When a government directs a nations natural resources and means of production with central decsion making for all, it is socialism.
When a government collects taxes from its citizens and corporations and spends allocates the money to expenditures for the public good, it is investment in a nations future and peace of mind.
2007-09-10 00:07:35 · 8 answers · asked by alphabetsoup2 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Ruth, how in heaven is spending tax money at NASA, NIH, for building library's, universities, and the health care of veteran's telling people they cannot succeed?
2007-09-10 00:15:32 · update #1
You make an excellent point! It seems the anti-income tax lobby has brainwashed an entire generation into believing that the government has no right to collect taxes or spend revenues on anything except right-wing priorities, like defense, "security," and corporate bailouts. They seem like absolute extremists, too, in that they want NO government programs to help the disadvantaged. The "principle" seems to be one of social Darwinism without a social conscience. I wonder how these selfish folks will talk when, as always happens, some of them don't make it to the top, through bad luck, illness, or family responsibilities. Will they call themselves losers? Or will they develop an insincere social conscience, out of pure self-interest? That would seem more in character...
2007-09-10 01:09:12 · answer #1 · answered by Who Else? 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I think the dividing line goes a little deeper than your analogy.
Whenever a government takes thru taxation, they are trying to control the wealth of the country. You should never give the government authority to take wealth from others for any purpose whatsoever. Governments are not able to stop at any point and will continue to take control of wealth by means of taxation.
It is a better approach to design a program intented to better society much like a municipal water system. A community votes to build a water system to serve all, then pays user fees when the system is put in place.
Of course programs like welfare can't fit into this design, but we do need some level of support for the poor in this country.
2007-09-10 00:53:39 · answer #2 · answered by Perplexed Bob 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
My response to "Who Else?".. the anti-income tax folks are simply anti-INCOME tax...This does not mean that the gov't will get no money...we pretty much can't do anything without paying a tax...so I'm sure the states will be able to provide NECESSARY services with this revenue. And yes, the federal gov't should stick to what it can handle, national defense (our current war NOT included)...but corporate bailouts? Wha?
2007-09-10 02:15:14 · answer #3 · answered by monkiby 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Young people today seem not to. I think it is a result of a campaign by the people who oppose social welfare programs to label them socialist. It has produce the odd effect in that many who think such programs are a good idea, now think of themselves as socialist. I am see more and more suggestions that we nationalize corporations. What comes around, goes around.
2007-09-10 00:23:29 · answer #4 · answered by meg 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Yes. Whether or not the government controls the program.
2007-09-10 00:23:00 · answer #5 · answered by Locutus1of1 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Socialism is socialism, no matter how you try to parse it. Who has the infinite wisdom to determine what is right for everyone?
Try to change any law in the US and people whose "ox is gored" will come forward and tell you why.
2007-09-10 00:16:46 · answer #6 · answered by regerugged 7 · 1⤊ 5⤋
It's a walk in the same dark park.
It's telling humans that they cannot succeed. It's telling government that it is better equipped for running our lives than we are.
2007-09-10 00:12:26 · answer #7 · answered by ? 7 · 3⤊ 5⤋
liberalism leads to socialism,.....socialism leads to Communism,,.....Communism leads to totalitarianism,.....
2007-09-10 00:25:02 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 4⤋