4 ms·

You’re a rare breed in these parts! I’m not trying to argue semantics, I don’t think most people on this forum realize that the redistribution of wealth IS soc

You’re a rare breed in these parts! I’m not trying to argue semantics, I don’t think most people on this forum realize that the redistribution of wealth IS socialism. I’m aware that “socialist” does not carry the bad connotation I believe it deserves on this forum. Capitalist companies are first and foremost concerned with growing the pie; socialist govts are concerned with getting a bigger slice of the current pie and don’t care very much about growing it.

chillacy 7y ago
> I’m not trying to argue semantics, I don’t think most people on this forum realize that the redistribution of wealth IS socialism Heh, that is literally arguing over the definition of a word ;) But yes, let's do the math trick of "Let X = Y" and say "Sbenitoj's Socialism" means wealth redistribution which I would assume to entail welfare, taxation, etc. I think that's a good jumping point to debate about what the best mix is (which would then depend on what measuring stick people are using... gdp? median happiness? min(happiness)?) and then you can get somewhere.
arcticbull 7y ago
I don't think most of us agree that redistribution of wealth (the proceeds of production) is socialism (the redistribution of the means of production). The US has particularly strong property rights, and asking companies to chip in to reimburse the public for the benefits they've leveraged to become and remain successful (such as national defense, public education, public roads, public police, public fire departments, public water, courts, etc) is beyond the pail even if you choose to label that socialism. I don't think it's beyond the pail to work to build a more meritocratic than plutocratic society to ensure the next generation of businesses also.
- chillacy 7y ago
  I don't want to get in between you two if you're dead set on arguing over the definition of socialism but it seems to me to be unproductive.
  - arcticbull 7y ago
    Fair, he seemed genuinely surprised that some of us had a different idea so I wanted to explain where I’m coming from so we had a shared basis to work from. It was more of a pitch than an argument :)

chillacy 7y ago

> I’m not trying to argue semantics, I don’t think most people on this forum realize that the redistribution of wealth IS socialism Heh, that is literally arguing over the definition of a word ;) But yes, let's do the math trick of "Let X = Y" and say "Sbenitoj's Socialism" means wealth redistribution which I would assume to entail welfare, taxation, etc. I think that's a good jumping point to debate about what the best mix is (which would then depend on what measuring stick people are using... gdp? median happiness? min(happiness)?) and then you can get somewhere.

arcticbull 7y ago

I don't think most of us agree that redistribution of wealth (the proceeds of production) is socialism (the redistribution of the means of production). The US has particularly strong property rights, and asking companies to chip in to reimburse the public for the benefits they've leveraged to become and remain successful (such as national defense, public education, public roads, public police, public fire departments, public water, courts, etc) is beyond the pail even if you choose to label that socialism. I don't think it's beyond the pail to work to build a more meritocratic than plutocratic society to ensure the next generation of businesses also.

chillacy 7y ago
I don't want to get in between you two if you're dead set on arguing over the definition of socialism but it seems to me to be unproductive.
- arcticbull 7y ago
  Fair, he seemed genuinely surprised that some of us had a different idea so I wanted to explain where I’m coming from so we had a shared basis to work from. It was more of a pitch than an argument :)