| We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| To the people here who live under socialism...; and think it is good or great.... | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Oct 27 2008, 11:57 PM (1,462 Views) | |
| 8247 | Oct 27 2008, 11:57 PM Post #1 |
|
Apparently we look like this now
|
....I have a few questions for you: How can someone afford a 3 month long vacation all over the world? How could someone earn enough money to do that? If it was saved, shouldn't that be taxed as well? If someone is that well off, how long would it take to save the money for it? If someone is that well off, shouldn't everyone in a socialist country be able to do that? Isn't the wealth spread around evenly? Why are there poor people in socialist countries who can't afford a 3 month vacation all over the world? Really, I'm just trying to understand. If you convince me how great it is, I might go to an ACORN office, tell them that I voted for McCain on an absentee ballot, and that I'd like 2 ballots to vote for Obama. I'd sure like a 3 month vacation all around the world. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| somerled | Oct 28 2008, 12:50 AM Post #2 |
|
Admiral MacDonald RN
|
LOL mmmm ..... you mean you can't afford to do the same kind of things in the USA ? Better now while my wife and young , have the $ , have a good 4x4 , are energetic and fit enough do it than waiting til I'm old and decrepid (in my late 60s which is when most people will be retiring I expect as a result of the losses their super funds have incurred. I am very glad we did our trip to Malaysia and Singapore when we did , the aussie dollar is heading south very quickly. Oh by the way, since when does one have to justify the way they spend their savings here ? Give up the booze, the hard liquor, the fags, and make do with a smaller house , the same old car , and you too might one day be in a position to take 5 - 6 months off work and do an extended tour and safari. I've done OK financially under a socialist economic system, socialism is not an obstacle to wealth creation or accumulating more than enough savings, I just don't feel a need to brag how well off we are. Money is not important to me, nor is personal wealth. There are more important and fullfilling things. And I am seriously fed up with the rat race and giving up my freedom (working). I guess some here will really spit the dummy should I announce i'm jack with working and have decided to retire at the age of 51 yo. to enjoy myself and to do what I please when I please which will include completing the Phd at my leisure. Still thinking about that BTW. Edited by somerled, Oct 28 2008, 01:32 AM.
|
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| ds9074 | Oct 28 2008, 06:20 AM Post #3 |
|
Admiral
|
I personally don’t think any of the regular posters here live under socialism. However, as someone who lives under a more social democratic system than that of the United States I can say I am honestly very grateful that it exists. For me personally it means two very important things, that I can get the medical treatment I need totally free of charge and that I have a reasonable income despite only being able to work part time hours. Without the support of the state I would likely be very ill and very poor. It has also meant I have been able to enjoy the benefits of education. Of course the existence of such a system does not mean that wealth is spread around evenly. I get a reasonable income but I don’t live in anything approaching luxury and so it should be. The tax and benefits system redistributes some wealth directly but the majority of the redistribution occurs because of free at the point of use taxpayer funded services. Yet we still debate whether this needs to go further or be reduced, what should be included in these services etc. Different parties have different answers, indeed different parts of the United Kingdom have different policies and certainly there are great differences between countries. The USA already adopts some of these kinds of policies it is just that it does so to a lesser degree than many other western nations. As to your point if I wanted to go on a 3 month holiday I would have to save for it (or borrow I suppose) but I think that would be the same for the majority of people in the USA and across the world. The first £3600 I saved each year would be totally tax free... as is the first £6000 anyone earns
Edited by ds9074, Oct 28 2008, 06:23 AM.
|
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Intrepid2002 | Oct 28 2008, 06:31 AM Post #4 |
|
UNGH!
|
Excellent point DS. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| whitestar | Oct 28 2008, 07:05 AM Post #5 |
|
Captain
|
Gotta disagree with Somerled, this aint a socialist system, Australia is a capitalistic market system... full stop. Over our history the mayority of governments have been conservative... but we have developed a safety net... the rest of us are out there on our own, part of the rat-race but there was a time I fell onto the safety net and thank god it was there, I will explain. Hospital is free, local GP service is mostly government paid for, specialists are free unless you choose to attend without a GP considering it necessary. My son at the age of 14 suffered a head injury, brain hemorrage was the result, three month stay in hospital, 4 brain surgery operations, hospital 60 miles from my regional area, free accomodation for me on hospital grounds, govt pay after my holiday pay and sick pay had runout, son fully recovered after three months solid of life and death battle... cost to me = $0 Edited by whitestar, Oct 28 2008, 07:26 AM.
|
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Dwayne | Oct 28 2008, 07:21 AM Post #6 |
|
Profanity deleted by Hoss
|
Unfornutately, one persistent misstatement all of you seem to be making in describing your medical system is this... "I can get the medical treatment I need totally free of charge" "Hospital is free" It is never free, you're just paying for it on the front end, through your tax system. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| whitestar | Oct 28 2008, 07:27 AM Post #7 |
|
Captain
|
Yea, your right.. 2% of my income to be exact, or I could opt out of that and choose private medical insurance, with excess charges after insurance meets what they choose to cover. Those excess charges would be in the thousands after a dozen or more specialist and three month hospital stay. Not to mention the government carried me when I was penniless, 60 miles from home
Edited by whitestar, Oct 28 2008, 07:31 AM.
|
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Dwayne | Oct 28 2008, 07:28 AM Post #8 |
|
Profanity deleted by Hoss
|
^^^ And a lot more from others. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Dwayne | Oct 28 2008, 07:32 AM Post #9 |
|
Profanity deleted by Hoss
|
As well as, that's 2% you pay irrespective of your health... so, live right and eat right, yet still pay out at least 2% of your income. I like my system better... I pay for what I use. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| whitestar | Oct 28 2008, 07:32 AM Post #10 |
|
Captain
|
No, 2% across the board |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| STC | Oct 28 2008, 07:33 AM Post #11 |
![]()
Commodore
|
Socialism, in the context that we are discussing it (i.e. there's no-one here from North Korea as far as I'm aware) is not an absolute, it occurs in degrees. Hence, to say that some of us here live under socialism, and others do not, would be patently untrue. For example, take the U.K. and the U.S. . Really, the only major difference I can see between those two countries is that, in the U.S., the majority of healthcare is provided by the private sector. Whereas in the U.K. the majority is provided by the public sector. Otherwise, lets see... police, fire, other emergency services, education, are provided by the government. The U.S. has a welfare benefits system, right? So do we. Infrastructure such as roads & bridges are, over here, funded by government but sub-contracted to the private sector, I'm guessing its a similar arrangement in the U.S.? All transport such as buses & railways is provided by the private sector over here. Taxation policy. I think we both have a progressive tax system, don't we? So, to take those two countries, we're really not that different. The tax burden over here is bigger, but not by much, and its lower here than many of our European neighbours. Its all about degrees of, not absolutes. We're really not so different. If you compared the U.S. to say Australia or Canada, you'd find the same picture - the main difference is in how we approach healthcare and thats pretty much it. Edited by STC, Oct 28 2008, 07:34 AM.
|
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| whitestar | Oct 28 2008, 07:35 AM Post #12 |
|
Captain
|
No offence Dwayne... live right, eat right, good policy but it aint no guarantee against been run over by a bus or anything else for that matter |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Dwayne | Oct 28 2008, 07:38 AM Post #13 |
|
Profanity deleted by Hoss
|
It's been agreed to repeatedly that we're only talking about degrees here... France has a higher degree of socialism than the United States, but less than China. The thing that must be, or at least ought to be noted, is that the higher degree of socialism practiced in a nation, generally the less economic and political freedom witnessed by its citizens. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| STC | Oct 28 2008, 07:40 AM Post #14 |
![]()
Commodore
|
By definition, you are right re. less economic freedom, if we define that as the choices one can make with ones own income. Though I would also add that a little re-distribution gives others greater choices by ensuring they have a liveable income and that is something I think most of us in the U.K., Europe, Canada, Australia, are supportive of. But to say less political freedom? I've no idea how you come to that conclusion.
Edited by STC, Oct 28 2008, 07:42 AM.
|
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| ds9074 | Oct 28 2008, 07:41 AM Post #15 |
|
Admiral
|
This is incorrect as for me personally it is totally free. However the point is it is free of charge not free of cost. That means that the cost to an individual is not related to how much they need to use the system or the costs to the system but only to their tax bill. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Politics and World Events Forum · Next Topic » |




2:12 PM Jul 11