Why does liberalism-socialism fail?

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

  1. Mav88

    Mav88

    Direct takeover of the economy never ends well. The mob takeover is more old school. Modern lefties just want your profits, after all why bother with the cow when all you want is the milk.


    Certainly there is a large element of the left that would love nothing more than to nationalize everything. Greed and hate are the primary motivations.
     
    #11     Nov 28, 2012
  2. There you go again. There is no rational thought here. Typical of the rabid right.
     
    #12     Nov 28, 2012
  3. Mav88---Sweden like.

    Last I checked, Sweden was one of the most homogeneous countries on this planet.

    Please explain their rampant liberalism...thanks.
     
    #13     Nov 28, 2012
  4. Mav88

    Mav88

    The size of our government is Sweden-like, I did not say that the population is.

    The steaming pile of shit known as diversity is a consequence of liberalism in a country with a split racial makeup, it is not a pre-condition for liberalism. Europeans have rejected multiculturalism as a workable doctrine, probably because it threatrens their welfare state. We will not because of a much larger racial minority and the inability of blacks to compete on a level field. Sweden is however busy creating diversity hell with its muslims.

    back to the original question, why did Sweden destroy themselves with modern liberalism? They were right next door to the massive failure of marxism, so why did they feel it necessary to harmfully adjust a highly successful free enterprise economy?

    The leaders of the left, the ones I am talking about specifically here, created the so called third way social democracy. The producers still owned the production but this time the government just took the profits instead of the entire enterprise. The word around Sweden from 1970 to 1980 was egalatarianism and flat incomes. People on disability made as much as engineers, and profits were a dirty word. It was the old dream of Marxian government paradise that would lead all to the promised land. Then came the collapse and it was either fall into the abyss or make conservative reforms. These days Sweden is moving to the right as we move to the left. We will most likely keep going off the cliff, only a small homogeneous exporting nation can make the kind of U turn Sweden did. Here such things would be racist.

    Empathy, sympathy, envy, greed, hate, and the need to feel that the world is conforming to your expectations - or a sense of fairness and order. The original idea of egalitarian outcomes derives from a mixture of the above depending on exactly what kind of redistributionist you are. Union types are different than university types etc. and again right here I am just talking about the elites since they set the national agenda (although unions get a close second). The better angels would be empathy and sympathy, but they are not the primary movers. Real empathy and sympathy means a person would normally give all they have first before demanding others chip in, there is no evidence that elite liberals impoverish themselves first for charitable causes. No, they typically demand that others must ‘do something’ and get some vicarious sense of satisfaction, then Obama says ‘we did that’. When the delusion proves unreachable then it turns to hatred towards those they see as in their way. When wealthy people for instance say that they are already paying their fair share, then the hissing-Hillary-fangs and all the mean spirited clichés come out. I reject egalitarian outcomes on moral grounds, and that really chaps their ass since it is a direct offense to their religion. Union types, and welfare recipients are a bit different. A greedy sense of entitlement and class envy drive the bus there.

    If that’s why it starts, then why does it fail? Since the agenda is emotional and not a scheme for material prosperity, you should not expect anything else. There is no economic multiplier when paying for someone else to lie in a nursing home bed, or paying someone else's rent, especially given the staggering government overhead rates. I get absolutely nothing out of knowing I help pay someone's nursing home care, in fact I think they are hell holes and I would rather die. You can’t build an economy around equal outcomes because unequal inputs and unequal wants are unavoidable, and outcomes themselves are subjective. Most of us are probably like me, I would rather have the money now to enjoy my life with, yet the liberals make us buy nursing homes....
     
    #14     Nov 28, 2012
  5. Ricter

    Ricter

    By what measure?
     
    #15     Nov 28, 2012
  6. Mav88

    Mav88

    by the size of government (39% GDP). In spite of your constant harping for more government you fail to understand we are already extremely socialist. The problem with people like you is that you want to keep doubling down on failure.

    http://www.economics21.org/commentary/us-and-europe-governments-equal-size

     
    #16     Nov 29, 2012
  7. Liberalism sounds exactly like Fascism only with a deceptively prettier name.

    Hitler stated, "The attitude of the State towards capital would be comparatively simple and clear. Its only object would be to make sure that capital remained subservient to the State."

    Hitler denounced capital gains as “effortless income", hence capital gains rate was 100pc on capital that had increased over 172,000 marks.

    Hitler Munich Speech of April 12, 1922, "We are not fighting Jewish or Christian capitalism, we are fighting every capitalism: we are making the people completely free."

    The taxism of fascism will free us from our capital.
     
    #17     Nov 29, 2012
  8. Mav88

    Mav88

    the parallels are very clear. liberals hate it, but it is quite clearly true.

    how about this one- some of hitler's early support came from university students. sound familiar?

    The need for order and control. For some it is god, for others it is government.

    Hitler had a vision of order, so does Obama and the liberal elite. They are not that far apart.
     
    #18     Nov 29, 2012
  9. Mav88

    Mav88

    http://www.economics21.org/commenta...ents-equal-size


    Hey Ricter, just making sure you get the memo.
     
    #19     Nov 29, 2012
  10. Ricter

    Ricter

    #20     Nov 29, 2012