How's your nation going?

[SKILORD]

Well, under socialism the governemnt si the employer, but you're arguing a strawman. Because I don't beleiv ein socialism in the sense of governemtn control. I just believe in things like public education, healthcare, and welfare support for people who are looking for a job.

1. I agree with Public Educationa nd have said so.
2. I have conceded helthcare, though i remained looking for an anarchists solutin to it.
3. How can you prove that their looking for work and not just jerking around? They are being paid my tax dollar, by the government, for not doing anything most likely. They also are not quite so motivated to seek employment if they can, instead, sit back and pick up a nice check from the government.

[GeneralTacticus]

1. I agree with Public Educationa nd have said so.
2. I have conceded helthcare, though i remained looking for an anarchists solutin to it.

Then are we agreed on those two.

3. How can you prove that their looking for work and not just jerking around? They are being paid my tax dollar, by the government, for not doing anything most likely.

No, they're being paid by your tax dollar to keep them alive until they can find a job. As for how they can prove that they're looking for a job - how hard could that be to deduce? If there are jobs avilable and they still aren't employed, that would seem to be a good indication that they aren't actually looking for a job.

They also are not quite so motivated to seek employment if they can, instead, sit back and pick up a nice check from the government.

As long as they can get more moeny from working than from welfare, I'd say they're mroe likely to pick working; welfare isn't meant to do anything more than keep you from starving. Anybody who picks welfare over work isn't exactly likely to be very productive anyway.

[SKILORD]

Well, under socialism the governemnt si the employer

Au contraire, government is both the employer and the government, meaning he has both the power of an employer and the power of a government. The trimuverate of modern society, Labor, Entrepenuers, and Government, cannot have any of these two powers united, It is the speration of powers on a Political scale.

If we unite the Workers with the government they use it to bully those who they work for. If we unite Government and business they only make laws to make themselves rich, rather than earning such wealth.

They are three, seperate and yet in the end equal, stations. Don't try to unite them at all, because it would be wrong to place the government, the most powerful, at the control of either of the others. It is just as wrong for the masses to silence the few as it is for the few to silence the masses. Might does not make right. So if you wish to end exploitation, end exploitation, do not reinvent it on your own terms.

[GeneralTacticus]

Um... how did you get from me pointing out that under socialism, the government is the employer because they employ everyone, to thinking I thought it was a good idea? A nationalized economy is a terrible idea, but disliking it doesn't mean I can't point out how it works.

[SKILORD]

As long as they can get more moeny from working than from welfare, I'd say they're mroe likely to pick working; welfare isn't meant to do anything more than keep you from starving. Anybody who picks welfare over work isn't exactly likely to be very productive anyway.

The work-payment ratio is off, they do virtually nothing and are paid enough to stay alive. or they could work and get enough, maybe, to thrive and prosper, never underestimate the laziness.

[GeneralTacticus]

Would you choose to stay alive and have nothing to do, or work some of the time and have stuff to do when you weren't working?

[SKILORD]

Um... how did you get from me pointing out that under socialism, the government is the employer because they employ everyone, to thinking I thought it was a good idea? A nationalized economy is a terrible idea, but disliking it doesn't mean I can't point out how it works.

Sorry, I thought it was supprting a point of yours.

[GeneralTacticus]

Well, what I was trying to say was that socialism doesn't 'exploit' the employers, it replaces them.

[SKILORD]

Would you choose to stay alive and have nothing to do, or work some of the time and have stuff to do when you weren't working?

I am a bad example, I happen to enjoy hard work, I am not a lazy person. There are people who could sit around watching the local channels of television all day, braindead, rather than lift a fingure to grow. I know peoplelike this. I, on the other hand, would do just about damn anything, from garbagemanning up or down, to improve my lot, there are no bad jobs, onl;y lazy sods.

[GeneralTacticus]

If they have no money, where would they get a TV?

[SKILORD]

steal it? I dunno, Welfare?

[GeneralTacticus]

I was saying that the only purpose of welfare was to make sure they didn't starve while looking for a job, so they'd have to save up for ages to be able to afford something like a TV. And if they stole it, of course, they'd be criminals.

[SKILORD]

Let us say they purchased the television with the monies from a past career. It doesn't really matter.

let us compromise form here, stating that it is wrong to provide the unemployed more that the barest necessary income, we shall also admit that in most nations this is sadly not the case.in many nations in this earth,.

[GeneralTacticus]

I suppose we can agree to disagree here.

[Sava]

I don't necessarily want a true Socialism, but rather, a United States' style government with some Socialist programs. But instead of the state supplying corporations with large subsidies (like it does today), that state sets up various non-profit style companies to handle things like health care and education. Also, following the US-style, I would stop subsidies to the oil industry and let gas prices be dictated by the market. Sure, gas would rise to about 5 bucks a gallon, but then the market would be forced to introduce more fuel efficient vehicles and possibly alternative fuel sources. Most conservatives complain about Socialist programs designed to help the populous, yet are strangely silent in their opposition to corporate welfare.