In what way does socialism foster taking advantage of others? Does it not mean taking care of all?

Question

In what way does socialism foster taking advantage of others? Does it not mean taking care of all?

Answer 1

gosh 20 answers so far and 3/4 have absolutely no clue what socialism is.  guy says when you work so hard you don't want to give any to those who don't.  how's your grandma doing, fella?  your kids in school?  got an uncle that's a vet?

so many years of anti-communist rhetoric have poisoned americans to socialism.  yet, where's all the clamor over corporate welfare?  or is paying companies millions as they lay off workers good business sense for the country?

but i'm just preaching to the choir.  the few here that understand it already know this, and the others will not listen.  they seem proud of their ignorance.

Answer 2

Well, that is what it means,,, take care of the unproductive by taking advantage of the productive,,,well fare has been around for 40 yrs and it has yet to cure poverty. We need programs that help our country and all its people not just give money away...

Answer 3

Read Animal Farm.

Answer 4

When you have busted your azz to get ahead you might understand about getting pissed when someone tries to take from you to give to the lazy or less capable.

Answer 5

because you are unwilling to share  obvious wealth with those who would rather sit and watch you work for it.

Answer 6

In 1954 the progressive tax reached a maximum of 90% of adjusted income.  Right 90%.

That's Socialism.

Who in their right mind would work their tail off and give the government even 50%?

Socialists never think it's wrong to steal another's labor.

Think about it.

What ambitions do you have of gaining any wealth?  ANY?

Answer 7

Socialism in its purest form takes advantage of highly educated and trained people.  If someone in a capitalist society achieves a higher level of knowledge in a field, they are rewarded with higher wages/salaries.  In a pure socialist society, those people are treated equally to some that did not achieve those qualifications.

Answer 8

Your obviously an Obama supporter, socialism and communism are much different on paper than it works out in reality. It winds up with the people in powe and a few select people siphining wealth from everyone else so everyone else starves and is poor while a few do well. Socialism and communism have failed time and time again. Why do you think the major powers mainly us is a democracy. Go to Canada if you like socialism.

Answer 9

socialism has a huge false idea in  that no one in the socialist system will want to better themselves and do better than their neighbor.  this goes against human nature and will always be the proof that socilism will fail.

Answer 10

Because when rich people have to think about having 1 less car they get their panties in a bunch and talk about how lazy people below them are.  

They only people complaining about socialism do not understand it and are too greedy for their own good.  They have no problem with having 16 houses when everyone else in the country is suffering.  

Answer 11

socialism takes advantage of the makers.  

Answer 12

socialism is all about the government deciding who to take care of and how.  Decisions are ostensibly made in the name of hte greater good.  That means that if there is one person who is hurt, but a hundred who are helped, its fine. Using this logic, socialists have historically killed the  mentally incompetent, the gypsies, the catholics, the jews, etc.

Answer 13

Because not 'all' contribute. You have 'some' carrying the load for 'all' and even when others carry some of the load, it is not shared equally. And that is taking advantage of others.

Besides, I don't need or what you or anyone to take care of me. I moved out of my mommy and daddy's house decades ago.  

Answer 14

Taking care of 'all' so that 'all' are equal in a marginal and submissive way.

See Cuba, Laos, North Korea, Viet Nam, China, Hungary, East Germany, etc. etc. etc.

Answer 15

Not one single person who has responded thus far to your question has the slightest idea what "socialism" means.

Edit: Correction. Apparently "Just Some Chick" posted a second before I did.

************************

For the record: The Social Democrats were the ONLY ONES to stand up against Hitler and try to prevent him from seizing power with the Enabling Act.

They were punished for it.

********************************

“A two thirds majority was needed, since the law would actually alter the German constitution. Hitler needed 31 non-n**i votes to pass it. He got those votes from the Center Party after making a false promise to restore some basic rights already taken away by decree.

However, one man arose amid the overwhelming might. Otto Wells, leader of the Social Democrats stood up and spoke quietly to Hitler.

"We German Social Democrats pledge ourselves solemnly in this historic hour to the principles of humanity and justice, of freedom and socialism. No enabling act can give you power to destroy ideas which are eternal and indestructible."

This enraged Hitler and he jumped up to respond.

"You are no longer needed! - The star of Germany will rise and yours will sink! Your death knell has sounded!"

The vote was taken - 441 for, only 84, the Social Democrats, against. The n***s leapt to their feet clapping, stamping and shouting, then broke into the n**i anthem, the Hörst Wessel song.

They achieved what Hitler had wanted for years - to tear down the German Democratic Republic legally and end democracy, thus paving the way for a complete n**i takeover of Germany.

From this day on, the Reichstag would be just a sounding board, a cheering section for Hitler's pronouncements.”

http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/ti...

********************************

And I am STILL waiting for one of these people to explain to me why is Socialism hunkey-dorey for bailing out failed corporations (which we have been overloaded with examples this past years), and why  Socialism is okey-dokey for giving MY TAX DOLLARS to the most profitable corporation EVER in the HISTORY of Earth (Exxon) -- but those same people scream and wail and thrash about if tax dollars are shared with the most downtrodden American citizens.

EXPLAIN IT TO ME.

Answer 16

There is a  vast chasm of difference between INTENT and RESULT.

Socialism sounds nice, but in practice it impoverishes.  Taking from the haves and giving to the have nots simply results in fewer people being willing to work to be a have.  

Also, because it is manifestly unfair to take from someone that which they have earned, to give it to someone who has not earned it, socialism fosters corruption even worse than capitalism does.

Socialism (and its ugly twin sister, communism) is based on a fundamentally wrong understanding of human nature, and is therefore incapable of delivering on its stated goals.

Capitalism, even will all its many failures, is at least based on a correct (though perhaps incomplete) understanding of human nature, and therefore succeeds.  

The wrongs of capitalism stem from basic human nature, not from the system itself, therefore, these wrongs cannot be corrected by changing the system.

Answer 17

Its not simply taking advantage of others labor as the wealthy maintain, or the wealthy would be practicing socialism when they hire their gardeners, pool boy, and maids.

Who they take advantage of whenever they can by offering low wages.

Or it would be socialism when they move a factory from China because they have to pay the workers two dollars a day now, to Myanmar, where they can pay two dollars a week.

That's taking advantage of others.

Its not even the nanny state that so many fear, the one that already tells you what fats you are allowed to cook with, and that you have to print calorie counters at a fried chicken stand, so you can't think you are having a treat, you must think you are turning into an obese pig simply breathing their air.

It is a moderate realization that some problems are simply to big to add a layer of profit to, and to complex to have dozens of different rules which make the whole system unwieldy and un-useful.

To accomplish this, usually in education and healthcare in most industrialized countries, money is taken from those who have it, and it goes to help those who don't, why we find this so abhorrent is ridiculous as we do it too, only under another name, and with socialized medicine, the rich get to benefit too, as everyone is on a level playing field, which, when you get to the heart of it might be the problem, if you can't wave your wealth around and get preferential treatment, you aren't going to work hard....ummm,  maybe not, maybe you will continue to work hard, or live off daddys money, or still trade on the market.  Maybe thats when we will see who is lazy and who isn't.

There are of course other meanings to socialism, but in this country thats what we are up in arms about this time, the idea that the maid and the mistress might one day share a room in the ER.

Answer 18

I think their point would be... do you have a right to force someone to help take care of others.  And the counter point would be that how can we call ourselves the greatest nation on earth, and not provide the basics that allow people to succeed... and I think that's the best place to draw the line... because the American Dream is all about having the opportunity to move up in the world... so what do people need to be able to achieve that.  In the past all they needed was determination.... but there came a point when most people would need an education to be able to do such a thing.. so we added public education to the list of things provided... now the question is.. is it time to add health care to the list.. is basic health care something people need to have a decent shot at being successful in this nation.  My vote is yes based on what I have seen, working with underprivileged children from underprivileged families.  

Answer 19

So, when Stalin ordered millions of Russian troops to the front without even having a weapon was he taking care of them?  We there equality there?  Socialism means whoever controls the state has absolute control over every aspect of your lives, and they will use and abuse you to either "better the state" or to suit their personal whims.

Now, granted there are varying levels of socialism.. but in it's final stage it is, in fact, communism.  The greater degree of capitalism in a countries system, the less likely the citizens of that country are likely to be abused and thrown away by their government.

Answer 20

I only read the first three answers.. programmed mutants, all of them.

It's really very simple for anyone that is actually interested in the subject.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&clien...

Lots' of info..

Despite what the first few confused individuals spewed, Social Democracies currently offer some of the very best technologies, the very best education and graduation rates (reading and Math scores) etc, they work, they get ahead, they just make, a little less, but now with the Dollar as far off as it is, in fact wages in Canada and much of western and northern Europe have passed us here in the states, and not by a little, but by a lot.

It does not foster taking advantage of others, to the contrary it encourages "everyone" to take part at whatever level they are capable of.

Capitalism only rewards the best, not everyone can be the best.. as much as we try, one person wins at something, but many people lose. Which is fine in "monopoly" but not in real life..

So go ahead and pass Go collect your 200.00 and learn around what they've forced into your mind... because it's wrong.

edit: Life is Good .. hit it on the head about corporate Socialism. This is how you know you've been trained, when something that is actually quite sensible and good becomes a pariah, except for those that create the fear ... holy 1984!