Forcing Socialism upon the American people


Has AOC even proposed a corporate tax rate? That 70% top rate is on personal income tax above $10,000,000.


We already have crime, violence and insurrection.
Wanna see what socialism produces? Venezuela and Cuba. Are you saying you’d rather have that than what we have now?


If you apply your definition of “socialism” to government operation of specific programs such as healthcare-for-all, as so many posters here often do, you know what else you get? Pretty much every industrialized country on the planet.

But sure, keep tossing out your boogeymen.


I find it curious that the OP characterises elected officials doing what they promised during the campaign as “forcing”.


It doesn’t matter. What matters is how dubious it sounds.


What businesses do they want to tax at seventy percent? Show me something definitive.


Still living under tyranny in other words…


Take a peek at the countries with the highest quality of life. They seem to be doing pretty well with all their horrible “socialist” ideas and programs. Using poor corrupt countries as an example for not doing something is your bias, not mine. Maybe we should list the current issues with the capitalist sub-Saharan African countries as reasons to abandon capitalism?


No, my definition of Socialism is defined by what it always becomes, no matter how well intended. Venezuela and Cuba are two good examples. You can add the USSR if you like, or North Korea and China. But of course, American leaders are enlightened and benevolent and would neeeverrr oppress it’s citizens! ( well, that, plus 100 million armed red necks)


I suspect your idea of “quality of life” is much different than mine…


Affordable, good jobs, stable economy, family friendly, politically stable, safe, good education and health systems. The same metrics used to evaluate the quality of life in national rankings.

My goals in life aren’t to die rich or make sure no “undeserving” person gets a penny I worked for. It’s to have the best life possible.

What’s your idea of “quality of life?”


Because we have a pretty decent Constitution, I’m confident that the landscape of our government is not comprised of only slippery slopes. We’ve had Social Security for almost 100 years, and Medicare for over 50. The solvency of those programs is threatened by a number of factors, and must be addressed. But to suggest that their inherently socialistic nature means they cannot be made to work, and efficiently so, is not born out by decades of experience.


Yeah tell that to the Venezuelans as they’re sifting through the garbage for food because there are no more zoo animals to butcher and they’ve already eaten their pets! :open_mouth:

And the Norwegian, European & Canadian style governments that so many leftists LIE about as being the socialist models are not socialist countries.


You’ve summarized the hysteria of the far right perfectly. Let me summarize…

  1. “The left” advocates improving and increasing social programs, similar to Scandinavian countries and other countries with high quality of life.
  2. “The right” hears “social programs” and equates that to a particular definition of socialism they despise.
  3. “The right” finds an example of the socialism they despise, in a historically poor, corrupt and failing country and thinks that’s what “the left” wants.

“The right” fails to understand the complexities of social programs and the multiple definitions of socialism. They use a contextually separate definition of socialism in a country with so many confounders it doesn’t merit a formed response. But there one was.


All of these are very reasonable, but how to achieve them is the quotation. There are limits to what government can, and should do.

A civics teacher I had in high school once said “The first priority of any government that has ever come into existence is self preservation.” To me, at the time, it was one of the most profound truths I had heard. As I look at the history if civilizations, including our own, I realize it is absolutely true. Our government is more concerned with getting reelected than serving the people. Yes, there are some elected officials, especially at lower levels, with service in mind, but my observation is that they are in the minority. As soon as they get to DC, they begin getting corrupted. This isn’t a Democrat or Republican thing, it’s a human thing.

For this reason, our founding fathers created a document to limit the powers of government. Our government has become a corrupt, bloated bureaucracy which continues ( in all 3 branches) to assume more and more power for itself which robs us not only of our rights and money, but more importantly, our ability to think and provide for ourselves.

It is not the function of government to provide jobs, health care, and for that matter, education, though the education train left that station long ago. The government, though it prints money, does not create wealth. Everything it doles out to give to one group, it must take from another and there is not enough to take from any group to pay for all the things you say provides you the “quality of life” you want. I don’t know how old you are, but I guarantee you are going to pay for the rest of your life for things our government spent money on decades ago, and so will your children, grand children and many generations beyond that. Socialism is a lie and a trap. Wake up…


The person who owns the business.


Social security was never optional


Then again worker owned co-ops where managers are elected exist already. Gives the workers more of an ownership role in the company.


Of course the government creates wealth, it’s absurd to think otherwise.


That is literally just, like, your opinion, man. :grin:

The general welfare clause pretty much guarantees that the items you list are absolutely the function of government if the electorate decides that they are.