Why does liberalism-socialism fail?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Mav88, Nov 27, 2012.

  1. Mav88


    Everywhere liberals get control of government fiscal policy over a period of time, they bankrupt it. It never fails, we could run through the list but that's been done before, and there is another thread on state finances.

    There are fundamental reasons for this, primary among them is liberal economic 'fairness' is really about envy, hate, and greed and not about maximal material prosperity for the most people.

    Economic laws that govern this failed dynamic:

    1. There will never be enough other people's money to make a liberal feel that life is fair.
    Corallary: Rich liberals really don't like paying a lot of taxes, they want the other guy to pay

    2. Government will never eliminate human suffering or want
    Corallary: Entitlements are never shackled to economic reality for that would be 'unfair' and a union mentality takes over

    3. Incentives do in fact matter, producers have a breaking point

    4. In spite of that, liberals will never abandon their religion since it feeds their sense of security.

    This cycle will repeat as long as people exist. Next step- some form of tyranny. Freedom is on its way out. Nice try founding fathers, you were right about the weakness of democracy.

    Canada and sweden had to let the conservative grown-ups take over and rescue them in the early 90's. For multiple reasons that will not happen in the USA or most of the rest of Europe. Demographics alone will kill us.

    Federal + State + Local spending now equals 39% GDP. That's Sweden like, and that fact is hidden by the enormous state and local public sector.

    Pensions+ Health Care + Welfare = 18% GDP


    They win..... see you in hell
  2. Mav88


    oh and if you give me the plate of shit about marginal tax rates in the 50's, keep this in mind also about 1950:

    Federal + State + local government = 24% GDP

    Pensions + Health Care + Welfare = 3.3% GDP

    I say then yes, bring back the 50's. Imagine that, we all look back at one of America's golden ages yet social welfare was about 1/6 as large as a percentage of GDP.

    Was america mean then? was it undesireable?

    Liberalism = ruin and that's the reality
  3. Mav88


    your usual random monkey at a keyboard stuff

    thanks cornelius, but I'd rather you go play with your digital watch, the rest of us would like to do grown up stuff
  4. You know that you've struck a chord with a liberal when they don't deny or, even address the numbers, but move straight to "stupid" and "deranged".

    We have to remember that we're dealing with "religious" zealots...
  5. Mav88


    whenever congressional liberals are presented with the numerical reality all you hear is "food out of children's mouths", "old people on the street', "mean spirited Nazi" blah blah

    ... also why we have no escape, they are unable or unwilling to grasp the situation with any sort of clarity or rational perspective, and they have the votes of millions of others. It's a real lesson in human politics, futurecurrents is our very own lab monkey.
  6. good reference :cool:
  7. "There are fundamental reasons for this, primary among them is liberal economic 'fairness' is really about envy, hate, and greed and not about maximal material prosperity for the most people. "

    ^This is just plain nuts. Anyone who says such a thing or agrees with it, which is most of the right-wing nut-jobs here, is deranged. Possibly mentally retarded, or deluded or chemically unbalanced. It goes beyond merely being wrong.

    The fact that this is a basis of the right-wing philosophy here just proves how whacked you guys are. You really can't be taken seriously after saying something like this. And you're so certain of it. It's actually kind of amusing.
  8. pspr


    Can I shoot him full of drugs and see what happens?

    Oh, wait....to late.
  9. Mav88


    First of all I never claimed to represent the entire 'right wing' with regard to my explaination, it is entirely my own. What I do claim is that fiscal conservatives in general offer the only sane path forward - cuts to government services.

    You claim it is nuts but offer no explaination why, a purely emotional reaction that typifies the religious mind. It is as if I made a Mohammed cartoon.

    It is quite logical if given a minute of thought, maybe about 58 seconds too much?
  10. Imo, SOP of the mafia.

    Classic "bustout"

    "a confidence scheme in which an established business is taken over, a large stock of merchandise is purchased on credit and quickly sold, and the business is then abandoned or bankruptcy is declared"

    It's not a stretch to find this everywhere in gov't.

    A recent example is OTB in NY. OTB made money, it became patronage jobs mill, then kaput, the city had to subsidize the operation.
    #10     Nov 28, 2012