Socialism

46Young

Level 25 EMS Wizard
3,063
90
48
I saw this post on FH.com and found it interesting. Any thoughts?

Socialism - A Simple Analogy

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never failed a single student before but had once failed an entire class.

That class had insisted that socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer.

The professor then said, "OK, we will have an experiment in this class on socialism. All grades would be averaged and everyone would receive the same grade so no one would fail and no one would receive an A.


After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B.

The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy.

As the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too so they studied little.

The second test average was a D! No one was happy.

When the 3rd test rolled around, the average was an F.


The scores never increased as bickering, blame and name-calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else.

All failed, to their great surprise, and the professor told them that socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great but when government takes all the reward away, no one will try or want to succeed.


Could not be any simpler than that.

:p*****EMS Related Disclaimer!*****:p >>> The socialism concept could be applied to emergency services and universal healthcare.
 

EMT11KDL

Forum Asst. Chief
964
76
28
I got that in an Email last week
 

Shishkabob

Forum Chief
8,264
32
48
Socialism will fail because it's stupid.








In theory, it's great. In practice, it's unrealistic and will never succeed. You can't have EVERY SINGLE HUMAN to never want more power or more privilege than someone else.

The very thought of a socialistic government is an oxymoron.
 

Maya

Forum Lieutenant
110
1
0
This is an interesting analogy and it does point out one of the major flaws of Socialism, but the problem with it is that the analogy is too simplistic to apply to a much more complex socio-economic system. Don't get me wrong -- this is *one* aspect of why Socialism failed in the former Soviet Union, but it was really much more complicated than just that one reason, which many people cite as being the *one* reason -- failing to account for the fact that Capitalist economies with Socialized health and education services have been extremely successful in many other countries.

It also does not point out the flaws in the opposite -- an unregulated Capitalist system, favoring Monopolies and Oligarchies -- allowing companies like Lehman Brothers and AIG to gamble with the livelihoods of millions of Americans, creating the greatest economic collapse since the Great Depression. Who suffers the most from this economic crisis? Those on the lowest tiers of society -- creating poverty, higher unemployment, an increase in crime, and further economic stagnation as a result.
 

Shishkabob

Forum Chief
8,264
32
48
I already told you why socialism in the Soviet Union failed


"The very thought of a socialistic government is an oxymoron."





:)
 

Maya

Forum Lieutenant
110
1
0
'Since 1973 the average income of the top 1% of Americans (income at least $90,000) has doubled, and the income of the top 0.1% (145,000 taxpayers with income at least $1.6 million) has tripled. (from Class in America series in the New York Times, May 2005).

'The top ten percent of the U.S. population owns 81.8 percent of the real estate, 81.2 percent of the stock, and 88 percent of the bonds. (Federal Reserve Bank data in Left Business Observer, No. 72, Apr. 3, 1996, p. 5).

'One percent of the U.S. population owns sixty percent of the stock and forty percent of the total wealth. (Hawken, Paul, The Ecology of Commerce: A Declaration of Sustainability. New York: HarperBusiness, 1993).'

-- These are the people who get tax-cuts under Trickle-Down Economics. Does the wealth actually trickle-down to the rest of the Economy? If it did, would the divide between rich and poor be so much greater than it was in the 1970's? Human beings are greedy by nature, as the Schoolroom story, by the OP. showed.

As the figures stated, the income of the top 1% of the population has doubled, and the top 0.01% has tripled since the 1970's. That indicates to me that wealth has accumulated amongst the rich and has, in fact, not trickled-down.

From seeing the most recent stories in the news of acts bordering on Corporate fraud by the CEOs of Lehman Brothers, AIG, and others; as well as Ponzi-schemes by people like Madoff and Stanford -- something tells me that the SEC has given these guys way too much slack. We´re all paying for it now and will continue to pay for it for a long time to come.

On another note, wasn't it President Reagan who essentially created the current homelessness problem by cutting spending on social services and taking mentally ill patients out of mental hospitals? These homeless people are the same people taxing our 9-1-1 service to a virtual breaking point now. I'm curious as to what people's opinions are on how that changed EMS -- those of you who have been around long enough to have witnessed the change.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Shishkabob

Forum Chief
8,264
32
48
'Since 1973 the average income of the top 1% of Americans (income at least $90,000) has doubled, and the income of the top 0.1% (145,000 taxpayers with income at least $1.6 million) has tripled. (from Class in America series in the New York Times, May 2005)

My family is part of that 1%. Both my parents also started out in poverty. It can be done, and my family is proof of such.


On another note, wasn't it President Reagan who essentially created the current homelessness problem by cutting spending on social services and taking mentally ill patients out of mental hospitals? These homeless people are the same people taxing our 9-1-1 service to a virtual breaking point now. I'm curious as to what people's opinions are on how that changed EMS -- those of you who have been around long enough to have witnessed the change.

On another note, wasn't it Clinton who created the current terrorist problem we have today because of the massive cutbacks in military spending? Wasn't it also under Clinton that 9/11 was planned, along with the USS Cole? And the '93 bombings? And the Marine barracks bombings? And the embassy bombings? Those same cutbacks put us back militarily pretty far, and as such we're playing catchup now to put terrorist where they should have been years ago--- the extinct list.


See, I can twist things too :p
 
Last edited by a moderator:

mycrofft

Still crazy but elsewhere
11,322
48
48
Linus, mil cutbacks really got started under repubs post Vietnam.

Ford, then Carter under BRACC. Reagan reversed it then Bush put it in overdrive, Clinton continued it.

I only know what I experienced as a service member in those times.
 

phabib

Forum Lieutenant
125
0
0
These analogies are always way too simple. The students in the class still missed the major point. If they study then they will gain the knowledge, that is the point of school.

Same thing with socialism in society. Will you want to work in a coal mine or at McDonald's just because you know you have the basics taken care of? Of course not. You'll work hard to have that dream job still but now money won't be your inspiration. Maybe under a socialist system you'll actually have the chance to go to college or even medical or law school. It's sad that entire societies think socialism will fail because they won't get to be the next millionaire. If all they get out of work is a paycheck then these people live pathetic lives.
 

minneola24

Forum Lieutenant
166
0
0
In theory, it's great. In practice, it's unrealistic and will never succeed. You can't have EVERY SINGLE HUMAN to never want more power or more privilege than someone else.


Get rid of greed and it would work just fine.
 

Shishkabob

Forum Chief
8,264
32
48
Get rid of greed and it would work just fine.

When you figure out a way to rid human kind of "The Jones' " syndrome, you let me know.


It's quite naiive to think every person in the world will want the same exact things as every one else, no matter how hard they worked for it. Impossible.
 

mycrofft

Still crazy but elsewhere
11,322
48
48
Don't take it all, lock, stock and barrel.

Wealth can reach critical mass where it becomes a black hole, consuming all. Some levelling has to take place in any system or it becomes too concentrated and social cohesion breaks down. We are seeing it starting in Africa and the Middle East/SW Asia; the have-nots will have it, one way or another, when they have nothing.
 

minneola24

Forum Lieutenant
166
0
0
When you figure out a way to rid human kind of "The Jones' " syndrome, you let me know.


It's quite naiive to think every person in the world will want the same exact things as every one else, no matter how hard they worked for it. Impossible.

I remember watching this movie in school about an African tribe and they all went about their work, they created food for each other, worked for each other, etc. One day they found this coke bottle that a westerner dropped out of his plane, the tribe found it very useful as a tool and increased productivity dramatically. Soon they all wanted the tool and it created loads of issues.

My point is that an equal society CAN occur, but most Americans want the latest and greatest right now.

Kind of upsetting considering many don't even have basic necessities, but hey its a fact of life.
 

SeeNoMore

Old and Crappy
483
109
43
Socialism is a big concept, with many potential applications as well as pitfalls. I don't find this story that insightful.
 

Sasha

Forum Chief
7,667
11
0
You know, America prides itself on being capitalists, but we employ many social programs. Welfare, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, public school systems... If everyone is entitled to basic education, why not basic healthcare? I am not saying that it should ann be free, but it should all be affordable to everyone.
 

Meursault

Organic Mechanic
759
35
28
Ooh, a politics thread! I can hardly wait!

Actually, this has been decent so far, except for the analogy. I've been reading John Rawls (Justice as Fairness: A Theory of Justice Revised), and his take is interesting. Essentially, he argues that society should be structured in such a way as to guarantee a certain acceptable minimum quality of life and to ensure that improvements above that level don't come at the expense of others. He shies away from discussing any practical solutions, but he is critical of welfare capitalism.

The problem with individual taxation as a means of ensuring a minimum quality of life is that it unduly punishes achievement. Beyond that, naive implementations of welfare and universal healthcare can make their recipients dependent on them, which if anything reduces their quality of life and locks society into a cycle of increasing taxation and decreasing economic output.

On a more specific note, implementing any sort of healthcare on a national scale is, I suspect, going to be a mess. There's too much diversity, too many compromises that need to be made, and too much administration needed. I had a lecturer who supported the idea of state-level healthcare programs as a way of allowing more customization and more flexible funding.

I honestly have no idea how we'd go about establishing programs that provide basic healthcare without bleeding large segments of society dry, making a lot of healthcare providers very unhappy, and trapping people in dependence on the system. I'm afraid that it's going to require that the systems (healthcare, government, and Erathis knows what else) collapse and be rebuilt.
 

EMTinNEPA

Guess who's back...
894
2
16
Why is healthcare seen as an entitlement, and not a privilege? Because people need it to live? People need food to live too, but if I just go to Burger King and say "I'm hungry", they'll say "Ok, you can have this burger for this price." It's a business... period.
 

fma08

Forum Asst. Chief
833
2
18
Some of those social programs need to be cut back a little, then it might be more motivation for some people to actually do some work. My personal belief is that how much support you get should depend on whether you are a productive member of society or not. A great example are jails. We're paying for inmates to get an education?? I'm sorry, but they screwed up. They are there to serve a punishment, not to go to school. They can do that when they get out. How many people do you see on disability that are there because they are obese? I know full well that several medical conditions can cause that, but where is the motivation to try and lose some weight or be healthier if all of their needs are payed for? Free power scooters because you don't want to stand up an walk? C'mon... (Let the bashing begin :p)
 
Top