11 responses so far ↓

• 1 don // Jan 28, 2009 at 4:25 pm

  Yes, it is socialism. Whether bush was president or obama. We are moving towards a “it’s not my fault it is theirs and they need to be punished” society. Punish the rich or sucessful because they are greedy, we aren’t. The rich say it is the poors fault for being needy and not working hard enough.

  As a personal finance person you should not want this to happen. It is called Personal Responsibility=Democracy=Capitalism.

• 2 don // Jan 28, 2009 at 4:31 pm

  Funny, one of your previous posts said this

  “Thus a huge difference between being rich and poor is being given a choice. Now I have the choice of beef or fish store bought. I can choose not to eat mac n’ cheese or canned meat. I can choose to be a vegetarian. Poor people will eat all parts of the animal and be happy. The rich? They can pick and choose what they want to eat.”

  NOT UNDER SOCIALISM THEY DON’T

  so why are you a proponent? you need to do your research on the definition. it won’t work, it has never worked.

• 3 Jim ~ mydebtblog.com // Jan 28, 2009 at 4:51 pm

  I never agreed with the last 700B bailout that was passed because I knew it would fail from the start. The calls to reject it were 99 to 1, but the elected officials knew better than the people and passed it anyway. Sure enough after a few months of nothing happening, they knew it didn’t work. So why even bother trying to do it again? I see nothing in the stimulus bill being proposed that makes any sense. Giving money to the banks didn’t fix it, so give more money to other things will somehow work? When the Democratic Congress passes this and Obama signs off on it, the bulk of the money won’t be spent until 2010 anyway. Short term actions are being used to keep people elected. I’m tired of both sides, GOP and DEM, saying they need to throw money at everything to fix it.

  Tax cuts have never been well received by some people because they feel that rich people must pay more taxes. It’s those same rich people that started the business, built the industry, build the labor force. People who earn less and think they should be given other people’s money so they can succeed have flawed logic. I think socialism is trickle up poverty, and it will never work in America.

  “You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.”
  ~Dr. Adrian Rogers (1931-2005)

• 4 LivingAlmostLarge // Jan 28, 2009 at 5:24 pm

  Actually Don, many poor struggle to get out. And under socialism they do better. Why socialism? Because the poor have a better quality of life than under free market. Free market you get what you can afford no minimum level. Socialism is everyone gets the same level of care regardless of money.

  Yep rich get to choose. But realize that in socialized countries the poor get to choose too. They get to choose because the playing field is such they don’t get to cut to the front of the line to get medical care. They all get retirement.

  So yep I’m for socialism. I believe that we have a responsibility to our fellow man. That we have a minimum level of health and well being.

  Jim, actually how could people be against 99 to 1? If they were then why pass it? The congressmen we all up for election, every two years. Instead the constituents kept them in.

  I don’t believe this country is 99% free market and 1% against the bailout.

  Socialism is making it all even. The trickle down policy of wealth doesn’t appear to be working. Perhaps it’s time to start in the middle and help out the middle class.

  Also why shouldn’t we invest in our countries social programs and infrastructure? Is every other country wrong? Or is it just they already are socialized to some extent? We’re going to be socialized as well soon enough.

  I’d be open to trying the free market health care. Where we buy medical services based on what we can afford. That we get care we can afford. Let’s deregulate and make it a free for all. And let’s see what happens. I predict the rich buy everything, the poor get no care, and the middle class fight tooth and nail to hang on.

  Let’s untie insurance with our jobs and make it truly free market. Where we pay for chemo, pay for dialysis, pay for x-rays. Then only people who can afford it should get care.

• 5 Don // Jan 28, 2009 at 7:02 pm

  So why try to Live Large? why would anyone try if they can just get healthcare, pick and choose what I want to eat, etc?

  forget that house you live in because the middle class and the wealthy will be brought down a notch to bring the poor up. If you are willing to do that than sell your house and buy a less expensive one and buy your fellow man a house. That is essentially what you are proposing.

• 6 Kristy // Jan 29, 2009 at 6:14 am

  I didn’t want socialism under either President, whether it was Obama or Bush. Socialism just doesn’t work. While the creation of jobs through infrastructure is a good idea on the surface, it is going to take far too long to implement to help the current economy. The best thing to do would have been to let the banks fail, let foreclosures happen and leave things alone. We would have gotten out of this mess alot faster. Now the goverment has prolonged the situation.

  Socialism gives the rich no incentive to make more money, hire more employees, etc. Why should I even try if I can get the same care, the same retirement as others who are not working and not helping themselves? I don’t want to be even with people who choose not to work and live off of welfare.

  I actually agree with Jim, most American’s are not for the bailouts. I will have to try to find some numbers for you though.

  The middle class have brought this on themselves by living far beyond their means. I’m not saying all of the middle class, but most have not planned for emergencies such as unemployment. They have been living paycheck to paycheck while they purchase new homes that they thought would appreciate and new cars.

• 7 D // Jan 29, 2009 at 9:56 am

  I agree with Kristy. Letting them fail and feeling the pain would have gotten us through this much quicker. It would have been painful but it is necessarry.

  American’s need to learn —like they learned after the depression. People learned to save, conserve and work hard. This can only happen the hard way.

  I do this with my kids and it has taken nearly a year but is now paying off. I give them allowance..lay out their responsibilities and they soon learn to save! What a concept.

  They started off blowing their allowance left and right—I let them! I let them blow their money on junk as much as it pained me I knew it was necessarry. Then when a friend called to invite them to the movies or to go to a water park, or whatever they would look at me with sad puppy eyes and knew they were out of luck….No bail out here! Yes, it was painful to watch them miss out on some fun. But better they miss out now on little things, learn to make mistakes with little amounts of money than to do it with lots.

  Now my oldest has envelopes (he did this on his own!) I did not suggest it or anything! He simply divys up his money. This process has taken a year. It was a painful year but he is better off for it.

  So would our economy be if we would just take our medicine. A new bank would emerge with better lending practices, a new car manuffacturing plant would emerge with better cars and less corrupt ceos. But we must take the pain somehow. I am all for getting on with it! I am all for learning from it too. But No, we will continue to hand out the sugar candy knowing we are causing their teeth to rot.

• 8 fengshui // Jan 29, 2009 at 8:32 pm

  “forget that house you live in because the middle class and the wealthy will be brought down a notch to bring the poor up”

  I think that people don’t understand that there are “levels” of socialism. Being ensured the right to health care, education, and food does NOT mean that you will be living in a trailer park if you’re rich. I think that you’re confusing communism with socialism. Rich people will still be living in big houses and still keep their large savings intact. Poor people will still be living in substandard housing, it is just that we will all still be able to get treated for strep throat if we need to be….. and not let it turn into rheumatic fever if we can’t afford to go to the ER.

• 9 LivingAlmostLarge // Jan 30, 2009 at 11:16 am

  I’m reading Green Economy right now and they mentioned two types of people in the US. WITTs and YOYOs. We’re in this together and Your On Your Own!

  Don, why try to live large? Because I believe that the YOYOs will win out. That we will move towards a more YOYO society where we independently have to save for retirement (already happening), insurance will not be tied to jobs, but individualized, and we will be responsible for ourselves entirely.

  Thus while I believe we should help each other, I don’t believe that’s how the US views itself as you can see from some readers.

  I believe that taxes aren’t going to go up and people aren’t willing to share the risk. They will want what they “earn”.

  The problem? It will be harder and harder to be upwardly mobile and wealth will become concentrated more and more in fewer and fewer hands.

  Kristy and D, please read the book review depression economics. Why many economist want stimulation of the economy.

  I do believe that we should socialize healthcare, education, and more government programs. I hope it happens.

  Do I believe it will? I am not sure. I think people who are middle class believe they will be better off on their own.

  But in about 20 years as we move more towards 401ks and NO PENSIONS, then people will suddenly realize that they weren’t as smart being independent.

  I’m not saying it’s bad, it’s just that it won’t work. Why? Because EVERYONE wants “independence” and NO government interference, until THEY need help. Then they suddenly want help.

  Suddenly when the insurance company won’t pay for chemo, or they won’t pay for surgery they want the government to step in.

  If we truly want to move to a capitalistic society we have to be ready for the repercussions. I’d prefer not to. BUT I’m planning that if we do I’m going to be safe and secure.

  Right now retirees still have pensions. What happens when they don’t and suddenly it affects how we have saved for retirement even?

  Or SS and Medicare isn’t funded?

• 10 Meg // Jan 30, 2009 at 2:24 pm

  The US will move more towards socialism because we have to – nobody is willing to watch people (even if they are stupid and lazy) die of hunger or disease en masse which is what inevitably happens to some people when everybody is responsible for themselves.

  I don’t care so much about socialized health care or social security, but none of those broad issues has much to do with what’s going on today – the bailouts, the “stimulus” bills, the rampant “throw money at it and hope something happens” government spending that is going on.

  This bill is AWFUL. How exactly is it going to help the poor or middle class? It’s going to help LOBBYISTs. Only 3% of it is now going towards things we know can (over the long term) create jobs and stimulate the economy, things like improving infrastructure.

  Meanwhile it will double our annual interest expense to over $430B from $200B. Which rivals Iraq war spending except it will continue indefinitely.

• 11 LivingAlmostLarge // Jan 31, 2009 at 11:23 pm

  I might get to see some people keep their jobs with the science and technology.

Leave a Comment