Sadly you do not control the numbers
 

When social security was launched there were, if, I recall what I had read, 11 people working to pay for each person retired. Today, it is 1 1/2. To make it even worse politicians on both sides added more benefits, to BUY VOTES, without adequate funding. Most recently Bush added prescription coverage followed by Obama adding OBAMACARE to the tab.

In case anyone has missed my previous posts- We have heard over and over again that Obama has added TEN TRILLION BUCKS to our national debt. FOR THE SHOCKING NEWS THAT THE LIBERAL CONTROLLED PRESS DOES NOT THINK YOU NEED TO KNOW. We hear over and over that China is our largest creditor. First of all that is not true, we owe slightly more to Japan then to China. THE SHOCK IS that together Japan and China hold 20% of our national debt. SOCIAL SECURITY HOLDS 42% OF THE NATIONAL DEBT. If, a company ran it's bookkeeping the way our country does, THEY WOULD BE SHUT DOWN.

Ryan's is a long term transitional plan and if implemented might hit a portion of Gen X.

Personal Best Regards:

You seem to have a grudge against Republican presidents, that have not ended medicare...

There was 2 other questions that you did not even attempt to offer answer or opinion, maybe because they lacked an opportunity to pass judgment on a past Republican.



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

To answer the subject question:

Progressives are attracted to socialism because the two words are synonymous. The left loves Ponzi schemes and believe that as long as they take care of today, someone else will deal with tomorrow. They still do not comprehend that once they spend all of someone elses money, socialism does not work. If socialism worked, then everyone would be equally wealthy forever. It is a left wing, liberal fantasy that fits perfectly with Obie's socialist Utopia. They still do not understand that the reason they have such a great lifestyle here in the U.S. is because of two ideas, trickle down and supply and demand. The more the rich make the better lifestyle the middle and lower class enjoy. That is fact that cannot be disputed, but can be proven. Take for example, the middle class in many other countries that enjoy socialism. Our lower class live as well as the middle class in other socialist countries. You cannot dispute that statement. I have lived much of my life overseas and have seen it personally. The reason the middle class is suffering right now is because of all the attempts by this administration to have the government interfere with private business and mandate everything other than themselves. That puts a governor on the economic engine, period.

A quick study of basic economics will reveal that in a society such as ours, capitalism works best for most things. But, there are some things the need to be run on a socialist basis. Police and fire for example. I don't know that there is anything more socialist than the military. In fact I think that problems have been created when the military began to become less self sufficient and capitalist companies were hirer to perform certain functions. But that's another discussion entirely.

Although it was fought as a horrible socialist program, I think that social security has worked out pretty well. of course it, and it's sister program, Medicare would work a lot better if our politicians would stop "borrowing" from them. But again, another discussion.

I don't think that the argument should be socialism or capitalism as both need to exist in this country. The question needs to be where to apply each of these economic models.

Certainly the things I mentioned, police, fire, military have to be paid for and serve all of us. Do we want to extend to health care? Should we share equally in the food supply? Should we pool all of our money and have the government provide housing for all of us. That's what socialism truly is. It is a system where everyone contributes and shares equally.

It's pretty apparent that countries where socialism and communism were the norm are adding more and more capitalism into the mix and becoming better off because of it. China and Russia are the two most obvious examples. An example of a country that has tried to be strictly socialist is Cuba. Obviously that system doesn't work if it is the only way.

We have always had and will always need a mix of capitalism and socialism. The debate is over how much of each should be in the mix. What should the government do for us and what should be left to private industry?

Why not pay for fire/police protection? Like you do homeowners or car insurance. This stops the majority from subsidizing the minority who have more fires and more crime. Most fires happen in the poorer parts of town, they should pay more. MOST police "protection" is needed in the poorer parts of town, they should pay more. Disagree?

"Privatizing", big business loves it...they make a ton of money doing what the soldiers USED to do. But...since the military is now more than half women and minorities...it has to be contracted out.

Socialism/communism works IF everyone contributes evenly...EQUALLY...but they DON'T. Never equally because they're incapable.

The military is NOT socialist.
First off, if the military is socialist, then why does the left hate it so much?
Socialism involves wealth redistribution. What does the military have to do with that?
We pay taxes for gov employees. Is having a congressman that is paid by our taxes to vote for us, considered socialism?
Government exists to protect people and their property, from other people.
If the military was socialist, it would not be voluntary and EVERYONE would be required to contribute their service.

No, liberals attempt to use extremes and attempting to group the military, Fire Dept and the Police together as a form of socialism is ludicrous. It is an excuse to rationalize their short comings and failures, as well as wealth envy.

ICYMI Trump's first cabinet pick was Rep Tom Price, MD (R-GA) who promised Medicare will be gone in six to eight months.

Lie of the year by Democrats. Too bad, Jan

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...M7vdmrlnkrBFag

The Huffington Post : FAKE NEWS ------- News for " The Chicken Little`s " of our society .

Like I said before, Lie of the Year. Huffington Post is a socialist/communist owned rag that spews opinion, commentaries and editorials. Try getting your information from AP and Reuters and it might be semi-factual.

Like I said, you get your information from someone's opinion.

WOW!

Well, I'm glad at least that you didn't say FOX News!

I guess my assumptions were right; ol Jan is just into critiquing past and future republican presidents that had control of congress and DID NOT END Medicare...:blahblahblah:

First of all, Progressives do not "hate" the military. That's a Republican myth that your party uses up to make conservatives sound like better Americans. Progressives support and honor the military just as much, if not more, than you. What Progressives do hate (and I suspect the military hates them too) are senseless wars, costing the lives of thousands of Americans and billions of tax dollars charged to the federal deficit to be paid by our children and grandchildren for generations because at the same time they adopted a tax cut that was implemented that primarily benefited the richest Americans under the lamebrain trickle down theory which hasn't worked since the Reagan years. That happened during the GW Bush administration.

Second, the term "wealth envy" is a euphemism for income inequality. Trickle down economics was correctly labeled by GHW Bush as voodoo economics, and he was right. It's like saying that if you have three dogs and give one a weeny thinking, "he'll share." Give that a try.

Third, "Socialism," as defined by Webster means"

"any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods and services"

We aren't talking about Marxism or Communism, but rather a system where the community joins together and provides services for the common good. And yes, paying our Congresspersons is socialism. Are you seriously going to attempt to argue that the military, police, fire departments, and Congress do not fall under that definition? Please don't. It just further destroys your credibility.

Now, I know Trumpies like to steer clear of things like truth and facts, but if you can stomach it, here are a few:

7 Charts Show What Free Market Economics Have Really Brought on America
| Mic

Actually, much of FOX NEWS comes from AP. Some of FOX NEWS comes from on the scene reporting. I believe you problem is the confusion many on the left have between the NEWS and the Commentary. And they are still the number one cable NEWS network.

No, socialism is not depended o everyone contributing equally. "From each according to their abilities, to each according to their needs." is the basic principal of socialism. That is exactly what government does. It provides services equally to everyone as needed and, in our system of taxation, it takes according to what one is able to pay.

We all pay taxes. Those of us that can afford more pay more, those who can't pay less or nothing. But services are equal to everyone. Like I said, necessary services such as police, fire, public schools and military, are available to all of us as we need them.

Although we are primarily a capitalist society we do have some areas that are socialist.

As far as I know this system has worked very well for necessary government services for a long time. The question is which services do we feel are important enough to put under this system.

I know that some people would move health care into a socialist system. To that I ask, if health care is that important, how about food? If health care should be socialized shouldn't food also be? Isn't food as important as health care? Should the government provide everyone with food? How about shelter? Should the government be responsible for making sure that we all have a place to live regardless of whether we can pay?

Going to a socialist system to provide everything is a slippery slope. Capitalism has shown to have worked better in most areas. The reason that we have a health care problem is that it is no longer a capitalist system. Health insurance is not insurance at all. Insurance is basically a wager between you and the insurance company. You buy car insurance the insurance company is betting that you don't have an accident. If you do, they lose.

We did have health insurance until about the 1960s. Today what we have is pooled payment. Everyone contributes and everything gets covered, even pre-existing conditions. Can you imagine getting into a car accident and then buying car insurance that pays to repair or replace your car?

When people bought their own health insurance or paid their doctor out of their own pockets, the prices had to remain at what the market would bear. A doctor couldn't charge outrageous amounts of money because he wouldn't have any patients. Once employers began including health insurance as a part of a compensation package, the free market began to break down. Prior to that people bought catastrophic coverage and paid for routine doctor visits out of their pockets. If something serious happened, the catastrophic coverage kicked in so no one went bankrupt.

Basically when the free market was taken away prices skyrocketed because people didn't care what the costs was. They weren't paying for it.

Several other factors such as HMOs came along and the problem kept getting worse and worse until we got to a point where some people felt that the government needed to fix the problem. Usually, with a few exceptions, when the government interferes with the free market, things don't go well.

Your theories are skewed. At least what I said was true. Yours, not so much. Go ahead and listen to opinions, where I have seen the evidence and experienced it. You are wrong but think you are right. You live in a fantasy like that of Obama's socialist Utopia. It doesn't work anywhere. Never has.

You say you don't hate the military, and then the same time say that you don't believe the military should be used in war, that we spend too much for the military, etc. Very believable, for sure.
Socialism does not work. Some social programs limp along in a capitalistic society but socialism is a failure. It does not work.
You try to act like socialism is something else, other than what Democrats wish to change our country to. Heck, at least Bernie had the b@lls to admit it and embrace it. And half the Democrat voters embraced his socialism.
Say what you will but I have lived in socialist countries and I don't use theory like you do. I do not read commentaries on economics from liberal schooled economists. Theory and reality don't always correlate.
So, believe the way you wish but at least admit the truth, if not to everyone else, to yourself. Socialism is a failed system and capitalism is prosperous.

Actually, I believe that this definition is closer to Marxism or communism than it is socialism. The basic difference is that in a communist system, the government owns the means of production and all of the property. There is not private property.

In a socialist system, individuals own the factories and businesses
but must contribute all or almost all of it's profits to the government which then distribute the money equally amongst the people.

In a communist system, everyone gets paid the same amount regardless of the work they do. In a socialist system people get paid according to the work they do and are allowed to keep some of their own money but the majority goes to the state.

"From each according to their abilities, to each according to their need."