• 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!

Which of these socialist programs should be eliminated?

Which of these socialist programs should we eliminate?

  • Public libraries

    Votes: 9 40.9%

  • Public parks

    Votes: 7 31.8%

  • Public education

    Votes: 14 63.6%

  • VA hospitals

    Votes: 8 36.4%

  • Social Security

    Votes: 19 86.4%

  • Medicare

    Votes: 17 77.3%
  • Total voters
    22
Groucho said:
For those of you who cannot stand the idea of a national health care program because it's socialism, which of these other socialist programs do you think we should eliminate?

If you do not choose all of them, please explain why.
Click to expand...

VA Hospital, SS, and Medicare are not socialist programs because you pay for medicare and SS out of your withholding and VA hospitals are for veterans who paid for them by serving their country.......What do you want to do with Veterans after they get wounded or maimed? Just throw them along side the road?
 
Last edited:
Morality Games said:
Regardless of whether or it advocates a %100 capitalist system, the Republican Party hasn't made an argument to justify its passion against socialism if it is willing to accept such a very high degree in so many industries.

The question is supposed to provoke reflection among people who decry socialization or who turn popular indignation against socialization into political capital; if socialization can exist in some sense without being an abomination, then what is it about socialization that is so objectionable? The more exceptions we make the less black-and-white we can consider the issue. If you start saying these programs need to be socialized because they have a utilitarian benefit, then it is difficult to protest against any socialization which has a good chance of a utilitarian benefit.
Click to expand...

Groucho said:
This poll was meant for those people who object to a national health care policy SOLELY because "it's socialism". I understand that there are other legitimate reasons not to want it, but if your only reason is "socialism" then you have to explain why you agree with other forms of socialism.

That's the hypocrisy this post was meant to address.
Click to expand...

Again, I'm unaware of any politicians who have said that "I oppose this healthcare bill because it's socialist and socialism is always bad in every facet of life." More commonly, the summarized argument is "I oppose this healthcare bill because it's a socialist plan that will not work in this particular area."

Once you acknowledge the distinction between the two, the argument behind this poll becomes moot.
 
RightinNYC said:
Again, I'm unaware of any politicians who have said that "I oppose this healthcare bill because it's socialist and socialism is always bad in every facet of life." More commonly, the summarized argument is "I oppose this healthcare bill because it's a socialist plan that will not work in this particular area."

Once you acknowledge the distinction between the two, the argument behind this poll becomes moot.
Click to expand...

Oh come on, "Obama's a socialist" is one of the biggest rallying cries the GOP keeps saying. You can't deny that (well, not without looking silly).
 
Navy Pride said:
VA Hospital, SS, and Medicare are not socialist programs because you pay for medicare and SS out of your withholding and VA hospitals are for veterans who paid for them by serving their country.......What do you want to do with Veterans after they get wounded or maimed? Just throw them along side the road?
Click to expand...

No, Socailist Security is socialism, since you're not paying for your benefits, you're paying for the people in retirement now. Also, there's the element of the gun pointing at your head. If you have a job, you can't decline to pay Socialist Security, though no on will force you to sign those check when you're old and decrepit. Compulsion is another hallmark of socialism.
 
Groucho said:
For those of you who cannot stand the idea of a national health care program because it's socialism, which of these other socialist programs do you think we should eliminate?

If you do not choose all of them, please explain why.
Click to expand...
So if we don't want socialism, we have to immediate get rid of programs ingrained into society for 60 years right? What's the elimination plan? If it's unrealistic then your thread is mere disingenuous political hackery.
 
Groucho said:
Oh come on, "Obama's a socialist" is one of the biggest rallying cries the GOP keeps saying. You can't deny that (well, not without looking silly).
Click to expand...

Which doesn't really bear one way or another on my point.

If I claimed that Obama was a socialist because he was trying to implement socialist policies in areas that have traditionally not been socialist, how is that incompatible with my support for public parks, etc.? I'm not saying "Obama is a socialist in that he supports some forms of socialism which is uniformly bad," I'm saying "Obama is a socialist in that he supports more socialist policies than most."
 
RightinNYC said:
Which doesn't really bear one way or another on my point.

If I claimed that Obama was a socialist because he was trying to implement socialist policies in areas that have traditionally not been socialist, how is that incompatible with my support for public parks, etc.? I'm not saying "Obama is a socialist in that he supports some forms of socialism which is uniformly bad," I'm saying "Obama is a socialist in that he supports more socialist policies than most."
Click to expand...

So it's not that he is socialist, it's that you don't like the kind of socialist he is?
 
Redress said:
So it's not that he is socialist, it's that you don't like the kind of socialist he is?
Click to expand...

For the person I'm referring to, they'd probably say that he's more socialist than most. Things aren't yes or no, they're on a spectrum.
 
Last edited:
Groucho said:
For those of you who cannot stand the idea of a national health care program because it's socialism, which of these other socialist programs do you think we should eliminate?

If you do not choose all of them, please explain why.
Click to expand...

We should get rid of everything just to watch those who complain start complaining about lack of services.
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
No, that's national defense.

Socialism is the threat to the nation, not the army.



But defense expenditures usually constitutional, socialist security is not constitutional.



Paying down the debt, then cutting taxes.

There's no particular reason why the government should be spending the people's money when the people are perfectly capable of spending it themselves if they want to.



Yes. Socialist Security should be cut by 100%. The Defense Budget should be reviewed annually and only those necessary expenditures should be made. I'd say we should have a committee looking at this, but we already do, we just need to make Congress do their job for a change.



National defense.

There is no justification for socialism.
Click to expand...

I generally agree(for the US, but I myself like socialism, and I am happy about having it in Europe), except a state defense system which is not a peoples militia is against the constitution and also socialism.
 
Last edited:
RightinNYC said:
Which doesn't really bear one way or another on my point.

If I claimed that Obama was a socialist because he was trying to implement socialist policies in areas that have traditionally not been socialist, how is that incompatible with my support for public parks, etc.? I'm not saying "Obama is a socialist in that he supports some forms of socialism which is uniformly bad," I'm saying "Obama is a socialist in that he supports more socialist policies than most."
Click to expand...

So you have no problem with socialism per se, just some socialism? Hey, me too! I'll bet even Obama agrees with that!

You know, every time one of these things was implemented it was "in areas that have not traditionally been socialist".

So in all these other instances when these things were passed, the majority of our politicians were all socialists because they supported that one socialist program. Right?

Man! We sure have had a LOT of socialists here in America, haven't we?
 
Groucho said:
So you have no problem with socialism per se, just some socialism? Hey, me too! I'll bet even Obama agrees with that!

You know, every time one of these things was implemented it was "in areas that have not traditionally been socialist".

So in all these other instances when these things were passed, the majority of our politicians were all socialists because they supported that one socialist program. Right?

Man! We sure have had a LOT of socialists here in America, haven't we?
Click to expand...

What part of this is hard to understand? There are very few people who are pure socialists or capitalists. Most recognize that a mix of the two generally leads to optimal outcomes, though there is plenty of debate as to where to draw the line. It's entirely rational to be a "capitalist" who accepts and even supports some socialist policies, just like it's rational to be a "socialist" who accepts and supports some capitalist policies. That doesn't mean that the capitalist can't object to some socialist policies or vice versa.

You keep on acting like you've uncovered some brilliant new angle on the issue, but you're basically restating common sense.
 
RightinNYC said:
What part of this is hard to understand? There are very few people who are pure socialists or capitalists. Most recognize that a mix of the two generally leads to optimal outcomes, though there is plenty of debate as to where to draw the line. It's entirely rational to be a "capitalist" who accepts and even supports some socialist policies, just like it's rational to be a "socialist" who accepts and supports some capitalist policies. That doesn't mean that the capitalist can't object to some socialist policies or vice versa.

You keep on acting like you've uncovered some brilliant new angle on the issue, but you're basically restating common sense.
Click to expand...

Well, once more, this poll was specifically only for those (as I have said three times now) who object to health care SOLELY because it's "socialist". My question was "Why then don't you object to all these other socialist programs?"

So I was debating you thinking you were one of those, but it's clear now that you're not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom