Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
July 23, 2019, 01:53:14 am
News: 2020 Presidential Predictions (General) are now active.

  Atlas Forum
  General Politics
  Economics (Moderator: Torie)
  Under AOC/Bernie-style American socialism, would rich people still be rich?
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] Print
Author Topic: Under AOC/Bernie-style American socialism, would rich people still be rich?  (Read 2947 times)
Ishan
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,628
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: July 07, 2019, 08:42:18 am »

Yes.  As long as the means of production are privately owned, the capitalist has the incentive and ability to exploit the laborer.

This is a great way to sum up the far-left of the Democratic Party


Great post!!
You don't get it SNJC, Progressivism in America is not Communism, and look at Kalwejt's post again and explain how Europe isn't Communist again.
Logged
Fubart Solman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,967
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: July 07, 2019, 04:52:28 pm »

drive used Mitsubishi Mirages.


That might be enough to make even me leave the country.
Logged
Vittorio
Full Member
***
Posts: 132
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: July 19, 2019, 11:12:49 pm »
« Edited: July 19, 2019, 11:18:35 pm by Vittorio »

Under AOC/Bernie-style capitalism, the American proletariat would subsidize the college careers of the children of the American petit-bourgeois while the haute-bourgeois gets to shift the burden of paying for insurance onto the State. Everyone... wins?

You don't get it SNJC, Progressivism in America is not Communism,

It certainly isn't. Case in point:

They'd be richer from all the money saved just letting the government do what it was tasked with doing.

Marx knows all about this.

Quote
A part of the bourgeoisie is desirous of redressing social grievances in order to secure the continued existence of bourgeois society. To this section belong economists, philanthropists, humanitarians, improvers of the condition of the working class, organisers of charity, members of societies for the prevention of cruelty to animals, temperance fanatics, hole-and-corner reformers of every imaginable kind. This form of socialism has, moreover, been worked out into complete systems.

...

A second, and more practical, but less systematic, form of this Socialism sought to depreciate every revolutionary movement in the eyes of the working class by showing that no mere political reform, but only a change in the material conditions of existence, in economical relations, could be of any advantage to them. By changes in the material conditions of existence, this form of Socialism, however, by no means understands abolition of the bourgeois relations of production, an abolition that can be affected only by a revolution, but administrative reforms, based on the continued existence of these relations; reforms, therefore, that in no respect affect the relations between capital and labour, but, at the best, lessen the cost, and simplify the administrative work, of bourgeois government.

Imagine wanting to sell social reform for no other reason than to sell social reform, heedless of the actual end aimed at by it.
Logged
Lfromnj stands with Sanchez.
lfromnj
Atlas Politician
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,603


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: July 20, 2019, 01:55:48 pm »

Sadly, yes. The complete elimination of opulence would require far more radical measures than just a return to 1970s-level marginal tax rates. It's still a goal to strive for, of course.

What a disgusting mindset. Its one thing to say lets help the poor by hurting the rich but now you are just saying  the rich.
Logged
Ilhan Apologist
Glowfish
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,111


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: July 20, 2019, 06:09:41 pm »

Yes.  As long as the means of production are privately owned, the capitalist has the incentive and ability to exploit the laborer.

This is a great way to sum up the far-left of the Democratic Party


Great post!!
You don't get it SNJC, Progressivism in America is not Communism, and look at Kalwejt's post again and explain how Europe isn't Communist again.


To him, everyone to the left of Ben Nelson is a Communist.
Logged
Ilhan Apologist
Glowfish
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,111


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: July 20, 2019, 11:33:49 pm »

Sadly, yes. The complete elimination of opulence would require far more radical measures than just a return to 1970s-level marginal tax rates. It's still a goal to strive for, of course.

What a disgusting mindset. Its one thing to say lets help the poor by hurting the rich but now you are just saying  the rich.

Having such rich people is a problem in itself. Money = political power, and concentrated political power = oligarchy.
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 29,393


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: July 22, 2019, 05:12:03 am »

There are always rich people, but it is more likely to be those with political connections than those with business ideas.

It's a little unclear exactly what "Bernie-style socialism" is. If it actually means something like Northern Europe lol yeah. It would primarily mean that high-paid professionals wouldn't be rich, only people like entrepreneurs etc. But those groups would still be fine.

I sometimes get the sense though that Bernie has no idea what Scandinavian economies look like and actually would like to go a lot further and also in drastically different directions. In that scenario you'd probably have a lot of wealth reduction as well as redistribution.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length
Logout

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

© Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Elections, LLC