[Goranhammer]

Here's a question to the socialists at heart.

Say the boot was on the other foot. What if you had a job that paid well in a capitalist market, and was continuing your education to obtain a master's degree for a healthy raise, and I was an unemployed, unskilled worker not really wanting to be a "wage slave" for my life.

Would you still cling to all aspects of socialism?

I'm not saying, of course, all socialists are unemployed, but I know one on here that is Overall though, this is just a "different perspective" post though.

Knowing I was leeching off you, and I'm definitely not alone, would you still back me up by continuing in this system? Or would you condemn me? Would you quietly do the things I didn't want to do, or would you suggest I go somewhere that I would have to do what you do to survive?

Opinions, please.

[Cap]

...so, you feel that Capitalists are producers and Socialists are consumers? All socialists are lazy?

Is this honestly the way you view these things? This is, of course, only my interpretation of what your statements imply... but you seem very clear in what you are suggesting. Re-read your post.


What do you mean by "leech off the system"?

Do you think all socialists are, excuse the term, "welfare bums"... who just want to "live off the government" and not do any work?

You have a very distorted view of socialism, and I'm sorry to say, your post isn't a "different perspective" post as you say... it's the false perspective continually put forth by capitalists. (see my sig)

It's not that socialists don't want to work, it's that they simply want everyone to have their basic needs taken care of.

I'm not saying that socialism is the answer for that, only that capitalism is not providing that, even for those who work their asses off... while some who haven't done much work, are living in great excess and waste.

That's all it is. Even if one is just an unskilled, uneducated worker... they should be able to provide for themselves and their family, as a basic human right.

You agree we need a working class... it's a necessary part of any society, but why must so many of them live in poverty? Should the working class not be given enough of the wealth of the nation to afford health insurance, or college education so their children can not be workers?


Cap

[Goranhammer]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
...so, you feel that Capitalists are producers and Socialists are consumers? All socialists are lazy?

Is this honestly the way you view these things? This is, of course, only my interpretation of what your statements imply... but you seem very clear in what you are suggesting. Re-read your post.

No, I don't think all socialists are lazy. If they were all like that, the rich couldn't support the poor because there would be no rich. How can you evenly divide no income? It may be an extremist view, but I do believe that there is alot of that going on, most likely by the younger people of a nation.

I do believe that the professionals in a socialist state are probably the most altruistic and selfless people alive. A doctor who would work in Canada for significantly less and pay significantly more in taxes will earn my respect. He would be a bigger man than I.

You agree we need a working class... it's a necessary part of any society, but why must so many of them live in poverty? Should the working class not be given enough of the wealth of the nation to afford health insurance, or college education so their children can not be workers?

More do not live in poverty than do. In addition, college is an option open to pretty much anyone in America that wants it and is willing to do what it takes. I know I didn't pay for all or even most of my tuition.

[Vivisekt]

Here's a question to the socialists at heart.

Well, i'm not a socialist (i'm not really anything) but i think i might be able to bring some relevant perspective to the question all the same, although i cannot directly awnser it as i am not it's intended subject.

What if you had a job that paid well in a capitalist market, and was continuing your education to obtain a master's degree for a healthy raise, and I was an unemployed, unskilled worker not really wanting to be a "wage slave" for my life.

Not too hard to imagine, because that is exactly the financial/educational position that i am currently in with the one exception that i am currently persuing my Ms degree for the knowelege, not the money that will go along with it. I belong to no political party, i support no political ideology, and i do not vote. I would say that as far as class goes, i would be considered by the general populace to be a member of the capitalist burgeois.

Knowing I was leeching off you, and I'm definitely not alone, would you still back me up by continuing in this system? Or would you condemn me? Would you quietly do the things I didn't want to do, or would you suggest I go somewhere that I would have to do what you do to survive?

I can tell you, with all honesty, that despite my success and impending increased upward-mobility within the capitalist environment - i still can't say that i'm enjoying it, or feel attached to it. The posession of "things" do not make me happy, no matter how much the mass media tells me that they should, and neither does working in a system that i see as so detrimental to the intellectual evolution of the human species. Similarly, financial success, while obviously not something that i shun, is not something that i particularly treasure either. I've never considered myself to be a capitalist by ideology (by practice, because i am forced to be), and the values that i feel this sociopolitical system encourages and nourishes (greed, individualistic selfishness, divisiveness, and so on) are some of the most loathsome.

So then... what is the fundamental, ideological difference between myself and the blue-collar worker based upon the contrast of employment and education? I don't see one, honestly.

Given my position as a person in the exact theoretical situation that you have outlined, i would imagine that if i was a commited, ideological socialist that i wouldn't feel any differently about it, despite my success within the system. Personally, i know it would be the principle of the ideology that would have to have been the compelling attraction to socialism...

anybody who would support socialism simply for the purpose of financial betterment is not a real socialist in the first place.

[SpiderMonkey]

Why do I get the feeling this thread is about me?

I can't imagine my circumstances ever affecting my political opinions to be honest. I'm very careful to keep my own desires out of my thought processes about such matters.

[Cap]

More do not live in poverty than do.

My only point is, take the United States for example. Richest country in the world, by FAR.

Why is there any poverty AT ALL?

Seriously. It doesn't make any sense.

You got money for wars but can't feed the poor?

Capitalism has some good things to it, I'm not denying that. But not when you take it too far. Why are hospitals businesses? Why are medications so expensive that people are coming to Canada for them?

It's just not right. Everything doesn't have to be a competition in order to have progress. You end up with a society of greedy individuals who will step on their drowning neighbour's head just to get out of the lake first.

On a side note, not all socialists are "young people", or "unskilled workers". There are socialists in every age group, economic class, and intellectual level.


Cap

[Mark]

Why do I get the feeling this thread is about me?

I can't imagine my circumstances ever affecting my political opinions to be honest. I'm very careful to keep my own desires out of my thought processes about such matters.

FACT: Using 2001 UK voting patterns, the higher you go up social classes (the letter method, divided by jobs), the lower the vote percentage is for Labour and the higher it is for Conservatives.

No anomalous results, just a curve.

Though some rich people cling to socialism, it's less likely. Frankly, we need an ideology that benefits everyone without taking anything away, but I think I may be asking to have my cake and eat it there.

[Goranhammer]

Why do I get the feeling this thread is about me?

I assure you it's not, and I tried to indirectly make statements that would show that. As much as I disagree with your views, I respect your opinion and would never attack you as a person.

My only point is, take the United States for example. Richest country in the world, by FAR.

Why is there any poverty AT ALL?

There has to be. Even if the well-off gave the hopelessly unemployed food and financial aid, wouldn't they still be in poverty? The way most leftists describe "poverty", the rich would have to give over pretty much every last penny they have, and still not all the "poor" people would be at or above the level they would call poverty.

Does a world-class athlete, a famous entertainer, or the inventor of a product in every household deserve only what an average man walking down the street can get? Not in my book.

[Deicidus]

A job, a decent house to live in and food on the table seems to be way to much to ask. And this crap about financial and food aid, its just bulshit. It's charity and charity has nothing to do with justice. Feed a man on the street today, will that help him to eat tommorow. no. They need to be able to take care of themslves. If they physicly or mentally can't, the society will take care of them. Because whatever pro-capitalism folks always say, there IS'NT a job for everyone who wants one.

[walkingbeard]

Does a world-class athlete, a famous entertainer, or the inventor of a product in every household deserve only what an average man walking down the street can get? Not in my book.

(Goranhammer)

This is not what many socialists stand for. If you pursue that path, you are going towards communism and onward. In a socialist state, the athlete, the entertainer and the inventor do get more than the guy walking down the street. But the law of the state makes sure that the average guy (or the poorest) still gets a comfortable life, even if they never reach the heights of the other three.

It a state with socialist ideals, the athlete and entertainer would not make quite as much as they do in current American or British culture (there are plenty of other people who work as hard as these people), but since they are providing something which in a way is unique, they will always be making slightly more out of their lot, than the grocer's assistant.

Frankly, we need an ideology that benefits everyone without taking anything away, but I think I may be asking to have my cake and eat it there.

(Mark)

Unfortunately, you are probably right. The problem that socialists have with capitalists is that they whine and whine when somebody takes something of theirs away, but at the end of the day, they have taken that from somebody else. They might have paid for it, but a deal where both parties agree to it may not be a fair deal.

[walkingbeard]

A job, a decent house to live in and food on the table seems to be way to much to ask. And this crap about financial and food aid, its just bulshit. It's charity and charity has nothing to do with justice. Feed a man on the street today, will that help him to eat tommorow. no.

I agree. In a way, I have much respect for big charities, that send huge deliveries of food and medicine etc. to poor countries and warring countries, but the only thing that will change that country into a better place is the replacement of their current system with one that champions the basic needs of its people and gives them out free. While the charities continue, hard-hit people have an excuse not to fight against their bad governments and natural hardships.

[walkingbeard]

In response to the original text:

People already do leech off me. Every time I go to the shop and buy something, I pay Value Added Tax.

It will get worse when I leave University. I intend to start a small co-operative music club. I will then be eligible for Council Tax, Income Tax and I think probably Capital Gains tax. I will make a fair amount of money from my club, if everything goes according to plan. But I will not complain. I really actually do want a socialist state. With higher taxation for higher earners and so on.

I accept that the world needs people to everything. Not everyone is a great businessman, not everyone knows have to earn £70,000 a year programming video games. We need dustmen and grocers' assistants. There are going to be people with only one arm and single mothers and a plethora of other people who basically sponge off others. But that is not something to be ashamed of, or to try and get round, because I, the entrepreneur, am lucky enough to have been brought up with parents who didn't drink too much, didn't hit me and did their best to make sure I had a comfortable life. They sent me to a nice school, in a conservative part of England, where academic achievement and subsequent business success are held up on high. I am at the University of Glasgow, among the most highly respected of Britain's universities.

I still want a socialist state. I still want those who have not had my amazing opportunities to feel fine about taking my money and using the roads, health service and so on that I helped pay for. I live in this community, protected by its laws and its people, so I want to look after it and do the best for it that I can.