55 Reasons Why Socialism Sucks

11 Comments

1. That was excellent and well articulated, clear and concise.

   • Thank you for the kind comment Chris.

2. Let freedom reign!!

3. Whilst I fully agree that the problem with Socialism on the whole, is eventually you run out of other people’s money. I was led to this page via your tweet on ‘if you don’t like socialism then reject your social security benefits’ Do you honestly believe the employer would pass on the 6.2% to the employees?! As if!! In a country where millions of the lowest hourly paid workers (in the food & beverages industry) are earning a shitty $8.88 at McDonalds, and no, lets not simplify the median income of $63,179, use the more realistic (being that these are the people who will no doubt be reliant on social security benefits) were the household income is purely by labor of individuals, 2 adults, 40 hours a week, $34,099,20 so over the 45 years its around $153,444 also you have used the median HOUSEHOLD income yet when calculating your cost benefit for retirement you base it solely on ONE recipient… so it wouldn’t just be $1503 per month! And, correct me if I’m wrong (as I am a Brit not an American) based on your ‘state & local government spend’ page you show a graph of the increasing trend in public welfare spend since 1977… well the fact SS was came into effect in 1935 then of course there is going to be a continuous climb as old aged people will be eligible to collect! Now if it’s no longer funding to a surplus, then those who are exempt (crackpot religious zealots/cargo cult/Mormon/Scientology/Waco oddities) should cough up, or the unscrupulous cities/states that hold closed meetings with fortune 500 companies (Amazon, Waltmart etc) giving upwards to $90bn in tax breaks etc for the 99% to prove the 1% they have the privilege of there presence… Oh look what at revenues collected from corporate taxes compared to those on payroll state & federal.
   Social Security tax is a regressive tax, which takes a larger percentage of income from low-income earners than from their high-income counterparts.
   You have also misquoted Churchill in regard to Socialism & Social Security, his view on the latter being:
   Reducing poverty
   The Labour Government introduced a number of reforms and changes in order to attempt to tackle the Five Giants – disease, want, squalor, ignorance and idleness
   Between 1906 when the Liberal Party won the General Election through until 1914, the Liberal Government passed a number of reforms to try to reduce poverty.
   The reforms aimed to help the following people:
   young, old, sick, unemployed, want, squalor, idleness.

   Winston Churchill summed up the aim of the Liberals. He said If we see a drowning man we do not drag him to the shore. Instead, we provide help to allow him to swim ashore.

   In other words, the Liberals wanted to provide some help for the poorer sections of society in order that they could help themselves.

   And (phew!!) my last gripe is relating to education, listed as one the 55, Government controlled education. I presume you are not opposed to government/tax payer quality education for all children up until college? In relation to college (universities in the UK) I agree that students should bear some of the financial costs for higher education (UK is 3 years at £9250 per year paid in advance from the Government, with 9% payable on your salary over & above £25000) oblique comparisons to US college fees & Sweden are totally misleading.Your argument fails immediately with the statement ‘In this article we will find how much the average European (specifically Swedish) pays over their life in taxes for their “free” college and compare it to how much American students pay’ Swedish, as well as EU/EEA citizens pay nothing for college So, as a Brit (until at least 2021 with Brexit) I am able to study without costs. Compared to the cost of tuition and fees at at a private college in the US, which cost an average of $34,740 per year in the 2017-2018 school year, according to the College Board. Stop f*cking moving the goalposts with half truths ‘ the average US students pay between $27,080 – $39,880 PER YEAR!
   National income tax, is only paid on annual income over a certain amount. On taxable income between 438,901 kronor and 638,500 kronor (roughly $77,900), you pay 20 percent in national income tax, which rises to 25 percent over 638,500 kronor
   On top of this high rate state income tax comes local income tax, paid on all annual income over 18,800 kronor (roughly $2,295). These rates also vary year to year and depend on where you live, but in 2017 and 2018 the average is roughly 11 percent in county tax and 21 percent in municipality.
   So on average, those in the highest earnings bracket will pay 56 percent of their taxable income to the taxman. ($77,660) Childcare $125pm US $1230pm. 16 months maternity leave for BOTH parents at 80% of salary. US only industrial country with zero paternity rights. Pro-life… joke!
   For a full breakdown of Swedens benefits:

   https://www.theguardian.com/money/2008/nov/16/sweden-tax-burden-welfare

   • Hey Gary, thanks for the elaborate comment. Even though we disagree, I appreciate the thought you put into it.

     You commented on 2 different articles besides this one, I’ll respond in kind.

     In the social security article, you mentioned you doubt the employer would pass on the savings. Yes, I do believe that is the case. Maybe not immediately, but over time the market forces price movement in a free economy. So agree to disagree, obviously outside of monopolies. They won’t get all of it, but a piece of it. You are right I used only one recipient for this article, good catch. I updated the article in response. (Naturally, it still doesn’t compare to a potential millions of dollars which that number does not change – we are still losing out on a ton of money when considering inflation). Finally, yes the fact that SS was old and is going to climb in cost as older people can collect is exactly the point… and the problem. It’s a Ponzi scheme.

     I also am not a fan of the wealthy or big business, so you’re preaching to the choir here. I don’t understand why you think this applies to SS, it’s still a trash system regardless of who is paying for it. I’d rather have health or infrastructure.

     As for the quote, it is not misstated. See sources. I took it directly from the Winston Churchill education website. I am not saying he hated all forms of socialism for everything, it’s just a fun quote.

     You then mentioned my article on colleges and said: “Your argument fails immediately. Swedish, as well as EU/EEA citizens pay nothing for college”: You clearly did not read the article. You do pay. It’s not magically free. You just pay through tax. It’s the same thing with social security. Instead of paying through a 401k or retirement you’re paying through social security tax for the same thing (retirement v college). Instead of paying directly for college you’re paying for it through taxes during your entire working life. As for the “average college costs 30k per year”, you are wholly misinformed about the average American student. Some may pay that much, but that is personal choice. Please recheck the sources I provided that explain the price deviation in the US within that article. Finally, you’re also using the Guardian as a source for tax that is dated 2008. I used a recent year official Swedish government websites for their costs and tax rates. Your article completely misses indirect taxes. Even the left leaning websites agree it is around 70% (see sources below). Conservatives push it even higher. I used the liberal estimate. Which is conservative, ironically.

     As a last remark, you mentioned paternity rights and the irony of them in the fact of the pro-life crowd. I agree. You divert the argument to somehow try to justify a 70% tax rate in favor of these things. You realize we could have capitalistic-like systems and still have parental protections, right? It is not solely a socialist invention. It is completely unrelated to the college topic you are debating. Yet, I agree with big business being evil and parental rights being an issue in the US. We should have much better paternity/maternity systems in place. So again, preaching to the choir. But that doesn’t mean we should become socialist. They are not mutually exclusive.

     Socialism is another term for a planned economy, capitalism a free market economy. Not whatever you invent in your head.

     Regardless of our disagreements, thanks for the comment.

     https://www.hiddendominion.com/how-rich-are-the-worlds-richest-families-ridiculously/
     https://www.hiddendominion.com/the-cost-of-free-college/
     https://www.hiddendominion.com/reject-your-social-security-socialism/
     https://www.hiddendominion.com/expand-social-security-not-financially-viable/
     https://www.hiddendominion.com/the-american-healthcare-system-is-a-disaster/
     https://www.hiddendominion.com/state-and-local-government-spend-most-of-their-money-on-welfare/

     Sources:
     https://winstonchurchill.hillsdale.edu/socialism-is-the-philosophy-of-failure-winston-churchill/
     https://www.peoplespolicyproject.org/2019/01/05/sweden-has-a-70-percent-tax-rate-and-it-is-fine/

   • Gary, the reasons you give for the problems you cite have nothing to do with Free Market Capitalism.

     Progressive Socialists or I do believe they are calling themselves Cultural Marxists at the moment created that mess.

     All ideologies to the left are based upon chattel slavery with the extreme left being complete control and the extreme right without leaders, anarchy.

4.  Tick off the programs to delete:
    
   [link removed]

   • Your link breaks my comment policy. Do not plague my readers with idiocy.
      
     The link purports to detail ways socialism has improved the US, with the very first item being the military. Completely oblivious to the fact that socialism is an economic and social system defined by social ownership of the means of production and workers’ self-management of enterprises. IE: socialism is not ‘paying tax’. Every governmental form collects tax. The author of your article does not understand what socialism is and neither do you.

5. This rant is about ‘Socialist’ states!
    
   Not about socialism and the benefits of non-Capitalist/LaissezFaire systems
   (which are destructive to a nation – Proven)

   • The socialist state is a state that uses socialism as an economic system. Your comment doesn’t make sense. Don’t pivot to problems with capitalism (which certainly also exists) to justify a separate failed system.

6. History repeats.

Comments are closed.