Lol !! Not this nonsense again.
Jesus was not a Socialist.
Please quote the scripture, book and passage where Jesus advocates forced redistribution via some bloated Bureaucracy.
Where he States that Government should be given the authority to control the means of production.
Socialism doesn't guarantee " equality ". It guarantees mediocrity, waste and eventually massive unsustainable debt
Argentina, Spain, France and Venezuela come to mind as excellent examples of the failures of Socialism.
Its naive to think anyone let alone the Government could guarantee some semblance of equality and fairness and its down right foolish to believe that Government should be the ultimate arbiter of whats fair in the first place.
Don't codemn the rest of Society to the consequences of Socialism just because the idea of self sufficiency and the Government staying out of your life scares the hell out of you.
Socialism has nothing to do with forced redistribution. It advocates the people owning the means of production.
Jesus was for giving to those less fortunate. He was also for equality. These are things socialism advocates and capitalism does not.
None of that is true, and your basing your opinion of socialism on Stalinist governments. Their is a large difference. No major country has ever had socialism.
France is not socialist. They have a mixed market economy. Never has been.
Spain has a capitalist mixed economy and a monarch. That's about as far as you can get from socialism without being fully capitalist FYI. Spain is also a decentralized government so different areas have allot more control than other places. For example their is one little town where in the 70s the people where starving. Now it is possibly one of the only examples of actual socialism in the world. The mayor (who was elected in the late 70s) took the unemployment rate from 60% to near 0%. People used to starve their. Now they get paid double the minimum wage if they are members of the towns farming coop. They where not effected by the 2008 crash. (like the rest of capitalist Spain)
Argentina was mostly Stalinist or even fascist. Neither is anywhere near socialism or communism. One of the ways you know a country is Stalinist is if its government claims to have achieved communism. No government should can do this and still exist. For the short periods of time (five years in spurts total in the 60s) they were socialist, they actually prospered greatly. Had their not been outside intervention and those people allowed to stay in power they still would.
And lastly Venezuela, the only one that's remotely close to socialism (or claims to be socialist for that matter) Venezuela still has private business believe it or not, so technically they have a socialist mixed market. That's not total socialism. Furthermore even if they where totally socialist they are the statist version, in which the state assumes massive amounts of control instead of the people. Theoretically they do this in the name of the people, but it usually does not work out that way. IMO to truly be socialist you need a market comprised of coops and a government that only owns production of things that are nesicsary to life. Like water, healthcare, education, and food. Although I do think cooperative ownership of food production could work well to. In all actuality Venezuela is not socialist because the people never controlled the means of production, the state did.
So your massively wrong on the first three, and half right on the last.... Good job...
The consequences of capitalism are terrible, as we are seeing. It turns into oligarchy every time.
I am a non violent drug felon. Please explain how your unfounded statement about the government staying out of my life scares me. What a joke. I don't think the government should be involved in most social issues, as it obviously is in capitalist society. It should be involved in helping to provide basic needs to the lower class, such as education, healthcare, food (as well as regulating the production of food MUCH better than it does now) and housing. It also should regulate buisness of any sort to stop it from destroying the environment or ripping off its customers (as it does not now)
So you would condemn society to the hellish consequences of capitalism? If yes then your ok with huge wealth gaps, endless wars for no reason, living in a oligarchy, and total destruction of the environment...
