Socialism - Pros and Cons.

[Dawnrazor]

Why had it always considered to have failed?

Where has it been a success?

 

Google is there but I'd be interested in personal views. 

[cubanjambo]

Socialist National Health Services around the world are always better for the whole population and not just the insured or rich

- like now

[robbo1874]

Is there anywhere it's been able to have been implemented without outside interference for any length of time? Serious question.

[Tynieman]

I believe that the main reason socialism has failed is because there’s always deliberate attempts to stop it from working by major countries.

 

Look at the history of socialist countries and one common theme exists - sanctions, isolation and even wars are punished against any socialist government.

 

Most of which in my opinion is to primarily to stop socialism working and spreading.

 

Even in our own country, the way the press tarnish politicians such as Corbyn is telling.

 

Unfortunately, I genuinely believe that big business (banks mainly) have a major say in our society and thus we’ll never see a socialist government.

 

Even in our current situation with regards to coronavirus, most big businesses have made profit a more concerning factor than lives. 

 

Unfortunately it’s the time we live in. Everyone out only for oneself.

Edited April 11, 2020 by Tynieman

[Pans Jambo]

11 hours ago, Tynieman said:

I believe that the main reason socialism has failed is because there’s always deliberate attempts to stop it from working by major countries.

 

Look at the history of socialist countries and one common theme exists - sanctions, isolation and even wars are punished against any socialist government.

 

Most of which in my opinion is to primarily to stop socialism working and spreading.

 

Even in our own country, the way the press tarnish politicians such as Corbyn is telling.

 

Unfortunately, I genuinely believe that big business (banks mainly) have a major say in our society and thus we’ll never see a socialist government.

 

Even in our current situation with regards to coronavirus, most big businesses have made profit a more concerning factor than lives. 

 

Unfortunately it’s the time we live in. Everyone out only for oneself.

Seems that like most leaders, socialist ones have either been forced to abandon it (by outside influences and wars etc as outlined above) or they completely feck it up by becoming dictators, becoming extremely wealthy in the process.

 

Like most things, a bit balance is good. Nothing wrong with capitalism as long as its checked. Greed, deregulation and corruption is the reason socialism has to bail out capitalism every 10 years or so.

 

This “privatise the profits & socialise the debt” needs to stop. Banks and large corporations need to be allowed to go bust to stop the roulette finance thats enjoyed by them and paid for by us.

[shaun.lawson]

Need to see a doctor? That's socialism.

Need to get an education? That's socialism.

Need to move around? That's socialism.

Need the police? That's socialism. 

Need the fire services? That's socialism.

 

Can't get on the housing ladder? That's neoliberalism.

Rents are impossible? That's neoliberalism.

Your wages are a joke? That's neoliberalism.

No rights at work? That's neoliberalism.

Benefits so derisory that you can't afford to live on them? That's neoliberalism.

Social mobility is dead? That's neoliberalism.

Privatised utilities and rail ripping you off every day? That's neoliberalism.

Our own species is destroying itself and all others? That's neoliberalism.

 

When did socialism prove most successful? After the war, for a generation or so. When publics across the West recognised the vital importance of depending on, working with and helping each other: all of which was propped up by Bretton Woods and Marshall Aid. The US provided the latter, then destroyed the former: dollarisation changed everything and created the whole gigantic mess we've been in ever since.

 

To emerge from this crisis, we're going to need a global Bretton Woods and new Marshall Plan. But more broadly: socialism actually exists within capitalism, most obviously in Scandinavia. Which by some unfathomable coincidence, always has least inequality, least poverty, best quality of life and best wellbeing. 

 

Capitalism without socialism is fascism.

Socialism without capitalism is communism.

 

But if you've noticed the demand for bailouts from companies owned by the super-rich, you should be aware: socialism already exists in the US and UK. For the rich. 

 

Edited April 12, 2020 by shaun.lawson

[The Brow]

19 minutes ago, shaun.lawson said:

Need to see a doctor? That's socialism.

Need to get an education? That's socialism.

Need to move around? That's socialism.

Need the police? That's socialism. 

Need the fire services? That's socialism.

 

Can't get on the housing ladder? That's neoliberalism.

Rents are impossible? That's neoliberalism.

Your wages are a joke? That's neoliberalism.

No rights at work? That's neoliberalism.

Benefits so derisory that you can't afford to live on them? That's neoliberalism.

Social mobility is dead? That's neoliberalism.

Privatised utilities and rail ripping you off every day? That's neoliberalism.

Our own species is destroying itself and all others? That's neoliberalism.

 

When did socialism prove most successful? After the war, for a generation or so. When publics across the West recognised the vital importance of depending on, working with and helping each other: all of which was propped up by Bretton Woods and Marshall Aid. The US provided the latter, then destroyed the former: dollarisation changed everything and created the whole gigantic mess we've been in ever since.

 

To emerge from this crisis, we're going to need a global Bretton Woods and new Marshall Plan. But more broadly: socialism actually exists within capitalism, most obviously in Scandinavia. Which by some unfathomable coincidence, always has least inequality, least poverty, best quality of life and best wellbeing. 

 

Capitalism without socialism is fascism.

Socialism without capitalism is communism.

 

But if you've noticed the demand for bailouts from companies owned by the super-rich, you should be aware: socialism already exists in the US and UK. For the rich. 

 

 

Excellent post. I remember having a debate with a friend about the banking collapse in 2008. I said that socialism saved capitalism (as it will after this is all over) and his head nearly exploded. This whole coronavirus episode will be used as a massive wealth shift from the public purse to private pensions, as always. Its bollocks but people keep voting for it so **** it. 

 

YOU CANT LET THE BANKS AND BIG BUSINESS DIE. 

 

Well, you can. And hopefully they let any company/bank/investment fund with a vastly wealthy owner die unless the owner puts some dosh up themselves and start paying into the UK tax fund. A likely story tho....

[Mikey1874]

They are trying it out a bit just now.

 

See what happens.

 

 

[Pasquale for King]

18 hours ago, Dawnrazor said:

Why had it always considered to have failed?

Where has it been a success?

 

Google is there but I'd be interested in personal views. 

It can’t truly happen until capitalism burns itself out.

[H2]

Socialism can only truly exist in a wealthy society, but even then there will be the narcissist who must be number 1.

[Cruyff]

I don't really understand your question OP. Are you talking Economically or Theoretically? 

 

You could say by all intensive purposes that we live in a Socialist Country, the Whole of Europe is Socialist and most of the World. 

 

In Europe we have a mixed economies. We have a Public Sector and a Private Sector but our governance is more Socialist than it is Capitalist. We allow for a State Regulated Free Market. 

 

The only real Capitalist Country on Earth is the United States where everything is a Commodity, whether that is Healthcare, weapons, wild animals...etc..

[Seymour M Hersh]

Socialism is great until other peoples money runs out. 

[Ricardo Shillyshally]

Can't help feeling the current HMFC wage structure is like socialism. 

[JamboAl]

1 hour ago, Seymour M Hersh said:

Socialism is great until other peoples money runs out. 

You do need to create wealth before you can spend it so it is a question of balance but what you say is a very simplistic and utterly selfish view.

The people with wealth usually (not always) have it for one or both of 2 reasons.

1. They inherited it from Daddy and generally have a huge sense of entitlement.

2. They made it on the back of the plebs they look down on.

[Cade]

Socialism is great when Capitalists spraff all their so-called "created wealth" up the wall and need bail-outs.

 

Socialise the losses.

Privitise the profits.

 

This is how neoliberalism works.

[Tynieman]

5 hours ago, Seymour M Hersh said:

Socialism is great until other peoples money runs out. 

 

I know you’re probably looking for a reaction, but stealing (or nearly stealing) a Thatcher statement, makes you look nothing more than a fool.

 

Another quote, this time actually one she made, rather than your half statement, was “there’s no such thing as society”

 

Tell me my friend, do you use the NHS, family which do? You got kids that have free education? Any chance you’ve ever known anyone who has required assistance when facing homelessness?

 

Incidentally, until who runs out of money? The banks? That’s already happened, and we paid for it. Society exists boy. 

 

P.s. I dance on Thatcher’s grave. As do the majority of Scotland.

Edited April 12, 2020 by Tynieman

[JackLadd]

5 hours ago, Seymour M Hersh said:

Socialism is great until other peoples money runs out. 

 

Although I'm not a socialist, I would tax the billionaires at 90% and ensure they can't hide in offshore havens. We need a global agreement for that to work btw. Not going to happen as long as a billionaire is running the U.S or fellow crooks like Putin are in power. 

Edited April 12, 2020 by JackLadd

[Selkirk_Jambo]

1 hour ago, JackLadd said:

 

Although I'm not a socialist, I would tax the billionaires at 90% and ensure they can't hide in offshore havens. We need a global agreement for that to work btw. Not going to happen as long as a billionaire is running the U.S or fellow crooks like Putin are in power. 

 

Presumably to ensure that the ultra rich pay their share and the money recouped gets spent on vital services to the benefit of the general population? 

 

I don't think it gets much more socialist than that 😂

[Tynieman]

2 hours ago, Tynieman said:

 

I know you’re probably looking for a reaction, but stealing (or nearly stealing) a Thatcher statement, makes you look nothing more than a fool.

 

Another quote, this time actually one she made, rather than your half statement, was “there’s no such thing as society”

 

Tell me my friend, do you use the NHS, family which do? You got kids that have free education? Any chance you’ve ever known anyone who has required assistance when facing homelessness?

 

Incidentally, until who’s money runs out? The banks? That’s already happened, and we paid for it. Society exists boy. 

 

P.s. I dance on Thatcher’s grave. As do the majority of Scotland.

 

[Dia Liom]

You couldn't really have a fully capitalist or socialist society, I don't think. From my point of view, more socialist societies seem to be more equitable which seems to bring many other benefits to health, happiness, etc.

 

I've been on minimum wage before and have no idea how anyone could survive on it. Definitely buy into the view that companies being able to pay folk a pittance, folk who then pay little in tax and probably get exemptions/handouts in other ways, is a scandal. Force companies to pay fair and give more rights to workers! 

[ri Alban]

If the people allow the country to go back to capitalist norm that has caused this shit, well maybe the virus should just wipe us all out now.

[ri Alban]

Always amazes me how socialist big business, banks and Tories are when their shit is about to fail.

[Jambo dans les Pyrenees]

The answer is Sweden.

[dicksojo]

15 hours ago, Cade said:

Socialism is great when Capitalists spraff all their so-called "created wealth" up the wall and need bail-outs.

 

Socialise the losses.

Privitise the profits.

 

This is how neoliberalism works.

I would like to think that the lessons of the past have been learnt and the high risk investment led parts of banks would be allowed to go bust now. However, in 2008 the banks’ retail and investment operations were not separated and if a bank went down then the retail arm would too and that is just too scary to contemplate.

[shaun.lawson]

[Seymour M Hersh]

[Pans Jambo]

12 minutes ago, Seymour M Hersh said:

Either:

A, Brainwashed & probably a tory.

 

B, Got a nice inheritance, few quid in the bank, a nice private pension & doesnt pay what what he really should in tax.

 

C, Just a cant.

[Seymour M Hersh]

13 hours ago, Tynieman said:

 

I know you’re probably looking for a reaction, but stealing (or nearly stealing) a Thatcher statement, makes you look nothing more than a fool.

 

Another quote, this time actually one she made, rather than your half statement, was “there’s no such thing as society”

 

Tell me my friend, do you use the NHS, family which do? You got kids that have free education? Any chance you’ve ever known anyone who has required assistance when facing homelessness?

 

Incidentally, until who runs out of money? The banks? That’s already happened, and we paid for it. Society exists boy. 

 

P.s. I dance on Thatcher’s grave. As do the majority of Scotland.

 

 

[Dawnrazor]

3 hours ago, Queensland Jambo said:

The answer is Sweden.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/fee.org/articles/is-sweden-socialist-no-but//amp

[ri Alban]

40 minutes ago, Seymour M Hersh said:

 

 

Utter nonsense. We all benefit not the few.

[Cade]

As has been said, either extreme leads to disaster.

Full on socialism doesn't work, neither does totally unregulated free market capitalism.

 

MI5 and MI6 said only this week that all major national infrastructure should be under government control as a matter of national security, to prevent companies with links to hostile nations having undue control over strategic assets.

This means all the big industries and all the major public services being nationalised.

Education, health, transport, gas, electricity, telecoms, water, etc etc etc.

 

Everything else can be left to free market economics. Plenty of room for innovation and private enterprise.

[ri Alban]

3 minutes ago, Cade said:

As has been said, either extreme leads to disaster.

Full on socialism doesn't work, neither does totally unregulated free market capitalism.

 

MI5 and MI6 said only this week that all major national infrastructure should be under government control as a matter of national security, to prevent companies with links to hostile nations having undue control over strategic assets.

This means all the big industries and all the major public services being nationalised.

Education, health, transport, gas, electricity, telecoms, water, etc etc etc.

 

Everything else can be left to free market economics. Plenty of room for innovation and private enterprise.

What about our own hostile governments. They seem to do more damage than any outside forces.

[Spellczech]

14 hours ago, Selkirk_Jambo said:

 

Presumably to ensure that the ultra rich pay their share and the money recouped gets spent on vital services to the benefit of the general population? 

 

I don't think it gets much more socialist than that 😂

Is inheritance tax the fairest or most unfair of taxes?

 

Absorbing your money with your body back into the World at large, or a re-taxing of income that has already been taxed?

[ri Alban]

7 minutes ago, Spellczech said:

Is inheritance tax the fairest or most unfair of taxes?

 

Absorbing your money with your body back into the World at large, or a re-taxing of income that has already been taxed?

You didn't pay tax tho did you. Taxation of all income you earn.

[Spellczech]

16 minutes ago, ri Alban said:

You didn't pay tax tho did you. Taxation of all income you earn.

It is not earned income...No good or service. It is gifted.

 

If gifted to charity there is no tax unless the charity uses it to pay a salary at which point it gets taxed once more... 

 

 

Edited April 13, 2020 by Spellczech

[Auld Reekin']

3 hours ago, Seymour M Hersh said:

 

"Eutopia"   

 

 

 

(Unless it was a deliberate, but shite, pun referring to the 'EU' - and, let's face it, it wasn't, was it? - it rather undermines whatever trite point you were trying to make...)

[Seymour M Hersh]

3 minutes ago, Auld Reekin' said:

 

"Eutopia"   

 

 

 

(Unless it was a deliberate, but shite, pun referring to the 'EU' - and, let's face it, it wasn't, was it? - it rather undermines whatever trite point you were trying to make...)

 

I didn't create it but I'm really glad it irked you. 

[Auld Reekin']

2 minutes ago, Seymour M Hersh said:

 

I didn't create it but I'm really glad it irked you. 

 

   And I'm really glad it rather undermined whatever trite point you were trying to make.

Edited April 13, 2020 by Auld Reekin'

[Seymour M Hersh]

1 minute ago, Auld Reekin' said:

 

   And I'm really glad it rather undermined whatever trite point you were trying to make.

 

It didn't though. 

[Auld Reekin']

1 minute ago, Seymour M Hersh said:

 

It didn't though. 

 

It did as far as I'm concerned, and that's what matters most.   

[Seymour M Hersh]

9 minutes ago, Auld Reekin' said:

 

It did as far as I'm concerned, and that's what matters most.   

 

Well you are a socialist after all. 

[Auld Reekin']

31 minutes ago, Seymour M Hersh said:

 

Well you are a socialist after all. 

 

  

 

Comedy gold - you should have your own daily column in the Daily Mail with material like that!

 

You ASSUME that I'm a "socialist" but, if I am I'm not doing it very well, given that I last voted Labour sometime in the early 80s and have not voted or campaigned for, nor joined, any other party since whose main aim was "socialism". Still, you bash-on with your hilarious gags and attempts at making trite points.     

 

Me? I've got more important things to do...

[Governor Tarkin]

On 12/04/2020 at 13:23, Pasquale for King said:

It can’t truly happen until capitalism burns itself out.

 

Socialism in it's broadest sense is currently alive and well at a variety of scales all throught the United Kingdom and the wider world.

 

It's the default setting for the majority of human beings, most of whom are blissfully unaware that they are a player in a vast and largely spontaneous socialist enterprise.

 

Capitalism will never burn itself out, but the two are far from mutually exclusive.

[Governor Tarkin]

6 hours ago, shaun.lawson said:

 

I'm not arsed that someone else is making a few quid off the back of my hard work, as long as I'm doing reasonably well too.

Isn't that how it's supposed to work?

[Pasquale for King]

21 minutes ago, Governor Tarkin said:

 

Socialism in it's broadest sense is currently alive and well at a variety of scales all throught the United Kingdom and the wider world.

 

It's the default setting for the majority of human beings, most of whom are blissfully unaware that they are a player in a vast and largely spontaneous socialist enterprise.

 

Capitalism will never burn itself out, but the two are far from mutually exclusive.

Im quoting Marx, I agree with most of your post but the last paragraph is playing out all I’ve the globe as we type.

[Pasquale for King]

19 minutes ago, Governor Tarkin said:

 

I'm not arsed that someone else is making a few quid off the back of my hard work, as long as I'm doing reasonably well too.

Isn't that how it's supposed to work?

That’s different from what a Branson type does, capitalism for their staff but socialism for his business when it’s failing and a bailout is required. 

[The Brow]

3 hours ago, Cade said:

As has been said, either extreme leads to disaster.

Full on socialism doesn't work, neither does totally unregulated free market capitalism.

 

MI5 and MI6 said only this week that all major national infrastructure should be under government control as a matter of national security, to prevent companies with links to hostile nations having undue control over strategic assets.

This means all the big industries and all the major public services being nationalised.

Education, health, transport, gas, electricity, telecoms, water, etc etc etc.

 

Everything else can be left to free market economics. Plenty of room for innovation and private enterprise.

 

I find it baffling thats theres only a few folk that realise you need both. 

 

You either get the gammon brigade pretending the EU is massively evil and they're all marxists or you get the far left pretending that everyone is richie ****ing rich if they think that you should be able to make some money and better yourself. 

 

As with everything, there is a middle ground. The idea you cant tax massive companies a lot and that they will just pick up their toys and leave a place with 60 million odd people to sell shit to, is to be fair, utterly stupid. Again, nationalising things that don't need it - is also bloody stupid. 

 

[Sharpie]

The post war Labour movement led by Atlee, Bevan,Bevin, and some there who's names have wandered from my mind entered what seemed to be very socialist policies. Nationalisation of such things as health were greeted with applause, the same actions with railways and coal mining with the creation of British Railways, and the National Coal Board caused some curiosity on part  of the public which did not take long to be solved. Railways under Beecching became a regular radio joke and were not seen as being efficient. NCB seemed to work fine for the miners, but did as most nationalised things seem to become  overpowered by bureaucracy. There was some good, some less so, but I am not sure that the U.K. ever totally accepts a fully socialist society. I have no idea of todays mood having been removed for so long

[ri Alban]

Socialism isn't the problem, militants are.

Edited April 13, 2020 by ri Alban

[Pans Jambo]

1 hour ago, Governor Tarkin said:

 

I'm not arsed that someone else is making a few quid off the back of my hard work, as long as I'm doing reasonably well too.

Isn't that how it's supposed to work?

I dont disagree with your point Tarkin but when a large company who pays minimum wage and paid out over £200Million to shareholders and then asks for government hand-outs, its a busted flush!