"Reports of my death have been greatly exaggerated" - The Socialism Thread

[PaloAltoCougar]

The abhorrence of socialism is in my DNA, or was at least beaten into me throughout my childhood, and I don't see that changing. But are we really talking about socialism when discussing Bernie? I thought socialism required public ownership of all of the means of production, which is a bit more than what Bernie is calling for. is the concern that his proposals are simply steps toward his end game of true socialism? And if one rejects his proposals, should one also support the rollback of other social programs (e.g., Social Security, Medicare, K-12 education)? At what point does a useful government program move into the socialism danger zone? Please keep your answers to 25 words or less, unless you're not Donald Trump.

[Eddie]

Apparently there are some who need convincing. Bernie took what, 100% of Utah votes? Cardiac's assessment is that even the Utah democrats would prefer a socialist to a woman. Clearly they Republicans would prefer an aspiring dictator likeTrump to a woman.

Man, I hate agreeing with SU but I live here. Despite your absence from the area for quite some time SU, your assessment is still accurate...and embarrassing.

It always bugs me when statements like this get thrown out there.

Eight years ago, it was all about how Utah would never elect a Black man because we are racist. (Sure...it had NOTHING to do with Obama or his party.)

Are you really now trying to push that Utah doesn't like Hillary simply because she is a woman? (And, conversely, that it has NOTHING to do with who Hillary is or her party?)

Get the Republicans to put Condoleeza Rice on the ballot and I suspect that you'd get to see Utah vote for both a Woman and a Black person in the same damn election!

I don't think this is about race OR gender.

[SeattleUte]

The abhorrence of socialism is in my DNA, or was at least beaten into me throughout my childhood, and I don't see that changing. But are we really talking about socialism when discussing Bernie? I thought socialism required public ownership of all of the means of production, which is a bit more than what Bernie is calling for. is the concern that his proposals are simply steps toward his end game of true socialism? And if one rejects his proposals, should one also support the rollback of other social programs (e.g., Social Security, Medicare, K-12 education)? At what point does a useful government program move into the socialism danger zone? Please keep your answers to 25 words or less, unless you're not Donald Trump.

I'm not stopping at 25 words.

I'm not your grandpa's socialism hater. But yes, it's a continuum. You don't want us to become Canada, trust me.

I understand the importance of certain social programs; I have family who are beneficiaries of them, and someday I will be too. But Bernie's comprehensive world view is infuriating if not disturbing--tariffs, demonizing immigrants, pandering to lazy entitled Millennials, blaming everybody's ennui on Wall Street and Mexican immigrants. He's pulled off the difficult feat of attracting both the insular and elitist liberals who think that progressivism is all about bemoaning climate change and avoiding genetically engineered foods and reflexively hating corporations (including those that produce vaccines and especially Amazon even though it may be in your own town stuffing goodies in your mouth)--clueless that it would be the poor especially in the most downtrodden countries that their ideas would most injure if put into practice--and the angry jobless white working class who actually are repulsive to the other branch of his constituency. Yes, now that Mormonism is effectively irrelevant, I've got my sight on a new kind of more dangerous religion. What's disturbing is the dogmatic outlook that calling yourself a socialist betrays.

[Topper]

The abhorrence of socialism is in my DNA, or was at least beaten into me throughout my childhood, and I don't see that changing. But are we really talking about socialism when discussing Bernie? I thought socialism required public ownership of all of the means of production, which is a bit more than what Bernie is calling for. is the concern that his proposals are simply steps toward his end game of true socialism? And if one rejects his proposals, should one also support the rollback of other social programs (e.g., Social Security, Medicare, K-12 education)? At what point does a useful government program move into the socialism danger zone? Please keep your answers to 25 words or less, unless you're not Donald Trump.

It is quite a different beast to argue in favor of rollback of existing social net programs as opposed to massive expansion of these programs. To be a conservative means to avoid social disruption. Although the Social Security program is not the best idea, millions now rely upon it. Expanding it is not a good idea.

Socialism has degrees and to the extent a society is economically successful enough, it might afford them for a while, but eventually their cost will cause negative effects.

If you monitor the western socialist adventures, most of them were implemented soon after WWII in nations that had almost full employment with previously dynamic capitalist economies. It was a burden. However, look to any economy that started with socialism and you won't find a vibrant economy. Example, look to Venezuela or Cuba. Only the capitalist elements provide success; the socialist element degrade life overall and the economy overall.

[imanihonjin]

I'm not stopping at 25 words.

We all now know that SU is not Donald Trump.

[Jeff Lebowski]

It always bugs me when statements like this get thrown out there.

Eight years ago, it was all about how Utah would never elect a Black man because we are racist. (Sure...it had NOTHING to do with Obama or his party.)

Are you really now trying to push that Utah doesn't like Hillary simply because she is a woman? (And, conversely, that it has NOTHING to do with who Hillary is or her party?)

Exactly. SU is peeved that Utah dumped Trump so he is making up crap in an attempt to save face in his lifelong campaign to discredit Utah/Mormons.

SU is pretending that the only distinguishing feature of Bernie is that he is a socialist while also ignoring that Hillary has socialist tendencies. He is also directly implying that the only distinguishing feature of Hillary is that she is woman, a notion that that is extremely sexist.

Get the Republicans to put Condoleeza Rice on the ballot and I suspect that you'd get to see Utah vote for both a Woman and a Black person in the same damn election!

I don't think this is about race OR gender.

That already happened. Mia Love. Yet another fact overlooked by SU.

[Topper]

Exactly. SU is peeved that Utah dumped Trump so he is making up crap in an attempt to save face in his lifelong campaign to discredit Utah/Mormons.

SU is pretending that the only distinguishing feature of Bernie is that he is a socialist while also ignoring that Hillary has socialist tendencies. He is also directly implying that the only distinguishing feature of Hillary is that she is woman, a notion that that is extremely sexist.



That already happened. Mia Love. Yet another fact overlooked by SU.

Utah has distinct voting tendencies, but those tendencies don't seem to be tied to misogyny or racism. This election is trying the faith of the elected, the very elite.

[frank ryan]

Utah has distinct voting tendencies, but those tendencies don't seem to be tied to misogyny or racism. This election is trying the faith of the elected, the very elite.

I agree the GOP party boss is a black guy. I can't stand him. Al Jackson, Frank's dad, served in the state senate, also black. I don't think Utah voters are more racist than voter in the Pacific Northwest.

[LA Ute]

[SeattleUte]

This is awesome for Seattle.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/14/n...q2-queens.html

I wonder why the Washington Post never stirred up opposition in Northern Virginia? Makes no sense.

[Omaha 680]

This is awesome for Seattle.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/14/n...q2-queens.html

I wonder why the Washington Post never stirred up opposition in Northern Virginia? Makes no sense.

You must be confused. AOC and the NYC city council are claiming victory.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

[SeattleUte]

You must be confused. AOC and the NYC city council are claiming victory.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

Which is why I put this in the socialism thread. Their radicalism is too much even for the New York Times (which bears a lot of responsibity for this happening) and Governor Cuomo.

Socialism isn’t working in China either. https://www.wsj.com/articles/why-chi..._copyURL_share

[frank ryan]

Which is why I put this in the socialism thread. Their radicalism is too much even for the New York Times (which bears a lot of responsibity for this happening) and Governor Cuomo.

Socialism isn’t working in China either. https://www.wsj.com/articles/why-chi..._copyURL_share

China has pretty much zero social programs and does not "free healthcare." It's a capitalist totalitarian state run by the Communist Party.

Weird statement on the NY Times.

[SeattleUte]

Weird statement on the NY Times.

It's not weird. The NY Times has repeatedly trashed Amazon as bad for Seattle and then as not good for New York--on its front pages--even since long before the HQ2 thing. Then when Amazon pulled the plug, the NY Times editorial board bawled that local politicians had driven Amazon away because of narrow special interests and this was a bad thing. Too bad, NY Times. You screwed up.

[Walter Sobchak]

Embedded Tweet

More Amazon $$$ for the Eastside!


(EDIT: added link to Seattle Times story.)