Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
1/22/2020 12:12:56 PM
Posted: 10/10/2007 9:32:31 AM EST
[Last Edit: 10/10/2007 9:38:53 AM EST by VooDoo3dfx]
A member posted something the other day that perked my interest about Socialism itself.



They are only able to REDISTRIBUTE wealth, but they know nothing about CREATING wealth.


Care to comment? I want to ask this in one of my classes..

Link Posted: 10/10/2007 9:35:13 AM EST
If that were true, then there would not be so much money in Hollywood, or so many rich socialist politicians.
Link Posted: 10/10/2007 9:36:58 AM EST

Originally Posted By mjohn3006:
If that were true, then there would not be so much money in Hollywood, or so many rich socialist politicians.


Hollywood survives under a capitalist system however.

In a socialist society, where equal distribution of wealth is key.. how is that wealth created?
Link Posted: 10/10/2007 9:38:13 AM EST

Originally Posted By mjohn3006:
If that were true, then there would not be so much money in Hollywood, or so many rich socialist politicians.



Thats because they think they are elite, and the rules dont apply to them. One set of rules for us, and one set for them.


The same fuckers that make 20 million for one movie and live in Malibu embrace people like Hugo Chavez. They then want to tell us working class people how to live our lives under their little ideas.
Link Posted: 10/10/2007 9:39:16 AM EST
[Last Edit: 10/10/2007 9:47:53 AM EST by Zhukov]
Link Posted: 10/10/2007 9:41:17 AM EST

Originally Posted By mjohn3006:
If that were true, then there would not be so much money in Hollywood, or so many rich socialist politicians.


And is it not funny that if all movies and tv showes stopped being produced, we would lose nothing as a society, but if all of the electricians stopped working, this country would be up a creek, yet one bozo in hollweird makes more than 50 electricians.
Link Posted: 10/10/2007 9:46:15 AM EST
Link Posted: 10/10/2007 9:48:40 AM EST

Originally Posted By ar10er:

Originally Posted By mjohn3006:
If that were true, then there would not be so much money in Hollywood, or so many rich socialist politicians.


And is it not funny that if all movies and tv showes stopped being produced, we would lose nothing as a society, but if all of the electricians stopped working, this country would be up a creek, yet one bozo in hollweird makes more than 50 electricians.


I think society would probably benifit if there was no TV or shitty movies being made, we would save money, we would not be bombarded with advertising, and we would have a bunch of out of work motherfuckers who could do the work that the mexicans do (since they really have no real skills).
Link Posted: 10/10/2007 9:54:40 AM EST
Link Posted: 10/10/2007 10:24:56 AM EST

Originally Posted By mjohn3006:
If that were true, then there would not be so much money in Hollywood, or so many rich socialist politicians.


That money is generated by Capitalism so it doesnt work here
Link Posted: 10/10/2007 10:41:40 AM EST

Originally Posted By Saginaw79:

Originally Posted By mjohn3006:
If that were true, then there would not be so much money in Hollywood, or so many rich socialist politicians.


That money is generated by Capitalism so it doesnt work here




I see my mistake. The question is socialism, not socialists.
Link Posted: 10/10/2007 10:45:51 AM EST

Originally Posted By ar10er:

Originally Posted By mjohn3006:
If that were true, then there would not be so much money in Hollywood, or so many rich socialist politicians.


And is it not funny that if all movies and tv showes stopped being produced, we would lose nothing as a society, but if all of the electricians stopped working, this country would be up a creek, yet one bozo in hollweird makes more than 50 electricians.



Thats because as a people Americans are shallow. When Halle Berrie walks into a room people scream and flock to her. Thousands show up to see her crappy movies and pay an arm and a leg for them.

Actors and actresses are here to serve my entertainment needs. They are currently overpriced, so I dont go to movies. The best surgeons, realtors, etc. are my celebrities. Most times they speak for free.
Link Posted: 10/10/2007 11:16:32 AM EST

Originally Posted By Zhukov:

Originally Posted By VooDoo3dfx:
A member posted something the other day that perked my interest about Socialism itself.



They are only able to REDISTRIBUTE wealth, but they know nothing about CREATING wealth.



I posted that, actually...

[ETA] If I remember correctly, that might have come from Thomas Sowell's book " The Vision of the Anointed: Self-Congratulation As a Basis for Social Policy"


Yeah..

I was gonna leave your name out of it to not tarnish your image.
Link Posted: 10/10/2007 12:11:45 PM EST
Link Posted: 10/10/2007 1:28:20 PM EST

Originally Posted By mjohn3006:
If that were true, then there would not be so much money in Hollywood, or so many rich socialist politicians.




Yeah, but Hollywierd doesn't really create or produce anything of any real material value. It's only entertainment and acting. There isn't really much that comes out of Hollyweird that has any intrinsic value.

So I don't see them as creating wealth, so much as a temporary distraction to help keep peoples minds off of what their fellow socialists are doing to us. I would say the same about most pro sports too.

-K
Link Posted: 10/10/2007 1:51:22 PM EST

Originally Posted By VooDoo3dfx:

In a socialist society, where equal distribution of wealth is key.. how is that wealth created?


There is no such thing as a purely Socialist society, just as there is no such thing as a purely capitalist society.

Capitalism is human nature. No matter how centrally-controlled an economy is, there are millions of individual people out there, each trying to take care of themselves and their families. Each one of them creates wealth. And even the most rigorously controlled command economy allows them to do that in one way or another, because the central planners all know that in a purely "equal" society, there will be a whole lot of hands being held out and not very much work being done, which will lead to revolution when the grasping hands keep coming back with nothing.
Top Top