3 ms·

The caveat for anyone outside of the United States is that what they call "socialism" is really just capitalism with a welfare state.

TheOtherHobbes 2mo ago
Which the US has anyway, albeit in a patchier form than other countries, and with welfare handed out more to corporations and "sponsors" than individuals.
- DamonHD 2mo ago
  I don't see how a shared currency (between poor and rich states, with the subsidy flows that implies), a national air-traffic control system and the interstates, amongst many other features, are not "socialism".
  - lotsofpulp 2mo ago
    The majority of federal government spending is a wealth transfer to old and poor people: https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/federal-spending/ https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/feder... That’s also an easy sign of socialism. Just not all of society benefits. Not to mention the state and local level stuff via Medicaid and property tax subsidies for old people, too. And then there’s the implicit monetary policy of putting asset owners ahead of income earners by debasing the currency.
    - myrmidon 2mo ago
      > The majority of federal government spending is a wealth transfer to old and poor people Sorry, but that's a ridiculous take. Thats just like saying that public schools are a wealth transfer from the working class to students, or that health insurance is a wealth transfer to old and sick people. It's neither useful nor precise. Things are never an actual "wealth transfer" when both sides consider it worthwhile-- that's just an ordinary trade.
      - lotsofpulp 2mo ago
        >Thats just like saying that public schools are a wealth transfer from the working class to students >or that health insurance is a wealth transfer to old and sick people Both of these are also true statements. >Things are never an actual "wealth transfer" when both sides consider it worthwhile-- that's just an ordinary trade. It's not an ordinary trade, it's a forced payment via the government's monopoly on violence, which is why it falls into a wealth transfer. I would consider it (mostly) worthwhile when it's students because they turn into future workers. However, I would prefer to opt out of social security and old age healthcare tax (Medicare) because I will be getting less into the system than I pay into the system. That is an inevitable future due to demographics. Note that I am not saying wealth transfers are categorically bad, just wanted to point out the hilarity of a country that can spend $1T+ per year on wealth transfers and still be afraid of "socialism". And it's far more than $1T, because the health insurance mandate to not price health insurance based on health risks is another massive wealth transfer probably worth at least another trillion.
    - soco 2mo ago
      Funny how subsidies to megacorps and tax exemptions are never "wealth transfer" just daily business.
      - lotsofpulp 2mo ago
        Those are also wealth transfers. I don't have that statistic to easily pull up, but the federal government has a nice website to easily show an example, one that happens to dwarf all the others in dollar amount.
  - preg_match 2mo ago
    To be fair, if any of those were proposed today, Republicans would absolutely lose their minds and it would never pass. Basically everything somewhat "good" about the US comes from vaguely-socialist policy making in the 20th century. Nobody will say it out loud, but we all know it's true. Living in America if the New Deal never happened would be absolutely miserable.
- vjvjvjvjghv 2mo ago
  The US has the same attributes that most European countries have. Just to a different degree. Socialized healthcare (for some), welfare, free markets (with restrictions), the state heavily involved in steering the economy . It’s all the same just with emphasis on different aspects. The US would be way better off if they accepted that fact and didn’t tell themselves that they are so different from these socialist/communist countries. A lot of the inefficiencies in areas like health care comes from the fact that the US does things that they don’t really want to accept that they are doing them.
bee_rider 2mo ago
That’s what some politicians here mean when they say it. The poll seems to indicate pretty negative results for “socialism,” which seems less likely if people were just interpreting it as capitalism+safetynet, right?
therealdrag0 2mo ago
Who is they? Did the poll define it like that or are you projecting into the minds of the populace?

TheOtherHobbes 2mo ago

Which the US has anyway, albeit in a patchier form than other countries, and with welfare handed out more to corporations and "sponsors" than individuals.

DamonHD 2mo ago
I don't see how a shared currency (between poor and rich states, with the subsidy flows that implies), a national air-traffic control system and the interstates, amongst many other features, are not "socialism".
- lotsofpulp 2mo ago
  The majority of federal government spending is a wealth transfer to old and poor people: https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/federal-spending/ https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/feder... That’s also an easy sign of socialism. Just not all of society benefits. Not to mention the state and local level stuff via Medicaid and property tax subsidies for old people, too. And then there’s the implicit monetary policy of putting asset owners ahead of income earners by debasing the currency.
  - myrmidon 2mo ago
    > The majority of federal government spending is a wealth transfer to old and poor people Sorry, but that's a ridiculous take. Thats just like saying that public schools are a wealth transfer from the working class to students, or that health insurance is a wealth transfer to old and sick people. It's neither useful nor precise. Things are never an actual "wealth transfer" when both sides consider it worthwhile-- that's just an ordinary trade.
    - lotsofpulp 2mo ago
      >Thats just like saying that public schools are a wealth transfer from the working class to students >or that health insurance is a wealth transfer to old and sick people Both of these are also true statements. >Things are never an actual "wealth transfer" when both sides consider it worthwhile-- that's just an ordinary trade. It's not an ordinary trade, it's a forced payment via the government's monopoly on violence, which is why it falls into a wealth transfer. I would consider it (mostly) worthwhile when it's students because they turn into future workers. However, I would prefer to opt out of social security and old age healthcare tax (Medicare) because I will be getting less into the system than I pay into the system. That is an inevitable future due to demographics. Note that I am not saying wealth transfers are categorically bad, just wanted to point out the hilarity of a country that can spend $1T+ per year on wealth transfers and still be afraid of "socialism". And it's far more than $1T, because the health insurance mandate to not price health insurance based on health risks is another massive wealth transfer probably worth at least another trillion.
  - soco 2mo ago
    Funny how subsidies to megacorps and tax exemptions are never "wealth transfer" just daily business.
    - lotsofpulp 2mo ago
      Those are also wealth transfers. I don't have that statistic to easily pull up, but the federal government has a nice website to easily show an example, one that happens to dwarf all the others in dollar amount.
- preg_match 2mo ago
  To be fair, if any of those were proposed today, Republicans would absolutely lose their minds and it would never pass. Basically everything somewhat "good" about the US comes from vaguely-socialist policy making in the 20th century. Nobody will say it out loud, but we all know it's true. Living in America if the New Deal never happened would be absolutely miserable.
vjvjvjvjghv 2mo ago
The US has the same attributes that most European countries have. Just to a different degree. Socialized healthcare (for some), welfare, free markets (with restrictions), the state heavily involved in steering the economy . It’s all the same just with emphasis on different aspects. The US would be way better off if they accepted that fact and didn’t tell themselves that they are so different from these socialist/communist countries. A lot of the inefficiencies in areas like health care comes from the fact that the US does things that they don’t really want to accept that they are doing them.

bee_rider 2mo ago

That’s what some politicians here mean when they say it. The poll seems to indicate pretty negative results for “socialism,” which seems less likely if people were just interpreting it as capitalism+safetynet, right?

therealdrag0 2mo ago

Who is they? Did the poll define it like that or are you projecting into the minds of the populace?