Sounds like a huge bag of prejudices. Wealthy people moving money off-shore is certainly not a problem of socialism, but is a sign of defection, such as overpaid bank employees have benefited from moral hazard. Today's problems have been - partially - created by the attitude I win or the public loses, which has lead to over-consumption and under-performance.
Basic health insurance for everybody is not a bad thing. Sharing common resources is not either. 4 weeks of holidays do not do any harm to the economy.
I am certainly not a socialist. The main problem of socialism is the concentration of power, as Friedrich Hayek has shown in his excellent book "The Road to Serfdom". Central economic planning, a central party, a centrally controlled information monopoly are the worst things that can happen. China still has political socialism, and they are far from catching up with the US.
Obama is not a socialist either. He just inherited a bunch of problems and was only partly able to lead back the US to credibility, which was lost again after George W.Bush had invaded Iraq, justifying this with carefully engineered lies.
The problem with a so-called free market economy is that at some stage the free-riders may outnumber those co-operating and contributing to society. Therefore either a common morale or laws and regulations are needed to protect the commons against moral hazard.
By the way, free-riders include bank managers, lawyers charging appalling fees, representative trying to vote for particular interests to make sure that they are reelected. The whole thing is very much a n-person prisoner's dilemma, everybody counting on somebody else to contribute, but few being willing to contribute themselves. Strategies of mutual defection do not pay out well in the longer term, so what is needed is punishment of moral hazard, even if there is a price to pay.
Now tell me, these problems are going on for years, how can you blame Obama?
The following 5 users say Thank You to Fat Tails for this post:
What is the median income (indexed) for an American from 1990-current. Then compare that to the average EU for the same. Then compare the rich for both parties.
You'll see that even though the rich are getting richer, it's dragging the "average" citizen along better.
The reason is that socialism doesn't grow as well. Sure, it's more predictable....but ask yourself....when was the last time that anyone in the EU developed or innovated ANYTHING.
Look at the US and look at ANY industry, pharma, entertainment and music, movies, sports, technology and communications, medical procedures and equipment, manufacturing, whatever.
The pure fact is that Americans still enjoy a median standard of living better than anyone in the world. Period. That was done on the back of capitalism. We thrived for a century with no free healthcare. It's only till recently that the "lower class" has learned they can vote themselves benefits and money.
When was the last time China developed ANYTHING. How many Nobel Prize winners does China have? They do a good job of reverse engineering and robbing intellectual investment, but they innovate NOTHING. Why doesn't china produce ANYTHING high end or revolutionary. They don't produce aircraft. They don't make an internationally competitive automobile.
Capitalism is a bitch. It has it's drawbacks, but I'll take capitalism over stagnating socialism any day.
"Capitalism is the unequal distribution of wealth. Socialism is the equal distribution of poverty." -W. Churchill.
The following 3 users say Thank You to RM99 for this post:
It's all borrowed time. Germany is in debt, 84% of their real GDP....and growing. Socialism is a giant game of musical chairs, when the music stops eventually, you'll have an entire generation of frownie faces.
I'm not a fan of living beyond my means and passing on my debt to my children.
Gee, they're only 40 years behind. And how much of that was stolen/mooched techology. EVEN IF, I were to wipe that issue away, look at the "median" standard of living for a Chinese national and compare that to an American. In China, a family is considered wealthy if they own an automobile.
And the greatest point of all.....if these other places are so great....then why is there no emigration to these places. I don't see people signing up to move to China or Germany. (from the states)
In fact, I see people moving to Australia, where there's a nation the size of the US with 36 million people.
The REAL problem, the REAL problem that no one is talking about is birth rates. The problem with socialism is that it does not account for the number of genetically inferior, genetically recessive, essentially productively disadvantaged people that are multiplying exponentially faster than the productive and advantageous members of society.
Why are the people in the MOST advantageous position to reproduce and pass along their genes, having babies at a rate that's declining.
Why are the people in the WORST position having babies at an increasing rate?
It's the sign of the end. In 100 years, socialism will crash and fall on it's face, because the number of productive members of societies across the world are being overwhelmed and overtaken by the lower class.
The only thing that will save our societies, European and Western, is population control, immigration control, etc.
I could support socialist policies here in the states if it wasn't dolled out like candy to anyone who puts a hand out. But every liberal judge in America wants to give the same rights, the same benefits, the same societal BURDEN to ANYONE.
We cannot sustain this. Socialism will not survive without a paradigm shift in population control and member benefit discretion. Just ask the Chinese about this issue, they're already experiencing it. Just ask the Europeans about immigration, their problems with illegals and immigration make ours look small.