https://komonews.com/news/local/komo-news-special-seattle-is-dying
It's always the same wherever Socialists are in charge, and unopposed. Socialism leads to economic decay, and eventually collapse. The USSR, Cuba, Venezuela, and now Seattle. Sad.
π
Don't know if you are being facetious, but obviously you don't live in or near Seattle.
shareI understand that you don't like socialism, but some of the most successful economies are still democratic socialist countries. When you talk about failed socialism, you are mostly referring to countries that are more communist than socialist and also ruled by dictators and corruption. Countries like Germany are considered to be more capitalist, but education and health care are certainly considered socialist. Japan has universal health care. So perhaps instead of just focusing on "socialism bad", look to places that can successfully combine different ideologies to create prosperity.
shareAnd I understand that you love Socialism, but what you say is simply not true. You have apparently been mislead by the Left Biased MSM. Neither Germany or any of the Scandinavian countries are Socialist. What they have are expanded welfare states, at the cost of much higher taxes. But that is not Socialism. All of these countries are market based capitalist countries.
USSR: Socialist Economy collapsed.
Cuba: Socialist Economy collapsed.
Venezuela: Socialist Economy collapsed. There are riots in the streets there, but you probably are unaware of this since you watch CNN and MSNBC, and other MSM outlets.
Carl Bildt, the PM of Sweden from 1991 to 1994, took to Twitter to warn your buddy Bernie Sanders that socialism is not the key to creating a great society as he and AOC seem to think. After old footage showing Sanders and his wife praising the Soviet Union for its programs went viral online, Bildt responded by saying:
"Sanders was lucky to be able to get to the Soviet Union in 1988 and praise all its stunning socialist achievements right before the entire system and empire collapsed under the weight of its own spectacular failures."
And Danish Prime Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen explained in 2015 that countries like his "are far from socialist planned economies." "Denmark is a market economy." he added
And it was reported by the Mises Institute in Economic Policy: Thoughts for Today and Tomorrow, there's "no western, capitalist country in which the condition of the masses have not improved in an unprecedented way."
https://www.theadvocates.org/2019/02/swedish-ex-prime-minister-rebukes-bernie-socialism-only-destroys/
What those countries have are expanded welfare states. They all have market driven capitalistic economies. Welfare is not Socialism.
PS Bilt added "Socialism only destroys."
And to further your economic education, here is the brilliant economist Milton Friedman comparing Capitalism to Socialism. Since you're a Leftist, I doubt that you will watch it.
But if you do, watch him run intellectual rings around poor Phil Donahue, an ignorant Leftist.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=76frHHpoNFs
π
What I am saying is that you can have market economies and still have social programs. I love the universal health care which my country has. I also like the fact we do have a free market economy. I just think that it is a much more complex system than just right and left, good and bad, black or white. There are combinations of ideologies that seem to work. They may not be perfect, and they may need to evolve as time goes on, but to simply suggest that socialism fails is completely inaccurate.
I should also state that I don't think I've ever watched MSM, and I don't live in the USA.
USSR moved beyond socialism to communism.
Cuba's economy collapse was tied to the fall of the USSR.
Venezuela's economy collapsed for many factors. One of those factors was government corruption. It wasn't necessarily the ideology behind the system which caused the collapse. Please don't assume that I watch any american news outlets or get the information on any of the countries that I have lived in from american news.
There aren't any countries on this planet that are only capitalist or socialist. It's how countries utilize both ideologies which make the difference.
I'm not a fan of expanded welfare states, but I have no problem with them in other countries. And since you live in another country, then you've been watching the Left Biased Media of your country.
Socialism / Communism: Six of one, half dozen of the other. You could say Communism is Socialism on steroids.
The fact remains, that the USSR's entire economic and political system collapsed under the weight of their failed Socialist/Communist policies. And their evil empire ceased to exist.
Cuba's economy failed for the same reason. Being tied to the USSR just made it worse.
And you can try to rationalize it, or explain it away, but the fact is that Venezuela's economy collapsed for the same reason. As history has taught us, Socialism always fails. You simply fail to understand the situation or refuse to do so because you're a Leftist.
But that's okay by me. Cling to your delusions. You are the only one they could hurt.
π
Please name me just ONE country that does not adopt any socialism.
You might say that I'm just a leftist. Whatever. Left/right really means nothing to me as I am more complex than just to be a dot on an imaginary spectrum.
Pretty much all of them. Name me one that does. And trust me, you're a Leftist.
π
My point is simply that neither ideology on it's own is successful. No country on this planet currently is one or the other. To say that socialism fails is just as true as saying that capitalism fails.
Trust me. It's much more complex than just right or left, and you can call me whatever you want as it's all relative to you own position. I think it's a complete disgrace to only see things in simple left/right, black/white, conservative/liberal. That's why I really don't like two party systems.
Nope. You're wrong. Capitalism works, Socialism does not. And trust me, you're a Leftie.
π
BTW, you didn't answer my question.
You said name me one that does. (without a question mark so I'm not even sure if that's the question) Does what? Have socialism? You said all of them. We've established that there is no country that is just one or the other. So, I don't understand what you want to know. You keep telling me that I'm wrong, and that I'm a leftist. So I really don't see the point on continuing this conversation as it will go nowhere. I have stated my position that the most successful countries at this time in history are a combination of both free market and social programs. I really have nothing more to say.
shareYes. I said "name me one country that does". That was a challenge which you failed, since you couldn't even name one.
And your statement that most countries are a combination of both free market and social programs makes no friggin' sense at all. The two are mutually exclusive. Free market defines the economy. Social programs have nothing to do with what kind of economy a country has. Nothing.
You obviously have a very poor understanding of the whole subject. If I were you, I'd just quit while I was behind.
Oh yes, and you ARE a Lefty. Trust me on this one. And why are you so ashamed to admit that? Is it because you know it's a stupid political position?
π
That's a thoroughly racist argument. Why doesn't Africa adopt demcratic socialism and become rich? The answer is they already have, and it doesn't work. Scandinavia was rich, under monarchies and relative freedom. Socialism didn't make them rich. Socialism is just spending. It's what you do once you get rich. So Scandinavia is becoming less rich, and they've been cutting back.
America is more socialist. American government spends more per capital on health care, education, foreign aid, all kinds of things, and spending for these is still increasing.
I don't really understand what was racist about that. My point was simply that no country is fully socialist or capitalist. Countries fail because of bad spending policies, corruption, war for example. Most countries that are doing well economically are because they have resources to sell. Whether they are natural resources or manufacturing or services. It's still a product that others want to buy. I also cannot speak on the economy of an entire continent of several separate governments. Many which are suffering from severe corruption.
You are absolutely correct that socialism doesn't make a country rich. But capitalism doesn't make a country rich either. It will make individuals of that country rich. If they don't contribute back into the country that doesn't do any good either. All I'm saying is that too far to one end isn't prosperous.
This is what happens when you let liberals run cities or entire states. The cities have the crime rate skyrocket, along with taxes, trash is everywhere (and I don't mean the 2-legged kind), places get crowded, and all the sensible people are forced to move out in search of better places to live. You wanta see where Seattle's going, watch "Soylent Green." They'll have homeless people sleeping out in the streets while the rich live in walled communities, and there will be no middle class at all.
share
Amen, girl! I couldn't have said it better myself.
π
The goal of every big liberal city seems to be to cement a divide between haves and have nots. No middle class.
share
And to CONTROL every aspect of every citizen's lives. And to keep them poor so that they will unwittingly vote Democrat.
Whether or not you think it works or is even desirable, one of the whole points of socialism is to reduce the divide between haves and have note through progressive taxation and a fairer redistribution of wealth.
Also, the middle class has been in constant decline since the neolib post-Reagan/Clinton consensus of the last forty years.