all 20 comments

[–]JollyRunstride 10 insightful - 8 fun10 insightful - 7 fun11 insightful - 8 fun -  (18 children)

Is the fear of socialism a fear that the government is going to take your money? Over half of your federal taxes go toward war. Billions of dollars for a bomber, but don't you dare give a dollar towards food for another poor person.

[–]fizzyj 8 insightful - 5 fun8 insightful - 4 fun9 insightful - 5 fun -  (5 children)

People would rather vote for war than healthcare.

I don't get it.

[–]KevinCostner 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

I have healthcare already without flipping the entire industry on it's head, almost certainly making it much less efficient, and spending a lot more in taxes than I do for premiums. Total military dominance by the United States is needed, and there's only one way to get it.

[–]ScienceOverAll 3 insightful - 4 fun3 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 4 fun -  (1 child)

Do you hear yourself?? Have you watched Team America World Police and thought "gee this is awesome!!!" or something?

[–]KevinCostner 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I know that it is a very significant advantage that we could fight a conventional war with just a couple of our aircraft carriers and win against most countries. Do you see this as something other than an advantage?

[–]Klondike 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

How the hell could it possibly be more inefficient than it already is? $500 for a single Tylenol at the ER? You somehow think change will make this situation worse? Or how about the (now nunerous) studies showing that it will in fact save money, and your taxes will in fact be far less than your healthcare premiums?

[–]KevinCostner 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yeah, no. Our system could become much less efficient. You aren't looking at spending anywhere close to 500 for a single Tylenol on average in the ER. Not even in the same galaxy. If you honestly think the situation can't be made worse, then you are smoking crack. There's a rock bottom, and it isn't in the US. There is no way, and I mean no way, that the taxes I would be forced to pay to socialize the entire healthcare system of the US would cost less than my premiums. 100 Percent can't be done, won't be done. Anyone that believe it will be, is, again, smoking crack.

[–]bobbobbybob 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

the fear of socialism is based on a knowledge of history.

Only fools expect things to go differently, each time the same thing is done.

[–]Klondike 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

The rest of the civilized world is doing just fine.

[–]bobbobbybob 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

the rest of the civilised world isn't doing anything like the socialism Bernie puts forward. Cuba is his golden standard. Small areas of socialised costs are normal.

[–]Klondike 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Norway is his golden standard and Norway is great.

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The fear is costs will skyrocket 10x because the government is fully corrupt and fully inept. Also there's a fundamental disagreement about the role of the federal government. The framers gave it very few specific responsibilities.

[–]mongoose 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

If BS gets elected then you'd have to pay for someone else's war and someone else's healthcare.

[–]Drewski 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

A bureaucrat stealing your money for war is bad, and a bureaucrat stealing your money to arbitrarily give it to someone else (impartially, wastefully and with way more administrative overhead than the private sector) is also bad. Voluntarily donating and helping those in need is good.

[–]Zahn 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

The concern is about the centralization and consolidation of power. A basic understanding of psychology and history yields the proof that humans inherently tend towards corruption and sociopathic lust for power. Their institutions inevitably over time reflect these innate flaws.

Until humans have evolved to a more perfect state of mind, then Decentralization of power is the only solution.

[–]Klondike 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

"Decentralizing" into multi-national corporate conglomerates who are accountable to nobody and can change the laws to prevent the birth of new competition. Got it.

[–]Zahn 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Non sequitur, what you say doesn't "follow"...

The point you're describing is a result of centralization and exists in pretty much every country, as well as economic system. Decentralization allows for the peasants...that's us...to exude greater control, awareness and to effect change on a more local level that is beneficial to citizens...wresting power from global multinational corps that daily shear the populace like the sheep they've conditioned us to be. Remember: global corporations love centralized power.

[–]Klondike 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

So let's take power away from insurance companies. Deal.

[–]Zahn 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

You're not aiming too high, but gotta start somewhere!

[–]JasonCarswellVoluntaryist 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Meh.

You already have mandatory taxes, mandatory surveillance, mandatory police, mandatory military, mandatory wars, etc.

This centrist "socialist" is not a threat. The rest of the system is.