Anonymous wrote:I think we should have better socialized medicine. It’s not capitalism all the way or we turn into Cuba. There is lots of middle ground. Western Europe does well with capitalism but has a much better ( not perfect) health care system and provides better for the elderly etc.

I would make the argument that socialized medicine would catalyze capitalism. Because it would capitalize entrepreneurship -- it's a lot easier to take risks in creating new businesses, etc. if you have the health care safety net. In an employer-based health insurance system, people are afraid to leave their jobs.

And before anyone starts harping on the taxes for socialized medicine, I'd argue that the premiums and deductibles we have to pay are the equivalent of taxes.

And before anyone starts harping that they don't want the government making decisions about when and where you can get treatment, I'd argue that as much as it would suck, it's probably preferable to allowing a profit-motivated insurance company that's trying to meet quarterly earnings targets to make such decisions.

I think the best systems use socialist principals to keep capitalism in check, as you see in many European countries. Unchecked capitalism is stupid and ultimately only liberating for a tiny few at the very tip top. Socialism on its own without capitalism doesn't work -- the incentives don't work.

But capitalism that allows people who work hard and are innovative to make more money, while also using taxes, social programs, and worker protections to ensure that everyone has a baseline standard of living, makes sense to me. Sure, I think someone starting a business or putting int eh work to become an expert in a field should make more and be rewarded for that. But I also think people who work in retail or service jobs should get a living wage and be guaranteed healthcare and access to education. I also think we can mitigate issues like homelessness by providing robust support for the poor, old, and mentally ill, including "government handouts" that enable people to live reasonably comfortable lives even if they cannot work or cannot work full time.

I think it's really weird when people complain about taxes or social services. I mean, do you want children to starve because their parents are poor, mentally ill, or lost their jobs? Do you want lots of desperate people who can't afford basic medical care or access to an education that might help them better their lives? Why would you want that? So I support things like socialized healthcare and free college, not because I want to "redistribute wealth" but because I want to live in a functional society with people who have access to healthcare and education.

Socialism is better for more people and capitalism is better for fewer people. How can you not grasp this reality by now? In this country, the goal is to get into or remain in the class that benefits from capitalism.

Anonymous wrote:I’m very worried about the direction of our country. There seems to be an accelerating drift toward socialism with the forced distribution of wealth. The famous quote about socialism working until you run out of other people’s money keeps coming to mind. What are people’s thoughts on this?

We are not a socialist country so it should not be a problem. You’re on your own here.

Yes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Socialism is better

Unless, of course, you are in the capitalist class. Your standard of living may drop when you stop oppressing others.

I'm wealthy yet we don't directly "oppress others". If anything my partner works for a smaller company, bends over backwards to treat the other employees extremely well (my CEO partner has been there 10+ years, has never taken a pay raise during this time and in fact during a few difficult years took a 25% pay cut for 2.5 years and obviously there was no bonus during those years. So there are sales people making more than them. Yes, the CEO is not the highest paid employee) They bust their butt to keep valued employees and give them the raises they deserve---that's why they have not taken a raise at all. And it's not like they are making $800K+, their base is much much lower.

We pay a ton in taxes, as all income is W2. But if you continue to overtax people, they will find a way to avoid paying it. Just look at Bezos---he recently moved his primary residence to FL from WA So both are no income tax states. But WA just implemented a Cap Gains tax (not on home sales and a lot of other stuff, just on basically those who sell stock options/stock). So Bezos officially moved an 3 months later he sold billions in amazon stock. Now he doesn't owe the state billions either. And it's not just the uber wealthy making moves. With remote work, I have to assume many others may move for 6months/year to a truly tax free state to avoid ridiculous taxes like that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m very worried about the direction of our country. There seems to be an accelerating drift toward socialism with the forced distribution of wealth. The famous quote about socialism working until you run out of other people’s money keeps coming to mind. What are people’s thoughts on this?

My thought is....is there someone with too much time on their hands starting all these threads just to get people riled up for their own entertainment? Or is someone or some organization funding an effort to go on various popular message and discussion boards and start threads to get people riled up to increase the perception of strong political divides, reduce confidence in the government, and generally contribute to the negative climate in the US?

OP was disappointed that their post on eliminating the 401k was met with too much unified condemnation. So, they switched to a broader topic.

That doesn't make sense to me. The Eliminate 401K thread when I read it was about how it only benefitted the rich, so do away with it. That seems completely opposite of this OP's intent. Perhaps that thread morphed. I only read the beginning and didn't go back.

The point isn't to get people on one side or the other, its to get people arguing and unhappy with each other. And agree, the 401(k) one was the one that really seemed out of left field and like part of a disinformation campaign "some people are saying....".

I just see so many threads on here, Reddit, in the comments on the Post that I just have a hard time believing are real Americans, now that I know what the Russians are up to. They just seem designed to provoke arguments or allow the introduction of confusing/erroneous information, not to raise an actual question or open a genuine discussion.

If we are being honest, I am a decently wealthy and would do everything in my power to maintain status quo.

My family is my priority and my assets protect them.

Let it ride baby!

A mix of both, which is what we currently have in the United States.

I strongly believe in incentives, the market place, etc. People should be able to get rich on a good idea.

But people also need a strong safety net when it comes to health insurance, shelter, public schooling, retirement, and public safety. Taxes are what make us civilized, instead of serfs and warlords.

Capitalism is about choice and as a concept, capitalism is the best way forward. Not without issues and harder than socialism but given human nature, capitalism is long run the more effective way.

Socialism (not communism) is the "best" way but human nature can't handle it. Socialism is truly about people working together and helping one another. Socialism dictates equality which human beings and most animals just aren't going to abide by. This is why public schools have so many issues - this notion of equality for all - kids aren't going to be able to learn equally because people are not the same.

This is applicable to this argument that while capitalism will always hurt some people, this is nevertheless the reality of life. We have to have choices and some will reap the rewards more than others. Greed is a part of human nature and Socialism does not account for it and that's why it won't work long run. You can however have socialism work as a stop-gap for government to effectively run a society but financially speaking, socialism does not work.

Better for whom? If you can answer that you will have an answer to your question.

Free markets.

Will not dispute socialism can be great, if there is tons of money and a strong incentive to keep the populace happy.

Without giving away too much, I grew up in a company town in a very undesirable to most location. The company was very profitable and knew they could not maintain a skilled work force without a great living environment, which was achieved through a benign authoritarian company. It was an wonderful place to grow up, in line with the ideals of socialism, but if the money had dried up, if needs and wants of the work force had not been diligently tended to, or if scofflaws not been quickly fired and in effect exiled, the town would have collapsed immediately.

Anonymous wrote:This is an undergrad research topic. OP, just use ChatGPT like the rest of your classmates. You lazy.

Love it!

I think we should have better socialized medicine. It’s not capitalism all the way or we turn into Cuba. There is lots of middle ground. Western Europe does well with capitalism but has a much better ( not perfect) health care system and provides better for the elderly etc.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m very worried about the direction of our country. There seems to be an accelerating drift toward socialism with the forced distribution of wealth. The famous quote about socialism working until you run out of other people’s money keeps coming to mind. What are people’s thoughts on this?

My thought is....is there someone with too much time on their hands starting all these threads just to get people riled up for their own entertainment? Or is someone or some organization funding an effort to go on various popular message and discussion boards and start threads to get people riled up to increase the perception of strong political divides, reduce confidence in the government, and generally contribute to the negative climate in the US?

OP was disappointed that their post on eliminating the 401k was met with too much unified condemnation. So, they switched to a broader topic.

That doesn't make sense to me. The Eliminate 401K thread when I read it was about how it only benefitted the rich, so do away with it. That seems completely opposite of this OP's intent. Perhaps that thread morphed. I only read the beginning and didn't go back.