Does Socialism Work?

So I was wondering why the democrats are so bent on imposing socialism on America?

Winston Churchill said *“Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.” *

He also said, “The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries.”

Or my favorite, “Socialism proposes no adequate substitute for the motive of enlightened selfishness that today is at the basis of all human labor and effort, enterprise and new activity.”

Doing some research I found these articles:

Why Socialism Is the People’s Choiceby James Ostrowski, June 2003Some excerpts –

Why then is socialism so popular?

Reason No. 1:Socialism allows people to spend other people’s money without feeling guilty about it.

Reason No. 2: Socialism satisfies the deeply felt and widely held emotion of envy.

Reason No. 3: Socialism purports to relieve people of the burden of worrying about their economic well-being.

Reason No. 4: Socialism is a secular substitute for religion and offers people (false) solace against the traumas of this life.

These are some of the main reasons that socialism, which is silly in theory and lethal in practice, remains so popular, even in a society such as ours, whose fabulous wealth is the result of the shrinking capitalist remnants of the economy.

Read the Article:

Why Socialism Is the People’s Choice

Hmmmmm, then I found this.Does Socialism Breed Laziness? Spain and the Problem of Post-Vacation SyndromeFrom the desk of Soeren Kern on Mon, 2008-09-08 12:08

….In 2007, an average Spanish worker worked 1,652 hours. This compares to 1,561 hours per French worker; 1,433 hours per German worker; and 1,794 hours per American worker.

An average Spanish worker generated US$39.4 in GDP per hour worked, compared with US$49.9 per French worker; US$47 per German worker; and US$50.4 per American worker.

Does Socialism Breed Laziness?

Still others maintain that Post-Vacation Syndrome is nothing other thanclassic laziness. And some go so far as to draw a clear connection betweenlaziness and European socialism. Whereas capitalism rewards hard work andpersonal initiative, socialism inherently rewards laziness. Indeed, Europeansocialist societies are teaching their citizens to expect everything,even if they contribute nothing. So why work if you can get it for free?

But according to researchers from Gothenburg University in Sweden, hard work is actually the key to happiness because laziness breeds depression and depression breeds laziness. Could this be why Spain, despite its good climate and good food, ranks as one of the unhappiest countries in Europe, according to the latest World Values Survey?
(Denmark ranks as the happiest country in the world; the United States ranks 16; and Spain ranks 44.)

Could it be that the Post-Vacation Syndrome afflicting Spain is nothing more than a politically-correct, post-modern label designed to conceal the laziness, narcissism, and irresponsibility being encouraged by Spanish socialism?

Read the article here:

Does Socialism Breed Laziness?

Socialism Does Not Work by James Douglas Buthman

(I only link to this because it is long.)

Socialism Does Not Work

Here is a good small business perspective:

…Eventually, though, the highest talent, most motivated people move on to other industries or occupations where their hard work is rewarded, and are replaced by a new generation of workers who are attracted to a job where only attendance (and sometimes not even that) is required.

…Beyond the moral failures of socialism, one of its practical failures revolves around incentives. Customers get subsidized products or services, forgetting that that this will cause people to use more than is available. Employees don’t get rewarded for merit or hard work, but the system is constructed such that it won’t work without these.

…Capital-intensive businesses, particularly extractive ones, can be looted for decades by kleptocratic governments.

…Technocratic idealists (AL GORE) ALWAYS lose control of the game. It may feel good at first when the trains start running on time, but the technocrats are soon swept away by the thugs, and the patina of idealism is swept away, and only fascism is left. Interestingly, the technocrats always cry “our only mistake was letting those other guys take control”. No, the mistake was accepting the right to use force on another man. Everything after that was inevitable.

Read the article here:

Why Does Socialism Sometimes Seem to Sort of Work, At First?

More from this blog:

I Guess I’m Not Patriotic

60 Second Refutation of Socialism, While Sitting at the Beach

Statism Comes Back to Bite Technocrats

And this blog led me to this:

Obama goes for the jungular

Back to: Does Socialism Work:

Does Socialism Work? Debunking the Myth

This one is for Nancy Pelosi.Why Does Socialism Cause Pollution? by Tim Swanson

15 years ago Thomas DiLorenzo penned a concise piece detailing severals reasons and examples as to why socialism was not only unable to prevent pollution, but how it is the prime culprit in many cases.

The latest edition of the Top 10 “World’s Worst Polluted Places” was released this past week. And unsurprisingly all ten are in regions of the world where property rights are either non-existent or not respected.

This is not to say that private firms would never or have never polluted, but rather, it illustrates the abuse land can take in the absence of incentives and accountability. Arguably, if the land had been owned by private companies capable of suing for restitution or damages, the dumping/toxifying would probably never have occurred in the first place.

In addition, for-profit companies have an incentive not to destroy or pollute their own land. For instance, deforestation would never occur on a privately owned plantation — in order to stay solvent, the owner has the inherent incentive to perpetually replant and nurture the inventory (i.e., you can’t sell it if you don’t have any of it). In other words, businesses must satisfy consumer demand to stave off bankruptcy; governments do not.

Banning government ownership of land is unfortunately not a solution currently listed by the institute responsible for the top 10 list. Next year perhaps.

Why Does Socialism Cause Pollution?

And:Does Socialism Work? Well of Course Not, But Why Not?

And here are some gems from a discussion about socialism,Where does Socialism work?

No. It does not work.

there are no credible links, socialism sucks.

The American public library system is the best example here of socialism and it works very well!

In a Democrats head…Thats also known as Fantasyland

San Francisco is a socialist bubble protected by a warm fuzzy blanket of democracy

Socialism has only worked briefly, only to collapse in debt and bureaucracy. Because Socialism requires heavy taxes which encourages people not to work or to work under the table. As the older generation(the first under socialism) stops working and gets there state pensions, the younger generation is not able to fully fund the pensions, leading to an even heavier tax.

Read more here:
Where does Socialism work?, if it does , and if so please provide credible links?

And I will wrap this up with an article from Alan J. Back.

Defenders of socialist economic policies have tried every trick in the book to stave off criticism from their opponents. Alexandros Salazar-Kardoza’s letter last week takes one of the oldest approaches: he insists that the goal is all that matters, without stopping to consider what is involved with reaching it.

Socialism, Kardoza states, aims “at giving everyone the same level of opportunity, and allowing only those who truly deserve… to get to the top to arrive there.”

Where will these opportunities come from? Someone has to provide them, either voluntarily or under threat of government action. The minute the latter happens, the free market goes right out the window.

Another problem: how to decide who deserves to succeed? In other words, what replaces individual judgment the arbitrary whim of some bureaucrat or the collective whim of society?

Either way, the end result is the same: a system that tries to shoehorn everyone into a narrowly defined “ideal” role and classifies those that fail to fit it as enemies of the “public good.” For a demonstration, look at the House Un-American Activities Committee.

Kardoza also fails to consider the issue of voluntary charity. As crazy as it might sound, there are people and groups who do what they can to nurture ability. Walk through any building on this campus and count the number of signs and plaques that say, “Donated by,” or “Made possible through a grant from,” and then ask yourself if charity is dead.

Socialism exists “to make sure everyone starts at the same point.” Politically, this has already been done, thanks to the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. Everyone has the right to live his own life as he sees fit, as long as he does not violate others’ rights. No one has the right to an education, a job, or a life-style paid for with money taken from others against their will. That is the difference between socialism and capitalism: one system tries to establish economic and political rights separately, while the other begins from the understanding that they are indivisible.

Alan J. Back

Get over it; Socialism does not work

*Be careful what you ask for, you may get it. *