Democratic Party Rebuild

Outlaw

New Hope For the HaveNotz
Joined
May 6, 2012
Messages
8,202
Reputation
496
Daps
24,645
Reppin
Buzz City, NC :blessed:
Socialism is a politico-economic philosophy with the goal of public benefit and ownership of the institutions that make up our society and economy.


This would depend on the context of the specific institution we're talking about, but I'm directionally orientation toward private power being subordinated to public power.


Yes, I absolutely believe and trust the public government to do a better job of mass building housing for all of society vs a deregulated private builder industry. I don't consider housing to be a luxury good where the free-market can be allowed free reign, I consider it a human right, which the government will always do a better job of enacting and safeguarding because rights are not conducive to the profit-motive that drives private interests. I feel the same way about the fire department and roads and the school system and healthcare and all other necessities that should be equally available to all people. The private market is simply inferior on these issues compared to the government. Luxury condos, sure let the private builders go nuts. But public/social housing? No.
If you over simplify economic systems it’s just properly allocating rewards and incentives for the good of the individual and society.

I think that some industries should be for-profit and building homes is one of those.

Do you think the utilitarianism of a government mixed in psychopaths (eventually they’ll gain power even if it’s after an benevolent socialist takeover) will produce more housing long term than a for-profit builder industry who is motivated through competition of government contracts?
 

☑︎#VoteDemocrat

The Original
WOAT
Supporter
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Messages
329,081
Reputation
-34,080
Daps
635,305
Reppin
The Deep State
Yeah if I too sniffed glue recreationally I could see how this would be a gotcha.

How about you find me the post where I claimed there needs to be more regulation in every area and instance. Because surely you're not just assigning that made-up idea to the people you're currently failing to debate. Like, surely you're not just using one area of poor regulation to counter people who are critical of a widespread deregulatory movement that doesn't account for the attendant phenomenon of corporate power. Surely you're not that stupid and bad-faithed...right?
Corporations can and will exist. I’m not inherently anti-corporation. at no point will you remove their influence. You can however increase the competition big business can face in key areas of contracting and infrastructure. Why is this so hard to accept?

You seem to be inherently skeptical of any business entity. Again, if your desire is to be more like China then you should at least learn what China does and it’s not being afraid of business.
 

☑︎#VoteDemocrat

The Original
WOAT
Supporter
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Messages
329,081
Reputation
-34,080
Daps
635,305
Reppin
The Deep State
Yet again, we see Nap doesn't understand the definition of the basic terms of the debate he's blustering his way through like a buffoon. Let me guess, your barometer of socialism is Soviet bread lines :mjlol:

Public schooling is one of the most classic examples of a socialist institution. Which private entity owns the public schools in your city, moron? Who is in charge of the deployment of resources and means of production? Is it a private enterprise or is it a publicly-run entity like a school board? Who pays for public schools? Private investors or is it publicly-funded by government taxation?

But perhaps public schooling is too triggering an example for you because you were held back multiple grades, so we can do social security, medicare and medicaid, public libraries, police and fire departments, the national park system, roads...
Every society has public schools. This isn’t unique to Marx learning how to walk.
 

King Kreole

natural blondie like goku
Joined
Mar 8, 2014
Messages
16,495
Reputation
4,558
Daps
44,836
If you over simplify economic systems it’s just properly allocating rewards and incentives for the good of the individual and society.
I'm not sure what point you're making here.

I think that some industries should be for-profit and building homes is one of those.
I am also fine with some industries being for-profit, but public housing is not one of them.

Do you think the utilitarianism of a government mixed in psychopaths (eventually they’ll gain power even if it’s after an benevolent socialist takeover) will produce more housing long term than a for-profit builder industry who is motivated through competition of government contracts?
Again, I'm not sure what you mean by "a government mixed in psychopaths". But I think the most sustainable and beneficial system is one in which the government plays an active, foundational role in creating the housing stock for the entire society. For-profit builders can have their sandbox to play in, like private schools, but housing is a human right like education. So the government should ensure its availability to the public through direct intervention, like they do with the school system. This is a socialist principle.
 

King Kreole

natural blondie like goku
Joined
Mar 8, 2014
Messages
16,495
Reputation
4,558
Daps
44,836
Corporations can and will exist. I’m not inherently anti-corporation. at no point will you remove their influence. You can however increase the competition big business can face in key areas of contracting and infrastructure. Why is this so hard to accept?
Yes, corporations can and will exist, and I am also not inherently anti-corporation. I'm not seeking to remove their influence, I'm seeking to constrain it to areas in which it doesn't produce the level of social harm that we're seeing it produce today. Your solution is to allow them more unfettered access to the public goods because you have accepted them as the primary stakeholder in society who everyone else must acquiesce to and work around. This is hard for me to accept because I am not a corporate bootlicking stooge and believe in longterm health and wellbeing of the entire public and society.

You seem to be inherently skeptical of any business entity. Again, if your desire is to be more like China then you should at least learn what China does and it’s not being afraid of business.
I have never expressed a desire to be more like China, so your comment here is irrelevant.
 

Outlaw

New Hope For the HaveNotz
Joined
May 6, 2012
Messages
8,202
Reputation
496
Daps
24,645
Reppin
Buzz City, NC :blessed:
I'm not sure what point you're making here.


I am also fine with some industries being for-profit, but public housing is not one of them.


Again, I'm not sure what you mean by "a government mixed in psychopaths". But I think the most sustainable and beneficial system is one in which the government plays an active, foundational role in creating the housing stock for the entire society. For-profit builders can have their sandbox to play in, like private schools, but housing is a human right like education. So the government should ensure its availability to the public through direct intervention, like they do with the school system. This is a socialist principle.
In your society would there still be a democracy?
 

King Kreole

natural blondie like goku
Joined
Mar 8, 2014
Messages
16,495
Reputation
4,558
Daps
44,836
Every society has public schools. This isn’t unique to Marx learning how to walk.
...yes, almost every society runs a mixed-economy with socialist institutions. What's unique is that America has produced this breed of anti-intellectual morons who don't understand the very underpinnings of their own social institutions, so they end up saying things like "Public schools and the fire department are not socialist concepts" and "No society has private exclusive schools".
 

☑︎#VoteDemocrat

The Original
WOAT
Supporter
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Messages
329,081
Reputation
-34,080
Daps
635,305
Reppin
The Deep State
Yes, corporations can and will exist, and I am also not inherently anti-corporation. I'm not seeking to remove their influence, I'm seeking to constrain it to areas in which it doesn't produce the level of social harm that we're seeing it produce today. Your solution is to allow them more unfettered access to the public goods because you have accepted them as the primary stakeholder in society who everyone else must acquiesce to and work around. This is hard for me to accept because I am not a corporate bootlicking stooge and believe in longterm health and wellbeing of the entire public and society.


I have never expressed a desire to be more like China, so your comment here is irrelevant.
I’m pro results. I’m not interested in front loading your concerns in a dynamic environment.

We need new ideas and plans and you dont have any. Funny who’s protecting the status quo now...
 

☑︎#VoteDemocrat

The Original
WOAT
Supporter
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Messages
329,081
Reputation
-34,080
Daps
635,305
Reppin
The Deep State
...yes, almost every society runs a mixed-economy with socialist institutions. What's unique is that America has produced this breed of anti-intellectual morons who don't understand the very underpinnings of their own social institutions, so they end up saying things like "Public schools and the fire department are not socialist concepts" and "No society has private exclusive schools".
You front loaded your defense of socialism with the fire department.

That sort of argumentation is cool in like the first semester of college.
 

King Kreole

natural blondie like goku
Joined
Mar 8, 2014
Messages
16,495
Reputation
4,558
Daps
44,836
I’m pro results. I’m not interested in front loading your concerns in a dynamic environment.

We need new ideas and plans and you dont have any. Funny who’s protecting the status quo now...
yeah who cares if there's a baby in that bathwater, just toss the whole thing out, it's a dynamic environment, move fast and break things, someone get me a DOGE hat :coffee:
 
Top