Socialism is very negative for any country, since it decreases the wealth of a nation by using it in unproductive manners. For example, it is hard to be negative on entitlements. Yet, before the govt got involved, most of the safety net was volunteer, charity, and church. These groups tried to get people on their feet again. People did not feel charity was due to them. Now we pay for govt to do what we did for free. Some people like the dole so we pay the govt to administer the dole and more people use it. How is this good for the nation? Simply, it decreases the wealth.
Why is socialism still got life? It is a great way for politicians to get power, for they can promise a bone to the needy masses and they vote them in. Does not matter if it destroys society in the long run, the goal is to get elected.
However, capitalism without a moral foundation tends to self-destruct. That's why a religious foundation worked well for us. Now as we lose it, I'm not sure what will happen, but it isn't positive.
2006-08-12 10:54:55
·
answer #1
·
answered by Cogito Sum 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
While the implementation of socialism has failed in many countries, it still has some values as a counter measure to pure capitalism. While capitalism is nice and ensures that the smarter you are and harder you work the more you get, it has it's down side in terms of preferring the business owners to the workers. And it almost always results in a concentration of wealth in a small percentage of the people.
It can be argued that these wealthy people deserve more because they worked more and because they were smarter. But somehow, an extreme concentration of wealth is not healthy and creates a lot of tension in the society.
2006-08-12 10:48:31
·
answer #2
·
answered by mraei 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
... it's good and bad... I think overall socialism is a drag on the economy, but at the same time, socialism has granted a higher standard of life in many European countries for the country as a whole...
like Sweden for example that has fairly a low unemployment rate, good medical system and good schools.. yet also has almost no poverty...
But there is still motivation to work, get paid and those who are paid well get the same perks of those paid well in the states...
most of the times when people think of socialism, they think of China or Russia, but in reality, those were more dictatorships under the guise of communism, and had relatively little to do with the true ideas of Marx...
2006-08-12 10:50:20
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
If your a socialist and lazy, it is good news.
If you want to try and get ahead and provide for your family, then any extra effort you put in will be sliced and diced to people less deserving. Share the wealth by force has always been bad. The community can take care of its own through local contributions. It's called charity. Socialism is forced charity, but some people don't like the stigma that goes along with that word.
2006-08-12 10:49:42
·
answer #4
·
answered by Mr Cellophane 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
No, it's not healthy. Has a prison ever been designed immune to escapes? No, because you can't control human beings and accurately predict human nature.
There is an elitism and arrogance behind socialism that dooms it to failure. The great speech on this subject is the closing speech of Charles Chaplin's "The Great Dictator."
In America, socialism is particularly dangerous in the form of social security (which has a net unfunded debt of over $11 trillion) and Medicare (which has a net unfunded debt of about $66 trillion).
Both these socialistic white elephants have to be sunsetted before they consume the federal government.
2006-08-12 10:55:27
·
answer #5
·
answered by urbancoyote 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
Elements of socialism work well in other countries. In Canada for example, they have a nationally funded health system so that their children can be cared for. In the US, we have a private system so 6 million of our children are without medical coverage.
In many European countries, health care and social care (caring for the poor, the homeless, the underprivileged is superior to the US) yet their actual tax burden for more workers is around the same as here. (In Britain for example, you lose about 32% of your income to taxes).
No one system provides all the benefits of a fair and just system. Our intensely capitalist system heavily favors the rich (as in 'the rich get richer, the poor get poorer') which does not result in a just society.
2006-08-12 11:13:48
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
A little socialism might be good, but a lot robs Americans of what they earn. America has accepted socialism..... very sad. Socialism is nothing but a little milder form of communism that feeds off capitalism, without capitalism, socialism would DIE from a lack of funding.
2006-08-12 10:38:40
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Republicans (Bush/McCain/Boehner/McConell) Democrats(Obama,Pelosi,Reid,Frank) voted for the main important Socialist Bailout of the Banks in mankinds background in September 2008. We dont see Bernanke or Kohn accessible helping the undesirable. IWe do see them helping the banks. Republicans and Democrats enable the Federal Reserve to control the US dollar and wildly set rates of pastime allowing the dying of the yankee citizen. usa does no longer desire the US government it extremely is a slave to the Federal Reserve $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ grant that they print whilst ever they desire. Socialism is a contravention of the US shape. you're a traitor to usa in case you believe in Socialism the US shape does no longer enable for the US government to acquire taxes. Its to stay small and insignificant. The unfastened industry and US voters are to ignore and fund the interior sight governments to grant centers procuring and merchandising with different states and international places. That way the "We the human beings" nonetheless has the customary public of the skill. enable it extremely is common that the US government is in charge for the Socialist Bailouts of the Banks considering the fact that they authorized it. If it had come to a vote the yankee human beings could have DEFEATED any action to bailout the banks that have been and nonetheless are in charge for their very own blunders. fact. fortuitously Christ Jesus does no longer make blunders and he would be coming quickly. Greed would be dropped at justice.
2016-12-17 09:44:25
·
answer #8
·
answered by menjivar 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Eh, some of the principles are ok, ie. giving to the poor, however i don't think socialism can work because greed is human nature, and while I think that no one should go hungry or be homeless, I think those who work harder should be better off.
2006-08-12 10:40:43
·
answer #9
·
answered by RATM 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I've experienced socialism...and I can tell you..it's not what it's cut out to be...socialism means coruption...everywhere it's the same socialism is coruption!!
2006-08-12 10:38:05
·
answer #10
·
answered by the_clown 2
·
1⤊
0⤋