UtahBill

I know you did not address that to me, but I agree with it.
The word Socialism is thrown about as though it is a bogeyman that we should be afraid of, but the fact is, it is here, has been here for some time, and isn't going away. The rich can still get rich, but we can't allow the "lesser beings" to have too small a portion of what is a finite pie.

__________________
Education is expensive, ignorance is costly.

Each generation should have more opportunities than the last, but not at the expense of the next.

TurtleDude

The driving force behind the redistribution of income by rich elites is to gain more political power by buying the votes of those who think that the redistribution goes to them.

__________________
SUPPORT OUR SOLDIERS

TurtleDude

A finite pie? If you labour under that delusion, I can see where you are coming from

__________________
SUPPORT OUR SOLDIERS

UtahBill

As an ordinary citizen not willing to pay for access to politicians, I have tried to contact senators, reps, etc. on energy issues, which are my favorite issues.
No success...
Only the rich elite have the funds to buy access, thus votes....

__________________
Education is expensive, ignorance is costly.

Each generation should have more opportunities than the last, but not at the expense of the next.

Iriemon

I suppose you could look at it that way and just as validly say that the driving force behind consolidation of wealth by rich elites is to gain more political power by buying the votes of those in political power.

UtahBill

I suppose you can explain how the pie is infinite?
Do we have unlimited resources? Not the USA. The middle east has lots of oil which is as close to unlimited as you can get, but even there they face the dilemma of having to find a different pie to divide, eventually.

__________________
Education is expensive, ignorance is costly.

Each generation should have more opportunities than the last, but not at the expense of the next.

ashurbanipal

Yeah, I have a hard time figuring out exactly how the pie is infinite as well. The earth is only so big, and therefore must contain a finite amount of resources. There is an absolute upper limit on the amount of arable land, on the number of gallons of drinkable water, on the total tonage of gold or silver or platinum or other minerals, and so on.

If we manage to colonize space, this might change things from a practical perspective, but of course we haven't colonized space to any meaningful degree.

Money is theoretically infinitely producible, especially if it doesn't have to be made as cash. But money is not necessarily wealth, as those in Zimbabwe are now discovering (last I heard, it cost something like 2 million dollars in Zimbabwe to buy a loaf of bread). I doubt that Zimbabwean dollars, themselves, have much intrinsic value.

I get what's wrong with full-blown socialism, and I would never argue for that. But I don't get what's wrong with implementing a few socialist ideas when that's clearly what's needed to keep the economy going. I see these two systems--i.e. socialism and market economics--as being based on two basic but opposing ideas: competition and cooperation. We clearly need both if we are to survive, thrive, and excel. Prefering one to the other is foolish, and often involves arguments that are obviously flawed. We need competition to generate fresh ideas and to have the drive to improve. We need cooperation to meet challenges that are too big for individuals to face on their own. Either is bad when it overbalances the other.

TurtleDude

Many of the very rich vote dem because higher taxes is a small price to pay for the power they get from a leftist government.

If it is an institutionalized requirement that the rich pay far more than they use, they should get additional de jure benefits from the government..

__________________
SUPPORT OUR SOLDIERS

TurtleDude

The poorest in america today live better than the richest of those in the 17th century.

__________________
SUPPORT OUR SOLDIERS

Iriemon

They do. They get access.