Socialsim built the middle class in America

[Tamas]

If your housing is controlled by the state, and your employment is controlled by the state (like it was the case in the eastern bloc), then YOU are controlled by the state, because if the state wants to destroy your life, they can. Happened to a lot of opposition figures in Hungary for example.

Obviously there are all kinds of degrees of mid-ways between that and full-fledged laisez faire, but I do believe the basic principle is there.

Just like living in a society is a compromise between personal freedom and safety. It is a well worth compromise to a (considerably big) degree, but still the compromise is there.

[Ideologue]

If my employment is controlled by a law firm instead, they can't destroy my life?

[grumbler]

If my employment is controlled by a law firm instead, they can't destroy my life?

If your employment really were controlled by a law firm, that would be slavery.  Slavery is illegal.

C'mon, man.  You are better than silly shit like this.  Get back on your game!

[Viking]

So, High Taxes = Socialism?

[Zanza]

You guys.... The country you live in and what you believe has not had enough socialism still is the most advanced of the world. All the countries that have had the kind of socialism you desire have failed to have less problems than evilcapitalistUSA (except maybe Scandistan), and the countries that have had more socialism than that have failed utterly.

Yet you cannot stop the "we need more socialism" mantra. Lame.

For proper "more socialism is needed in the US" rhetoric, you obviously need to look at the "inequality-adjusted human development index" and in that, you have fifteen countries ahead of the United States, i.e. "more advanced" and all of them are probably more "socialist". Basically most of Northern and Central Europe plus Australia and Canada. As Japan and New Zealand aren't covered by the index it might be even more ahead of the US.

[Ideologue]

If my employment is controlled by a law firm instead, they can't destroy my life?

If your employment really were controlled by a law firm

Certainly seems to be the case given what happens to my resumes otherwise.

[Tamas]

If my employment is controlled by a law firm instead, they can't destroy my life?

If your employment really were controlled by a law firm

Certainly seems to be the case given what happens to my resumes otherwise.

Ok I will bite. If your law firm fires you, they cannot actually deny your right to be considered to other positions across the job market. Even the state can only limit your options by giving you a criminal record.
Whereas if the state controls the economy across the board, you CAN be denied of employment everywhere except where the state wants to put you in. As I said, this happened to countless educated people in communism. If they talked out of the line, they soon found themselves working at assembly lines.

[grumbler]

For proper "more socialism is needed in the US" rhetoric, you obviously need to look at the "inequality-adjusted human development index" and in that, you have fifteen countries ahead of the United States, i.e. "more advanced" and all of them are probably more "socialist". Basically most of Northern and Central Europe plus Australia and Canada. As Japan and New Zealand aren't covered by the index it might be even more ahead of the US.

So "more socialist" = "more advanced" now?  Okay. 

By raw HDI, the US is 3rd in the world (virtually tied for second with Australia).  If you assign an arbitrary 12.4% loss to that actual figure, the US drops to 16th.  This doesn't actually reduce US lifespans; people still live just as long as they did when the US was #3.  It just reduces the score.  Why reduce the score?  Because #3 in the world is obviously wrong, no matter what the facts are.

[Eddie Teach]

Ok I will bite. If your law firm fires you, they cannot actually deny your right to be considered to other positions across the job market. Even the state can only limit your options by giving you a criminal record.
Whereas if the state controls the economy across the board, you CAN be denied of employment everywhere except where the state wants to put you in. As I said, this happened to countless educated people in communism. If they talked out of the line, they soon found themselves working at assembly lines.

If the state wants to control you like that, it can do it whether or not the state is running all the corporations(which is something few here wish for anyway).

[Tamas]

You guys.... The country you live in and what you believe has not had enough socialism still is the most advanced of the world. All the countries that have had the kind of socialism you desire have failed to have less problems than evilcapitalistUSA (except maybe Scandistan), and the countries that have had more socialism than that have failed utterly.

Yet you cannot stop the "we need more socialism" mantra. Lame.

For proper "more socialism is needed in the US" rhetoric, you obviously need to look at the "inequality-adjusted human development index" and in that, you have fifteen countries ahead of the United States, i.e. "more advanced" and all of them are probably more "socialist". Basically most of Northern and Central Europe plus Australia and Canada. As Japan and New Zealand aren't covered by the index it might be even more ahead of the US.

I would need to read up on the inequality indexes because I don't really know much about how they calculated.

But I guess it must be true that it is better to be dirt poor in a welfare state than in a non-welfare one. Unfortunately, the number of content poor people is not an indicator of a country's general nicety when it comes to advances and opportunity for individuals.
I mean, surely there must be a reason why almost all innovative big shot companies are in the US, for example.

[Tamas]

Ok I will bite. If your law firm fires you, they cannot actually deny your right to be considered to other positions across the job market. Even the state can only limit your options by giving you a criminal record.
Whereas if the state controls the economy across the board, you CAN be denied of employment everywhere except where the state wants to put you in. As I said, this happened to countless educated people in communism. If they talked out of the line, they soon found themselves working at assembly lines.

If the state wants to control you like that, it can do it whether or not the state is running all the corporations(which is something few here wish for anyway).

If the state excercises such level of control than it does control the economy though, right?

And we are really debating levels of state involvement I think. I always find it funny that the US is portrayed as free market haven when the single biggest thing ever moving stock markets are the Fed decisions.

[grumbler]

And we are really debating levels of state involvement I think. I always find it funny that the US is portrayed as free market haven when the single biggest thing ever moving stock markets are the Fed decisions.

Are you quite sure that this is true?  What Fed decision was made between 2011 and 2013 that caused stocks to rise 50%, and why did they change that decision in 2014?

[Tamas]

And we are really debating levels of state involvement I think. I always find it funny that the US is portrayed as free market haven when the single biggest thing ever moving stock markets are the Fed decisions.

Are you quite sure that this is true?  What Fed decision was made between 2011 and 2013 that caused stocks to rise 50%, and why did they change that decision in 2014?

Is this irony?

[grumbler]

Is this irony?

Nope.  Still wrinkly, like your statement.

[Tamas]

Is this irony?

Nope.  Still wrinkly, like your statement.

I thought you were being ironic/sarcastic about Quantitive Easing. Which have driven at least a good portion of that growth and its cancellation has been the scare-talk of the year.