Socialism usually looks good in the short term - it's free money for lots of people.
Long-term....the further you get from actual socialism, the better it works. And when socialist economies get in trouble, they inevitably have to increase economic liberty to survive.
That dynamic should really tell you all you need to know about socialism.
I know, and i hear it all the time, but im weary of straw men. Id rather hear it from a proponent of the system and decide.
I think its unethical to take more money from people who do better, to a point. I do think if someone extravagantly benefits from this country consistently, you could justify they pay a little more back to the country that theyre benefitting from. I dont think they should be forced to and i think the government sucks at spending. But if there are different types of socialism, im open to hearing them out.
If its a dressed up argument of the same thing as the rest, then its the same as the rest. But ive seen too many instances of the left and the right not giving what theyre taking on a fair shake. Id rather steel men be defeated. I know, equity vs equality, etc. Talking points. I think people on the right may not be honestly representing what theyre opposing. Oversimplification. And I've seen definitions of socialism that dont appear to be about wealth distribution or state control of means of production. If it is in fact those things, im against it. Youll need an incredible argument to reason me away from that position.
Id be hard to be swayed away from the idea that capitalism is not the answer in general. Its a poverty killer and even those whoe are struggling live better than the best in countries without it. I just want to see it represented by an adovate. And no system is perfect. To imply that mentally retarded people should just "work harder" if they want their fair share is insane. You've got 6 million americans with iq so low they wont ever be literate. You have 50 million with an iq of less than 85 and their jobs are being destroyed quickly and on many fronts. I am so opposed to welfare programs its acidic, but "just work harder" isnt going to work for some. Especially when we're losing jobs to automation, computers allowing people to do their own skilled work for themselves, and outsourcing, and illegal immigration. Im undecided about h1s impact. I have no problem with making america better by importing skilled workers. But its going to kill american citizens and drive down wages even further. And put more people on welfare, never to return.
And automation of jobs certainly isnt certain to create more jobs. And minimum wage puts people out of work bc employers cant afford to hire, but without it, people are sometimes too stupid to realize theyre getting worked. What do we do with them?
I see posts on uber forums that just.. Jesus christ, find a new job. They don't do the math and see when adding in depreciation to their car and calculating net profit per hour, theyre literally making a few dollars an hour. Back when i was doing my moving company, idiots who couldnt figurr out their costs were still getting jobs because theyd set their revenue up to undercut the market and would end up having a negative margin after careful planning. With absolutely unfettered capitalism, i just think people are not savvy enough to figure their own stuff. And yes, thats their own problem. But i think youd be shocked to realize how many people that would actually be. And their consent to fiscal relationships that are costly to them end up being costly to everyone. Youre driving wages down. So i dont think "no regulation" is necessarily the right answer. But i think when you start with one regulation, more and more seem to follow until you've got socialism or communism. But all ideologies have massive blindspots and to assume they dont and that their answer is the best for everybody is just wrong.