Well, my people, the Danes, are frequently number 1 on the measures for happiness. No system solves all the problems but greedy capitalism seems to create really dangerous & inhumane ones.

Of course not! Look at how we live now...police, fire, education, Medical health care, street repairs, trash pick-up, and dozens of other services I can't recall at the moment....all provided through our taxes via the government.

We really must stop equating the word ''socialism'' with ''communism''....which is what we were force-fed back in the ''cold'' war.

Ever traveled to countries which use a democratic socialistic system? DELIGHTFUL!

People have jobs and can afford to live lives with health care, good education, the expectation of comfort and nobody grumbles because they know they're fortunate to live in a nation where people actually care about one another.

I kind of like having highways, a power grid, an EMS system, and police and fire service. Those are all socialist programs. It would be nice though if we could have some of the cool socialist stuff that smarter countries have.

Most Western European countries have socialist things like NHS. Seems to work a lot better than here.

If you mean socialism for the rich; in other words, billion dollar tax cuts, YES. If you mean redistribution of wealth by the government to give poor people money they should have been paid by corporations so they can live on an 8 hour a day job, NO, not at all.

Ford motor company is nearly bankrupt, because they have specialized in low cost cars for the middle and lower paid wage earners. However, the minimum wage is so low, that group of people cannot afford cars. Thus, a major automobile manufacturer is suffering. Automation will drive costs down and eliminate jobs. When no one is required to run corporations, people will not be able to buy goods and services unless social programs distribute tax money to the people.

It's bad for oligarchs, but if you look at the countries that practice Democratic Socialism in Northern Europe, on average, they have a higher standard of living than we do here in the U.S.

Historically the growth of income inequality has always led the an economic collapse.

The U.S. has a lot of socialism inspired attributes already. However, Peopel are hust nto really aware, and those who are tryign to say it are not doing a very good job of it

As was recently pointed out e are socialist in many ways already.Roads,services,airports are all socialist endeavors and I strongly favor them as I do health insurance single payor medicare for all. Illness should not be a factor in a person going broke,loosing a home etc. If small countries can do it there isn't any reason except greed that prevents us from doing so.

America already has certain aspects of socialism that it embraces. Medicare, Medicaid, social security are all socialist programs.

Lot's of "If-by-whiskey" arguments in this thread

[en.wikipedia.org]

Personally I find it horrifying the number of US households bankrupted by a family member's illness. Fully half of the bankruptcies involve people who were fully insured at the time of initial diagnosis.

Nice place to visit but for that reason alone I could never live there.

Let's first look at pure socialist systems that are part of American lives: Highways and public infrastructure systems, law enforcement / police departments, fire departments, public libraries, public schools, social security, governmental help of any kind, the infrastructure of our political system, all branches of the military, TSA, coast guard, and many others. Again, every one of those systems is not kind of like socialism; they are socialism in its purest form. Conservatives in the US tend to confuse socialism with communism. Nobody in the US wants a 100% socialistic system or communism but many different systems simply cannot function unless a socialistic system is incorporated. Scandinavian countries rely more on socialism than we do but they do not want 100% socialism any more than we do yet they embrace their system. I was there recently and many locals seemed to go out of their way to point out what the government provides for them and everybody is equally aware that they are heavily taxed to provide all of it. They wouldn't have it any other way and the people are far less stress that Americans. Most European governments provide health care through their taxes. The additional freedom that proves people in terms of making a living in creative ways is amazing. People in the US with families MUST HAVE HEALTH CARE and cannot engage in creative entrepreneur endeavors without risking having to go without health insurance because of the high cost. When people say they don't want socialism in the US ask them if they are willing to do without Highways and public infrastructure systems, law enforcement / police departments, fire departments, public libraries, public schools, social security, governmental help of any kind, the infrastructure of our political system, all branches of the military, TSA, and the coast guard.

Citizens are what's really bad for the USA. Socialism, capitalism, communism all are 'tools' with pro/cons. It's how and to what extent they are implemented. Capitalism drives innovation and business efficiency, communism drives worker rights and efficient operations, socialism drives community safety and security. We also can see the negatives in these. Given our greed, laziness, apathy, and ignorance...we can't seem to make good, rational, achievable decisions to address many of the problems faced using the right tool for the job.

Pure anything is bad politically.
It is in the conflict between sides like yin and yang, or conservative vs progressive, that balance is found.
Seek the middle path always.
You need something like the Canadian system, of a Government run system in open competition with the free market.
If the Government is doing a good job, then people have a social platform to help them.
But if the free market can do better, then everyone does better.

To the extent that it enables government to encroach on our lives, our freedoms, it is bad; but to the extent that it preserves, saves and betters our lives, it is good.

we need to keep the greedy narcestis out of governement

All lazy people love it. I am willing to pay my share for the infrastructure, but will resist paying for most welfare.

Socialism is neither good nor bad. It is often conflated with Communism which it is not. Communism calls for the violent overthrow of the existing order and a subsequent military dictatorship to reorganize the masses into the efficient and obedient society necessary for worker equality and sacrifice for the common good. Socialism really means that the government strives to provide for a basic quality of life for the people. Business ventures are tightly controlled so as to provide the maximum benefit for the workers and the profit motive is secondary to the social benefits they provide. This may occur with the consent of the governed. Socialism may coexist with a capitalist system where property may be owned and developed by private interests who can receive a return on their investments as long as the public good is served in the undertaking and is not harmed in the process of profit taking.

I don't think that socialist security has hurt anyone. In fact it gives a littler money for older people to live on so others can go about being productive and making more money for themselves and the government at large. Without it many productive people would be out of the workforce and taking care of their older relatives with many living in squalor.
In case you wanted an answer that involved Communism that is a whole other matter.

It depends on your definition of socialism. For some, anything that obligates them to others or takes money out of their pockets to pay for anything that isn't to their direct benefit is "socialism". In my mind, socialism is the mass control of everything in society, where the majority controls and directs the individual; which would clearly be harmful.

There's a middle ground where social programs provide a safety net for the less fortunate and help lift people up to the middle class, without dragging down the very fortunate. That's where we need to get. How do we do it? That's the mystery.

Lol, no
socialistic aspects that already exist: public schools, libraries, parks, Social Security, Medicare and more.

it hasn't been, so far. see ocjoe's post, in which he lists many ways in which socialism has been working well for america. i will add that in addition to confusing socialism with communism, people (not just conservatives -- and by the way, there are no more conservatives, just regressives) confused socialism, an economic system, with various forms of government, and thus see it as incompatible with democracy, whereas in fact socialism, or a form of it, has been quite compatible. it's rampant capitalism that is bad for democracy. i myself am something of a socialist i suppose, but not exactly. i had to make up a term to describe myself; i am a social free enterprisist, free enterprise encompasses the good parts of capitalism. capitalism as it is now (rampant) is not the same as free enterprise; it is an enemy of free enterprise. enterprise isn't free when it is run by capitalists.

g