Originally Posted by secretzofwar
Taking money from people and having the government inefficiently allocate it is socialism/communism. There's really no reason to differentiate, as they end up with the same consequences: the ruling class benefits and everyone else is oppressed.
Please tell me how Bernie plans to attract top talent to the United States when he intends to INCREASE taxes on corporations (which are often now domiciling overseas due to asinine US tax policy) and make it a much more hostile environment for the wealthy. The last thing we should want as a country is to incentivize entrepreneurs, corporations, etc. to start businesses in other countries.
Providing benefits for workers are fine-- as for free public college-- I don't know that free public college is even a good idea. Also, frankly, if you deserve to go to college for free, you will under the current system.
Much of the problem with student loan debt is the inability for kids to see what the value of skills acquired at colleges are. Sure, it's fun to go party at an SEC school or Big Ten school for 4 years, but your degree in ceramics isn't getting you a job.
Yes. There is a need to differentiate, because they are not the same thing.
It's like saying sex with a condom is like sex without a condom. They are both sex (socialism & communism do both have varying degrees of government intervention), but they are not the same. To say they are the same (sex with a condom vs. sex without a condom / communism vs. socialism), would show you don't know what you're talking about.
Soooooo only the ruling class benefits in socialism..... You do know that income inequality is the largest it has been in 80 years right? You also know that when the government was most involved in planning after WWII, was the largest growth of the middle class right? Since 1979, the top 1% has grown 281%, while the bottom 40% has only grown 40% combined.
Corporate Revenue Tax is a third of what it was in the 1950s. And unless you lower it to an obscene amount that this country can't afford, you will not be able to compete. Why? Because you'll never compete with countries that do not follow the same worker laws, environmental laws as we do. Want to have workers for 12 hours a day, pay them a dollar a day, dump toxic waste into the water and pollute the atmosphere with no safe guards. Can't do that here, but there are plenty of places that you can do it. A corporation is looking to maximize profit, and if it suits them to go elsewhere, they will. And no matter what we do, there will always be a more business friendly country.
You know how you get them to keep their business here, If they are a US company, and they relocate overseas, you tax them so much to import their goods back here that they can't even rationalize leaving. Because unless you do that, or don't tax them at all... You will never be the most financially optimal country for a business.
The only thing I'm hearing from you is give to the top, and the rest will prosper. We've done it, it doesn't work. It has been proven that it doesn't work, and anyone with a rational economic mind will laugh at the idea that it works.
You have a very skewed perspective of college. Doing exceptional in high school doesn't guarantee scholarships, nor does it while in college. College tuition increases every year, especially at public universities because they are losing funding, due to a rapidly shrinking tax revenue base, specifically at the top. And get out of here with your ceramics nonsense. There's a litany of worthwhile degrees that people get that enter into a really tough market. I.e. Education.Edited by Essential1 - 10/17/15 at 10:26pm