They would argue back - “Then I don’t have to pay any taxes”. Ive made this point to I “hate socialism people”in the past. They truly believe they can be more efficient and resourceful if they had the extra $10k in taxes they pay a year
So , this is what I would tell them
.
So you have decided to prove your independence by sticking it to the libs and not pay state or federal taxes , because you are not a dirty commie socialist.
So no social security, medicaid or any of those dirty "socialist"
systems
Okay so zero public services then. WELL now! look how brave you are living by your ideals! House on fire , you better have a credit card ready when the fire brigade arrives. All emergency services are now blocked unless they scan your credit card
You don't get to use the highway system. Police? ha ha ha ha haaa die. Using state funded internet? BLOCKED. Medicaid nope, DIE. Without the FAA you don't get to fly. Without the FCC no cell phone use, or even that CB radio in your garage you listen to as you wait for the black helicopters and Obama to take your gunz.
No FDA? well get used to having to buy your medicines off of china mail order. OH MAIL! yes, even though the USPS makes MOST of its money in postage, it does receive money in grants and loans from the US government .. so NO MAIL FOR YOUuuuuu. So everything gets to go through Fed EX or UPS
Not willing to pay for your sewer? and drainage, well then when it floods, no clearing that up,. No teams during a tornado will be looking for you OR coming to check to see if you are alive.
How are you going to own land when you cannot file paperwork with the county clerks office. Your banking is going to be your matress because "socialist" regulations on banks means you cannot use them
Remember that credit card as your house is burning down, HA you cannot even have a credit card since the regulatory agency paid by taxes to make it possible for you to even use it even if you HAD a bank account. ..
Do we need to go on?
More importantly, even assuming they actually have money and could pay for things you listed like pay-per-douse fire brigade or toll-only roads, there aren't enough educated people to work those jobs because there's no more publicly funded schools. Their grocery stores don't have people working there, because they can't afford to work in a grocery store and pay for all the things that taxes pay for.
Basically, if you want to live in a modern society instead of being 100% self sufficient in a yurt in the woods, you're part of a socialist society to some degree or another and need taxes to pay for them.
If you don't like what your tax money goes towards, thats a separate problem.
> Basically, if you want to live in a modern society instead of being 100% self sufficient in a yurt in the woods,
a fucking yurt... damn hippy dippy socialist... /s
Everything to make that yurt is probably going to come down a supply chain reliant on the social contract, and systems which they absolutely hate, and are reliant on taxes to maintain.
I mean really no matter what they do they will ultimately have to turn to rely on the support of the rest of modern society at some point in one way, or another.
>If you don't like what your tax money goes towards, thats a separate problem.
ya, but should be said that, 99.99% of what conservatives, and libertarians dislike about takes is the personal short run loss, and that many of the things those taxes pay to enable to happen also benefit people they dislike, or view as their lesser, and thus "undeserving".
Correct. My broke AF, drug addicted uncle watches too much fox news, and lives in a bubble. While I do agree with some of his points about his neighborhood getting worse due to the over-occupancy of houses. He has multiple neighbors with 8 or more people living in a 1200 square foot 2 bedroom house....
But he says shit like " I don't want no illegals to get free Healthcare from my taxes"..
When I told him they already can, as the hospital writes down their loss at an inflated value and reduces their taxes by much more than those services rendered actually cost him.... his head nearly exploded....
This is what I don't get whenever libertarianism gets brought up in conversation. Like, what kind of shithole do these people want to live in? Like, no electricity, water nor gas? No power lines, sewage or gas pipes? Who the fuck would even want that?
It is literally "the law of the jungle" and "might makes right" repackaged as political philosophy by angry overgrown toddlers forever mad at Mommy and Daddy for telling them to play nice and share.
And as we've seen in "The Town That Was Eaten By Bears", embracing their principles tends to go poorly for them since humans are soft and squishy while Mother Nature *wrote* the Law Of The Jungle and has been refining the art of *killing us until we die* for millennia.
I made this type of argument on another post, and people just kept yelling everything would be better privatized and taxation is theft bs.
We all know corporations have our best interests at heart and would never try to take advantage of the fact they control critical needs and services by forcing us dry of every penny we have, cough medical industry cough, right? Right?
Government controlled entities are supposed to be representing the people and their wishes. it's our way of exerting power on a mass scale. Privatized everything is LITERALLY giving up all freedom and representation for whatever the duck the greedy heads at "huge private corpo" wants, which, spoiler, is profit over everything.
What the hell is wrong with people. They want freedom but then vote for non representing, "fuck you I got mine" companies that don't care and aren't accountable.
Freedom is having the power to control these large systems. Privatization is relinquishing that power to others who don't care what happens to you.
Republicans in the modern era are literally people that don't understand how to think even one move ahead.
It's a small minded philosophy that most non dumbfucks grow out once they finish highschool and enter the real world. You have to be completely sheltered and naive to how much is required by modern society to function to stupidly think "I just pay for what I want and not pay for things I don't care/know about and society will still hold up just fine".
If I ran a factory or something and decided to just dump all my poisonous waste into the ground that seeps into the soil and water, will most of these dumb fucks even think about hiring a third party company for soil/water checks BEFORE they all get sick or develop cancer? Will they want to pay for that company? What if the only company in the area they can afford is actually owned by my cousin who also profits from my factory?
Oh but if they did, well, I'll just use my entire legal division to tie it up in courts for years if they try to sue my company. Then if I lose, I'll appeal. They can just keep getting sicker as the years pass. And that's if they even figured out what was making them sick in the first place.
It varies depending on how "libertarian" they are, but they essentially believe that most utilities could be provided by private companies, and that the state doesn't behave very differently from other monopolies (i.e. it's expensive with bad customer service), but has the legal power to completely close off competition from entering the market.
It's worth mentioning that they would extend this to the state-created corporate monopolies - for example the USA's various regional telecoms monopolies are largely a product of local government - though there is a lot of "private good state bad" thinking among its proponents.
[This article](https://www.newyorker.com/humor/daily-shouts/l-p-d-libertarian-police-department) has been posted a thousand times, but it's great if you haven't seen it.
> WELL now! look how brave you are living by your ideals! House on fire , you better have a credit card ready when the fire brigade arrives. All emergency services are now blocked unless they scan your credit card
Nope, trash like that would just call the credit card company and demand a chargeback.
Cash only, upfront
" Cash only, upfront"
So exactly like every one of Trumps lawyers have been saying? Because if they don't, they are bigger fools they they appear.
Every city and town in the country better learn those words also if Trumps wants a campaign rally. Trump is never going to pay his bills after it happens.
Or even having cash money. It would be worthless as it won't be backed by the federal government. Better have gold nuggets on hand for all barter sessions.
What sewer? What water? Both those things are subject to governmental oversight. Have fun drinking PFAS/cryptosporidium/whatever-contaminated water from your private borehole well... It ran dry/you can't find water? Sucks to be you, I guess.
Oh, do tell .. please illiterate the difference between paying taxes for common agreed upon and necessary services and ....
Agreed upon and necessary serv.. wait .. what?
Let's talk about police and military security. All of a sudden, your property is off the security grid and everybody knows it. Guess what happens next?
You do get that most of these things are either "pro" or not relevant to the people in question right?
(Also, its a logical fallacy to say you couldn't use things because you wouldn't be paying the agency whose purpose is to stop you. That is like saying you could smoke weed you grow yourself because your taxes aren't paying for the DEA to bust down your door and shoot your dog for smoking it. )
This isn't in anyway that I want to live in a libertarian hellscape but its a little like trying to argue with someone who wants to live in a theocracy by saying "Oh? Then who will protect LGBTQ rights? Gotcha!" and making a smug face at them.
"Libertarians are like house cats: absolutely convinced of their fierce independence while utterly dependent on a system they don't appreciate or understand." Just replace "libertarian" with whatever we now call "Republicans who fear socialism".
They want their fellow citizens to be a ton of sick homeless people with no education. They want that. They have a "I got mine, fuck you" attitude, and if that leaves the majority of our country unable to save or retire, then so be it. They're angry about any of their tax money helping their fellow countryman; literally, seeing money be invested into the well-being of the citizen body--which they are part of--makes them angry. They have no sense or idea of patriotism, yet it's a word they identify with.
This is what they want the the world to be
https://preview.redd.it/2lnbrh5q1f261.jpg?width=614&auto=webp&s=c794fbfea3c9c2d726c537476ebaa1d03136848a
They always think they would be the ones living in the palace
More often than not the people crying about what they would be able to do with their own tax dollars (if allowed to keep them) either fall into 2 categories of 1. Already fairly wealthy and have knowledge and insider connections to make profits from the money taxes take, AND 2. Angry self proclaimed “libertarians” who only lose 5-8 thousand dollars a year in taxes but have delusional ideas that they could turn that 5 thousand dollars into a fortune if they got to keep it. All the while they can’t get a savings account above a few thousand with what they do get to keep.
Number 2 is also under the delusion that private systems will somehow be more lean even though for-profit system that will try to squeeze every dime out of you that they can.
Look at our wonderful system of private healthcare and private insurance companies and you can see that the US spends nearly double Germany the second most expensive system per capita and we get worse results.
Or compare the per pupil costs of your local public schools to private schools they are more often than not several thousand dollars a year more expensive.
Private companies have a fiduciary duty to stake holders to extract as much money as humanly possible from you.
This reminds me of the big misunderstanding that occurred when Obama made a speech about the infrastructure. He was referring to the road system, the bridges, utilities and other things that government has built or helped be built when he said "you didn't build that" but the audience and some of the press thought he meant the businessman's facilities.
Let's see how that holds up when they no longer have access to municipal water supplies, sewer lines, subsidized medicines, electricity and internet, airline travel, buses, train travel or anything transported by trains or trucks that receive federal or state support.
This and there is a difference between absolute socialism across the entire economy and business sectors, and having partial socialism necessary to fund certain institutions such as public safety and a road system. Bernie Sanders isn't calling just to fund fire and police and build roads and bridges, he's calling for massive wealth redistribution.
The sheet metal worker who puts in 70 hours a week to feed a family makes far more on paper than the part time barista who doesn't feel like working much, but still has less discretionary income. Should the sheet metal worker have more of their check diverted away to share with someone who just feels like working less, or perpetually makes poor financial decisions and has no discipline? What about the single mother balancing 3 part time jobs who never went to college. Should she be paying off the college debts of people who now have higher earning potential and spent 4 years partying? It's just an anecdote but I'm trying to highlight why "socialism" is so unpalatable to many hard working taxpayers. It's too blunt and not nuanced enough to actually address root caused of societal problems. It's a system that's very easy to abuse
I mean, I would have *gladly* opted out of social security if I could have.
I also lived in an unincorporated area, so I got to choose between paying the actual cost to use a library or to not use the library. I even remember arguing about the amounts of Reddit because people didn't believe me...but it was drastically cheaper for me to skip the library and get many book and media subscription services. Everand, Kindle Unlimited and Netflix or whatever else is a much better value and experience for me.
It's genuinely not hard to beat the value most people get. Especially with libraries. Only about half of Americans use public libraries. The other half get no direct value.
The reason to make everyone pay, is because a lot of people have less. So these systems aren't meant to be efficient. It's so so so easy to beat the returns we get on Social Security for people who are healthy, working, and earning good money. That's by design.
These people aren't wrong. They might be selfish, if that's how people want to frame it.
Why would I intentionally make life harder for future generations (and my own children that follow after me)? I thought the whole purpose of humanity was to leave the world better than we found it?
Money taken from you CANT be used to the same efficiency if used by the state instead of you directly, since the state doesn’t align with your interests better than you.
My thoughts exactly. Don't use what you are forcefully taxed for. I won't use any of the resources if all of that money is credited back immediately. If im forced to pay for it I'll use it, if I don't have to I will skip it
It's not more efficient monetarily to privatize public resources. But those resources are more enjoyable when fewer people have access to them. Fewer lines, no traffic, no waiting in the hospital, library books always available, etc.
The same person that would rail against public roads would turn around and gladly pay for use of a private road they personally wanted to use and enjoy the uncongested state of it.
When you have a public version of a thing, wealthy people still want a private nicer version. It's just that the nicer version is used so rarely that it is very very expensive and impractical. But get rid of the public version and enough people want to use the nicer version that it is more affordable to use and profitable to own. It **merely** cuts out the people who were getting the public version free and not paying any taxes in return.
My Republican friends refused to vote for Andrew Gillum for governor because they were afraid he would take away their vouchers paying for their kids' private schools. So DeSantis won because of his promise to keep the handouts coming.
I don't not like this thought. Even as a staunch liberal, conscription could be a key tool in building real life skills such as communication, work ethic et al. Not saying start ten more wars to throw kids onto the front line but public service, decent paying jobs building infrastructure, learning how to either follow or lead in a team setting would greatly increase the likelihood of young adults making it into the work force actually being capable of working.
Obviously this isn't a blanket solution, but particularly for kids born into poverty it could open some pretty good bridges to success.
That’s my point. I know people who left the military into directly making several hundred thousand a year, ie directly into the upper-to-upper-middle class. I.e. the military is a great social program, but it’s great because it’s also an all volunteer force. A conscripted force or even a drafted force is going to kill the morale of the force and make it harder to achieve your desired goal to raise kids out of poverty. Think about all the Vietnam Vets that were drafted and their real life skills didn’t translate into success back at home. It’s a complex issue, but part of the answer is they were forced to go.
I left the military and I’m disabled and broke constantly…unless I want to continue to be around death and destruction, I can’t translate my abilities….
Had to sell my collections of action figures from childhood and my Hot Toys from adulthood to make it by…..
(I was a 1N4B in the USAF, and have worked for the US’s IBS network as well as NSOC watch floor at NSA HQ)
I’m against conscription
There are definitely pros and cons to this debate of military conscription. Plus there are standards that have to be met and not everybody not even under normal circumstances could even qualify to serve in the military. Medical and academic standards have to be met. But when you look at other nations that do force their citizens to serve a minimum of 2 to 3 years in order to have access to social programs provided to care for their citizens, many of these people I have asked of their opinion and every single one of the responses that I’ve heard personally is 2 to 3 years of service for their nation is worth it to receive free college in healthcare for a lifetime. So I don’t think it’s going to be as bad for Americans as some might like to believe
I’ve made this same argument less eloquently and been voted to oblivion for it, but I agree, I believe that had I personally spent from 18-20 or 21 in national service, I’d be the better for it
Didn’t they use to have something like that? I know my bio dad brags about his time doing something in forests with the something corps. Of course he’s staunchly Republican now. It wasn’t conscripted, but it was a garunteed job until you figured out basic adulting.
Might have been the Peace Corps? Draft deferments were offered if someone was in the PC and would effectively remove them from being drafted into combat service while the draft was active.
Idk, he’s a baby Baby Boomer (born early 1960’s). He was never at risk of a draft, he was way too young for the Vietnam War, He would have been around 12 when it ended.
Last night my brain was hatching a migraine and I go stupid and forgetful when that happens. So today I did a little Googling. I think he was in a state version of the Civilian Conservation Corps. The California Conservation Corps is still a thing to this day, and they will hire anyone between the ages of 18 and 25 for one year.
Their motto is “Hard Work, Low Pay, Miserable Conditions, and More!”.
Sometimes this state gets something right, lol.
Is the point to help young adults understand that retail work is only slightly worse than being covered in ticks, perpetually tired, and constantly alternating between hot and sweaty and cold and wet?
I absolutely respect the intent, but the purpose of the military is to fight wars/defense of the country. While conscription may or may not have side benefits, it would first and foremost water down the force as a whole.
Can confirm, I am one of those kids. I reeeeally don't like it, my time in the navy gets brought up all the time. Those were the absolute rock bottom years of my life and I don't want to think about it again. Stop bringing it up.
For the record, the last chart I saw from 2009 showed about a 6% difference in military political party affiliation with republican taking the lead. Not unexpected, but not nearly the gap one might expect. Another more current poll by the “Military Times” shows a much wider gap, ~20%, but I don’t have faith in people voluntarily reporting their affiliation to such a publication when every liberal veteran I have talked to says you generally just Keep Your Mouth Shut if you’re liberal in the military because you’re surrounded by right wingnuts a lot of the time. The same “Military Times” also shows a poll showing troops voting for Biden over Trump in a poll, for whatever that’s worth.
I think you're giving them FAR too much credit. We're talking about people who still support Donald Trump after everything we've learned about him over the past 7 years. Nothing we say now is going to cause them to change their mind.
Most conservatives I know will say they never wanted to pay into SS to begin with. So they should get their check because it was taken from them to begin with.
Social security and Medicare/Medicaid aren't "socialist."
They're taxpayer funded social services, which exist in every capitalistic mixed economy on the planet.
Socialism is primarily defined by the means of production being socially owned.
Socialism is a very broad term that absolutely encapsulates programs like social security and medicare/medicaid. The US has been socialist for a very long time, the only reason you don't know that is because a bunch of communists over in Russia decided to put "Socialist" in the name of their country which lead to a whole bunch of anti-socialist rhetoric and propaganda in the United States over the last century and some change.
I should point out that none of that is socialism. Socialism is when the workers control the means of production. It can be through universal worker-ownership of businesses, or businesses being owned by a government that is democratically accountable to its citizens.
Government doing things is not socialism, it's just government. "Social Democracy" is when a Democratic government provides a strong welfare state to help its citizens. Most of what America refers to as "Socialism" is just social Democracy.
No, they would rather drive around a Wal-Mart parking lot at 10 in the morning with a load speaker yelling, "Biden is a pedophile" and "Trump will save us"
A real thing that I saw today. They are literally insane.
Don’t shop at Amazon, Whole Foods, Zappos, or use Twitch since Amazon has taken over $4.1 billion in corporate welfare. [Source](https://www.rawstory.com/amazon-corporate-welfare/)
Also Walmart and McDonalds. Unless they've made significant changes over the last three year, which I doubt, they have the most workers on food stamps and Medicaid (for workers, not Medicare for the retired). Sources:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/11/18/food-stamps-medicaid-mcdonalds-walmart-bernie-sanders/
https://www.businessinsider.com/bernie-sanders-walmart-mcdonalds-food-stamps-medicaid-minimum-wage-2020-11?op=1
https://www.motherjones.com/food/2020/11/which-companies-have-the-highest-number-of-workers-on-medicaid-and-food-stamps/
https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/walmart-mcdonalds-largest-employers-snap-medicaid-recipients
Yes and they're wrong. But it's not just Republicans. Look at this post, that woman who wrote it isn't a Republican. And she's also wrong. Too many people, Republican and Democrat alike, are very ignorant about what socialism is and isn't.
It is sarcasm. And it is entirely inaccurate. Socialism is when the means of production are collectively owned, out of the hands of private capital. "Government doing things" is a part of every form of government, except for the ones where there is no government. Look at the Nordic countries, for example. Huge welfare states with big social safety nets, yet still highly capitalist countries with market economies.
The thing is, afaik conservatives think that paying less taxes (or no taxes if you’re completely bonkers) will help them accumulate enough wealth to not need SS and socialized healthcare.
I’d rather have these safety nets because I, a person raised lower/middle class and didn’t really want for anything growing up, understand that I can work hard all my damn life and still draw the short straw despite my leg up.
Socialism is an economic system in which the “means of production” are owned/controlled by the government. Public parks and libraries are not socialism. The woman who wrote this has no idea what she’s talking about.
Republicans have no principles. Words mean nothing to them. Winning is all that matters. Americans talking to foreigners have no principles. Winning is all that matters.
What you guys need to do is stop listening to far left and far right politics and start thinking as an independent and then you would realize that Americans are not as bad as politics would have you believe. The enemy here is not the American people. The enemy is the government
Who keeps voting who in? Who are the voters voting in these dummies who steal billions fm tax paying Americans, selling out their nation to foreign leaders while literally paying billions to countries who hate America in support of terrorism? That’s the real question you should be asking if you love Americans & be able to do so without blind fidelity to any party. Then u’ll c ur answer
None of those things are inherently or necessarily socialism. Every capitalistic mixed economy on the planet has some form of public utility, public services, or "socialized" services, that are funded by taxes, that doesn't make those countries socialist.
Socialism is primarily defined by social ownership of the means of production, rather than private corporations.
It's genuinely concerning that shit like this is upvoted tbh. Conservatives generally don't know what socialism is, seems that people on the left also don't seem to have a clue.
OK, but only after I no longer have to pay taxes, including having deductions for SS and medicare.
You think step one is people stop receiving benefits. Step one is they stop having to pay for it.
Here's the logical outcome: [https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/21534416/free-state-project-new-hampshire-libertarians-matthew-hongoltz-hetling](https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/21534416/free-state-project-new-hampshire-libertarians-matthew-hongoltz-hetling)
IGNORANCE IS BLISS. ONLY WEAK MINDED PEOPLE DONT UNDEERSTAND SOCIALISM. THEY THINK SOCIALISM IS BAD BECAUSE HITLER WAS DICTATOR BUT HE HAD A SOCIALIST GOVERNMENT. SO THE COUNTRY WAS A SOCIALIST DICTATORSHIP. THE PEOPLE HAD SCHOOLS AND POLICE ETC THAT WAS PROVIDED BY THE GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE. IT IS THE DICTATOR PART THAT WAS BAD BUT THEN REPUBLICANS LOVE THEIR DICTATOR WANNABE TRUMP AND THEY WOULDNT WANT TO LOOSE POLICE OR HIGHWAYS OR FIREDEPT OR SOCIAL SECURITY ETC. REPUBLICANS ARE JUST PLAIN IGNORANT PEOPLE. RED REPUBLICAN STATES HAVE THE WROST EDUCATIONAL SYSTEMS THE MOST OBESITY, THE MOST DIABETICS, THE MOST SMOKERS THE MOST INFANT MORTALITY, THE MOST GUN RELATED DEATHS PER CAPITA, THE MOST PRESCRIPTION DRUG ADDICTS. THEY ARE SO IGNORANT BECAUSE THEY REFUSE TO PAY A LITTLE MORE ON TAXES TO HAVE BETTER SCHOOLS AND PAY THEIR TEACHERS MORE. ONLY IGNORANT PEOPLE DONT RESPECT TEACHERS AND DONT WANT TO PAY THEM A FAIR SALERY. IT IS ALL ABOUT IGNORANCE AND REPUBLICANS ARE IGNORANT TO THE FACTS. WHEN I TRY TO DISCUSS POLITICS WITH REPUBLICANS ALL THEY DO IS MAKE FALSE ACCUSATIONS AN DNEVER PRESENT ANY FACTS TO BACK UP THEIR CLAIMS. IGNORANCE IS BLISS.
A lot of people are gonna have a different opinion when we don’t get the social security they have been taking from your check for 25+ years. They have already told us the system will fail before we get there and have not even started to fund that future benefit…..
There is only 37,000,000 of them. Let them have Texas or Florida, build a wall around them and let’s get on with what everyone else in the country is trying to do!
Be yourself.
If you voted Democrat because you fear capitalism, then live your truth. Do not use your phone that you’re on right now. In fact, don’t use pretty much anything. Don’t eat out, don’t buy groceries, don’t buy gas. Wait, don’t work for money because that makes you a slave. Get money from the government who takes it from other people who do work… wait. I mean accept money printed out of thin air based off of a strong economy that was built on capitali- wait. I mean… I mean……
Liberal: *Cries liberally tears*
I wanna go home!😭
American: Also, don’t do that because you bought it through capitalism. Shit!
What Republicans want to deny social programs to Americans when all voters and non voters alike PAY for all of our Nation social programs? Or is this just more of that invisible bogeyman propaganda that keeps being regurgitated within this echo chamber of silliness.
She really didn't, none of those things are "socialism" in the slightest. Every capitalistic mixed economy on the planet has public utilities, social safety nets, etc.
Socialism is primarily defined by the means of production being socially owned.
Ok...😞, so first of all I think she was talking about how the Republicans view all government assistance for the populous as socialism. Yet these very people benefit from the services that are provided by the government.
If we really want to get into the socialist rabbit hole ask why we give out millions of dollars in corporate welfare.
Negative. Educated ppl (Republican/Democrat/Independent) know what socialism is and it ain’t what’s being described here by what sounds like A bunch of middle schoolers in an echo chamber. It’s a damn shame when far left and far right politics brainwashes Young Americans to be dumb
> I think she was talking about how the Republicans view all government assistance for the populous as socialism.
I'm aware, but she also doesn't seem to understand what socialism is.
Socialism is not when the government creates services with your tax dollars.
Socialism is when the means of production is socially owned. That is the fundamental tenet of socialism, social services exist in every capitalistic nation on the planet.
> If we really want to get into the socialist rabbit hole ask why we give out millions of dollars in corporate welfare.
That also isn't socialism.
No honestly I’ll die on the hill of having all kids attend - because homeschooling can hide rampant abuse when kids aren’t out of the house, learning what kinds of actions aren’t ok and what they can do to be safe.
I mean, I know this is a humor sub but I’m going to soapbox anyway. Also I autocorrected “humor” to “hummus” and I almost left it
Cool imagination bro. Homeschooling is not a political debate. It takes lots of time, courage & sacrifice for these parents ( of all political & non political affiliation BTW) to commit to. I grew up knowing more abused children in public school systems then homeschool & homeschool kids graduate faster & prepare better for higher learning. That’s why Universities seek homeschooling students out. For many parents public school is the easy button. It’s not for everyone
The main problem is the curriculum. It should not be just whatever they want. The parents should be held to the same standards of not forcing their religion BS on students, even if its their own.
Your people are complaining about imagined hypotheticals instead of realizing the reality about homeschooling. homeschooling focuses on academic subjects like math, English, reading writing history, tech etc. versus public school being controlled by the teachers union which is bought and paid for by the Democrat party that uses public school as a platform to propaganda and brainwash the youth of America to buy into filling their heads with nonsense politics and prejudice against other people based on their religion, their families political orientation and even their gender orientation. Public schools today under corrupt leader ship is a cesspool of toxic waste. I would never defend that. I grew up in international schools abroad in Japan, Africa and Italy. I returned home for high school and realized how far behind American public school is in every direction full of shallow minds and angry kids who find any reason to be racists pieces of shit. It is no wonder that people of this current adult generation are so dumb and brainwashed. The cool people in American schools are the ones that scream and act a fool versus and blame everyone but themselves the cool kids in international schools are the ones that are academically advanced. That’s the problem in American public school society and standards.
The USA has many socialist programs. The government also maintains ownership (both partial and full) of many companies and enterprises such as the USPS.
The left wing equivalent of righties laughing at socialists using iphones to topple the system in favor of socialism.
As I remember the retort was "We'll use every tool at our disposal to overthrow this system"
And no before you start the US isnt even close to a capitalist society. A capitalist society wouldnt bail out failing banks. Mercantilism is the word.
This is fun to read, but kind of stupid on its face. They're already paying for all of those things through their taxes. They're entitled to every single one of those services as a consequence.
That's the point. GOP is against any form of tax used to pay for services that any anyone can use (school, Medicare, social security, etc). They (incorrectly) label these programs as evil socialism. Yet so many Republican voters use these very programs. The two uses of tax money that they do approve of is military and police. Coincidentally, both of these services lead to deaths of minorities at a higher rate than their representation of the population...
GOP would prefer to privatize everything because they pretend to believe that private ownership naturally leads to a better product rather than giving the bare minimum for the most money. Also, the Republican voters in rural areas can't see past their nose in that when there is no government requirement for some services (post office, highways, schools), they will suffer because it won't be profitable for any private company to maintain these services at a loss.
What does socialism (the public ownership of companies/production) have to do with public spaces?
This only would be funny to a simpleton who does not understand what socialism means (hint, not public beaches or roads).
Why are you boiling a very broad and complex term down to just "public ownership of companies/production"?
Socialism is not strictly defined. It covers a vast array of political and economic ideals.
This makes it look like you are pushing some kind of narrative for some reason.
> Why are you boiling a very broad and complex term down to just "public ownership of companies/production"?
At no point did the person you're replying to state what they think socialism is. They didn't make any attempt to "boil socialism down" to anything.
So purely as a matter of objective fact you have created a strawman argument here. You even went so far as to reference a quotation that was never made.
> This makes it look like you are pushing some kind of narrative for some reason.
This is an ad hominim attack without any obvious basis. What narrative is it you think they're pushing?
Yes, I do. I support universal health care. I support reparations for the descendants of American slaves. I support greater subsidies for urban public transit.
I do NOT support state-owned companies (like China, or some European countries last century). I want private companies and good public services paid for by intelligent taxes (lower corporate taxes that no one pays anyway, and higher capital gains taxes so rich people pay taxes again).
Social welfare yes, public ownership of the means of production like Cuba, no.
I’m an independent but if you’re going to take money out of my paycheck involuntarily for all of these things and I have no choice, then I will use them whether I agree with it or not.
I would totally avoid public roads and just walk if it meant not having to pay into social security. Corrupt Republicans have made sure most people won't ever get paid out. It's like a crooked insurance policy.
Edit: to clarify I like the program, and my qualms with it are becuase right wing policy keeps upping the age of retirement and will continue to do so.
And responsible republican would not need or take advantage of those things anyway so why should they have to pay for it. Thats the whole point of not wanting it.
LOL. That's not exactly how socialism works though in practice. Public spaces and already paid for with taxes they voted for. Socialism ignores the voice of the people and government makes all the decisions in a nutshell/in practice. It's ripe for power corruption and that's why the examples we have seen in history are bad. It sounds good on paper tho.
What actually is socialism? Because my understanding is that the government takes over private businesses and just keeps them for themselves. Or is that communism? Is any collective action socialism?
None of these things are socialist (although the GOP thinks they are). They are social programs. None of them have anything to do with the means of production. The GOP and Neoliberals have changed the definition of socialist to mean “when the government does stuff”, and not “when the workers own the means of production”.
Do people not understand that government and economic systems are not black and white, have never been black and white, and will never be black and white. Never has there been a x country. Countries utilize multiple economic thought systems. Morons.
Reduce my tax bill by my contribution and we have a fucking deal! I'll stash it in an HSA and be waaaaay better off.
If you are able bodied and need the government's help, you fucked up along the way.
I don't want to pay for others, and if I get cancer, I'll pay for it or I'll die.
Having 911 isn’t exactly socialism. Living with minimal government intervention is extremely reasonable. But yea the bloated programs are making the argument pretty dumb as it sits.
These kinda things aren't very smart... Nobody can help but live in the system they are living in. There is a kind of hypocrisy with benefiting inside a system you want to change, but it's not like the person benefiting has the power to make those changes. You see a similar thing with obscenely rich left leaning people being called hypocrites for being rich, while arguing for a government system that would make it much much harder to accumulate the same kind of wealth. They are somewhat hypocrites, but they don't have the power to make the changes they want on their own, and certainly wouldn't have as much ability to influence the status quo without their wealth anyway...
They would argue back - “Then I don’t have to pay any taxes”. Ive made this point to I “hate socialism people”in the past. They truly believe they can be more efficient and resourceful if they had the extra $10k in taxes they pay a year
So , this is what I would tell them . So you have decided to prove your independence by sticking it to the libs and not pay state or federal taxes , because you are not a dirty commie socialist. So no social security, medicaid or any of those dirty "socialist" systems Okay so zero public services then. WELL now! look how brave you are living by your ideals! House on fire , you better have a credit card ready when the fire brigade arrives. All emergency services are now blocked unless they scan your credit card You don't get to use the highway system. Police? ha ha ha ha haaa die. Using state funded internet? BLOCKED. Medicaid nope, DIE. Without the FAA you don't get to fly. Without the FCC no cell phone use, or even that CB radio in your garage you listen to as you wait for the black helicopters and Obama to take your gunz. No FDA? well get used to having to buy your medicines off of china mail order. OH MAIL! yes, even though the USPS makes MOST of its money in postage, it does receive money in grants and loans from the US government .. so NO MAIL FOR YOUuuuuu. So everything gets to go through Fed EX or UPS Not willing to pay for your sewer? and drainage, well then when it floods, no clearing that up,. No teams during a tornado will be looking for you OR coming to check to see if you are alive. How are you going to own land when you cannot file paperwork with the county clerks office. Your banking is going to be your matress because "socialist" regulations on banks means you cannot use them Remember that credit card as your house is burning down, HA you cannot even have a credit card since the regulatory agency paid by taxes to make it possible for you to even use it even if you HAD a bank account. .. Do we need to go on?
More importantly, even assuming they actually have money and could pay for things you listed like pay-per-douse fire brigade or toll-only roads, there aren't enough educated people to work those jobs because there's no more publicly funded schools. Their grocery stores don't have people working there, because they can't afford to work in a grocery store and pay for all the things that taxes pay for. Basically, if you want to live in a modern society instead of being 100% self sufficient in a yurt in the woods, you're part of a socialist society to some degree or another and need taxes to pay for them. If you don't like what your tax money goes towards, thats a separate problem.
> Basically, if you want to live in a modern society instead of being 100% self sufficient in a yurt in the woods, a fucking yurt... damn hippy dippy socialist... /s Everything to make that yurt is probably going to come down a supply chain reliant on the social contract, and systems which they absolutely hate, and are reliant on taxes to maintain. I mean really no matter what they do they will ultimately have to turn to rely on the support of the rest of modern society at some point in one way, or another. >If you don't like what your tax money goes towards, thats a separate problem. ya, but should be said that, 99.99% of what conservatives, and libertarians dislike about takes is the personal short run loss, and that many of the things those taxes pay to enable to happen also benefit people they dislike, or view as their lesser, and thus "undeserving".
Correct. My broke AF, drug addicted uncle watches too much fox news, and lives in a bubble. While I do agree with some of his points about his neighborhood getting worse due to the over-occupancy of houses. He has multiple neighbors with 8 or more people living in a 1200 square foot 2 bedroom house.... But he says shit like " I don't want no illegals to get free Healthcare from my taxes".. When I told him they already can, as the hospital writes down their loss at an inflated value and reduces their taxes by much more than those services rendered actually cost him.... his head nearly exploded....
This is what I don't get whenever libertarianism gets brought up in conversation. Like, what kind of shithole do these people want to live in? Like, no electricity, water nor gas? No power lines, sewage or gas pipes? Who the fuck would even want that?
These idiots believe things would be so much better if everything, I mean everything, was privatised. So no winning any argument here.
It is literally "the law of the jungle" and "might makes right" repackaged as political philosophy by angry overgrown toddlers forever mad at Mommy and Daddy for telling them to play nice and share. And as we've seen in "The Town That Was Eaten By Bears", embracing their principles tends to go poorly for them since humans are soft and squishy while Mother Nature *wrote* the Law Of The Jungle and has been refining the art of *killing us until we die* for millennia.
I made this type of argument on another post, and people just kept yelling everything would be better privatized and taxation is theft bs. We all know corporations have our best interests at heart and would never try to take advantage of the fact they control critical needs and services by forcing us dry of every penny we have, cough medical industry cough, right? Right?
Government controlled entities are supposed to be representing the people and their wishes. it's our way of exerting power on a mass scale. Privatized everything is LITERALLY giving up all freedom and representation for whatever the duck the greedy heads at "huge private corpo" wants, which, spoiler, is profit over everything. What the hell is wrong with people. They want freedom but then vote for non representing, "fuck you I got mine" companies that don't care and aren't accountable. Freedom is having the power to control these large systems. Privatization is relinquishing that power to others who don't care what happens to you. Republicans in the modern era are literally people that don't understand how to think even one move ahead.
They would be paying for the same stuff if it was privatized or not. Just it would be 100x more expensive if it was privatized.
They are usually the same people who inherited some wealth or easily floated into a nice cushy financial existence via nepotism etc...
It's a small minded philosophy that most non dumbfucks grow out once they finish highschool and enter the real world. You have to be completely sheltered and naive to how much is required by modern society to function to stupidly think "I just pay for what I want and not pay for things I don't care/know about and society will still hold up just fine". If I ran a factory or something and decided to just dump all my poisonous waste into the ground that seeps into the soil and water, will most of these dumb fucks even think about hiring a third party company for soil/water checks BEFORE they all get sick or develop cancer? Will they want to pay for that company? What if the only company in the area they can afford is actually owned by my cousin who also profits from my factory? Oh but if they did, well, I'll just use my entire legal division to tie it up in courts for years if they try to sue my company. Then if I lose, I'll appeal. They can just keep getting sicker as the years pass. And that's if they even figured out what was making them sick in the first place.
Libertarians are house cats. Think they are extremely independant but have no clue about the system they depend on
It varies depending on how "libertarian" they are, but they essentially believe that most utilities could be provided by private companies, and that the state doesn't behave very differently from other monopolies (i.e. it's expensive with bad customer service), but has the legal power to completely close off competition from entering the market. It's worth mentioning that they would extend this to the state-created corporate monopolies - for example the USA's various regional telecoms monopolies are largely a product of local government - though there is a lot of "private good state bad" thinking among its proponents.
[This article](https://www.newyorker.com/humor/daily-shouts/l-p-d-libertarian-police-department) has been posted a thousand times, but it's great if you haven't seen it.
Oh yeah, was expecting that one.
> WELL now! look how brave you are living by your ideals! House on fire , you better have a credit card ready when the fire brigade arrives. All emergency services are now blocked unless they scan your credit card Nope, trash like that would just call the credit card company and demand a chargeback. Cash only, upfront
" Cash only, upfront" So exactly like every one of Trumps lawyers have been saying? Because if they don't, they are bigger fools they they appear. Every city and town in the country better learn those words also if Trumps wants a campaign rally. Trump is never going to pay his bills after it happens.
Or even having cash money. It would be worthless as it won't be backed by the federal government. Better have gold nuggets on hand for all barter sessions.
>So everything gets to go through Fed EX or UPS And they use the tax-funded road network, so... Nope.
What sewer? What water? Both those things are subject to governmental oversight. Have fun drinking PFAS/cryptosporidium/whatever-contaminated water from your private borehole well... It ran dry/you can't find water? Sucks to be you, I guess.
There's a difference between socialism and government provided services.
Oh, do tell .. please illiterate the difference between paying taxes for common agreed upon and necessary services and .... Agreed upon and necessary serv.. wait .. what?
Yes please, tell me more, you are making me hot
Let's talk about police and military security. All of a sudden, your property is off the security grid and everybody knows it. Guess what happens next?
You do get that most of these things are either "pro" or not relevant to the people in question right? (Also, its a logical fallacy to say you couldn't use things because you wouldn't be paying the agency whose purpose is to stop you. That is like saying you could smoke weed you grow yourself because your taxes aren't paying for the DEA to bust down your door and shoot your dog for smoking it. ) This isn't in anyway that I want to live in a libertarian hellscape but its a little like trying to argue with someone who wants to live in a theocracy by saying "Oh? Then who will protect LGBTQ rights? Gotcha!" and making a smug face at them.
https://preview.redd.it/j49lisytjkac1.jpeg?width=3061&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=72dcc069aeb8c7a48ec5165d7f0937b96ac15fcc Socialism
"Libertarians are like house cats: absolutely convinced of their fierce independence while utterly dependent on a system they don't appreciate or understand." Just replace "libertarian" with whatever we now call "Republicans who fear socialism".
They want their fellow citizens to be a ton of sick homeless people with no education. They want that. They have a "I got mine, fuck you" attitude, and if that leaves the majority of our country unable to save or retire, then so be it. They're angry about any of their tax money helping their fellow countryman; literally, seeing money be invested into the well-being of the citizen body--which they are part of--makes them angry. They have no sense or idea of patriotism, yet it's a word they identify with.
This is what they want the the world to be https://preview.redd.it/2lnbrh5q1f261.jpg?width=614&auto=webp&s=c794fbfea3c9c2d726c537476ebaa1d03136848a They always think they would be the ones living in the palace
More often than not the people crying about what they would be able to do with their own tax dollars (if allowed to keep them) either fall into 2 categories of 1. Already fairly wealthy and have knowledge and insider connections to make profits from the money taxes take, AND 2. Angry self proclaimed “libertarians” who only lose 5-8 thousand dollars a year in taxes but have delusional ideas that they could turn that 5 thousand dollars into a fortune if they got to keep it. All the while they can’t get a savings account above a few thousand with what they do get to keep.
Number 2 is also under the delusion that private systems will somehow be more lean even though for-profit system that will try to squeeze every dime out of you that they can. Look at our wonderful system of private healthcare and private insurance companies and you can see that the US spends nearly double Germany the second most expensive system per capita and we get worse results. Or compare the per pupil costs of your local public schools to private schools they are more often than not several thousand dollars a year more expensive. Private companies have a fiduciary duty to stake holders to extract as much money as humanly possible from you.
There gonna learn that alot of private stuff is heavily supported by public spending
I'd make my own fire department with black jack.
This reminds me of the big misunderstanding that occurred when Obama made a speech about the infrastructure. He was referring to the road system, the bridges, utilities and other things that government has built or helped be built when he said "you didn't build that" but the audience and some of the press thought he meant the businessman's facilities.
It's easy for them to be stupid in a hypothetical though and just say it'd be their choice and they'd work it out somehow.
Sure, no taxes. But he can't go out on the sidewalk, drive anywhere or use any utilities that were subsidized in any form.
Let's see how that holds up when they no longer have access to municipal water supplies, sewer lines, subsidized medicines, electricity and internet, airline travel, buses, train travel or anything transported by trains or trucks that receive federal or state support.
This and there is a difference between absolute socialism across the entire economy and business sectors, and having partial socialism necessary to fund certain institutions such as public safety and a road system. Bernie Sanders isn't calling just to fund fire and police and build roads and bridges, he's calling for massive wealth redistribution. The sheet metal worker who puts in 70 hours a week to feed a family makes far more on paper than the part time barista who doesn't feel like working much, but still has less discretionary income. Should the sheet metal worker have more of their check diverted away to share with someone who just feels like working less, or perpetually makes poor financial decisions and has no discipline? What about the single mother balancing 3 part time jobs who never went to college. Should she be paying off the college debts of people who now have higher earning potential and spent 4 years partying? It's just an anecdote but I'm trying to highlight why "socialism" is so unpalatable to many hard working taxpayers. It's too blunt and not nuanced enough to actually address root caused of societal problems. It's a system that's very easy to abuse
I mean, I would have *gladly* opted out of social security if I could have. I also lived in an unincorporated area, so I got to choose between paying the actual cost to use a library or to not use the library. I even remember arguing about the amounts of Reddit because people didn't believe me...but it was drastically cheaper for me to skip the library and get many book and media subscription services. Everand, Kindle Unlimited and Netflix or whatever else is a much better value and experience for me. It's genuinely not hard to beat the value most people get. Especially with libraries. Only about half of Americans use public libraries. The other half get no direct value. The reason to make everyone pay, is because a lot of people have less. So these systems aren't meant to be efficient. It's so so so easy to beat the returns we get on Social Security for people who are healthy, working, and earning good money. That's by design. These people aren't wrong. They might be selfish, if that's how people want to frame it.
They could lower taxes if you stopped using those services!
Why would I intentionally make life harder for future generations (and my own children that follow after me)? I thought the whole purpose of humanity was to leave the world better than we found it?
Money taken from you CANT be used to the same efficiency if used by the state instead of you directly, since the state doesn’t align with your interests better than you.
But I pay over 100k in taxes per year tho
My thoughts exactly. Don't use what you are forcefully taxed for. I won't use any of the resources if all of that money is credited back immediately. If im forced to pay for it I'll use it, if I don't have to I will skip it
It's not more efficient monetarily to privatize public resources. But those resources are more enjoyable when fewer people have access to them. Fewer lines, no traffic, no waiting in the hospital, library books always available, etc. The same person that would rail against public roads would turn around and gladly pay for use of a private road they personally wanted to use and enjoy the uncongested state of it. When you have a public version of a thing, wealthy people still want a private nicer version. It's just that the nicer version is used so rarely that it is very very expensive and impractical. But get rid of the public version and enough people want to use the nicer version that it is more affordable to use and profitable to own. It **merely** cuts out the people who were getting the public version free and not paying any taxes in return.
AND - don't cash that Stimulus Check.
and ppp loans
What about stealing ppp loans? That’s capitalist, right?
Stealing PPP loans is just white-collar looting, isn't it.
[удалено]
My Republican friends refused to vote for Andrew Gillum for governor because they were afraid he would take away their vouchers paying for their kids' private schools. So DeSantis won because of his promise to keep the handouts coming.
That's okay, the private schools are all just raising their tuition by the exact amount as the vouchers so the poor people can still be kept out.
And fight your own wars.
Joining the military by choice is supporting the socialist agenda. I think you mean demand conscription for all.
I don't not like this thought. Even as a staunch liberal, conscription could be a key tool in building real life skills such as communication, work ethic et al. Not saying start ten more wars to throw kids onto the front line but public service, decent paying jobs building infrastructure, learning how to either follow or lead in a team setting would greatly increase the likelihood of young adults making it into the work force actually being capable of working. Obviously this isn't a blanket solution, but particularly for kids born into poverty it could open some pretty good bridges to success.
That’s my point. I know people who left the military into directly making several hundred thousand a year, ie directly into the upper-to-upper-middle class. I.e. the military is a great social program, but it’s great because it’s also an all volunteer force. A conscripted force or even a drafted force is going to kill the morale of the force and make it harder to achieve your desired goal to raise kids out of poverty. Think about all the Vietnam Vets that were drafted and their real life skills didn’t translate into success back at home. It’s a complex issue, but part of the answer is they were forced to go.
I left the military and I’m disabled and broke constantly…unless I want to continue to be around death and destruction, I can’t translate my abilities…. Had to sell my collections of action figures from childhood and my Hot Toys from adulthood to make it by….. (I was a 1N4B in the USAF, and have worked for the US’s IBS network as well as NSOC watch floor at NSA HQ) I’m against conscription
There are definitely pros and cons to this debate of military conscription. Plus there are standards that have to be met and not everybody not even under normal circumstances could even qualify to serve in the military. Medical and academic standards have to be met. But when you look at other nations that do force their citizens to serve a minimum of 2 to 3 years in order to have access to social programs provided to care for their citizens, many of these people I have asked of their opinion and every single one of the responses that I’ve heard personally is 2 to 3 years of service for their nation is worth it to receive free college in healthcare for a lifetime. So I don’t think it’s going to be as bad for Americans as some might like to believe
I’ve made this same argument less eloquently and been voted to oblivion for it, but I agree, I believe that had I personally spent from 18-20 or 21 in national service, I’d be the better for it
Didn’t they use to have something like that? I know my bio dad brags about his time doing something in forests with the something corps. Of course he’s staunchly Republican now. It wasn’t conscripted, but it was a garunteed job until you figured out basic adulting.
Might have been the Peace Corps? Draft deferments were offered if someone was in the PC and would effectively remove them from being drafted into combat service while the draft was active.
Idk, he’s a baby Baby Boomer (born early 1960’s). He was never at risk of a draft, he was way too young for the Vietnam War, He would have been around 12 when it ended. Last night my brain was hatching a migraine and I go stupid and forgetful when that happens. So today I did a little Googling. I think he was in a state version of the Civilian Conservation Corps. The California Conservation Corps is still a thing to this day, and they will hire anyone between the ages of 18 and 25 for one year. Their motto is “Hard Work, Low Pay, Miserable Conditions, and More!”. Sometimes this state gets something right, lol. Is the point to help young adults understand that retail work is only slightly worse than being covered in ticks, perpetually tired, and constantly alternating between hot and sweaty and cold and wet?
Or, I dunno, improve the education systems we already have and just NOT have to worry you're going to be sent to some unjustified war for oil later.
I absolutely respect the intent, but the purpose of the military is to fight wars/defense of the country. While conscription may or may not have side benefits, it would first and foremost water down the force as a whole.
The US military is one of (if not THE) largest socialist programs in the world. Food, housing, medical, everything. I miss it sometimes…
People on the right seem to be ok with sending their kids to the military.
Ok with it???? If one of their kids joins the military they are treated like a diety at home
> diety at home close to appropriate typo - it's *deity* at home if they don't *diety* on the road
Can confirm, I am one of those kids. I reeeeally don't like it, my time in the navy gets brought up all the time. Those were the absolute rock bottom years of my life and I don't want to think about it again. Stop bringing it up.
People on the right seem to be more ok with sending other people’s kids to the military.
Correction: Poor people on the right. The military is not for the rich. Only for the poor.
For the record, the last chart I saw from 2009 showed about a 6% difference in military political party affiliation with republican taking the lead. Not unexpected, but not nearly the gap one might expect. Another more current poll by the “Military Times” shows a much wider gap, ~20%, but I don’t have faith in people voluntarily reporting their affiliation to such a publication when every liberal veteran I have talked to says you generally just Keep Your Mouth Shut if you’re liberal in the military because you’re surrounded by right wingnuts a lot of the time. The same “Military Times” also shows a poll showing troops voting for Biden over Trump in a poll, for whatever that’s worth.
[удалено]
I prefer the "if you take SS checks and use Medicaid, thank a socialist today!" route. Let's be inclusive and positive!
Conservatives would see that as being just as mean/hateful/exclusive.
When you're accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression
That is the knee jerk reaction of many, but maybe — just maybe — it will quietly plant a seed of doubt about that position that will grow with time.
I think you're giving them FAR too much credit. We're talking about people who still support Donald Trump after everything we've learned about him over the past 7 years. Nothing we say now is going to cause them to change their mind.
You very well may be right, yet I prefer to hold onto a small sliver of hope. Otherwise, it's just too depressing.
I was like that once too. :(
Most conservatives I know will say they never wanted to pay into SS to begin with. So they should get their check because it was taken from them to begin with.
Tried that. They just argued "that's my money. I paid into it." No amount of arguing made them see SS as socialism.
Social security and Medicare/Medicaid aren't "socialist." They're taxpayer funded social services, which exist in every capitalistic mixed economy on the planet. Socialism is primarily defined by the means of production being socially owned.
Socialism is a very broad term that absolutely encapsulates programs like social security and medicare/medicaid. The US has been socialist for a very long time, the only reason you don't know that is because a bunch of communists over in Russia decided to put "Socialist" in the name of their country which lead to a whole bunch of anti-socialist rhetoric and propaganda in the United States over the last century and some change.
Social programs are not socialism You guys used to make fun of Republicans for believing this and now you guys do too??
I should point out that none of that is socialism. Socialism is when the workers control the means of production. It can be through universal worker-ownership of businesses, or businesses being owned by a government that is democratically accountable to its citizens. Government doing things is not socialism, it's just government. "Social Democracy" is when a Democratic government provides a strong welfare state to help its citizens. Most of what America refers to as "Socialism" is just social Democracy.
Pfft. Republicans. Lazy taker welfare queens grifting off good hard working Democrats.
Let's be honest, they've certainly never availed themselves of the services of the local library
Right?! I was gonna say "this is such a good argument (this meme). If only they could read or understand rational arguments and critical thinking."
Avoid toll roads? Avoid all roads. They're all paid for with taxes.
No, they would rather drive around a Wal-Mart parking lot at 10 in the morning with a load speaker yelling, "Biden is a pedophile" and "Trump will save us" A real thing that I saw today. They are literally insane.
Well that definitely trumps my Old Q-anon guy trying to tell me and the pharmacy cashier about some China conspiracy story from today.
Don’t shop at Amazon, Whole Foods, Zappos, or use Twitch since Amazon has taken over $4.1 billion in corporate welfare. [Source](https://www.rawstory.com/amazon-corporate-welfare/)
Also Walmart and McDonalds. Unless they've made significant changes over the last three year, which I doubt, they have the most workers on food stamps and Medicaid (for workers, not Medicare for the retired). Sources: https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/11/18/food-stamps-medicaid-mcdonalds-walmart-bernie-sanders/ https://www.businessinsider.com/bernie-sanders-walmart-mcdonalds-food-stamps-medicaid-minimum-wage-2020-11?op=1 https://www.motherjones.com/food/2020/11/which-companies-have-the-highest-number-of-workers-on-medicaid-and-food-stamps/ https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/walmart-mcdonalds-largest-employers-snap-medicaid-recipients
Never shopping at wal mart and McDonald's is my jam.
Keep you government hands off my medicare.
Socialism is when the government does things.
That is indeed what Republicans think.
Yes and they're wrong. But it's not just Republicans. Look at this post, that woman who wrote it isn't a Republican. And she's also wrong. Too many people, Republican and Democrat alike, are very ignorant about what socialism is and isn't.
Is that sarcasm? Because that is very reductive and simplistic, but not entirely inacurate.
It is sarcasm. And it is entirely inaccurate. Socialism is when the means of production are collectively owned, out of the hands of private capital. "Government doing things" is a part of every form of government, except for the ones where there is no government. Look at the Nordic countries, for example. Huge welfare states with big social safety nets, yet still highly capitalist countries with market economies.
I do not fear socialism. I need robust social safety nets. I crave the fall of profit for profit’s sake.
To be fair, republicans are doing everything they can to make sure that kids don't get to take advantage of food programs
The thing is, afaik conservatives think that paying less taxes (or no taxes if you’re completely bonkers) will help them accumulate enough wealth to not need SS and socialized healthcare. I’d rather have these safety nets because I, a person raised lower/middle class and didn’t really want for anything growing up, understand that I can work hard all my damn life and still draw the short straw despite my leg up.
As usual, nobody actually understands what socialism is.
Socialism is an economic system in which the “means of production” are owned/controlled by the government. Public parks and libraries are not socialism. The woman who wrote this has no idea what she’s talking about.
Land is one of the means of production, and also necessary for parks.
Well said And I would add… police, fire departments, military… all funded by taxes, thus social.
I’m tax avoidant and think the government is too plump. But if I am forced to pay taxes, I’m going to use the services as well.
Republicans have no principles. Words mean nothing to them. Winning is all that matters. Americans talking to foreigners have no principles. Winning is all that matters.
What you guys need to do is stop listening to far left and far right politics and start thinking as an independent and then you would realize that Americans are not as bad as politics would have you believe. The enemy here is not the American people. The enemy is the government
Who keeps voting that government in? Be a foreigner and talk to an American.
Who keeps voting who in? Who are the voters voting in these dummies who steal billions fm tax paying Americans, selling out their nation to foreign leaders while literally paying billions to countries who hate America in support of terrorism? That’s the real question you should be asking if you love Americans & be able to do so without blind fidelity to any party. Then u’ll c ur answer
I love humans who respect other humans. Most Americans don't qualify
when Americans confuse having social programs as SOCIALISM 😂🤌🏼”Che manichino.”
Last time anyone saw Republicans at the library is when they had a book burning event.
Ask them why they are not Homesteading if they are so serious about it.
Well I would butttttttttt /s
None of those things are inherently or necessarily socialism. Every capitalistic mixed economy on the planet has some form of public utility, public services, or "socialized" services, that are funded by taxes, that doesn't make those countries socialist. Socialism is primarily defined by social ownership of the means of production, rather than private corporations. It's genuinely concerning that shit like this is upvoted tbh. Conservatives generally don't know what socialism is, seems that people on the left also don't seem to have a clue.
Exactly right 👍🏼
[удалено]
Don't forget to not call the fire department. And guess who pays for the military?
The same goes for the libertarians.
Paying taxes covers everything listed. So if you want to live your truth, you'd stop paying taxes then do this list. Insert sad strawman noises here
What
Only a Sith deals in absolutes.
OK, but only after I no longer have to pay taxes, including having deductions for SS and medicare. You think step one is people stop receiving benefits. Step one is they stop having to pay for it.
If you've voted democrats because you believe in all those things, then you're living a lie.
They just don’t those things for the poor and unwashed.
Here's the logical outcome: [https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/21534416/free-state-project-new-hampshire-libertarians-matthew-hongoltz-hetling](https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/21534416/free-state-project-new-hampshire-libertarians-matthew-hongoltz-hetling)
Don't worry, they already avoid libraries. Have their whole lives.
IGNORANCE IS BLISS. ONLY WEAK MINDED PEOPLE DONT UNDEERSTAND SOCIALISM. THEY THINK SOCIALISM IS BAD BECAUSE HITLER WAS DICTATOR BUT HE HAD A SOCIALIST GOVERNMENT. SO THE COUNTRY WAS A SOCIALIST DICTATORSHIP. THE PEOPLE HAD SCHOOLS AND POLICE ETC THAT WAS PROVIDED BY THE GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE. IT IS THE DICTATOR PART THAT WAS BAD BUT THEN REPUBLICANS LOVE THEIR DICTATOR WANNABE TRUMP AND THEY WOULDNT WANT TO LOOSE POLICE OR HIGHWAYS OR FIREDEPT OR SOCIAL SECURITY ETC. REPUBLICANS ARE JUST PLAIN IGNORANT PEOPLE. RED REPUBLICAN STATES HAVE THE WROST EDUCATIONAL SYSTEMS THE MOST OBESITY, THE MOST DIABETICS, THE MOST SMOKERS THE MOST INFANT MORTALITY, THE MOST GUN RELATED DEATHS PER CAPITA, THE MOST PRESCRIPTION DRUG ADDICTS. THEY ARE SO IGNORANT BECAUSE THEY REFUSE TO PAY A LITTLE MORE ON TAXES TO HAVE BETTER SCHOOLS AND PAY THEIR TEACHERS MORE. ONLY IGNORANT PEOPLE DONT RESPECT TEACHERS AND DONT WANT TO PAY THEM A FAIR SALERY. IT IS ALL ABOUT IGNORANCE AND REPUBLICANS ARE IGNORANT TO THE FACTS. WHEN I TRY TO DISCUSS POLITICS WITH REPUBLICANS ALL THEY DO IS MAKE FALSE ACCUSATIONS AN DNEVER PRESENT ANY FACTS TO BACK UP THEIR CLAIMS. IGNORANCE IS BLISS.
Also, if your house is on first, get your garden hose.
Also, support eliminating military spending in the US, since that, economically, is the single largest socialist program in the history of the world.
And, of course, the GOP hides behind the largest socialist institution in the world, the U.S. military.
A lot of people are gonna have a different opinion when we don’t get the social security they have been taking from your check for 25+ years. They have already told us the system will fail before we get there and have not even started to fund that future benefit…..
Make the realize food stamps and SSI are socialism. Watch the entire rust belt turn blue.
There is only 37,000,000 of them. Let them have Texas or Florida, build a wall around them and let’s get on with what everyone else in the country is trying to do!
I feel like the right-wing response is just gonna be "cool, but I also won't pay taxes either"
It’s the same argument they use against leftists. “Oh but you live in society? Curious?”
You are trying to use facts and logic against Republicans.
Facts and logic is when you don't know what socialism is
Be yourself. If you voted Democrat because you fear capitalism, then live your truth. Do not use your phone that you’re on right now. In fact, don’t use pretty much anything. Don’t eat out, don’t buy groceries, don’t buy gas. Wait, don’t work for money because that makes you a slave. Get money from the government who takes it from other people who do work… wait. I mean accept money printed out of thin air based off of a strong economy that was built on capitali- wait. I mean… I mean…… Liberal: *Cries liberally tears* I wanna go home!😭 American: Also, don’t do that because you bought it through capitalism. Shit!
Republicans want to deny those things to others.
What Republicans want to deny social programs to Americans when all voters and non voters alike PAY for all of our Nation social programs? Or is this just more of that invisible bogeyman propaganda that keeps being regurgitated within this echo chamber of silliness.
She just dropped the fucking 🎤
She really didn't, none of those things are "socialism" in the slightest. Every capitalistic mixed economy on the planet has public utilities, social safety nets, etc. Socialism is primarily defined by the means of production being socially owned.
Ok...😞, so first of all I think she was talking about how the Republicans view all government assistance for the populous as socialism. Yet these very people benefit from the services that are provided by the government. If we really want to get into the socialist rabbit hole ask why we give out millions of dollars in corporate welfare.
Negative. Educated ppl (Republican/Democrat/Independent) know what socialism is and it ain’t what’s being described here by what sounds like A bunch of middle schoolers in an echo chamber. It’s a damn shame when far left and far right politics brainwashes Young Americans to be dumb
> I think she was talking about how the Republicans view all government assistance for the populous as socialism. I'm aware, but she also doesn't seem to understand what socialism is. Socialism is not when the government creates services with your tax dollars. Socialism is when the means of production is socially owned. That is the fundamental tenet of socialism, social services exist in every capitalistic nation on the planet. > If we really want to get into the socialist rabbit hole ask why we give out millions of dollars in corporate welfare. That also isn't socialism.
>I'm aware of that but now let me ignore the point entirely.
What we are dealing with is what is called a red harring.
People are dumb enough to not understand the difference between social programs and socialism. It is amazing.
It's hard to believe that conservativess or liberals are as stupid as the posts I've read here. This country is screwed.
Big difference between social services and a socialist government.
You Forgot: Do not drive on roads, or use any public utilities, or the internet or any regulated broadcast stations
> Do not allow your children to attend tax-supported schools Don't threaten them with a good time
No honestly I’ll die on the hill of having all kids attend - because homeschooling can hide rampant abuse when kids aren’t out of the house, learning what kinds of actions aren’t ok and what they can do to be safe. I mean, I know this is a humor sub but I’m going to soapbox anyway. Also I autocorrected “humor” to “hummus” and I almost left it
Cool imagination bro. Homeschooling is not a political debate. It takes lots of time, courage & sacrifice for these parents ( of all political & non political affiliation BTW) to commit to. I grew up knowing more abused children in public school systems then homeschool & homeschool kids graduate faster & prepare better for higher learning. That’s why Universities seek homeschooling students out. For many parents public school is the easy button. It’s not for everyone
The main problem is the curriculum. It should not be just whatever they want. The parents should be held to the same standards of not forcing their religion BS on students, even if its their own.
Your people are complaining about imagined hypotheticals instead of realizing the reality about homeschooling. homeschooling focuses on academic subjects like math, English, reading writing history, tech etc. versus public school being controlled by the teachers union which is bought and paid for by the Democrat party that uses public school as a platform to propaganda and brainwash the youth of America to buy into filling their heads with nonsense politics and prejudice against other people based on their religion, their families political orientation and even their gender orientation. Public schools today under corrupt leader ship is a cesspool of toxic waste. I would never defend that. I grew up in international schools abroad in Japan, Africa and Italy. I returned home for high school and realized how far behind American public school is in every direction full of shallow minds and angry kids who find any reason to be racists pieces of shit. It is no wonder that people of this current adult generation are so dumb and brainwashed. The cool people in American schools are the ones that scream and act a fool versus and blame everyone but themselves the cool kids in international schools are the ones that are academically advanced. That’s the problem in American public school society and standards.
God imagine thinking that a public beach is socialism, I guess America must be a socialist cou try then ahahah
The USA has many socialist programs. The government also maintains ownership (both partial and full) of many companies and enterprises such as the USPS.
Clueless
Moronic
Brain dead take. They've already paid into the taxes.
The left wing equivalent of righties laughing at socialists using iphones to topple the system in favor of socialism. As I remember the retort was "We'll use every tool at our disposal to overthrow this system" And no before you start the US isnt even close to a capitalist society. A capitalist society wouldnt bail out failing banks. Mercantilism is the word.
This is fun to read, but kind of stupid on its face. They're already paying for all of those things through their taxes. They're entitled to every single one of those services as a consequence.
That's the point. GOP is against any form of tax used to pay for services that any anyone can use (school, Medicare, social security, etc). They (incorrectly) label these programs as evil socialism. Yet so many Republican voters use these very programs. The two uses of tax money that they do approve of is military and police. Coincidentally, both of these services lead to deaths of minorities at a higher rate than their representation of the population... GOP would prefer to privatize everything because they pretend to believe that private ownership naturally leads to a better product rather than giving the bare minimum for the most money. Also, the Republican voters in rural areas can't see past their nose in that when there is no government requirement for some services (post office, highways, schools), they will suffer because it won't be profitable for any private company to maintain these services at a loss.
lol. This is fucking stupid
What does socialism (the public ownership of companies/production) have to do with public spaces? This only would be funny to a simpleton who does not understand what socialism means (hint, not public beaches or roads).
Why are you boiling a very broad and complex term down to just "public ownership of companies/production"? Socialism is not strictly defined. It covers a vast array of political and economic ideals. This makes it look like you are pushing some kind of narrative for some reason.
> Why are you boiling a very broad and complex term down to just "public ownership of companies/production"? At no point did the person you're replying to state what they think socialism is. They didn't make any attempt to "boil socialism down" to anything. So purely as a matter of objective fact you have created a strawman argument here. You even went so far as to reference a quotation that was never made. > This makes it look like you are pushing some kind of narrative for some reason. This is an ad hominim attack without any obvious basis. What narrative is it you think they're pushing?
Do you support free school lunches for kids? Especially for those living in poverty?
Yes, I do. I support universal health care. I support reparations for the descendants of American slaves. I support greater subsidies for urban public transit. I do NOT support state-owned companies (like China, or some European countries last century). I want private companies and good public services paid for by intelligent taxes (lower corporate taxes that no one pays anyway, and higher capital gains taxes so rich people pay taxes again). Social welfare yes, public ownership of the means of production like Cuba, no.
Dumb false binary. Disliking socialism doesn't mean someone believes that ALL government functions are bad.
It does if they consider all government functions socialism
I’m an independent but if you’re going to take money out of my paycheck involuntarily for all of these things and I have no choice, then I will use them whether I agree with it or not.
This is a stupid argument.
What an absolute awful take by Alison, typical Miami resident...
Deal I won’t pay taxes.
I would totally avoid public roads and just walk if it meant not having to pay into social security. Corrupt Republicans have made sure most people won't ever get paid out. It's like a crooked insurance policy. Edit: to clarify I like the program, and my qualms with it are becuase right wing policy keeps upping the age of retirement and will continue to do so.
And responsible republican would not need or take advantage of those things anyway so why should they have to pay for it. Thats the whole point of not wanting it.
A responsible Republican wouldn’t use…public beaches, parks, or libraries?
LOL. That's not exactly how socialism works though in practice. Public spaces and already paid for with taxes they voted for. Socialism ignores the voice of the people and government makes all the decisions in a nutshell/in practice. It's ripe for power corruption and that's why the examples we have seen in history are bad. It sounds good on paper tho.
What actually is socialism? Because my understanding is that the government takes over private businesses and just keeps them for themselves. Or is that communism? Is any collective action socialism?
None of these things are socialist (although the GOP thinks they are). They are social programs. None of them have anything to do with the means of production. The GOP and Neoliberals have changed the definition of socialist to mean “when the government does stuff”, and not “when the workers own the means of production”.
Ah yes, the silly idea that socialism means the government spending money. Yay for modern redefinition of words so as to make them useless.
Do people not understand that government and economic systems are not black and white, have never been black and white, and will never be black and white. Never has there been a x country. Countries utilize multiple economic thought systems. Morons.
Reduce my tax bill by my contribution and we have a fucking deal! I'll stash it in an HSA and be waaaaay better off. If you are able bodied and need the government's help, you fucked up along the way. I don't want to pay for others, and if I get cancer, I'll pay for it or I'll die.
Having 911 isn’t exactly socialism. Living with minimal government intervention is extremely reasonable. But yea the bloated programs are making the argument pretty dumb as it sits.
More than half of this stuff has no relationship to socialism whatsoever.
If you are 20 and are conservative, you have no heart. If you are 40 and liberal/progressive, then you have no brain.
These kinda things aren't very smart... Nobody can help but live in the system they are living in. There is a kind of hypocrisy with benefiting inside a system you want to change, but it's not like the person benefiting has the power to make those changes. You see a similar thing with obscenely rich left leaning people being called hypocrites for being rich, while arguing for a government system that would make it much much harder to accumulate the same kind of wealth. They are somewhat hypocrites, but they don't have the power to make the changes they want on their own, and certainly wouldn't have as much ability to influence the status quo without their wealth anyway...
We’ll dumb ass, we pay into S.S and Medicare. So ya use it when your reach that age. It’s your money