Do the people that support Bernie Sanders really know what Socialism is?

PO2 Mark Saffell — Mon, 15 Feb 2016 07:09:14 -0500

Here I will help define it:

Full Definition of socialism
1
: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods

Response by PO2 Mark Saffell made Feb 15 at 2016 7:09 AM

PO2 Mark Saffell — Mon, 15 Feb 2016 07:09:48 -0500

it would not let me post the complete definition so I will here.

Full Definition of socialism
1
: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2
a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property
b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3
: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done

Response by Sgt Tom Cunnally made Feb 15 at 2016 7:35 AM

Sgt Tom Cunnally — Mon, 15 Feb 2016 07:35:35 -0500

No but once again Bernie knows that people will vote for a Democrat Candidate who promises free stuff. Even though they know there is no such thing as a free lunch and they know our country now has $19 Trillion National Debt. Bernie plans to tax the rich to get our of this mess and angry voters are buying into this socialism without realizing the effect this will have on our economy

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made Feb 15 at 2016 8:06 AM

Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS — Mon, 15 Feb 2016 08:06:00 -0500

The problem as "I" see it:

Pareto Principle (80-20 Rule): It's a "simple" measure of Wealth Distribution. 80% of the people have 20% of the wealth, and conversely 20% of the people have 80% of the wealth. If taken to it's natural "mathematical conclusion" we end up with the "1% argument" where 1% of the population owns 99% of the resources. Keep this in mind for a second.

Democracy (1 man, 1 vote): Seems like a really great idea, except when you look at things like Wealth/Resource Distribution (see above). The second the Majority (80%) realize that they can VOTE to redistribute the Resources (aka Wealth) of the Minority (20%) the economy collapses.

Charismatic Based Leaders, using a "Fairness" (Subjective) Argument to convince the Majority that they "Deserve" said resources.

"If" We look at Economic Systems like a GAME, say Monopoly for instance, everyone starts out on "even footing." The Game is inherently Fair. Some players will have natural skill advantages which allow them to change the existing resource distribution to their favor over the course of the game. However, we have a Banker (Government) we ensures that no one is "booted" from the game. Everyone still gets to play.

An argument can be made that some players do manipulate the rules for unfair advantage. However, that doesn't mean that we should flip the table and play a different game. It just means we need to adjust specific rules which are being abused.

Unfortunately because "many" people do not understand Economics, or Government processes, they "believe" that modifying specific aspects will enhance their standard of living. It might, however we're a closed system, therefore it will be at someone else's expense. At that point we get into Philosophy and Belief Systems rather than Economics & Government theory however.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 15 at 2016 8:31 AM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 15 Feb 2016 08:31:28 -0500

If we are going to discuss socialism as it pertains to Bernie S anders, may as well look at his own words and ideas as to how he defines what he is talking about.

http://www.salon.com/2015/11/21/bernie_sanders_12_best_reasons_for_being_a_democratic_socialist_partner/

The 12 best reasons to be a democratic socialist

Bernie's latest speech is a triumph -- and a reminder that our greatest domestic programs are rooted in socialism

Response by PO1 William "Chip" Nagel made Feb 15 at 2016 9:22 AM

PO1 William "Chip" Nagel — Mon, 15 Feb 2016 09:22:21 -0500

"All forms of Government are "Socialist" the Opposite of Socialism is not Capitalism but rather Anarchy". It is just a choice of what kind of "Socialism" you prefer one that benefits a small elite at the top or one that benefits society as a whole.

Response by MCPO Roger Collins made Feb 15 at 2016 10:39 AM

MCPO Roger Collins — Mon, 15 Feb 2016 10:39:55 -0500

January 27, 1838

At what point shall we expect the approach of danger? By what means shall we fortify against it? Shall we expect some transatlantic military giant to step the ocean and crush us at a blow? Never! All the armies of Europe, Asia, and Africa combined, with all the treasure of the earth in their military chests; with a Buonaparte for a commander, could not by force take a drink from the Ohio, or make a track on the Blue Ridge, in the trial of a thousand years.
At what point then is the approach of danger to be expected? I answer, if it ever reach us, it must spring up amongst us. It cannot come from abroad. If destruction be our lot, we ourselves must be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen, we must live through all time, or die by suicide.

Response by CPO Frank Coluccio made Feb 15 at 2016 11:30 AM

CPO Frank Coluccio — Mon, 15 Feb 2016 11:30:51 -0500

Response by CPO Frank Coluccio made Feb 15 at 2016 11:37 AM

CPO Frank Coluccio — Mon, 15 Feb 2016 11:37:21 -0500

Socialism creates lines FOR bread.
Capitalism creates lines OF bread.

Response by TSgt Kenneth Ellis made Feb 15 at 2016 11:45 AM

TSgt Kenneth Ellis — Mon, 15 Feb 2016 11:45:53 -0500

I was talking to a High School senior. And I asked who he liked in the election. And my mouth dropped when he said Bernie Sanders. My reply you know he is a Socialist.

Response by PO1 Glenn Boucher made Feb 15 at 2016 12:57 PM

PO1 Glenn Boucher — Mon, 15 Feb 2016 12:57:22 -0500

I doubt that many people truly understand Socialism, myself included.
Yes I know the definition and the concept behind it but the examples we have seen in history suggest even the true Socialists don't really have an idea what they are doing.
There is no such thing as free education, free meals, free health care, etc., in the end its usually the middle class supporting the taxes because we cannot qualify for enough of the tax breaks or hide our money in off shore banking.
You can raise the tax all you want on rich people, and they will find more ways to reduce their actual taxable income by hiding more money or putting it into investments.
The only thing that will change is how the rich move their money around to protect it.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 15 at 2016 1:40 PM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 15 Feb 2016 13:40:31 -0500

Im 19, and its absolutely embarrassing to see 90% of my peers supporting an avowed socialist with out knowing to repercussions of the choice they are about to make. When you offer the lazy free stuff i guess you really grab the attention. Socialism has failed numerous time, failed everywhere it was adopted. Look at Venezuela , Since Venezuela embraced socialism in 1999, poverty, crime and corruption have all increased. Grocery shelves are empty and the annual inflation rate is estimated to be as high as 200%. Everythingyou possess is subject to confiscation and redistribution. Harworking and productive people are punished while parasites are rewarded, but youll always have those people who want something for nothing.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 15 at 2016 2:03 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 15 Feb 2016 14:03:41 -0500

I get why people want this socialism so bad, For the same reasons that the Nazi supporters wanted Hitler so bad. It sounded great on paper and when spoken with passion, the ideas are tremendous and aspire to the good in all people. Its still a bunch of HorseCrap.

One of they many things that confound me in confusion is the phrase "the (richer) will pay their fair share in taxes". In particular in section 10, the last line, he is implying that most of Americans can pay a lower tax if the hedge fund managers will pay their fair share in taxes. Somehow those are unicorn wishes. Even if you tax the top 15 people who make billions and billions and billions, at the allegedly same rate of someone who is make over 70k a year, that is not going to reduce the tax burden of everyone else. It just doesn't add up to me.

In my mind, in theory the only way to quantify the "fair share" lie of the super rich is to more or less tax their wealth (income and current account levels) down to the same amount that everyone else has. For instance, if it is supposed by the government that a family of 3, will get by comfortably with 60k a year, then you'd have to take away all the money from the bazillionaires until they are at the prescribed rate of income for their family level. In my opinion you would have to have a set rate of what is expected income for each family size, and if you make more than that, it gets taxed at a ridiculous rate, and if you make less than that you can get subsidized so you can also live a comfortable life.

"You can legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity".... it just doesn't work. For being a strong conservative leaning constitutional libertarian, wouldn't it be great to get 60k a year regardless of whether you work or not...

Maybe I'm reading too far into this, but this is still not freedom, this is still not what the Constitution is about, and this is not what the Revolutionary and Civil War was fought over. This is nothing that America is about. America is a Constitutional Republic style government. not a democracy, not a socialism, and not a democratic socialist.... Sure our Constitutional Republic County has many band aids and other amendments to sway it to the democracy a bit, but America is about individual freedom, and playing the cards you were dealt. not begging the government for more cards.

Anyways that my opinion

Response by CPT Jack Durish made Feb 15 at 2016 7:04 PM

CPT Jack Durish — Mon, 15 Feb 2016 19:04:24 -0500

Bernie doesn't understand socialism. How can anyone expect this admirers to understand it?

Response by LTC David Brown made Feb 15 at 2016 7:58 PM

LTC David Brown — Mon, 15 Feb 2016 19:58:41 -0500

All you really need to know is toilet paper is hard to get in Venezuela. Plan ahead if Bernie is elected. The slick pages in the Sears catalogue are the last ones used, but a news paper subscription can work, not for the news...

Response by LTC David Brown made Feb 15 at 2016 8:09 PM

LTC David Brown — Mon, 15 Feb 2016 20:09:31 -0500

How is the great society and war on poverty going? Hmmm and Bernie wants more of the same??

Response by PO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 15 at 2016 9:09 PM

PO1 Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 15 Feb 2016 21:09:31 -0500

Raise your hand if you think that the United States would actually turn into Stalin's Russia or Chavez's Venezuela if Bernie Sanders is elected. Regardless of a president's political beliefs, we have these institutions called the Congress and the Supreme Court. No president in modern times has gotten his way 100%. If you are scared of the USA becoming the USSR under Sanders, then you should be concerned about the US becoming Nazi Germany under Trump.

*Note: This is directed at a broad audience and not the OP.