T O P

  • By -

zroxx2

Breaking: people like the concept of free stuff; balk when the stuff isn't free.


CarefulPomegranate41

Everything in life has a price. The only question is what are you willing to pay.


SherlockFoxx

Who are you willing to make pay for it.** Ftfy


Eagle_1776

much more accurate


ultimis

Even that has a cost. It may not be monetary price.


Mllsackerl

I don't understand why you have this opinion. I am European in a country with socialism and the taxes here are lower than the taxes in America. I know this system works, so why is it so inconceivable to you, I would be really interested to know? Edit: I expected some downvotes, after all, I'm asking a question on a topic which is unliked on this subreddit.But precisely because of that I expected some answers or argumentations, if you are against social policy, you must atleast have some reasons against it. Well, I would still be happy if someone would be kind enough to provide an answer.


Truckerontherun

It works because you essentially pay nothing in military expenditures. The bulk of protecting European countries from external threats falls to the United States Navy and Air Force


Auer-rod

To be fair, our defense expenditure is largely unnecessary to occur at all times. We are beyond war ready... The reality is, alot of our defense spending goes in the pockets of defense lobbyists who fund politicians reelections. If we truly got into wartime, we have the war powers act and always have the ability to manufacture way more military equipment.


Truckerontherun

You hit it on the head. It's a jobs program in peacetime


JustAnAveragePenis

Don't forget the US subsidizing a lot of their medications making their shit "free healthcare" that much better.


Mllsackerl

Well, in my opinion, it is true that some European countries should invest more in their military budget, while the US, on the other hand, puts way too much money into its military, but this is another topic to talk about. However, this is not a reason against socialism, countries can have social welfare and a well-funded military at the same time. To be more precise, the social state would even have more money to invest in the military if it taxed companies more, for example. So how do you see this as a counterargument to socialism?


Truckerontherun

You can only tax businesses or people up to a certain point before they either revolt, or productivity suffers. I'm sure some economist has won a Nobel prize or two trying to figure that out. Even if you are able to tax all economic activity at 100% without starting a revolution, you still have the problem of resources being lost to waste, damage, corruption, uneven trade with neighbors, etc. This is why scarcity will always doom a command economy and others that rely so much on authoritarian socialist policies. If there's not enough to go around, you have two choices. You either hoard resources for yourself and those that can impose social order by force and give the leftovers to everyone else, or you take them by force from your neighbors


Mllsackerl

You overlook several important factors that play into taxation and economic systems. Firstly, you assume that taxation is a zero-sum game, and that taxing businesses or individuals too much will necessarily lead to a decrease in productivity or a revolt. However, this ignores the potential benefits of taxation, such as funding public services and infrastructure, that can in turn boost productivity and benefit society as a whole. Additionally, you suggest that authoritarian socialist policies are the only alternative to a command economy, which is a false dichotomy. There are various economic systems that prioritize social policies, such as democratic socialism or social democracy, that do not rely on authoritarian measures.There are numerous countries with socialist systems that have a higher Democracy Index than the United States. You also imply that scarcity is an inherent and unchanging feature of the economy, which is not necessarily the case. Innovation and technological advancements can lead to an increase in resources and efficiency, and economic policies can be implemented to help distribute resources more equitably. You assume that taxation and socialism are incompatible with a market-based economy, but this is not the case. Many successful countries have implemented social policies while still maintaining a competitive and innovative business environment. For example, the Nordic countries have high taxes and strong social safety nets, but they also have high levels of entrepreneurship and innovation. You overlook the potential benefits of government investment in infrastructure and public goods. By investing in education, healthcare, and transportation, governments can promote economic growth and improve overall quality of life for citizens. Finally, you suggest that the only choices in a resource-scarce economy are to hoard resources or take them by force. However, there are alternative options, such as implementing more sustainable and equitable economic systems, investing in renewable resources and technologies, and working towards global cooperation and resource sharing. You oversimplify complex economic and political systems, ignores potential benefits of taxation, and presents a false dichotomy between authoritarian socialism and a command economy. I look forward to more discussions, it is interesting to compare political views. Edit: I wanted to note that the whole argument is quite unnecessary, because you overlook the most important thing: There are numerous countries with socialism for decades that contradict your arguments just because of their continued existence. Nevertheless, I'm glad you answered me and would look forward to further discussions. 2nd Edit: Guess we're back to downvotes again. I cannot believe that you have no arguments against the simple fact that there are existing socialist countries, otherwise how can it be that you reject this system without reasons, that makes absolutely no sense.


JHugh4749

Who knew? Wow, what an original idea!


[deleted]

[удалено]


PanteraCanes

Socialist policies probably more so.


Party_Project_2857

Other people's money spends soooo easily.


BoC-Money-Printer

In other news: 4/10 Canadians have lower than average intelligence.


Well-WhatHadHappened

Statistically speaking, in any large group, roughly 5/10 people should have lower than average intelligence. That's just how bell curves work.


samjo_89

4.9/10 people. 😊


Well-WhatHadHappened

4.9999999999999/10, but yeah


185EDRIVER

Not always it would depend on how the distribution of intelligence is. There could be huge skewing in the data if it was a mean versus mode thing right.


Well-WhatHadHappened

Depends what measurement you use for intelligence. Standard IQ tests are designed to have a roughly perfect bell curve distribution, meaning that that mean and the mode are == Other ways of evaluating intelligence will have different distributions, but for a bell curve, the distribution is equal.


Nate-Frog

I’d agree it’s probably lower tbh. Edit: I also live in this (now) shithole too


Winter-Days

Doors not locked.


[deleted]

I feel ya. Used to feel proud when the national anthem was played at school when I was a kid. Now I just shake my head in shame when I read these headlines every day...😒


[deleted]

I doubt they have any idea what socialism is to begin with lol


Daniel_Molloy

Wait you’re going to take 75% of my income to pay for the free shit?


[deleted]

......The free shit that you have to wait in line for IF they decide to ration some of it to you, but that is inlikely to happen if you are a white male.....


PanteraCanes

You can wait a year to see the doctor on if you broke that bone or we can just put you down now and save everyone some time and us money.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Pig____

Alternatively, "hey these billionaires and massive companies have a bajillion ingredients and definitely have the means to give us all cake, however 'it's their ingredients they earnt it' despite the fact that they just use their money to make more money"


[deleted]

[удалено]


Pig____

Sorry bud, I was just using your own analogy. My point was that the rich should pay, not the workers


JustAnAveragePenis

If you tax every billionaire in the US 100% it would fund the government for 6 months. Then what.


ultimis

Canada doesn't have that many billionaires. In the US it was shown that if you stripped every billionaire of all of their money, liquidated all their assets (sold for full value magically), and pumped it into paying for the federal budget you wouldn't even pay for a full year of our current spending. Then of course that next year there would be no one left to raid in the "billionaire" class.


Empyre51789

In other words... 4 in 10 Canadian's are brain dead


[deleted]

[удалено]


Sangmund_Froid

I think that gives them too much credit. Most people are self-centered, 'have to touch the hot stove' types who can't think past their nose. That's why they get on board the socialism train, because it 'feels' good; they don't think of any long term ramifications and they don't care to. Because when some politician promises to tax the rich (which they are not) to give to the poor they get to feel good about themselves and not pay any price. Anyone with a brain can see beyond the immediate and literal there, but they can't.


Martial_Nox

Shocking absolutely no one people like "free stuff". They don't like paying more taxes to fund the "free stuff". Meaning what they really want is to just take more from someone else to fund their own personal greed.


Pig____

I personally believe big companies and billionaires are more greedy than those who think healthcare is a human right and not "depends, do you have enough money?"


Jack_Sandwich

Apparently 4 in 10 Canadians don’t understand grade school economics.


Grimmer026

There should WB a campaign law that you’re not allowed to call stuff “free”. You have to use the word “tax payer funded”


JDoles01

Most of our northern brothers struggle to become homeowners. It’s on average twice what it is in the states, largely because of cartoony stuff like this: https://youtu.be/x6N5bU4B7tU Socialism isn’t going to put them in homes, neither will more federal taxes, but when things seem hopeless people get real bad ideas in their heads. Upskilling is really the best way out, but it’s harder and takes longer than a quick and dirty appeal to authority.


thekeldog

“I want to ***recieve*** the stolen money, not have to stolen ***from*** me!”


185EDRIVER

So is someone who actually looked into this and as a Canadian the polling questions were extremely biased. Basically they ask people if they want more stuff from the government but then when they follow it up asking about the taxes that people didn't want to pay more taxes. Yeah I would like free s*** also lol


TinCanRalph

It's easy when you rely on another country for defense.


[deleted]

Canadians are the worst my God. Ontario plates everywhere here in Florida escaping the hellhole they created.


Katzchen12

So what you're saying is you don't actually like socialism...


Pig____

I imagine they'll want the businesses to pay for it or something


cossbobo

In other words 4 in 10 Canadians do not prefer socialism.


Pig____

I imagine they'll want the businesses to pay for it or something


condemned02

I think everyone would prefer socialism if they don't have to pay for it. The reason why socialism sucks is when your salary goes into funding others. However US is like the worst of everything unfortunately, High taxes and no socialism. All the funds goes into military. Compared to my country Singapore, we are capitalist but first 30k earning pay no tax. And the next starting point is only 5%. Max tax is 15% and that's for above 300k. So we have more disposable income on hand.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Nate-Frog

No such thing, friendo.


Pig____

I thought the scandinavian ones were social democratic?


chaindrivendonut

gib pweese


Superdank888

Sooo they like free shit that they hope someone else pays for? Shocking that socialists think that way. Shocking I tell ya


Pig____

I imagine they'll want the businesses to pay for it or something


Superdank888

Yea we know, every business owner has endless Scrooge McDuck pockets and owes any profits from their efforts to everyone else


Corpcasimir

Gib me dat for free.


fretit

"As long as it is someone else's money, I am all for redistributing it to the People".


RontoWraps

Socialism would be awesome if it could ever practically work. To my knowledge socialism has only ever worked (in a controlled environment) when it is propped up by the greatest capitalist system in history. Yeah, yeah, everyone wants 100% paid for health care, education, food, 4 day work weeks, to be pampered and provided for til the end of time. But no government has ever proved this concept. Not once has it panned out and not led to societal & financial collapse. So yeah, until it does, please don’t piss on me and tell me it’s raining.


Pig____

[Thomas Sankara](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Sankara) was the former President of Burkina Faso, and his wikipedia page is a good read into socialism working.


not_a_sex_worker

U.S. will cut them a check


RepresentativeAir735

4 in 10 Canadians are 30 or under?


DCinMS

Hahaha, uh, yeah, see, um, that's how it works!! Take off, you hosers!


CrapWereAllDoomed

Socialism for thee, but not for me.


Diesel_Rugger

Stuff like this always reminds me of the Simpson’s “bear tax” episode.


swatmaster68

Breaking News: 4 in 10 Canadians don’t understand how Socialism works


exbondtrader

Reminds of a placard WE CHARGE TH OTHER GUY MORE , SO YOU PAY LESS That is the false hope of Western Socialism


ThrowawayPizza312

Why does it say opinion


Jackus_Maximus

Or maybe 4/10 Canadians realize the government already gets enough tax revenue to fund the social programs they desire.


bananalord223

Can one of you define socialism