheviks took from them what they earned under capitalism. Workers did not get plants but turned into poor slaves. Capitalism has nothing to promise except hard work for money so it can loose the battle for minds if economy is sinking.
FacePalm Added Feb 10, 2019 - 11:07am
"It should be thought a hard government which should take a tenth part in taxes."
~Benjamin Franklin
the government takes about 30% of our lives and our children's lives away each year.    
For most, the taxation exceeds 50%, once you add in fees for licenses of various sorts, RE and personal property taxes, sales taxes, taxes on every utility needed for a normal life, State taxation, motor vehicle infractions, ad nauseum.
It's all tied in to the national debt, a completely unpayable (and undischargable) amount, as every penny collected in taxes by general government actors goes to just the INTEREST every year, as proven here:
"100% of what is collected is absorbed solely by interest on the Federal Debt ... all individual income tax revenues are gone before one nickel is spent on the services taxpayers expect from government."
- Grace Commission Report, submitted to President Ronald Reagan on January 15, 1984
And in the ensuing 35 years, things have not gotten better...but what is worse is that the vast majority of this "debt" is completely imaginary, and quite possibly could be entirely voided on grounds of fraud - but none dares to tackle the banksters; the Kennedys are proof of what happens when you do - and Garfield before them, and Lincoln before him.
It remains to be seen if "Betsy Anne" will return to defend her POV, but i'd certainly be interested in her take on how to restore the Constitutional Republic America was designed to be...rather than accelerate the slide down to the antheap of socialist totalitarian tyranny.  i've certainly expressed a number of ideas along that line...
Bill H. Added Feb 10, 2019 - 11:39am
The ideal system would be a combination of the best points of Socialism combined with the best points of Capitalism.
What we have now in the US is more of an Authoritarian Corporatism, whereas the government is at the beckon call of the corporations at the expense of the people. The next step is true Fascism.
Thomas Sutrina Added Feb 10, 2019 - 12:55pm
Bill that is what the Democratic party and progressive Republican party has been selling since 1880's. <<The ideal system would be a combination of the best points of Socialism combined with the best points of Capitalism.>>  Bull shit.   
Just follow the money and reality comes as clear.  The wealthy capitalist have been purchasing or paying for the construction of a CLASS SOCIETY TO PROTECT THEMSELVES.   Self interest is the motivation.  They will not life forever but as we see in Europe monarchy system a class society that protect the generation after them.   We see this around the world.  All humans have a self interest to protect the generations after them.  Money and power make it possible.   The ideal system is a class society with barriers between the classes and only a very few are capable of moving up to higher classes and only a very few are so inept to fall to a lower class.   Bill that ideal system is not stable and have been built up every time it collapses since the stone age.  The history books tell the cyclic story.  
Socialism is just a new name for monarchy system.  The players have changed name and how they got to be on top has change.  Capitalism or the spontaneous order created by a free market  (capitalism exist in any human society.  In seasonal parts of the world the storage of food is 'capital.'  Yep capital goes back to hunting and gathering.)  Spontaneous order exist in nature and since we are part of nature it exist in human society.   As we see in China is that it was on the verge of failure by government trying to control the economy.  Now China as achieve what Bill wants a blend of government control, Socialist economic approach, and spontaneous order, tagged capitalism.  
Your free, Bill, to go to China and participate in there IDEAL BLEND!!!!
Thomas Sutrina Added Feb 10, 2019 - 1:05pm
Betsy Ann, welcome to WB.   You have described Bill's ideal blend which America is in the process of always improving to the detriment of the principle of America's founders. 
What your describing is a leviathan government that no longer operates with the consent of the governed.  The majority of the laws are written by bureaucrats that are not elected and that the citizens can not remove without great difficulty.  Those laws are enforced by the same department of government whose bureaucrats wrote them and to make matters worse are interpreted and adjudicated by other Bureaucrats from the same department of government.  
I agree Betsy Anne, we do not known anything because it can arbitrarily be taken away by a bureaucrat and we have not recourse.
However, if the government followed the principles of the Declaration of Independence and the states created Constitution that also followed the declaration then we still would be paying the list of taxes.  The difference is that we would give our consent and receive for that consent what as individual is not possible to do without the structure of government.  Thus we by choice would not own anything without a lean on it.
Dino Manalis Added Feb 10, 2019 - 1:09pm
 Paying property taxes is like paying rent to the borough!  
Bill H. Added Feb 10, 2019 - 2:04pm
The ideal blend is in no way what I know you are thinking.
So what you are telling me is that you don't want anything to do with Social Security or Medicare?
So I guess you are going to refuse these benefits when they come your way?
While your at it, you can refuse protection from your local Police, refuse to have your trash collected, refuse having your street sweeped, refuse to have the Fire Department come to your house if it catches fire, get rid of the Military, public libraries, and parks, highways, and even public parking!
Will you be happy then?
George N Romey Added Feb 10, 2019 - 2:21pm
At the end of the day who is going to pick up the trash, find and arrest the criminals, fix the roads?  Seems like a bunch of utopians that think this stuff we somehow just get taken care of.
James Travil Added Feb 10, 2019 - 2:37pm
" Seems like a bunch of utopians that think this stuff we somehow just get taken care of."
That's just how Conservofascists think and operate George. They exist in a fantasy world with laws created to sustain their lives and protect them from their own stupidity. Take away their safety nets and you'll see what FAKE tough guys they really are. The true snowflakes. 
George N Romey Added Feb 10, 2019 - 2:48pm
People that don't want the government to do anything seem to be clueless to how hard and undesirable life was in the early 20th century.  Roads were muddy ruts. People had to use horrible outhouses to do their business. Personal hygiene due to lack of sanitation was horrific. Next time one sits on the comfy commode to take their morning constitutional should think about where their "waste" goes and how it gets there.
Bill H. Added Feb 10, 2019 - 3:24pm
I guess we will just ban taxes and live without everything I described.
Or maybe we can get the Mexicans to pay for it!!
"It will be a beautiful thing......so good......people are saying"
Bill H. Added Feb 10, 2019 - 3:26pm
Maybe all of these "Socialist fearing" individuals can all go off to Greenland, form their own nation, and fend for themselves with no services or benefits.
Thomas Sutrina Added Feb 10, 2019 - 4:36pm
Bill H., I didn't say I do not want government.  What I am saying is that I want the principles of the Declaration of Independence to be followed.   The 16th Amendment that approved Income tax was the first shot into the body of the Constitution and Declaration.  We could not have Social Security or Medicare without the 16th Amendment.  The Republican and Democrat progressives passed this and the 17th Amendment that destroyed Federalism.
This is what the founders thought of welfare Bill H..  We see that they are correct when more then half the money spent by the Federal Government is for welfare.  And most is defined as non-discretionary spending where as the required tasks of the Government spelled out in the Constitution are put under discretionary spending.   Bill H. this is deception by the federal government.
"While living in Europe in the 1760's, Franklin observed: "in different countries . . . the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer.  And on the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer."
Similarly, Jefferson argued that, "to take form one . . . in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers, have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, the guarantee to everyone the free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it." 
This is why the founders encouraged reliance upon family, private charity and community. This approach ensured that aid to the needy was provided as personally as possible.  Family and community can make crucial distinctions between the deserving and the undeserving poor. whereas government cannot."   http://www.heriatage.org/research/commentary/2011/07/what-would-the-founder-do-about-welfare
Bill H., Social Security and Medicare are the contrivance of Bismark that I call the founder of the Panzi Scheme.  "Pay as you go," as the citizens pay into the plan at the beginning when few people are using the system.   Bismark (and USA) included the hidden payments by employers that do not show up on the wage stub given to the workers, making the cost seem lower.   The employees protect the program because they paid into it and were promised the insurance.  Thus the program can not be ended,  Bismark created the third rail.  Bismark used this approach to get the people to become members of the nation and move away from their ties to the Provence.   The states regulate insurance.  However this doesn't apply for Social Security and Medicare, make the people look to the federal government.
Bismark also use the programs as part of invisibly paying for welfare AFDC was written into Social Security from the beginning.  Who know how many other welfare program were slipped into this and other legislation.  The politicians will never tell and the media will choose not to look.   The money also even for Bismark didn't go into an annuity type of account but into the general taxes box.  Thus this money does not accrue interest  and is often replace by a promise to pay.   Thus the programs all become insolvent some day into the future.  This is part of the Bismark "pay-as-you-go."
So to answer your question No I do not like that I have been taken advantage of and will be stuck with the bill for the bankruptcy of Social Security and Medicare.  It is an investment that I  was forced to make and I will as everyone else try to recover my investment.
Bill H. Added Feb 10, 2019 - 5:25pm
So you then have no problem accepting your Social Security and Medicare.
Nothing wrong with that!
Any politician that wants to abolish either is in for a rude awakening, for sure. Welfare has it's bad points, but if we insist on ignoring our education systems, sending jobs overseas, and hiring foreign workers to fill what jobs we still have, things will get even worse.
Actually, we should clamp down on our corporations and penalize them for their greedy practices that are mainly responsible for many of the problems we fact these days. How about taxing the shit out of them for offshoring jobs and hiring H1-B workers? How about not allowing them to hide their profits in offshore accounts? How about forcing them to reinvest their new tax windfalls here in the US?
What a concept!
As many have noticed, there are way too many homeless around these days.
opher goodwin Added Feb 10, 2019 - 6:33pm
No man is an island. We are all part of a society comprising hundreds of millions of people. In order for that many people to coexist there has to be structure and compromise. That means taxes.
There is a balance between complete freedom and existing as part of this society.
I'm in the UK. I reckon we've got it about right. I have freedom to say what I like, believe what I like, vote for who I like, go where I like. I have fair laws and a good standard of living. I might rail against many things that I don't like - the inequality for example - but it is still pretty good.
No man can be completely free when he lives in among other people.
Without laws there is chaos and everyone suffers. Without taxes we do not have the things society requires in order to prosper. Without compassion we have selfishness and greed.
Thomas Sutrina Added Feb 10, 2019 - 9:16pm
Bill H., Bismark knew what he was doing by forcing me to pay a tax specifically for Social security and Medicare.  He specifically know to tell me that I was purchasing an annuity,  That is the exact sales pitch for SS.    I am guilty Bill H.  I am not that strong to consider this a total loss.  
Stone-Eater Added Feb 11, 2019 - 4:00am
We have such a system. It's called social democracy with direct votes on subjects and people, and no president. Quite unique LOL
Doug Plumb Added Feb 11, 2019 - 4:03am
Any society, in exchange for the comfort and safety that it offers requires you to pay a tax. Your property cannot be your property without laws, you can't have laws without money and taxes are required to protect trade and the money supply. That is just reality.
  Most of what we pay for taxes aren't really taxes, the bureaucracy and the body politic has recognized that we will go along with almost anything and never resist or complain. So corruption, violence, oppression, etc ensues. No one respects a coward and even cops now regularly and normally break the law just to push us around a little and show us who's boss.
opher goodwin Added Feb 11, 2019 - 8:41am
Doug - yes there is corruption and oppression. What we need is to root that out and prevent it from ruining the system.
At present the system works for most people - we are kept safe, secure and fairly prosperous. We now need to make it fairer so that it works for everyone. 
But the main thing is that it works and it enables 8 billion people to live.
Stone-Eater Added Feb 12, 2019 - 8:34am
Another useless try to explain socialism. Americans and Europeans have a completely different understanding of this, so forget it. If this is meant for a US audience only, you sure are are the captain of your boat.
Thomas Sutrina Added Feb 12, 2019 - 4:43pm
Stone-eater "We have such a system. It's called social democracy with direct votes on subjects and people, and no president. Quite unique LOL" Seem to me that you do not want to follow the discussion.  Starts with "Labeling communism as socialism doesn't change the fact of what it really is."  and includes this witty comment, "Socialists have always a lot to promise including so called bright future. They never carry out what they promise but it is enough to get power. Lenin cheated both peasants and workers with his slogan "Land - to the peasants and plants - to the workers"."   
Stone-eater I do think Lenin understood European style SOCIALISM?  
Are you calling the nations of the EU 'social democracy'?
How about me choosing the words of  a 'European' that was steeped in SOCIALISM, Ayn Rand (Born:Alisa Zinovyevna Rosenbaum, 02, 1905, St. Petersburg, Russian Empire.)  At 12 she supported the revolutionaries, Alexander Kerensky.   Went through the USSR education system to get a degree.  She arrived in America at the start of 1926, I assume she never left. 
But first let me picture the 'social democracy'  The EU nations are all welfare states with a large bureaucracy that create regulations without the consent of the people.  America follows the same approach.  No DEMOCRACY THERE.   
They opened the borders to a flood of Muslim immigrants. Also same in America but the people on the other side of the border are not Muslims, just a geography difference. And again the citizens wishes are ignored over the interest of the industrialist that want cheep labor.  NO DEMOCRACY THERE.
Most have prime ministers which one could say is elected by representatives elected by the citizens.  Now that sounds exactly like the 'electoral college' in America.  So the means of becoming the leader is the same.  Who cares what the title is?
Now to Ayn Rand: Man' survival is based on rational faculty.  his mind is his basic means of survival and only means of gaining knowledge.  Man cannot provide for his simplest physical needs without a process of thought.   The process of thought moved man from gathering to hunter with weapons, farmer, husbandry, sailor, machine builder, computer builder. space explorer.
[Socialism is based on the idea that their are master minds that lead the nation and master minds that create the wealth of the nation, the governing class in society that have their own rules, superior humans.  And the other lesser classes, the collective, those that the upper class choose not to think or is even capable of thinking.]   Though is the product of an individual mind.  NO SUCH THING AS A COLLECTIVE BRAIN.  
Man's survival requires that those who think be free of the interference of those who don't.  Freedom is the fundamental requirement of man's mind. A rational mind does not work under compulsion.  Man does not subordinate its grasp of reality to anyone's orders directives or control.  It doesn't sacrifice it's knowledge,  view of the truth to anyone's opinion,  wishes, threats, or welfare.
A mind can be forced into silence, constrained, and killed.   A gun is not an argument.   Stalin, Hitler, Mao Zedong, etc. are socialist that committed holocausts to there people to silence opposition.  A mind that could not otherwise be controlled.
The social recognition of man's rational nature is the concept of INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS. Rights are a moral principle defining and sanctioning a man's freedom of a action in a social context. First right is to life and the second is to the tools and result of his rational mind, the Right to property. without the product of a humans labor then he will not survive.
A social system is a set of moral-political-economic principles embodied in a society's laws, institutions, and government, which determine the relationships, the terms of association, among the men living in a given geographical area.
Two fundamental questions
Does a social system
1. Recognize individual rights?
2. Ban physical force from human relationships?
 Capitalism (free market) is the only system that answers: YES to both.  A man is FREE, his mind is free.
Milton Friedman
liberty before equality----- have a lot of both
equality before liberty----- have very little of both
Socialism claims we need eq
Thomas Sutrina Added Feb 12, 2019 - 4:48pm
Continue to the end:
Socialism claims we need equal distribution of wealth, thus goods.   To accomplish it they must take liberty away.
Liberty frees man to produce wealth which created the the vast numbers of people with significant wealth called the middle class of America.  Not duplicated in any socialist nations with a governing and industrial upper class protected by government laws. 
Stone-eater I hope that your satisfied with a 'European educated women from a Socialist/Communist country (USSR)'?