Why Does Socialism Have a Negative Connotation?

[summerteeth]

I stand corrected, but you are incorrect as well, Norway is in the top ten:

http://www.therichest.com/business/the-top-10-highest-average-salary-per-country/13/

The WHO ranks a lot of countries better then the US in terms of health care systems then the US:

http://thepatientfactor.com/canadia...zations-ranking-of-the-worlds-health-systems/

http://www.theatlantic.com/health/a...ankings-of-17-nations-us-is-dead-last/267045/

So exactly how does the US have a better health care system then those countries?

Those countries also have a far lower crime rate then the US. In a happiness index, these countries beat the US:

http://psychcentral.com/blog/archiv...live-in-one-of-the-most-prosperous-countries/

I stand by my statement that many of the Social Democratic countries beat in the US in many key areas. In terms of education, health care, safety, clean environment, etc. If the US is the best country in the world why are these countries ahead in these areas?

Norway is not in the top 10, I have no idea what the Richest.com is but that is not a credible source. OECD has them outside the top 10 I will go with the OECD. I didn't say that we had a better healthcare system, I said we have a higher life expectancy than Denmark. Sorry, but how do you measure happiness? You are talking to a son of a behaviorist, I don't see how happiness is quantifiable. They have better education and better health, but like I said we spend more than they do on education so how are we supposed to learn from their model exactly?

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

While the social democratic system works in the Nordic Countries, I don't think it's a system where one size fits all.

The Nordic Countries really benefit from having really small populations (none of them go above 10 million), which makes a universal health care system really easy to manage. Compare that to the United States with a population of over 300 million. The Nordic Countries benefit from having much better diets than Americans, the awful American diet has really plagued our health care system with problems associated with obesity, something that universal health care isn't going to fix.

And culturally, the people in the Nordic Countries are much more willing to accept the costs of maintaining a high quality health care system as opposed to Americans. Politicians do not have the stomach to raise the necessary revenues to maintain a high quality universal health care system and Americans just don't like paying taxes in general. Hell, we gained our independence simply because we didn't like paying our taxes.

Well maybe universal healthcare can be imposed state by state since many states compare to Nordic countries in population.

and Americans fought taxation WITHOUT REPRESENTATION, not simply taxation.

Something I think the Tea Party forgets.

 

[wiegeabo]

Vermont went to a single payer system not long ago. We'll have to keep an eye on them.

 

[The Overlord]

Norway is not in the top 10, I have no idea what the Richest.com is but that is not a credible source. OECD has them outside the top 10 I will go with the OECD. I didn't say that we had a better healthcare system, I said we have a higher life expectancy than Denmark. Sorry, but how do you measure happiness? You are talking to a son of a behaviorist, I don't see how happiness is quantifiable. They have better education and better health, but like I said we spend more than they do on education so how are we supposed to learn from their model exactly?

I'm pretty sure that was a psychological survey used as a poll, that was done on a psychology web site. We use polling to determine people's opinions on various issues, why couldn't use that to gather information on how happy the population. Yes happiness is just a feeling, but more well off societies are happier then other societies.

Also has Norway always not always been in the top ten, because this OECD poll from the recent past put them pretty high up. Maybe Norway fell behind temporarily.

http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/sites/...?itemId=/content/chapter/soc_glance-2011-6-en

Plus while the us may have a higher life expectancy the Denmark, that doesn't change the fact that several other western Democracies have a higher life expectancy then the US, including Norway and Sweden, so just beating out Denmark in this regard doesn't mean much really.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expectancy

I don't think the US has a huge median income advantage over Norway, certainly not one that off sets all the areas Norway excels ahead of the US. Especially since the US has some of the highest income inequality in the Western world:

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tan...n-rise-for-decades-is-now-highest-since-1928/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_equality

 

[summerteeth]

I'm pretty sure that was a psychological survey used as a poll, that was done on a psychology web site. We use polling to determine people's opinions on various issues, why couldn't use that to gather information on how happy the population. Yes happiness is just a feeling, but more well off societies are happier then other societies.

Also has Norway always not always been in the top ten, because this OECD poll from the recent past put them pretty high up. Maybe Norway fell behind temporarily.

http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/sites/...?itemId=/content/chapter/soc_glance-2011-6-en

Plus while the us may have a higher life expectancy the Denmark, that doesn't change the fact that several other western Democracies have a higher life expectancy then the US, including Norway and Sweden, so just beating out Denmark in this regard doesn't mean much really.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expectancy

I don't think the US has a huge median income advantage over Norway, certainly not one that off sets all the areas Norway excels ahead of the US. Especially since the US has some of the highest income inequality in the Western world:

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tan...n-rise-for-decades-is-now-highest-since-1928/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_equality

In regards to Norway's income their median income hasn't grown while others have, I would guess it has to do with the recession and other countries who were hit hard by it recovering. Norway was probably not hit as hard...just speculating given the time frame.

My point about Denmark is that even though they have socialized medicine they aren't outliving us, showing that socialized medicine is not a panacea. US has a pretty significant median income advantage of about

The difference is very significant especially if you dig deeper. The average household financial worth in Norway is about 7,000 dollars the OECD average is $40,000. America's average household worth is $115,000. Sorry, but that is extremely significant.

 

[hippie_hunter]

I'm not saying you can apply something in Norway in the US, that would be silly. But it wouldn't hurt to look at countries to see what they are doing, rather then dismissing everything they do out of hand. Like I said there is a right wing spin machine in the US, that tries to deem anything left of center as radical and out of the mainstream, though the machine is not what it used be, with the Republicans themselves becoming very radical. When have the likes of Glenn Beck saying many sort of left of center policy will lead to Stalinism, its hard to have a rational debate. Some conservatives in the US take the slippery slope argument to insane degrees and imply that a Social Democracy like Norway will lead to a Red Fascist like North Korea or indeed anything left of center will lead to a red fascist state.

The left is just as bad in portraying the right in America as nothing but bunch of Tea Party loony racist wackos. For every Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck you have a Ed Schultz and Keith Olbermann. For some reason the left likes to ignore that their side is just as bad with the spin as the conservative media.

 

[hippie_hunter]

Well maybe universal healthcare can be imposed state by state since many states compare to Nordic countries in population.

States don't exactly have the resources that the Federal government has. Not only that, but you also have to take into account that the states don't have the right to control fiscal policy or print money. Look at Europe where the excesses of the welfare state are now starting to bite a lot of European Union member states in the ass because they don't have the flexibility to adjust their currency. If Denmark, Norway, and Sweden had adopted the euro, I think we'd start seeing their social systems start to feel the strain of having a currency union without the fiscal union attached to it.

If nations like France and Germany are having a hard time getting their finances in check along with managing the welfare state, what makes you think that New York or Texas can do it?

and Americans fought taxation WITHOUT REPRESENTATION, not simply taxation.

Something I think the Tea Party forgets.

Even without representation, the British had every right to impose those taxes, especially since they were being used to pay for the defense of the colonies, not being pocket for the British Treasury.

Vermont went to a single payer system not long ago. We'll have to keep an eye on them.

Vermont is going to be an interesting case and I think we're going to see a lot of success stories out of it. Vermont has the small population to make such a system manageable and the population that has the enthusiasm to make sure that it works. And the Democratic Party in Vermont really isn't a progressive party the way the national Democratic Party is. It's becoming more and more of an actual social democratic party.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

In regards to Norway's income their median income hasn't grown while others have, I would guess it has to do with the recession and other countries who were hit hard by it recovering. Norway was probably not hit as hard...just speculating given the time frame.

My point about Denmark is that even though they have socialized medicine they aren't outliving us, showing that socialized medicine is not a panacea. US has a pretty significant median income advantage of about

The difference is very significant especially if you dig deeper. The average household financial worth in Norway is about 7,000 dollars the OECD average is $40,000. America's average household worth is $115,000. Sorry, but that is extremely significant.

Denmark may not have longer life spans but how many Denmark families go deep into debt due to medical expenses?

That's the main reason people advocate universal healthcare. Families are being ruined by medical expenses.

Medical bills are the biggest cause of bankruptcy in America. That doesn't include the millions of Americans deep in debt due to medical bills and haven't filed for bankruptcy yet.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

States don't exactly have the resources that the Federal government has. Not only that, but you also have to take into account that the states don't have the right to control fiscal policy or print money. Look at Europe where the excesses of the welfare state are now starting to bite a lot of European Union member states in the ass because they don't have the flexibility to adjust their currency. If Denmark, Norway, and Sweden had adopted the euro, I think we'd start seeing their social systems start to feel the strain of having a currency union without the fiscal union attached to it.

If nations like France and Germany are having a hard time getting their finances in check along with managing the welfare state, what makes you think that New York or Texas can do it?

Why do you blame France and Germany's economic troubles on socialism?

America has economic troubles too and we don't have universal healthcare or free college.

and austerity counter-measures aren't helping America or Europe.

Even without representation, the British had every right to impose those taxes, especially since they were being used to pay for the defense of the colonies, not being pocket for the British Treasury.

I think there's a big difference in paying taxes simply to defend the king's territory and paying taxes that allow you to somewhat control how your country is governed and how it advances into the future.

 

[Pink Ranger]

I wonder what this thread would be like if it was 1776 and we had the internet. t:

 

[The Overlord]

In regards to Norway's income their median income hasn't grown while others have, I would guess it has to do with the recession and other countries who were hit hard by it recovering. Norway was probably not hit as hard...just speculating given the time frame.

My point about Denmark is that even though they have socialized medicine they aren't outliving us, showing that socialized medicine is not a panacea. US has a pretty significant median income advantage of about

The difference is very significant especially if you dig deeper. The average household financial worth in Norway is about 7,000 dollars the OECD average is $40,000. America's average household worth is $115,000. Sorry, but that is extremely significant.

Or maybe there is just a temporary lull in Norway's median income that will change in a year or two?

Also if several other Western Democracies have a better life expectancy then the US, beating Denmark in that regard is not very impressive.

Plus you don't seem to factor in that the US has a bigger class divide then other Western democracies, with a shrinking middle class. If the American people are so much more well off then other Western countries, why do we see a huge income inequality gap and a shrinking middle class?

The left is just as bad in portraying the right in America as nothing but bunch of Tea Party loony racist wackos. For every Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck you have a Ed Schultz and Keith Olbermann. For some reason the left likes to ignore that their side is just as bad with the spin as the conservative media.

Olbermann and Schultz have no real influence, a lot people seem to credit Limbaugh, in part for winning 1994 mid term elections for the GOP. The word conservative has never been used as a pejorative the way liberal, socialist and Progressive has.

 

[summerteeth]

Or maybe there is just a temporary lull in Norway's median income that will change in a year or two?

Also if several other Western Democracies have a better life expectancy then the US, beating Denmark in that regard is not very impressive.

Plus you don't seem to factor in that the US has a bigger class divide then other Western democracies, with a shrinking middle class. If the American people are so much more well off then other Western countries, why do we see a huge income inequality gap and a shrinking middle class?

Norway's median income is low, the average wealth of a household is extremely low, virtually to the point where private ownership doesn't exist. $7,000 are you kidding me?

The reason why I have not commented on income inequality gap because I do not perceive it as a problem. We know that areas (U.S. cities) can have high income inequality and social mobility levels that are comparable to the Nordic countries (San Francisco and San Diego come to mind). The middle class shrank because we were hit hard by the recession prior to the recession even with large income inequality the middle class' income was growing. It will grow again, the middle class has also had to adjust to the technology and information age as different types of skills are needed moving forward.

Healthcare costs being the leading cause for bankruptcy brings us back to the crux of the issue. The cost of healthcare is astronomical and the reasons for that is the market is not operating efficiently because of regulations that have led to fewer choices which allows insurance companies to gouge you. The same goes for the AMA, they limit the pool of doctors so they can make more. The amount of doctors per capita in the U.S. is extremely low, so again simple economics if their is little supply and a large demand costs will go up. Many times too a nurse practitioner does most of the work anyways, I've been happy to see CVS and their minute clinics pop up. Things like this will help towards bringing down the costs. Government action and Union action have combined to create a very inefficient market place that has led to higher costs for the average American. These could be remedied pretty easily without socializing what 1/5 of the economy?

 

[hippie_hunter]

Why do you blame France and Germany's economic troubles on socialism?

You're misreading my post. I'm saying that because the members of the Eurozone don't have the ability to set their own currency policies (just like the states in the United States), the welfare state that the member states have set up are just too expensive to maintain. Hence the austerity that they are forced to take.

The states don't have the ability to have a flexible currency, just like with the euro, thus having a strong welfare state will be very difficult for them to maintain. Particularly in states with large populations like California, Illinois, and New York or states that just encourage unhealthy lifestyles like Texas. We're already seeing these states having troubles with pension payments, they're not going to be able to maintain a high-quality health care system. Add in the fact that the American diet will make a universal health care system run by the states all the more difficult.

America has economic troubles too and we don't have universal healthcare or free college.

Economists have a lot more faith in the strength of the American economy than they do with the European economy.

and austerity counter-measures aren't helping America or Europe.

The austerity measures aren't helping Europe, but the Eurozone member-states have no choice with the rules set forth by the euro guidelines. And the debt getting out of control in the PIIGS nations made things even worse.

The "austerity" measures being taken in America barely count as austerity.

I think there's a big difference in paying taxes simply to defend the king's territory

The King's territory that they happen to live on.

and paying taxes that allow you to somewhat control how your country is governed and how it advances into the future.

Which is what the British taxes wanted to do. They wanted to fulfill their responsibilities to their citizens, the American colonists, in being able to protect them.

 

[hippie_hunter]

Olbermann and Schultz have no real influence,

Olbermann lost influence because he ended up destroying himself wherever he went. If he didn't have the ego that ruined his career, he would still be a major player in political conversation the way Rachel Maddow is today. Ed Schultz is a reflection of the attitudes that many progressives have today as well.

a lot people seem to credit Limbaugh, in part for winning 1994 mid term elections for the GOP. The word conservative has never been used as a pejorative the way liberal, socialist and Progressive has.

Oh, so that's why we see Democrats use "right-wing" and "Tea Party" and "conservative" as dirty words all the ****ing time.

What you're really doing, is just kinda reinforcing how the left in America somehow thinks that they aren't as bad as the right is even though they do the EXACT SAME THINGS. It's just as bad as conservatives acting as if the media is completely dominated by liberals while completely ignoring how powerful Fox News is.

 

[The Overlord]

Olbermann lost influence because he ended up destroying himself wherever he went. If he didn't have the ego that ruined his career, he would still be a major player in political conversation the way Rachel Maddow is today. Ed Schultz is a reflection of the attitudes that many progressives have today as well..

Has anyone ever claimed Schultz and Olbermann ever helped the Democrats win any election? Because you have several people claiming Rush helped the GOP win back in the 1994 Mid Term election. That does make Rush seem more powerful then Schultz and Olbermann.

Oh, so that's why we see Democrats use "right-wing" and "Tea Party" and "conservative" as dirty words all the ****ing time.

What you're really doing, is just kinda reinforcing how the left in America somehow thinks that they aren't as bad as the right is even though they do the EXACT SAME THINGS. It's just as bad as conservatives acting as if the media is completely dominated by liberals while completely ignoring how powerful Fox News is.

If you are expecting me to carry water for the Democrat party, I'm not, I find them a great disappointment.

But in the last election we had several conservatives call Obama a socialist and implied the most negative aspects of that word, did anyone call Romney a fascist or an extreme religious zealot. The worst thing he got called was an out of touch elitist, which is not the same thing.

We still have members of the GOP calling Obama a socialist dictator or some such non sense:

http://www.newsmax.com/NewsmaxTv/rand-paul-obama-government-socialism/2014/02/05/id/551134

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...congressman-calls-obama-a-socialist-dictator/

 

[SV Fan]

We still have members of the GOP calling Obama a socialist dictator or some such non sense

More ironic when they complain he isn't like Putin. lol

The worst part of the socialism criticism, is it gives him creed with the extreme left who don't call him out at times for not being socialist enough

 

[hippie_hunter]

People who call Obama socialist have no idea what they're talking about.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

People who call Obama socialist have no idea what they're talking about.

It's like calling him a Muslim.

A buzzword to help taint his image.

 

[Thundercrack85]

Well no, Obama has made some vaguely socialist rhetoric. Emphasis on rhetoric.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

More ironic when they complain he isn't like Putin. lol

The worst part of the socialism criticism, is it gives him creed with the extreme left who don't call him out at times for not being socialist enough

I wonder what percentage of the left are extreme left.

I think a greater percentage of the right has been pushed to the fringes and it's hurting the cohesiveness of the party.

 

[Thundercrack85]

The right is dominated by extremists in America. Even the moderate conservatives complain about them.

The left is dominated by sane, but not particularly inspiring – or competent – moderate pragmatists.

 

[hippie_hunter]

The right is dominated by extremists in America. Even the moderate conservatives complain about them.

The left is dominated by sane, but not particularly inspiring – or competent – moderate pragmatists.

I wouldn't say that the left isn't dominated by pragmatists. I would say that the more hardcore lefties just know when to shut up as opposed to the hardcore right wingers.

 

[Thundercrack85]

Well, what would you constitute as extreme left wing?

Aside from gun grabbing, and partial-birth abortion nothing much comes to mind.

Gay marriage is now a mainstream concept.

I guess there are the extreme environmentalists, but nobody takes the green party seriously. Most Democrats have given up on real socialized healthcare, and just want water that is only mildly flammable (so, slightly more focused on environment than Republicans).

The Republican party's radical elements just seem much stronger, and sizable.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

I wouldn't say that the left isn't dominated by pragmatists. I would say that the more hardcore lefties just know when to shut up as opposed to the hardcore right wingers.

The reason the right wing extremist are so visable is because they get elected to office across the country. By comparison the lefties who hold office are far more pragmatic and politically correct.

Then again, the Tea Party is considered extreme these days whereas many left-wing policies are mainstream like gay rights, environmentalism, and reproductive rights.

 

[summerteeth]

The right is dominated by extremists in America. Even the moderate conservatives complain about them.

The left is dominated by sane, but not particularly inspiring – or competent – moderate pragmatists.

Dominated? Pretty sure Republicans have nominated a moderate Republican for President the last two election cycles and previously had elected a moderate Republican for President. Tea Party gets headlines because of idiots like Ted Cruz and the tactics they used. Meanwhile the Democratic Party rid themselves of the Blue Dogs the more moderate faction of the party.