Why socialism won’t work

Brilliant explanation of why socialism doesn’t, can’t, won’t, ain’t gonna work. I heard the audio of this on Glenn Beck’s show this morning and thought this was one of the best explanations ever. It’s a graphic depiction of the saying, “socialism always fails because sooner or later you run out of other people’s money.”

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=661pi6K-8WQ[/youtube]

4 Responses to “Why socialism won’t work”

  • Anonymous:

    That’s a great video Oak, thanks for sharing it.

    I am often frustrated yet interested in why socialism sells. When you look at it logically and with reliable data (as is done with this video), then it seems so obvious how bad it is. Yet, so many are still taken in by the idea of simple redistribution of wealth by little steps. How does that happen? I see it happen at city council meetings across the state and in states across the nation.

    Many different versions of redistribution of wealth exist at different levels of society. We are not a socialist nation, yet we don’t seem to mind taking a little here and there from the people who work, and distributing it to the people who do not work (i.e. medicare) or supporting programs like universal healthcare that would take money from those who work and presumably give it to everyone (universal legal plunder).

    When I read Upton Sinclair’s book “The Jungle” a few years ago, I was surprised how easy the author could sell socialism. Steinbeck used the exact same tactics in his book “In Dubious Battle.” The key selling point is much what Michael Moore was saying in the clip shown in the video, and that is that it’s “not fair” the rich have all of the money. We’re the working class! We deserve a break! Right? We work to provide the services, or make the products and therefore make the money, but then the rich keep getting richer from our labor! That’s not fair! — or so say the reds.

    In Sinclair’s book, Jurgis’s story really tugs at our heartstrings, and honestly, it really was not fair the way he was treated. It was inhumane, it was immoral, and it was unjust. But why, then, would it seem just to do something similar to anyone else? If we take money from the rich, or even a little bit from everyone to spread it around, it is just as inhumane, immoral, and unjust.

    Socialism sells because people think capitalism is not fair. Socialism sells because for some reason we are bothered when we find out that our company earns $100K for the work we did in a year, yet we are only paid $40K of that profit.

    Socialism sells because people see short term benefits but the slow decay of their society takes years or decades to erode enough until it is beyond repair. The generation left to look back in despair (i.e. what England is struggling with today) can do little or nothing to fix it. The generation that benefited from the redistribution is already gone.

    The generation that gave us medicare and social security and income taxes are gone. Their kids and grand-kids have nearly finished spending it all and are leaving now. I doubt I will ever see a single social security dollar, and there will not likely be any medicare money left for me and certainly none for my children. The system is unsustainable. The decay continues.

    It’s never too late to go back, but it will require people to be self sufficient. It will require people who are willing to pay medicare and social security for a while until we can wean people off of it. Those who pay now will need to agree to get nothing from it later except a society that is beginning to heal. I doubt I’ll see that either, but I think that is more likely than seeing a single social security dollar.

    Dougc

  • I’m in the generation who will most certainly have to pay for SS and Medicare twice–but I would be MORE than willing to do it if we could secure a real, genuine turn-around and spare my children the despair. The founders believed it was immoral to spend the next generation’s money…but masses of American youth are not the first to have immoral acts done to them. So what do we do when we are treated unfairly? Turn the other cheek. Give the cloak also. I’m ready. Let’s get this done and over with. Painful? Yes. Necessary? Definitely yes. Great comment, Dougc.

  • Anonymous:

    As you know, Oak, “most” faculty at college and university — public and private — with rare exceptions such as maybe BYU and its satellite locations in Hawaii and Idaho — believe in and support socialism.

    Some, like Utah Valley University’s Department of Peace and [Social] Justice Studies and The U of U’s Departments of Humanities & Sociology & Salt Lake Community College’s Department of Humanities, have the staunch defenders of socialism, which is same as communism. I know quite a few faculty members at UVU and SLCC who are “progressives” with dogmatic attitude, threatening to “flunk” out (or give subpar grade to) the students whose opinion differs from their uniform view.

    This attitude is abusive towards the students. They pretend to be right in their Ivory Tower mentality. This is why Chris Herrod’s bill on abolishing tenure at public colleges is the right thing to do, yet it failed to survive the commission at the legislature. This is why I believe there must be accountability for the faculty, with termination of employment upon determination there has been the case of the abuse of power. I tried to write about this idea to a few legislators, but they don’t seem interested. The Governor being given the power to decide on public education may be the start, but I am not sure about this.

    I loathe the shrill faculty members who insist that the students conform to their view in order to pass to gain credit towards the degree. That is clear violation of the freedom of conscience. They wield power under the assumption that they are “tenured,” officially or not, and therefore cannot be held accountable for “intellectual” and verbal bullying the students who differ in opinion, as in essaying.

    The faculty members also promote anti-Caucasian propaganda in philosophy, humanities, sociology, communication, American history, and ‘diversity’ courses with the assignments on “White privileges,” watching vulgar movies such as “Crash”, talking about how villainous European race is, et cetera. I experienced this in classrooms, and frankly it is (was) nauseating.

    Communism by way of cultural Marxism is very much alive in K-12 and college, and it is a contagious mental disease. Utah state legislature must do something to stop this depravity by firing some faculty members who cross the line to abuse the students with intellectual and verbal bullying to pressure the students to conform or else ‘fail’ the course.

    The fact that these faculty members depend on the posh and lucrative salary paid for by the taxpayers who happen to be overwhelmingly Caucasian and conservative according to political demography in Utah state is ironic, and quite loathsome. They are the brain-sucking red leeches.

  • Anonymous:

    Thanks Natalie. There are about 8 of us willing to do it so far. Now, we just need about 129,999,992 more give or take a few million.