tzor wrote:Dukasaur wrote:The great Democratic Socialist nations of Europe firmly reject communism. It's completely possible to have a hybrid economy, where a free market provides the great engine but there is reasonable agreement that those on the express train leave something behind for those less fortunate. Protestations that a free market and a system of social protection cannot co-exist are pure propaganda, and quite false. Free markets and social services can and have been co-existing perfectly well in many places and at many times.
Communism generally collapses. Socialism generally collapses before the onset of communism. It's like a boy and his rocket; sure, he may have his goal of his rocket hitting the moon, but it runs out of fuel long before it hits the edge of the atmosphere. Hybrid systems don't work. It's like driving with three tires and one flat tire, yes you can move along, but the flat tire drags everything down. But the biggest threat of socialism is not to the "free market." The biggest threat is to the morale of the people. In the end, the free market does squat; the people do everything. When you have the attitude that the government does everything, (which it can't) the people decide that they don't have to to anything. If you want to see the lowest rates of charitable giving, look towards socialist Europe.
The opposite of socialism is actually subsidiarity, the notion that government belongs to the lowest level possible, not the highest. The question is not whether "social protection" but where. The closer it belongs to the people, the more people are motivated to maintain it. Charity gladdens the heart; taxes burdens the heart. Socialist Europe, which came from the dustpile of Secular Europe (which also game us secular capitalism which loves to exploit workers wherever they can find them) is a result of the moral collective guilt of striping the corporate works of mercy from the collective mind; a result that resulted in such wonderful things as the Holocaust and the culture of abortion / euthanasia.
And by the way, the "great Democratic Socialist nations of Europe" generally suck; just saying. If they were considered with the "states" of the United States, they would rank near the bottom of the list, economically speaking.
If Sweden and Germany Became US States, They Would be Among the Poorest StatesSince Sweden is held up as a sort of promised land by American socialists, let's compare it first. We find that, if it were to join the US as a state, Sweden would be poorer than all but 12 states, with a median income of $27,167.
Median residents in states like Colorado ($35,830), Massachusetts ($37,626), Virginia ($39,291), Washington ($36,343), and Utah ($36,036) have considerably higher incomes than Sweden.
With the exception of Luxembourg ($38,502), Norway ($35,528), and Switzerland ($35,083), all countries shown would fail to rank as high-income states were they to become part of the United States. In fact, most would fare worse than Mississippi, the poorest state.
Hey Sweden! New York called and she said ... "YOU SUCK!"
Hey Sweden! New Jersey called and she said ... "YOU SUCK!"
Hey Sweden! Colorado called and she said ... "YOU SUCK!"
