Townhall.com
Walter Williams


Several recent polls, plus the popularity of Sen. Bernie Sanders, demonstrate that young people prefer socialism to free market capitalism. That, I believe, is a result of their ignorance and indoctrination during their school years, from kindergarten through college. For the most part, neither they nor many of their teachers and professors know what free market capitalism is.

Free market capitalism, wherein there is peaceful voluntary exchange, is morally superior to any other economic system. Why? Let's start with my initial premise. All of us own ourselves. I am my private property, and you are yours. Murder, rape, theft and the initiation of violence are immoral because they violate self-ownership. Similarly, the forcible use of one person to serve the purposes of another person, for any reason, is immoral because it violates self-ownership.

Tragically, two-thirds to three-quarters of the federal budget can be described as Congress taking the rightful earnings of one American to give to another American -- using one American to serve another. Such acts include farm subsidies, business bailouts, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps, welfare and many other programs.

Free market capitalism is disfavored by many Americans -- and threatened -- not because of its failure but, ironically, because of its success. Free market capitalism in America has been so successful in eliminating the traditional problems of mankind -- such as disease, pestilence, hunger and gross poverty -- that all other human problems appear both unbearable and inexcusable. The desire by many Americans to eliminate these so-called unbearable and inexcusable problems has led to the call for socialism. That call includes equality of income, sex and race balance, affordable housing and medical care, orderly markets, and many other socialistic ideas.

Let's compare capitalism with socialism by answering the following questions: In which areas of our lives do we find the greatest satisfaction, and in which do we find the greatest dissatisfaction? It turns out that we seldom find people upset with and in conflict with computer and clothing stores, supermarkets, and hardware stores. We do see people highly dissatisfied with and often in conflict with boards of education, motor vehicles departments, police and city sanitation services.

What are the differences? For one, the motivation for the provision of services of computer and clothing stores, supermarkets, and hardware stores is profit. Also, if you're dissatisfied with their services, you can instantaneously fire them by taking your business elsewhere. It's a different matter with public education, motor vehicles departments, police and city sanitation services. They are not motivated by profit at all. Plus, if you're dissatisfied with their service, it is costly and in many cases even impossible to fire them.

A much larger and totally ignored question has to do with the brutality of socialism. In the 20th century, the one-party socialist states of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, Germany under the National Socialist German Workers' Party and the People's Republic of China were responsible for the murder of 118 million citizens, mostly their own. The tallies were: USSR 62 million, Nazi Germany 21 million and PRC 35 million. No such record of brutality can be found in countries that tend toward free market capitalism.

Here's an experiment for you. List countries according to whether they are closer to the free market capitalist or to the socialist/communist end of the economic spectrum. Then rank the countries according to per capita gross domestic product. Finally, rank the countries according to Freedom House's "Freedom in the World" report. You will find that people who live in countries closer to the free market capitalist end of the economic spectrum not only have far greater wealth than people who live in countries toward the socialistic/communist end but also enjoy far greater human rights protections.

As Dr. Thomas Sowell says, "socialism sounds great. It has always sounded great. And it will probably always continue to sound great. It is only when you go beyond rhetoric, and start looking at hard facts, that socialism turns out to be a big disappointment, if not a disaster."

Link

Do you mean Venezuela (our most recent convert to socialism) isn't a big success?

The capitalist sheds his own blood, sweat and tears, to enjoy the fruits of his labor.

The socialist sheds everyone else's blood, sweat and tears, to enjoy the fruits of their labor.

When we accepted principles and programs based on the Socialist model, we set a time bomb for ourselves that ticks louder and louder everyday.

quote:

When we accepted principles and programs based on the Socialist model, we set a time bomb for ourselves that ticks louder and louder everyday.

That is true.
We started down this path 100 years ago with compulsory, "public education". Then "social security".
Now, we have patterned our health care after "public education".
It's the slow slide down the slippery slope to socialism.

Seems to me socialism is great, except for some minor flaws.

Socialism pays the idler the same as the laborer, the slothful worker the same as the industrious worker. There is no incentive to perform, the economy decays, then crumbles, then bankrupt.

In socialism, the gov't runs the economy, politicians and bureaucrats pay themselves first, the masses get paid the leftovers. So in the name of equality socialism creates substantial inequality - the ruling class and the working class.

And in socialism there is no separation/balance of power. Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.

But other than those matters, socialism is great.

Good one Scoutmaster. LOL

I've been wondering this for a while. I think these kids are looking at the welfare states of Europe and equating them with true socialism. They (the countries) are not, IMO. Socialism "lite" or "semi-capitalist" maybe. They don't try to control everything like Venezuela did.

quote:

Originally posted by egregore:
I've been wondering this for a while. I think these kids are looking at the welfare states of Europe and equating them with true socialism. They (the countries) are not, IMO. Socialism "lite" or "semi-capitalist" maybe. They don't try to control everything like Venezuela did.

Maybe not yet, maybe increased incremental control, here a little, there a little. But on the same road going in the same direction as Venezuela.

As the article opines, this comes from the ignorance of America's youth. They've been indoctrinated/inculcated in it since birth. Which begs the question....

If Socialist college professors believed their own propaganda, wouldn't they teach for free?

quote:

Originally posted by JALLEN:

As Dr. Thomas Sowell says, "socialism sounds great. It has always sounded great. And it will probably always continue to sound great. It is only when you go beyond rhetoric, and start looking at hard facts, that socialism turns out to be a big disappointment, if not a disaster."

]

This is what I stress with my kids - there is a huge difference between what sounds like a good idea and how something works 'in real life'.

A thousand examples will point this out in practical terms.

-----------------------------------------------

I think the biggest selling point for socialism is it's someone else's fault you don't have what you want. With oppressors, you have no blame. All leftist cant requires oppressors.

Historically there have been oppressors and some societies have better created a fairer playing field to deal with that but yeah, easy answers are gobbled up. Like others, Limbaugh regularly says leftism is easy.

quote:

Originally posted by Birdvol:
Do you mean Venezuela (our most recent convert to socialism) isn't a big success?

For the Campus nerds who espouse Socialism sending them to Venezuela would be a good example. Also have them take a lot of toilet paper.

Bernie Sanders always talks about more free stuff but never says anything about how or who will pay.And of course the MSM people never ask,of course.

quote:

...."socialism sounds great. It has always sounded great. And it will probably always continue to sound great..."

Baby, I'll be there to shake your hand,
Baby, I'll be there to share the land,
that they'll be given' away,
When we all live together...

-Burton Cummmings


.

Tax the rich, feed the poor
'Till there are no rich no more

Alvin Lee

quote:

Originally posted by egregore:
I've been wondering this for a while. I think these kids are looking at the welfare states of Europe and equating them with true socialism. They (the countries) are not, IMO. Socialism "lite" or "semi-capitalist" maybe. They don't try to control everything like Venezuela did.

Europe is in deep Obama too.

Sweden's economy, one that socialists love to tout as nirvana, hasn't hit 2.0% GDP even once in the last 35-40 years. In fact, they have averaged .56% GDP growth in that time.

In Norway, both spouses must work, even if they can survive or thrive on one income, because they are required to provide tax income to support the welfare state.

And almost none of the EU countries have to expend anything close to a realistic amount of money on self-defense because of us. If not for NATO, their economies would likely be belly-up already.

Europe is falling apart under the weight of their socialist utopia. Looking, or visiting, over there and not seeing people digging through trash cans yet, like Venezuela, is misleading. It's like filming a skydiver at 20,000 feet who doesn't realize his parachute doesn't work. Because of the distance from the ground, he appears to be flying rather than falling,, but he's still doomed.



.

quote:

Originally posted by Patrick-SP2022:
Tax the rich, feed the poor
'Till there are no rich no more

Alvin Lee

Good one.



.

quote:

Originally posted by TigerDore:

quote:

Originally posted by Patrick-SP2022:
Tax the rich, feed the poor
'Till there are no rich no more

Alvin Lee

Good one.


.

...I'd love to change the world
But I don't know what to do.
So I'll leave it up to you."

--Alvin Lee, cont'd.

If you can bear it, I have a little story that makes clear the difference between Socialism and Capitalism in a practical way.

May years ago, I was a member of the British Military Mission in the former DDR, and, as was not uncommon, we got caught flat-footed photographing a few rare species of bird-life whilst 'accidentally' driving along a road that just happened to be lined with the artillery regiment of 10 Guards Tank Division - a genuine oversight on our part, as we attempted to explain to the Soviet troops who eventually drove us off-road and into a boggy field full of parsnips.

See - http://www.brixmis.co.uk/photos/detained.html

During the course of the long day that inevitably followed - the accusations and denials, general unpleasantness on their part, and an attempt to lure us out of the vehicle by the display of food and the odd veiled threat - we eventually settled down, awaiting the arrival of the local Kommandatura and his VAI boys, meanwhile actively engaging each other with the usual soldier-like banter between allies [Read all about it by googling the Robertson-Malinin Agreement].

I was engaged in conversation with the guy who took this photo, who eventually became quite friendly, and offered me a piece of his Russian-made chocolate. It came in a vivid brown cardboard wrapper, stamped Confectionery Factory #12 - Omsk, was almost black and as solid as a rock. He demonstrated how one ate it by shaving a thin scrape/curl off it with his field knife. I asked him how much it cost to buy this item - five roubles he replied smugly, and THAT's for a WHOLE 100 grams [about four ounces].

Unimpressed by this practical example of Social confectionery production, our driver reached under his seat, and produced a 500g bar of Cadbury's Bournville [dark] chocolate, and handed it to me. I handed it over to the Sov, whose eyeballs were popping almost popping out. 'How much does something like this actually cost you?' he asked wonderingly. Well, I replied, you have to remember that your chocolate was made under Socialism, beans from Cuba, and so on, and you end up paying one rouble per 20 grams. However, OUR chocolate was made under Capitalism, like this.

The bean grower grows the beans, and get paid to do it.
His employees, the bean-pickers/sorters, packers, get paid to do it.
The beans are examined by the company agent, who says yes - he gets paid to do it.
The beans are them transported to the waterside by a bean-driver, who gets paid, and unloaded by a dock worker, who gets paid, onto the ship by a crane driver, who gets paid.

The shipping company gets paid, and so too are the guys who unload the beans, and put them on the truck to take them to the chocolate factory, where they are unloaded by people who get paid to handle them and process them under the supervision of a floor boss who gets paid to do it. After a while, it comes out the other end as a slab of tasty chocolate, and gets driven, along with ten thousand other similar bars, by the truck driver [who gets paid] to the wholesalers/distributors, all of whom get paid. The distributors then distribute the stuff to the candy stores, whose staff get paid, making some money out of selling it to me.

So in the end, about fifty people from the point of origin to me handing it to you have earned money from it, and it STILL only cost me 16 kopecks for 20g.

That's not only Capitalist chocolate, but it's nicer.

tac

This message has been edited. Last edited by: tacfoley,