• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Why Young People are Becoming Socialists in One Graph

phattonez

phattonez

Catholic
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 3, 2009
Messages
30,870
Reaction score
4,246
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
grattan-house-prices-Vs-wages.jpg


And this isn't even looking at a constant population. The workforce is older and more experienced, and we have a lower percentage of people working.

If you want to guarantee a socialist revolution, make sure that no one can afford basic necessities.
 
phattonez said:
grattan-house-prices-Vs-wages.jpg


And this isn't even looking at a constant population. The workforce is older and more experienced, and we have a lower percentage of people working.

If you want to guarantee a socialist revolution, make sure that no one can afford basic necessities.
Click to expand...

No young people are becoming socialist because they're being brainwashed in liberal schools.

Housing is expensive because socialist universities push out "urban planners" who occupy the bureaucracy, set the land use rules, enforce permit regulations, and do whatever they want without oversight from voters.

A good example is Washington's 1992 Growth Management Act, to give people trees to look at the supply of buildable land was severely limited and both sprawl and denisty were curtailed.
 
Last edited:
EMNofSeattle said:
No young people are becoming socialist because they're being brainwashed in liberal schools.

Housing is expensive because socialist universities push out "urban planners" who occupy the bureaucracy, set the land use rules, enforce permit regulations, and do whatever they want without oversight from voters.

A good example is Washington's 1992 Growth Management Act, to give people trees to look at the supply of buildable land was severely limited and both sprawl and denisty were curtailed.
Click to expand...

Lol, you really think people look at the fact that they can't afford a home, and it doesn't make them sympathetic to socialism? A guy coming out of college sees he can't afford to buy, is forced to rent at high cost, and thus must delay family formation. Yeah, sounds like the kind of thing most would be indifferent to.
 
phattonez said:
grattan-house-prices-Vs-wages.jpg


And this isn't even looking at a constant population. The workforce is older and more experienced, and we have a lower percentage of people working.

If you want to guarantee a socialist revolution, make sure that no one can afford basic necessities.
Click to expand...

Young people have always been socialist. They were when I was a kid 40 years ago. Most of them eventually mature and grow up. Socialism sounds good to the stupid and immature, who think with their hearts and not their brains.
 
It's interesting how all the conservatives apparently see no problem with homes being out of reach for most people. I guess they got theirs (wealth through property price accumulation) and now don't care about the effect on their children.
 
phattonez said:
Lol, you really think people look at the fact that they can't afford a home, and it doesn't make them sympathetic to socialism? A guy coming out of college sees he can't afford to buy, is forced to rent at high cost, and thus must delay family formation. Yeah, sounds like the kind of thing most would be indifferent to.
Click to expand...

Socialism is not the answer though.
 
phattonez said:
grattan-house-prices-Vs-wages.jpg


And this isn't even looking at a constant population. The workforce is older and more experienced, and we have a lower percentage of people working.

If you want to guarantee a socialist revolution, make sure that no one can afford basic necessities.
Click to expand...

Democrats are the biggest portrayer of keeping homes prices high.
If you want a cheap house just look at places that vote republican.
 
phattonez said:
Lol, you really think people look at the fact that they can't afford a home, and it doesn't make them sympathetic to socialism? A guy coming out of college sees he can't afford to buy, is forced to rent at high cost, and thus must delay family formation. Yeah, sounds like the kind of thing most would be indifferent to.
Click to expand...

Nobody delays family formation because of cost. Family formation is delayed because marriage has been destroyed as an institution by no fault divorce and birth control.

The poorest people in the world have families and have them young. I’m guessing most people of socialist inclination are not truly interested in having families, the women will be when they’re 35 and can’t get pregnant or find a man because they were told to focus on a career, and the men can fornicate because of the pill

Socialism is materialistic greed, that’s why they boil all problems down to power and economics, economics really has nothing to do with it. If it did then these people would support a Christian and free market society and not secular socialism
 
phattonez said:
grattan-house-prices-Vs-wages.jpg


And this isn't even looking at a constant population. The workforce is older and more experienced, and we have a lower percentage of people working.

If you want to guarantee a socialist revolution, make sure that no one can afford basic necessities.
Click to expand...

The Clinton, Bush, Obama years really stuck it to the American workforce, not to mention their offspring being poorly educated in tax starved schools.

phattonez said:
It's interesting how all the conservatives apparently see no problem with homes being out of reach for most people. I guess they got theirs (wealth through property price accumulation) and now don't care about the effect on their children.
Click to expand...


Well, we are all going to be dying off soon, so there will be plenty of home for sale. BTW, part of the problem is the high cost of construction - environmental reports, new efficiency regs, demand for bigger houses and larger lots, and a constant rain of new fees, including special levies for roads already paid for.
 
Last edited:
Moderate Right said:
Young people have always been socialist. They were when I was a kid 40 years ago. Most of them eventually mature and grow up. Socialism sounds good to the stupid and immature, who think with their hearts and not their brains.
Click to expand...

Yup, why do you think birth control was pushed on society? It was to perpetuate adolescence so now we have 30 y/o teenagers who think and vote like teenagers running around
 
jdog21 said:
Democrats are the biggest portrayer of keeping homes prices high.
If you want a cheap house just look at places that vote republican.
Click to expand...

that's because places that tend to vote republican are generally **** hole states.
 
EMNofSeattle said:
No young people are becoming socialist because they're being brainwashed in liberal schools.
Click to expand...

Let's look at your argument. On one hand we have students getting a post secondary education. They're going to school, learning how to evaluate information, how to use critical thinking skills, how to put together a coherent argument. And in your estimation this makes them totally susceptible to brainwashing.

But people with no critical thinking skills, people with no idea how to evaluate information, people with no idea of how to put together coherent argument, they're the ones who have the abilities and skills to avoid being brainwashed.

You're going with that, are you? That's your best argument?
 
JustHanging said:
Let's look at your argument. On one hand we have students getting a post secondary education. They're going to school, learning how to evaluate information, how to use critical thinking skills, how to put together a coherent argument. And in your estimation this makes them totally susceptible to brainwashing.

But people with no critical thinking skills, people with no idea how to evaluate information, people with no idea of how to put together coherent argument, they're the ones who have the abilities and skills to avoid being brainwashed.

You're going with that, are you? That's your best argument?
Click to expand...

Education does not by necessity produce critical thinking skills. Those are only taught if the institution wants people to think critically. In fact they do not. American schools follow the Prussian model which was intended to tech loyalty and obedience to a secular state, what was Prussia known for? Oh yeah strictly disciplined soldiers. That’s where our education model comes from.

Philosophy is almost never taught, when it is secular French and German philosophers (of the type that produced the worst dictatorships in history) and not British Conservatives like Burke and free market pioneers like Smith are stressed, Joe Biden called for the abolition of British jurisprudence as a side note. Your premise is faulty on many levels.
 
phattonez said:
Lol, you really think people look at the fact that they can't afford a home, and it doesn't make them sympathetic to socialism? A guy coming out of college sees he can't afford to buy, is forced to rent at high cost, and thus must delay family formation. Yeah, sounds like the kind of thing most would be indifferent to.
Click to expand...

Maybe they should try doing something besides working minimum wage jobs. As far as those graduating from college. Maybe they should have gotten a degree in a field that has job potential instead of some do nothing degree.

Hint for some. Move to a part of the country where housing is affordable.
 
jdog21 said:
Democrats are the biggest portrayer of keeping homes prices high.
If you want a cheap house just look at places that vote republican.
Click to expand...

They are also the places with no jobs, so let's not celebrate too soon.
 
EMNofSeattle said:
Nobody delays family formation because of cost.
Click to expand...

Wrong.

Guardian said:
Millennials were not alone in believing that a stable job was important before marriage: 89% believed this to be true, as did 94% of seniors. A large number also agreed that saving money or paying off debt before marriage was important.
Click to expand...

Millennials delay marriage in order to form a more perfect union, poll suggests | Life and style | The Guardian

Family formation is delayed because marriage has been destroyed as an institution by no fault divorce and birth control.
Click to expand...

I do agree that these are reasons, but these aren't mutually exclusive.

The poorest people in the world have families and have them young. I’m guessing most people of socialist inclination are not truly interested in having families, the women will be when they’re 35 and can’t get pregnant or find a man because they were told to focus on a career, and the men can fornicate because of the pill
Click to expand...

Here's something that they never tell Americans: the poorest people in the world also don't have any debt, and they own their homes.

Socialism is materialistic greed, that’s why they boil all problems down to power and economics, economics really has nothing to do with it. If it did then these people would support a Christian and free market society and not secular socialism
Click to expand...

Socialism is materialistic greed. I fully agree, and I want to prevent it. However, you have to realize that usury concentrates wealth in the hands of those who already have wealth, and as wealth is transferred more and more to capital, asset prices inflate as wages are left in the dust. Avarice is a mortal sin in Christianity, and a good Christian society would not tolerate it.
 
chuckiechan said:
The Clinton, Bush, Obama years really stuck it to the American workforce, not to mention their offspring being poorly educated in tax starved schools.

Well, we are all going to be dying off soon, so there will be plenty of home for sale. BTW, part of the problem is the high cost of construction - environmental reports, new efficiency regs, demand for bigger houses and larger lots, and a constant rain of new fees, including special levies for roads already paid for.
Click to expand...

The other, arguably bigger reason, is that homeowners aren't selling, and rather are renting out to get more passive income. Those home owners then get wealth for doing nothing while the screws are put on renters who can't afford to buy and increasingly cannot afford to rent. I argue that this is easy to combat by raising taxes on landlords. That would decrease rental yields, drive home prices down, and give renters the option to buy.
 
EMNofSeattle said:
Yup, why do you think birth control was pushed on society? It was to perpetuate adolescence so now we have 30 y/o teenagers who think and vote like teenagers running around
Click to expand...

And don't think that it had no effect on the 60 year olds who also embraced it.

I'm guessing you're Catholic. We should have more of a discussion on economics from a Catholic perspective. Have you read Rerum Novarum?
 
mike2810 said:
Maybe they should try doing something besides working minimum wage jobs.
Click to expand...

If you know where millions of people can find good paying jobs, I'm all ears.

As far as those graduating from college. Maybe they should have gotten a degree in a field that has job potential instead of some do nothing degree.
Click to expand...

So these young people trusted their advisors, trusted their parents, trusted colleges, and trusted the government, and now you blame them for being in debt? They have to pay all of it while everyone else reaps the rewards? Sorry, I don't buy that, not one bit. Forgive the debt.

Hint for some. Move to a part of the country where housing is affordable.
Click to expand...

There's plenty of cheap housing in Gary, Indiana. You know what they don't have? Jobs.
 
enderpotato00 said:
Socialism is not the answer though.
Click to expand...

Well we KNOW that but what we also know is that capitalism must be buffered and, to a certain extent, some aspects of it need regulation, the same way we have FIRE regulations. You're free to use fire to forge steel, smelt precious metals, warm your homes, cook your food, but you're not free to use fire to burn down entire villages, and then claim that you "are being denied the freedom to do as you wish with your fire".

It's the Despair Quotient. Fix that, so people just starting out know that while they might be struggling at first, they know that eventually if they work hard they'll make it. Fix that, and a lot of our big problems will seem like things which can be handled.
But right now, with even the basics out of reach, any idiot professor with marxist delusions of grandeur has a receptive audience.

Even Arthur Brooks, former head of the American Enterprise Institute, is now calling for a change to a New Deal style modified and regulated capitalist system that focuses on OPPORTUNITY EQUALITY instead of INCOME EQUALITY.



AEI is a conservative think tank and they're now almost channeling FDR.
 
phattonez said:
The other, arguably bigger reason, is that homeowners aren't selling, and rather are renting out to get more passive income. Those home owners then get wealth for doing nothing while the screws are put on renters who can't afford to buy and increasingly cannot afford to rent. I argue that this is easy to combat by raising taxes on landlords. That would decrease rental yields, drive home prices down, and give renters the option to buy.
Click to expand...

We are letting Chinese citizens buy houses for investments here in the USA. I think the openness of the USA to foreign exploitation in going to be the ruin of our workforce.
 
chuckiechan said:
We are letting Chinese citizens buy houses for investments here in the USA. I think the openness of the USA to foreign exploitation in going to be the ruin of our workforce.
Click to expand...

We're way past that point.
 
phattonez said:
And don't think that it had no effect on the 60 year olds who also embraced it.

I'm guessing you're Catholic. We should have more of a discussion on economics from a Catholic perspective. Have you read Rerum Novarum?
Click to expand...

You don't need to guess. I am Catholic.

I'll give this a read, There are too many encyclicals to memorize though.

However something to remember, the Church has no dogmatic teachings on economics that I am aware of, and so I can choose to disagree on such issues.
 
EMNofSeattle said:
You don't need to guess. I am Catholic.

I'll give this a read, There are too many encyclicals to memorize though.

However something to remember, the Church has no dogmatic teachings on economics that I am aware of, and so I can choose to disagree on such issues.
Click to expand...

Be careful with that reasoning. I know that people like Tom Woods like to make that argument, but the arguments in these encyclicals are MORAL, not economic, and the Church certainly has authority when it comes to moral judgements.

And the big issue is usury. It's still a mortal sin, and that is infallibly taught by multiple councils and popes. Libertarian Catholics are absolutely wrong when they try to justify it.

And I hope you enjoy reading it. It's one of the most important encyclicals of the 19th century, and had responses every 10 years for about 100 years thereafter. It's a landmark.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom