Margaret Thatcher once said that "The trouble with Socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money.

Trump.


“We will never be 'socialist,' ”

Martinez39:
The community owns the means of production but the leaders are in charge and oversee the means of production. These leaders/politicians are in charge of distributing wealth/generated capital.

Then it can not be socialism. In socialism, the community that owns the means of production are in charge and oversee it themselves.

Do not sleep on your watch please!

Martinez39:
They live the high life because they have exploited the absolute power socialism gave them as overseers of the means of production. They may spend all they want and leave little or nothing for the people. Imagine if equally distributing wealth will leave everyone with #10, won't you think that these politicians will be tempted to hoard some so as to have enough because ten naira is too small? So even if their intentions are good, they would be tempted to abuse their position and it might spiral down into a money laundering dictatorship.

In the society described above the community that owns the means of production (if they do own it), is not in charge and does not oversee the means of production! Socialism does not delegate its communal responsibility, everyone plays their part. A society where the above is done is not a socialist society.

stanech:
Margaret Thatcher once said that "The trouble with Socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money.

"A socialist is one who had read Lenin and Marx. An anti-socialist is someone who understands Lenin and Marx."
- Ronald Reagan

Socialism is bad

budaatum:

Then it can not be socialism. In socialism, the community that owns the means of production are in charge and oversee it themselves.

Do not sleep on your watch please!


In the society described above the community that owns the means of production (if they do own it), is not in charge and does not oversee the means of production! Socialism does not delegate its communal responsibility, everyone plays their part. A society where the above is done is not a socialist society.

Lol. Okay o.

Martinez39:


"A socialist is one who had read Lenin and Marx. An anti-socialist is someone who understands Lenin and Marx."
- Ronald Reagan

It creates equally poor and miserable people.

Socialism is not cool.

Martinez39:
Lol. The state compels people to work for the good of the state in the hope that what ever comes out of it will be distributed equally. They are given things like health care, welfare etc. The system soon crashes as people lose incentive to innovate and work and there is no such thing as free stuff.

When I said "... I don't know...," I meant that you left me speechless.

I know I left you speechless. I got jigi yesterday and its just power!

A state that compels people to work for the good of the state in the hope that what ever comes out of it will be distributed equally is a Slave State. And the people in it are called Slavians, because they practice slavery. No state, in a socialist society, compels anybody in that society to work for the good of the state!

Socialism is a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole because we are they best stewards of what's ours.

We own it, We run it! Socialist are not slaves!

Martinez39:
Socialism that need capitalism is no longer socialism.

Really? Socialists don't like capital?

You know something? I'm finding that everytime someone tells me to read what they wrote and which I quoted, they themselves are the nonreader!

How can you say socialists don't like money?

Socialism is a political and economic (capital, ego, money, dollars) theory of social organization which advocates that the means (money, power, us) of production, distribution, and exchange (money, capital, ego, naira, dollar) should be owned or regulated by the community (we, us, ourselves) as a whole (all of us) because we are the best stewards of what's ours.

Please! Pay tithes!

Martinez39:
lol. I don't know how to respond to this. Read my post and read what you wrote. Nevertheless, even their previous cash would be distributed equally.

No, Martinez39, we will not take your gold and share your earrings amongst us!

We shall use Redistributive Taxes to spread incomes more fairly among people by taxing rich people more and poor people less. Or don't you want to contribute more to make the community better?

Optional ‘mansion tax’ in Westminster raises £400,000 fund for the homeless

24hoursreporter:
Even though queen Elizabeth is a public figure, she lives a very private life. What baffles most people about her is that she seldom speaks about herself and never grant interviews to the media. This is the reason why so little is known about her.

With over 66 years on the throne, she has become the longest reigning British monarch. Behind the stern poker face you always see screen, there are a whole lot of amazing facts you don’t know about her.

16 Amazing Facts About Queen Elizabeth


#8. She Is Rich But Not The Richest Person In The UK

Without an iota of doubt, Queen Elizabeth is very rich. But she is not among the richest people in the UK.

She gets money from taxpayers and the royal family real estate holdings. Her net worth is £340 million.

However, she has not been listed on the SUNDAY Times’ list of 300 wealthiest Brits for the past 2 years.

#9. She Pays Her Taxes Every Year

Ordinarily, queen Elizabeth II isn’t required to pay tax. But she has been paying tax voluntarily since 1993.

Isn’t she a great leader? How many leaders around the world do this?

Socialist rebellion in the most capitalist city!

Each according to their ability to contribute. But if you are unable to contribute you will not starve to death or sleep on the street because we are socialists!

Martinez39:
The ..... leaders are in charge and oversee the means of production. These leaders/politicians are in charge of distributing wealth/generated capital.

Why does this sound like Amazon and Facebook? Capitalist type companies with boards of directors and shares and dividends?

abduljabbar4:


Yet you expect the socialist north to vote a capitalist

There are MB, SW, SE and SS are bloody capitalists. There are many capitalists in NW/NE also.

@OP who lines up a long list of ills associated with socialism, also readily admits that the examples he provided are hardly 100% socialist. To be clear, without meaning to do so, he inadvertently reinforces the view advanced by the socialist party of Britain; which holds that there are no socialist countries in the world at present.

There are none in Europe, which is suffering from a great capitalist crisis. In Latin America, Venezuela is not socialist, despite nationalising some enterprises. See articles on Venezuela here.

Moving swiftly on, would the same clown be prepared to accept that some of the most stable economies in the world today - Denmark, Norway and Sweden - also have strong socialist systems? Why is that so? Would he acknowledge the benefits that accrue from the provisions made by the state in the areas of education, health care, pensions, and so on, in those countries?

AnyoneButAtiku:
@OP who lines up a long list of ills associated with socialism, also readily admits that the examples he provided are hardly 100% socialist. To be clear, without meaning to do so, he inadvertently reinforces the view advanced by the socialist party of Britain; which holds that there are no socialist countries in the world at present.



Moving swiftly on, would the same clown be prepared to accept that some of the most stable economies in the world today - Denmark, Norway and Sweden - also have strong socialist systems? Why is that so? Would he acknowledge the benefits that accrue from the provisions made by the state in the areas of education, health care, pensions, and so on, in those countries?

Not hold the same opinion with you doesn't make me a clown. When I mentioned the so called socialist programmes, I only mentioned America. Those programmes aren't even socialist in the strict sense. No matter how people want to put it, Venezuela is a socialist country and that is the cause of their suffering. Full blown socialism.

A lot of people ignorantly mention most of the countries you stated to support socialism. They are capitalist economies. Here is a quote from the prime minister of Denmark.

Martinez39:
Not hold the same opinion with you doesn't make me a clown. When I mentioned the so called socialist programmes, I only mentioned America. Those programmes aren't even socialist in the strict sense. No matter how people want to put it, Venezuela is a socialist country and that is the cause of their suffering. Full blown socialism.

A lot of people ignorantly mention most of the countries you stated to support socialism. They are capitalist economies. Here is a quote from the prime minister of Denmark.

When you make a statement which argues that socialism normalises envy, without offering further qualification or context, that amounts to clowning around to me. But in order to not to lower the tempo of this discussion needlessly, I would withdraw that remark and also tender an apology.

When you offer a quote from a centre-right PM in Denmark to invalidate my point about having "strong socialist systems", are you just trying to be as opaque as possible? I am asking because what I wrote is nothing short of a view that is commonly held by most political observers - regardless of where they stand on the political divide.

Martinez39:

A lot of people ignorantly mention most of the countries you stated to support socialism. They are capitalist economies. Here is a quote from the prime minister of Denmark.

The Nordic model refers to the economic and social policies common to the Nordic countries (Denmark, Finland, Norway, Iceland, Greenland, the Faroe Islands, and Sweden). This includes a comprehensive welfare state and collective bargaining at the national level with a high percentage of the workforce unionized while being based on the economic foundations of free market capitalism. The Nordic model began to earn attention after World War II.

If the above were introduced in America would you not call it "full blown socialism" and communist, even?

AnyoneButAtiku:


When you make a statement which argues that socialism normalises envy, without offering further qualification or context, that amounts to clowning around to me. But in order to not to lower the tempo of this discussion needlessly, I would withdraw that remark and also tender an apology.

When you offer a quote from a centre-right PM in Denmark to invalidate my point about having "strong socialist systems", are you just trying to be as opaque as possible? I am asking because what I wrote is nothing short of a view that is commonly held by most political observers - regardless of where they stand on the political divide.

I think op is American. He might not get the "centre-right PM".