Why Socialism is gaining respect

[Hawkeye2j]

When private companies continue to intentionally mislead consumers in order to rip them off, capitalism dies a little more each day.

http://consumerist.com/2010/03/charter-communications-rep-says-cable-companies-taking-over-all-streaming-video-on-may-1st.html

[kres24GT]

Luckily we have the freedom to no longer do business with companies in a free market. Companies that rip off the consumers, we have the power to drive them out of business in a free market. In a Big Government world that isn't the case and companies can rip off customers and stay in business with corporate bailouts or Big Government contracts.

[Hawkeye2j]

The problem is, ripoffs by private companies have become the norm not the exception. Healthcare is the biggest example.

I'll give you another example. My wife kept receiving books in the mail and a bill. She never ordered them or wanted them. When she called the place to tell them to knock it off, they said she would have to send the book back and cancel the account. So to cancel she would have to pay the postage to send it back and still be responsible for the other books she received. I told her to ignore it. It went to a collection agency.

This is what private business is doing. And yet people like you just open your pocket and say I will gladly let you steal from me.

[kres24GT]

The problem is, ripoffs by private companies have become the norm not the exception. Healthcare is the biggest example.

I'll give you another example. My wife kept receiving books in the mail and a bill. She never ordered them or wanted them. When she called the place to tell them to knock it off, they said she would have to send the book back and cancel the account. So to cancel she would have to pay the postage to send it back and still be responsible for the other books she received. I told her to ignore it. It went to a collection agency.

This is what private business is doing. And yet people like you just open your pocket and say I will gladly let you steal from me.


With the power of Big Government they sure are, as government grows, so does the power of Big Business. in a free market we can drive these companies out of business.


And no, it is not the norm. I agree that business are ripping us off frequently, but it is not the norm. The problem is we refuse to us our power as consumers, we sit around and wait for Nanny Government to fix it.



The "only through government" mentality has been great for Big Business.

[Hawkeye2j]

First of all it is the norm. Secondly I am not advocating Socialism. I just want the government to regulate more so that capitalism can thrive in a somewhat honest setting. The government is supposed to be by the people and for the people, not by the corporation and for the corporation.

I am also pointing out that as this becomes more the norm, socialism will gain respect.

[kres24GT]

First of all it is the norm. Secondly I am not advocating Socialism. I just want the government to regulate more so that capitalism can thrive in a somewhat honest setting. The government is supposed to be by the people and for the people, not by the corporation and for the corporation.

I am also pointing out that as this becomes more the norm, socialism will gain respect.


More regulation is great for big business. As we give more power to Big Government they in turn give that power to their corporate masters. The bigger government gets, the more power Big Business and corporations have over us.

And no, the majority of businesses do not rip you off.

[Hawkeye2j]

Of course they do. Just look at sales in every day fliers. They advertise sales prices, but just before they mark the price up and put it on sale for the price it was before.
Look at automobile dealers. When they offer you so much for a trade in, they don't really give you that much. It is offset in the price of a new vehicle. They do rip you off. Don't go through life with blinders on.

Did you ever buy refreshments at a movie theatre or a ball game? How much are they charging. Pretty good considering you aren't allowed to bring your own refreshments.

RIPOFFS as far as the eye can see. How about cell phones? How much does it cost the companies to allow you to text? What are they charging? RIPOFFS! It is the norm.

[kres24GT]

Of course they do. Just look at sales in every day fliers. They advertise sales prices, but just before they mark the price up and put it on sale for the price it was before.
Look at automobile dealers. When they offer you so much for a trade in, they don't really give you that much. It is offset in the price of a new vehicle. They do rip you off. Don't go through life with blinders on.

Did you ever buy refreshments at a movie theatre or a ball game? How much are they charging. Pretty good considering you aren't allowed to bring your own refreshments.

RIPOFFS as far as the eye can see. How about cell phones? How much does it cost the companies to allow you to text? What are they charging? RIPOFFS! It is the norm.

A ripoff is not something that you don't like the price of. If you think something costs too much, don't buy it. You don't have a right to text messaging or movie theater popcorn. Those aren't ripoffs, those are companies charging for luxury items a price that people are willing to pay for them. They are ethically obligated to do this.

When Turner Field opened in Atlanta in the late 90s they banned outside food and drink. The fans wouldn't have it, they protested, they boycotted, and soon the stadium relented, almost 15 years later outside food and drink is still permitted. No one needed Big Government to step in. Consumers forced changed. By the way, turner field offers $1 standing room only and $5 seats for a 2-3 hour baseball game. is that a rip off?


I go to the movie theater maybe 3 times a year, and i always go to the before noon weekend shows that cost 6 bucks. I skip the food and drink. I am not getting ripped off in anyway. I make choices based on what this company charges for their goods and services. For other movies I wait for it to come on Netflix where I get streaming movies to my TV and up to 2 DVDs at a time in the mail for like 12 bucks a month. Are they ripping me off?

When I first started dating my girlfriend I knew nothing of texting. Her being a younger woman texts all the time. It became clear after our first date I was going to be texting her and I immediately called my phone company and found out what I would be charged for overages and what text plans I could get. That is called being a responsible consumer.

[Hawkeye2j]

A ripoff is not something that you don't like the price of. If you think something costs too much, don't buy it. You don't have a right to text messaging or movie theater popcorn. Those aren't ripoffs, those are companies charging for luxury items a price that people are willing to pay for them. They are ethically obligated to do this.

When Turner Field opened in Atlanta in the late 90s they banned outside food and drink. The fans wouldn't have it, they protested, they boycotted, and soon the stadium relented, almost 15 years later outside food and drink is still permitted. No one needed Big Government to step in. Consumers forced changed.


I go to the movie theater maybe 3 times a year, and i always go to the before noon weekend shows that cost 6 bucks. I skip the food and drink. I am not getting ripped off in anyway. I make choices based on what this company charges for their goods and services.

When I first started dating my girlfriend I knew nothing of texting. Her being a younger woman texts all the time. It became clear after our first date I was going to be texting her and I immediately called my phone company and found out what I would be charged for overages and what text plans I could get. That is called being a responsible consumer.

Really? A bank raises its interest rate on a credit card to 30%. You wouldn't call that a ripoff? Price gouging is considered a ripoff. They used to have regulations to prevent it.

[kres24GT]

Really? A bank raises its interest rate on a credit card to 30%. You wouldn't call that a ripoff? Price gouging is considered a ripoff. They used to have regulations to prevent it.

I didn't say ripoffs don't exist. I said what you were calling a ripoff wasn't.



People need to read what they sign. Not have government do it for them. Again, we as consumers can make a difference, we don't need big government interfering.

[GetAClue]

Why Socialism is gaining respect? Because our educational system is putting morons like Hawkeye2j on the streets with their indoctrination in lew of a real education. Those people are more interested in who won the last American Idol that what is contained in the excrement sandwich that is being shoved down our throats by our government.

[kres24GT]

Why Socialism is gaining respect? Because our educational system is putting morons like Hawkeye2j on the streets with their indoctrination in lew of an real education. Those people are more interested in who won the last American Idol that what is contained in the excrement sandwich that is being shoved down our throats by our government.


Yep, people like Hawkeye don't want to have to read a contract, or prepare a budget to see if they can afford $5 for movie popcorn. That would cut into VH1 reality show time. Instead have government do all of it for him. Nevermind government is in bed with big business, the very entity he fears.

[Hawkeye2j]

You fail to look at reality. People like you who don't believe price gouging is a ripoff is exactly why it occurs so often.

[Boogie man]

You fail to look at reality. People like you who don't believe price gouging is a ripoff is exactly why it occurs so often.

What do you do for a living?

[kres24GT]

You fail to look at reality. People like you who don't believe price gouging is a ripoff is exactly why it occurs so often.

Again, just because you would like to pay less for something does not mean it is price gouging.


Would you like it if the government told you what you could sell your property for, or charge for your time? If you were selling a car, would it be Ok for the government to come in and tell you that you can only charge X for it? If you were looking for a job would you like government saying you can earn no more than y per year?

Of course not, afford the same respect to others.

You are entitled to movie theater popcorn, it isn't price gouging because you think it costs too much.

You aren't entitled to text messages, it isn't price gouging because you would like to pay less for it.

If something costs too much people won't pay for it. Movie theater popcorn is about as much of a non necessity as one can imagine. It costs 7.50 because people will pay 7.50 for it.

[GetAClue]

You fail to look at reality. People like you who don't believe price gouging is a ripoff is exactly why it occurs so often.
Who doesn't believe that price gouging is going on? I am smart enough not to fall for it. If you're not, then it sucks to be you. As John Wayne once said "Life is hard. It's even harder if you're stupid!". That quote really stands out in this instance.

[Hawkeye2j]

Why do you want to know what I do for a living? Given my politics, you would be amazed at my occupation.

[GetAClue]

Why do you want to know what I do for a living? Given my politics, you would be amazed at my occupation.
Given your posts, I would be suprised if you didn't live in your parents basement. :lmao2:

[Hawkeye2j]

In answer to your question I am in retail management.

[Citizen]

Common sense article written back in 1995.

http://www.thefreemanonline.org/feat...ialism-failed/

"Socialism is the Big Lie of the twentieth century. While it promised prosperity, equality, and security, it delivered poverty, misery, and tyranny. Equality was achieved only in the sense that everyone was equal in his or her misery.

In the same way that a Ponzi scheme or chain letter initially succeeds but eventually collapses, socialism may show early signs of success. But any accomplishments quickly fade as the fundamental deficiencies of central planning emerge. It is the initial illusion of success that gives government intervention its pernicious, seductive appeal. In the long run, socialism has always proven to be a formula for tyranny and misery.

A pyramid scheme is ultimately unsustainable because it is based on faulty principles. Likewise, collectivism is unsustainable in the long run because it is a flawed theory. Socialism does not work because it is not consistent with fundamental principles of human behavior. The failure of socialism in countries around the world can be traced to one critical defect: it is a system that ignores incentives.

In a capitalist economy, incentives are of the utmost importance. Market prices, the profit-and-loss system of accounting, and private property rights provide an efficient, interrelated system of incentives to guide and direct economic behavior. Capitalism is based on the theory that incentives matter!

Under socialism, incentives either play a minimal role or are ignored totally. A centrally planned economy without market prices or profits, where property is owned by the state, is a system without an effective incentive mechanism to direct economic activity. By failing to emphasize incentives, socialism is a theory inconsistent with human nature and is therefore doomed to fail. Socialism is based on the theory that incentives don’t matter!

In a radio debate several months ago with a Marxist professor from the University of Minnesota, I pointed out the obvious failures of socialism around the world in Cuba, Eastern Europe, and China. At the time of our debate, Haitian refugees were risking their lives trying to get to Florida in homemade boats. Why was it, I asked him, that people were fleeing Haiti and traveling almost 500 miles by ocean to get to the "evil capitalist empire" when they were only 50 miles from the "workers’ paradise" of Cuba?

The Marxist admitted that many "socialist" countries around the world were failing. However, according to him, the reason for failure is not that socialism is deficient, but that the socialist economies are not practicing "pure" socialism. The perfect version of socialism would work; it is just the imperfect socialism that doesn’t work. Marxists like to compare a theoretically perfect version of socialism with practical, imperfect capitalism which allows them to claim that socialism is superior to capitalism.

If perfection really were an available option, the choice of economic and political systems would be irrelevant. In a world with perfect beings and infinite abundance, any economic or political system–socialism, capitalism, fascism, or communism–would work perfectly.

However, the choice of economic and political institutions is crucial in an imperfect universe with imperfect beings and limited resources. In a world of scarcity it is essential for an economic system to be based on a clear incentive structure to promote economic efficiency. The real choice we face is between imperfect capitalism and imperfect socialism. Given that choice, the evidence of history overwhelmingly favors capitalism as the greatest wealth-producing economic system available.

The strength of capitalism can be attributed to an incentive structure based upon the three Ps: (1) prices determined by market forces, (2) a profit-and-loss system of accounting and (3) private property rights. The failure of socialism can be traced to its neglect of these three incentive-enhancing components.

Prices

The price system in a market economy guides economic activity so flawlessly that most people don’t appreciate its importance. Market prices transmit information about relative scarcity and then efficiently coordinate economic activity. The economic content of prices provides incentives that promote economic efficiency.

For example, when the OPEC cartel restricted the supply of oil in the 1970s, oil prices rose dramatically. The higher prices for oil and gasoline transmitted valuable information to both buyers and sellers. Consumers received a strong, clear message about the scarcity of oil by the higher prices at the pump and were forced to change their behavior dramatically. People reacted to the scarcity by driving less, carpooling more, taking public transportation, and buying smaller cars. Producers reacted to the higher price by increasing their efforts at exploration for more oil. In addition, higher oil prices gave producers an incentive to explore and develop alternative fuel and energy sources.

The information transmitted by higher oil prices provided the appropriate incentive structure to both buyers and sellers. Buyers increased their effort to conserve a now more precious resource and sellers increased their effort to find more of this now scarcer resource.

The only alternative to a market price is a controlled or fixed price which always transmits misleading information about relative scarcity. Inappropriate behavior results from a controlled price because false information has been transmitted by an artificial, non-market price.

Look at what happened during the 1970s when U.S. gas prices were controlled. Long lines developed at service stations all over the country because the price for gasoline was kept artificially low by government fiat. The full impact of scarcity was not accurately conveyed. As Milton Friedman pointed out at the time, we could have eliminated the lines at the pump in one day by allowing the price to rise to clear the market.

From our experience with price controls on gasoline and the long lines at the pump and general inconvenience, we get an insight into what happens under socialism where every price in the economy is controlled. The collapse of socialism is due in part to the chaos and inefficiency that result from artificial prices. The information content of a controlled price is always distorted. This in turn distorts the incentives mechanism of prices under socialism. Administered prices are always either too high or too low, which then creates constant shortages and surpluses. Market prices are the only way to transmit information that will create the incentives to ensure economic efficiency.

Profits and Losses

Socialism also collapsed because of its failure to operate under a competitive, profit-and-loss system of accounting. A profit system is an effective monitoring mechanism which continually evaluates the economic performance of every business enterprise. The firms that are the most efficient and most successful at serving the public interest are rewarded with profits. Firms that operate inefficiently and fail to serve the public interest are penalized with losses.

By rewarding success and penalizing failure, the profit system provides a strong disciplinary mechanism which continually redirects resources away from weak, failing, and inefficient firms toward those firms which are the most efficient and successful at serving the public. A competitive profit system ensures a constant reoptimization of resources and moves the economy toward greater levels of efficiency. Unsuccessful firms cannot escape the strong discipline of the marketplace under a profit/loss system. Competition forces companies to serve the public interest or suffer the consequences.

Under central planning, there is no profit-and-loss system of accounting to accurately measure the success or failure of various programs. Without profits, there is no way to discipline firms that fail to serve the public interest and no way to reward firms that do. There is no efficient way to determine which programs should be expanded and which ones should be contracted or terminated.

Without competition, centrally planned economies do not have an effective incentive structure to coordinate economic activity. Without incentives the results are a spiraling cycle of poverty and misery. Instead of continually reallocating resources towards greater efficiency, socialism falls into a vortex of inefficiency and failure.

Private Property Rights

A third fatal defect of socialism is its blatant disregard for the role of private property rights in creating incentives that foster economic growth and development. The failure of socialism around the world is a "tragedy of commons" on a global scale.

The "tragedy of the commons" refers to the British experience of the sixteenth century when certain grazing lands were communally owned by villages and were made available for public use. The land was quickly overgrazed and eventually became worthless as villagers exploited the communally owned resource.

When assets are publicly owned, there are no incentives in place to encourage wise stewardship. While private property creates incentives for conservation and the responsible use of property, public property encourages irresponsibility and waste. If everyone owns an asset, people act as if no one owns it. And when no one owns it, no one really takes care of it. Public ownership encourages neglect and mismanagement.

Since socialism, by definition, is a system marked by the "common ownership of the means of production," the failure of socialism is a "tragedy of the commons" on a national scale. Much of the economic stagnation of socialism can be traced to the failure to establish and promote private property rights.

As Peruvian economist Hernando de Soto remarked, you can travel in rural communities around the world and you will hear dogs barking, because even dogs understand property rights. It is only statist governments that have failed to understand property rights. Socialist countries are just now starting to recognize the importance of private property as they privatize assets and property in Eastern Europe.

Incentives Matter

Without the incentives of market prices, profit-and-loss accounting, and well-defined property rights, socialist economies stagnate and wither. The economic atrophy that occurs under socialism is a direct consequence of its neglect of economic incentives.

No bounty of natural resources can ever compensate a country for its lack of an efficient system of incentives. Russia, for example, is one of the world’s wealthiest countries in terms of natural resources; it has some of the world’s largest reserves of oil, natural gas, diamonds, and gold. Its valuable farm land, lakes, rivers, and streams stretch across a land area that encompasses 11 time zones. Yet Russia remains poor. Natural resources are helpful, but the ultimate resources of any country are the unlimited resources of its people–human resources.

By their failure to foster, promote, and nurture the potential of their people through incentive-enhancing institutions, centrally planned economies deprive the human spirit of full development. Socialism fails because it kills and destroys the human spirit–just ask the people leaving Cuba in homemade rafts and boats.

As the former centrally planned economies move toward free markets, capitalism, and democracy, they look to the United States for guidance and support during the transition. With an unparalleled 250-year tradition of open markets and limited government, the United States is uniquely qualified to be the guiding light in the worldwide transition to freedom and liberty.

We have an obligation to continue to provide a framework of free markets and democracy for the global transition to freedom. Our responsibility to the rest of the world is to continue to fight the seductiveness of statism around the world and here at home. The seductive nature of statism continues to tempt and lure us into the Barmecidal illusion that the government can create wealth.

The temptress of socialism is constantly luring us with the offer: "give up a little of your freedom and I will give you a little more security." As the experience of this century has demonstrated, the bargain is tempting but never pays off. We end up losing both our freedom and our security.

Programs like socialized medicine, welfare, social security, and minimum wage laws will continue to entice us because on the surface they appear to be expedient and beneficial. Those programs, like all socialist programs, will fail in the long run regardless of initial appearances. These programs are part of the Big Lie of socialism because they ignore the important role of incentives.

Socialism will remain a constant temptation. We must be vigilant in our fight against socialism not only around the globe but also here in the United States.

The failure of socialism inspired a worldwide renaissance of freedom and liberty. For the first time in the history of the world, the day is coming very soon when a majority of the people in the world will live in free societies or societies rapidly moving towards freedom.

Capitalism will play a major role in the global revival of liberty and prosperity because it nurtures the human spirit, inspires human creativity, and promotes the spirit of enterprise. By providing a powerful system of incentives that promote thrift, hard work, and efficiency, capitalism creates wealth.

The main difference between capitalism and socialism is this: Capitalism works."

[Hawkeye2j]

Like I said, I am not advocating Socialism. I am only stating why it carrying less and less of a negative stigma. When people are hurting they turn to things they always rejected before. The question is, how can we get capitalism to address the problems that are making people turn away from it today.

[Boogie man]

Why do you want to know what I do for a living? Given my politics, you would be amazed at my occupation.

Does your store make a profit?

[Hawkeye2j]

No, I go into business to lose money.