HomeBloggingSocialism is not a Good Idea Regardless of Angry and Incoherent Comments

Socialism is not a Good Idea Regardless of Angry and Incoherent Comments

A Sexy Beast who Shouldn't be Forgotton during tough financial times
A Sexy Beast who Shouldn’t be Forgotten

I apologize beforehand this post is nothing more than a political rant.  If you don’t want yet another view, end your reading now, try one of my other posts that are based on facts and tax law and not opinion like this one, or this one, or this one!

There are a few blogs that I try to check daily (despite me offering feed options, I don’t have one! I am a bad financial blogger geek, I know); today I caught up on a favorite one of mine, Clever Dude.  He wrote a post describing New York Times Op Ed piece written by the Great Milton Friedman in 1989 describing how Socialism is bad.

This post is not an attempt to paraphrase Cleverdude, who is paraphrasing Milton Friedman.  Rather the point of this post is to VENT because reading the comments, ENRAGED ME.  I don’t want to take away from the pure entertainment that makes up these comments so I will just quote them directly (don’t worry CleverDude gave me the okay).  By the way, they all come from one person who cares very little about spelling, grammar or logic (so if it is difficult to read I apologize).

I would like to disagree [with Milton Friedman, yes this well educated man with no empirical data or logic wants to disagree with Milton Friedman] and say capitalism is a failure, and socialism is a success. (my fire-retardant suit is on) (thanks mike for the perfect op-piece for me to dissect).

He then makes a statement about 45% of the nation is now socialist…i am confused why this is a “bad thing”…i like my streets plowed during the 9 winter months. if someone wants to do this privately…more power to them, until then, i will be happy.

he then says that the mail system is technologically backward and antiquated. now, i probably do about 80 bucks a month in mailings, and well, i have never had a complaint, and the items get back to me in relativly short periods with great accuracy. i may get an item or two every 4 months that should have been delievered elsewhere. meanwhile, using ups, it takes 3 weeks for that 7-10 day delievery. competition drives the industry, but when the industry sucks, don’t knock it till it can compete.

(note, private school kid here)…but slamming the public school system is just plain stupid. now, i want to see a private school work at the same rate of funds in compton or miami as it would in shiny (insert your favorite white bread city). now, i am not comparing apples and oranges. kids are kids, on the most basic level…but if you take a kid from an affluent community, and place him in a warzone, and vise versa…well, you know where i am going with this.

my final note…the last administration had fed govt grow exponentially, and we have had a total failure of everything due to gross incompetance…now i am not saying vote for the democrat who seems to have a great idea, no no, but if you liked seeing everything you thought was great fall apart, and liked it…vote for the republican…but if you want the last 8 years to go away, go with the democrat or look to the independants, sure, you are wasting your vote, but you will at least be able to sleep at night.

Lets go with the obvious first, WHAT THE HELL IS HE TALKING ABOUT? He jumps from snow plowing to the mail system, to the public school system without really answering any of the issues.  I believe this comes down to one thing, this guy is ANGRY and is lashing out without any regard to as to who he should be lashing out against.  Lets review some basics about socialism (a college course can be based on the different factions of Socialism, but here are some simple quotes),

Socialism refers to a broad set of economic theories of social organization advocating state or collective ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods, and the creation of an egalitarian society. Modern socialism originated in the late nineteenth-century working class political movement. Karl Marx posited that socialism would be achieved via class struggle and a proletarian revolution which represents thetransitional stage between capitalism and communism.

Economically, socialism denotes an economic system of state ownership and / or worker ownership of the means of production and distribution (emphasis added)

Please RE-READ that last statement, and ask yourself, “should the government own the means of industry?” Does this really seem like a good idea?!  I have always inherently believed that we need government, to handle those areas that private government shouldn’t be in charge of (police for instance) but the smallest government is the best one.   When I was younger I would say, “I am a republican who cares about civil rights” and then I learned about Libertarianism.  The definition libertarian which is covered by the FAQ on the party’s website But here are some insights,  Let’s start with Webster’s definition:

libertarian: A person who upholds the principles of individual liberty especially of thought and action.

Libertarian: a member of a political party advocating libertarian principles.

Libertarians believe in, and pursue, personal freedom while maintaining personal responsibility.  The Libertarian Party itself serves a much larger pro-liberty community with the specific mission of electing Libertarians to public office. Libertarians strongly oppose any government interfering in their personal, family and business decisions.  Essentially, we believe all Americans should be free to live their lives and pursue their interests as they see fit as long as they do no harm to another. In a nutshell, we are advocates for a smaller government, lower taxes and more freedom.

Conclusion to Chris’ Comments

Just because you don’t like Bush (which I don’t either but for logical and political reasons…his complete disregard of the Bill of Rights and increased spending) doesn’t mean we should turn to socialism.  Do you know how absurd of a statement, this is!

I think I am done ranting and raving (FOR NOW!)…If you have questions about where I stand on issues please ask! And if Chris you read this please contact me, I’d love to have you write a coherent devil’s advocate post.

By the way want to know who that sexy beast up there is? That is Adam Smith some people need to read up on him during this time of unrest (Thanks Spark68)



  1. I’m going to start this off by saying that I’m a socialist. I believe that in a perfect world society everyone’s needs are met preferably through a system of community, not necessarily government, ownership.

    Now if you have decided to continue reading, I don’t disagree with some of the libertarian principles. I like the stand point of everyone should manage their money effectively and if people can afford to feed their families without the government then they should. I also like the idea of people being able to keep their wealth. And the idea of keeping government from being restrained and overbloated.

    But I don’t believe that any of that should happen at the expense of a person having access to food, shelter, education, health care, and transportation. I believe that people who do everything right shouldn’t have to worry about having enough to eat or getting to see a doctor. And if the government has to pay for it to get it done then so be it.

    Personally I think that providing my fair share of taxes to a government that focuses it’s efforts on the needs of society is a responsibility I’m more than willing to accept.

  2. @CJ,

    First and foremost, I have never seen your blog before, congrats on the weight loss, especially the most recent mark of under 300 (Oct 18).

    I would never stop reading, because someone has a different view than me. But to be honest, you aren’t a socialist, at least not to the extent that I would define someone as a socialist. This is evidenced by two simple statements:
    1) “I also like the idea of people being able to keep their wealth.”
    2) “And the idea of keeping government from being restrained and overbloated.”

    Socialism is the opposite of those 2 statements. You just believe that there are some inalienable rights that the gov’t should provide for (i.e. “food, shelter, education, health care, and transportation”). VERY REASONABLE.

    My Question to you, and I hope your respond, is:
    How does the government account for those allegedly inalienable rights? Should they tax more? Should they cut spending? etc.

    Funny story, last night as I wrote the post, I watched the 3rd debate (thanks tivo!). While watching THE WIFE and I fought about what should the gov’t provide. Her stance? Healthcare.

    My selfish stance? I don’t believe my taxes should be increased because someone chose not to work for a company with health care.

    It is a fundamental difference in ideology, but I think we will work it out in our marriage LOL (I hope so cause we are only pushing 4 months thus far).

  3. I know this is over a year old, but I’m reviving it anyway. I agree with Marx that Socialism is the next step in human evolution as a society. People never thought capitalism would work coming out of feudalism. Socialism will happen, just like black people are allowed to go to school with whites, and women are allowed to vote.
    Socialism is an economic system. Not a political party or affiliation. There are a lot of things that are socialist in nature, religious organizations and families come to mind.
    Socialism is less about what the government is going to give you, or force you to do and more about people learning to take care of each other and stop being stingy and greedy.
    I am a socialist. I know that nothing I have is mine. Nothing you have is yours. Is that car you drive really yours? The house you live in? The private school you go to? All the objects that people attach to themselves to define themselves and attempt to feel superior to others is a facade.

    You really think that people choose not to work for a company with health care? Where are these jobs that offer health care? In my area (western Ohio) they were at Chrysler, GM and the factories that made parts. I’m glad people chose to take those jobs with health care, all their problems were solved, they don’t have to worry about a single thing now, because they got a ‘good job’. Just because your employer doesn’t offer health care doesn’t make it any less of a human right. If you are homeless there are shelters, if you are hungry, there are pantries. If you are sick you’re screwed.

  4. Wow Kriket a lot to digest there.

    First and foremost, I love that you are commenting on a year old post!

    “Socialism is less about what the government is going to give you, or force you to do and more about people learning to take care of each other and stop being stingy and greedy.”

    Says who? Says the gov’t tool telling me what to do? or forcing me to do? or giving me my alloted amount regardless of how hard I work?

    Your last paragraph is incoherent at best, but I will try to respond.

    There are a ton of jobs that offer health care, from the paralegals at my old office, to the kid who pretends to be IT in my new job (I say pretend since I am pretty sure I know more than him)?

    “Just because your employer doesn’t offer health care doesn’t make it any less of a human right.”
    That is where I disagree, health care at a job is a benefit – if your job doesn’t offer it and you are pissed of…go work at starbucks. They offer it to part timers I think.

    “If you are homeless there are shelters, if you are hungry, there are pantries. If you are sick you’re screwed.”

    This is literally just bullshit – if you are sick an ER is legally not allowed to turn you away. Alternatively, if youa re ‘alright’ living in a shelter then you should be alright going to a free clinic.

    Check out my political posts! I’d love to have future discussions.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Related Articles

Recent Comments