Social Security, Medicare, Student Loans, Welfare. All socialist programs.
2006-12-19 07:16:25 · 8 answers · asked by 3rd parties for REAL CHANGE 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
I consider myself to be conservative, where are the neo-cons screaming outrage?
2006-12-19 07:22:17 · update #1
There is a HUGE difference in socialism and communism comrade.
2006-12-19 07:22:52 · update #2
"In the United States, the economic means of production are not owned and controlled collectively by the people."
Isn't it a government that provides social programs, for the people by the people?
2006-12-19 07:25:36 · update #3
Actually we are a modified capitalist country. Which basically means that we are capitalist with socialist tendencies.
2006-12-19 10:08:44 · answer #1 · answered by ikeman32 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You're right -- social security, Medicare, student loans, and welfare could all easily be deemed socialist programs. Now please refresh the collective memory of everyone here: Which party established these programs? Which party is therefore responsible for all the layabouts we have on welfare who can work but refuse to? Who is responsible for the creation of the "entitlement society" in this country where so many people believe that everything should be handed to them on a silver platter simply because they're Americans? Which party continues to champion the idea of redistribution of wealth by the government? To sum up: Which party is trying to make every last citizen in this country totally dependent on the government for everything, which in turn gives the government absolute power to regulate everything including personal behavior? And you have the ignorant unmitigated gall to declare that this is somehow different than the former Soviet Union?
Typical liberal -- editorializes facts to support his own decidedly slanted agenda without investigating matters fully or thinking them through to their logical conclusions.
2006-12-19 15:29:38 · answer #2 · answered by sarge927 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because it's not.
In the United States, the economic means of production are not owned and controlled collectively by the people.
Do a little research.
2006-12-19 15:24:15 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
You are not a well informed person, even though you have a lot of self-confidence. You have never lived in a socialist country. Otherwise, you would not have made such an absurd statement.
(I am from the former Soviet Union and know well what socialism really is.)
2006-12-19 15:21:52 · answer #4 · answered by paloma 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
because it's not a socialist country. it's a corporate republic.
no-bid contracts for reconstruction of Iraq, no-bid contracts for Katrina recovery, restricting the minimum wage for Katrina recovery, tax incentives to offshore jobs, mining companies that get free/minimal cost mining rights on federal land, logging companies that can log an acre of old wood forest on public land for $1 an acre, reduction in pollution controls, elimination of consumer bankruptcy rights while making corporate chapter 11 easier, corporate bailouts of large utilities, allowing mergers of telecommunications/utilities firms that do not have a benefit to free speech or the consumer, zero oversight of price gouging at the pump, etc etc etc. Yeah, sounds alot like a pinko commie nation to me.
2006-12-19 17:06:23 · answer #5 · answered by SqRLiO 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Joe Willy Neckbone says, " for going above and beyond ignorance.... you deserve a degree."
2006-12-19 15:25:02 · answer #6 · answered by joewillyneckbone 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Them damned liberals.!!
2006-12-19 15:19:54 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
it's all about balance.
2006-12-19 15:20:46 · answer #8 · answered by Take it from Toby 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋