View Poll Results: Why are all first-world democracies, socialized democracies?

Voters
136. You may not vote on this poll
  • It's just a coincidence, an accident of economics.

    1 0.74%
  • These are just lies fed to us by the liberal media!

    3 2.21%
  • Yes, certain socialized programs DO benefit a democracy's economic health.

    132 97.06%
Page 16 of 21 FirstFirst ... 61415161718 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 160 of 201

Thread: So...why are all first-world democracies, socialized democracies?

  1. #151
    Sage
    Glen Contrarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Bernie to the left of me, Hillary to the right, here I am...
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    15,538

    Re: So...why are all first-world democracies, socialized democracies?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lakryte View Post
    First, your assumption that the rich always use more of the infrastructure is bogus and made up. Many of the rich send their kids to private schools for starters. And the rich are less likely to use public transportation.

    Second, even if the rich always use public infrastructure more, the already pay more in taxes anyway. If everyone pays a flat tax of 10%, the rich will be paying more in taxes. Aman making $10k will pay $1k in taxes, and a woman making $1 million will pay $100k in taxes--100 times more than the poorer man.

    You are merely asking the rich to pay a higher percentage of their income to taxes to provide and maintain your desires. You can try to spin it all you want, but that's what you're asking. At least be honest about it.
    You really don't understand what I mean by infrastructure, do you? It's not just public transportation and schools - per person, those are relatively inexpensive.

    For the rich, there's the airspace for their jets, the time taken up for their safety by the FAA. There's the taxpayer-funded infrastructure for their yachts, including having the Coast Guard ready to come save them when their yacht's in trouble. There's their houses on the beach, which the taxpayers replace (yes, we do) when a hurricane destroys them. There's the time that they see our senators and representatives face-to-face telling them what they want. There's the fire and police protection for their businesses, the roads where their delivery trucks go.

    On top of all that, the very rich normally pay less in taxes percentage-wise as their secretaries do - Warren Buffet said it himself.

    You really need to widen your mind, and stop trying to protect the rich - they're not the 'job creators'. We in the middle class are the real job creators, always have been. Think about the big companies out there - how many of them were started by multi-millionaires? Outside the financial sector and perhaps Big Oil, not many. Apple? Started in a garage. So did Microsoft. Goodyear started in a kitchen or some such. The stories of middle-class people making it big are effectively endless.
    To do evil, a human being must first of all believe that what hes doing is good" - Solzhenitsyn

    "...with the terrorists, you have to take out their families." - Donald Trump

  2. #152
    Traveler

    Jack Hays's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Williamsburg, Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    54,865
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: So...why are all first-world democracies, socialized democracies?

    Quote Originally Posted by Glen Contrarian View Post
    There are three observations:

    (1) ALL first-world democracies are generally socialized, and have big government, high effective taxes, and strong regulation, whereas
    (2) NO first-world nations at all meet the conservative demands of zero socialism, small government, low taxes, and weak (if any) regulation. And
    (3) ALL nations which DO have small governments, low taxes, and weak regulations ARE third-world nations.

    If including socialist programs such as Medicare, Medicaid, Obamacare, Head Start, free public schools and the like are (as conservative pundits claim) a sure way to the economic dustbin of history, why is it that America (and the British Commonwealth before us) started down this road eighty years ago (FDR's New Deal) and we've been the most successful nations in human history? Is it just an accident or coincidence? Or does the inclusion of such socialist programs actually contribute to a nation's economic health?
    You have it backwards. It is the wealth that enables the public largesse. It is not the public largesse that enables the wealth.
    "It's always reassuring to find you've made the right enemies." -- William J. Donovan

  3. #153
    Sage
    German guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Berlin, Germany
    Last Seen
    08-24-17 @ 06:57 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    5,187

    Re: So...why are all first-world democracies, socialized democracies?

    Quote Originally Posted by Glen Contrarian View Post
    There are three observations:

    (1) ALL first-world democracies are generally socialized, and have big government, high effective taxes, and strong regulation, whereas
    (2) NO first-world nations at all meet the conservative demands of zero socialism, small government, low taxes, and weak (if any) regulation. And
    (3) ALL nations which DO have small governments, low taxes, and weak regulations ARE third-world nations.

    If including socialist programs such as Medicare, Medicaid, Obamacare, Head Start, free public schools and the like are (as conservative pundits claim) a sure way to the economic dustbin of history, why is it that America (and the British Commonwealth before us) started down this road eighty years ago (FDR's New Deal) and we've been the most successful nations in human history? Is it just an accident or coincidence? Or does the inclusion of such socialist programs actually contribute to a nation's economic health?
    My guess is that for a nation to be economically successful, it must be stable and integrated. And in order to get a stable, integrated society, you simply need a certain minimum of social safety nets and/or policies that make sure inequality doesn't grow beyond a certain level.

    When inequality gets too big, there is no solidarity between the citizens anymore, they no longer identify with their country and society breaks apart into different factions. You then either get social unrest even to the point of civil war, or you choose an authoritarian government that keeps society together by force and coercion.

    But when there is not enough solidarity, there is not enough trust. And without trust, you cannot run a successful economy.
    "Not learning from mistakes is worse than committing mistakes. When you don't allow yourself to make mistakes, it is hard to be tolerant of others and it does not allow even God to be merciful."

  4. #154
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:53 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    21,782

    Re: So...why are all first-world democracies, socialized democracies?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Hays View Post
    You have it backwards. It is the wealth that enables the public largesse. It is not the public largesse that enables the wealth.
    I guess I don't see it as either/or issue. Wealth allows society to provide for the poor, doing so maintains conditions that allow for more accumulation of wealth, such as social stability, widespread support for favorable economic decisions, efficient allocation of resources to productive activities rather than dealing with social unrest/public safety/defending elites from mob actions and/or revolutions.

  5. #155
    Sage
    mpg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Milford, CT
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 04:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,769

    Re: So...why are all first-world democracies, socialized democracies?

    Quote Originally Posted by Glen Contrarian View Post
    There are three observations:

    (1) ALL first-world democracies are generally socialized, and have big government, high effective taxes, and strong regulation, whereas
    (2) NO first-world nations at all meet the conservative demands of zero socialism, small government, low taxes, and weak (if any) regulation. And
    (3) ALL nations which DO have small governments, low taxes, and weak regulations ARE third-world nations.

    If including socialist programs such as Medicare, Medicaid, Obamacare, Head Start, free public schools and the like are (as conservative pundits claim) a sure way to the economic dustbin of history, why is it that America (and the British Commonwealth before us) started down this road eighty years ago (FDR's New Deal) and we've been the most successful nations in human history? Is it just an accident or coincidence? Or does the inclusion of such socialist programs actually contribute to a nation's economic health?
    Where do you draw the line between big government and small government? Most people consider the US's taxes and spending to be low.
    If you expect people to be rational, you aren't being rational.

  6. #156
    Sage
    mpg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Milford, CT
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 04:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,769

    Re: So...why are all first-world democracies, socialized democracies?

    Quote Originally Posted by Glen Contrarian View Post
    When you say "false", you should show precisely how it is that there are any first-world democracies who do not have big government, high effective taxes, and strong regulation. AND you should show how there are any nations that DO have small government, low effective taxes, and weak (or no) regulation are not third-world nations.

    And btw - did I say that first-world nations ARE socialist? No. They are socialized democracies, meaning that they ALL have integrated into their governments programs which are socialist in nature. My points stand.
    It's your thread. The burden of proof is on you.
    If you expect people to be rational, you aren't being rational.

  7. #157
    stb
    Nilly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Beantown
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:04 PM
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    6,217

    Re: So...why are all first-world democracies, socialized democracies?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lakryte View Post
    He didn't list any such examples.
    Erm, yes he did?

    He listed high speed rail in communist China, as well as progression made by Germany/Russia in the early-mid 20th century. Free market does help foster technologiccal progression, as he admitted. However, a free market is not a necessity for progression, as you claimed was fact.
    "Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable" - JFK

  8. #158
    Professor

    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Texas
    Last Seen
    11-27-17 @ 09:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,907

    Re: So...why are all first-world democracies, socialized democracies?

    Quote Originally Posted by Glen Contrarian View Post
    There are three observations:

    (1) ALL first-world democracies are generally socialized, and have big government, high effective taxes, and strong regulation, whereas
    (2) NO first-world nations at all meet the conservative demands of zero socialism, small government, low taxes, and weak (if any) regulation. And
    (3) ALL nations which DO have small governments, low taxes, and weak regulations ARE third-world nations.

    If including socialist programs such as Medicare, Medicaid, Obamacare, Head Start, free public schools and the like are (as conservative pundits claim) a sure way to the economic dustbin of history, why is it that America (and the British Commonwealth before us) started down this road eighty years ago (FDR's New Deal) and we've been the most successful nations in human history? Is it just an accident or coincidence? Or does the inclusion of such socialist programs actually contribute to a nation's economic health?
    Answer: Thirst for power. All governments are self promoting agencies. Democracies need consent, so governments led by arrogant and narcissistic men / women with huge egos promise benefits to gain consent for the power and adoration they seek.
    "It is only when men contemplate the greatness of God that they can come to realize their own inadequacy." Jean Calvin

  9. #159
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:41 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,670

    Re: So...why are all first-world democracies, socialized democracies?

    Quote Originally Posted by chromium View Post
    Of course you have no use for it, since you've never been vulnerable to poverty

    Hypothetical and all that, but it's plain to see why you'd feel different had you grown up on food stamps, a "handout" that in reality meant living primarily off ramen noodles, friends living in a duplex with 5 siblings and a single parent who's never around due to working 2 jobs and hell, there was even a local kid whose parents had to beg for donations for a life saving treatment. Seeing an alternative such as forcing, say, supreme asshole ted cruz to pay for medical care for children instead, i will opt for higher taxes every time.

    Why would politicians pander to it? Because it's astonishing the majority would even contemplate putting up with such disparity
    so your solution is to tax tax tax till the rich run out of money or move away

    and Cruz's hostility to homosexuality really does not mean his tax policy is improper



  10. #160
    Sage
    faithful_servant's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Beautiful Central Oregon
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    10,694

    Re: So...why are all first-world democracies, socialized democracies?

    Quote Originally Posted by Glen Contrarian View Post
    And you completely missed my point - Germany had such a program from the beginning, even through the years of the Weimar Republic and through the Nazi years, through the Cold War, and still has it today now that they've absorbed the poverty-ridden eastern half after the Soviet Union melted down, and became the most powerful economy in Europe.

    And they did it all while having those socialist programs you decry so much.
    ..and now explain Greece to us.

    The answer to the question your post os begging is nto answered by throwing out an example or two, it's answered by looking at what normally happens. That means that the more socialized a nation becomes, the less prosperous it ends up. Yes, there are exceptions, but they are FAR out weighed by the rest.
    Our nation has not always lived up to its ideals, yet those ideals have never ceased to guide us. They expose our flaws, and lead us to mend them. We are the beneficiaries of the work of the generations before us and it is each generation's responsibility to continue that work. - Laura Bush

Page 16 of 21 FirstFirst ... 61415161718 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •