A discussion of socialism

How can anyone not know that free stuff isn’t really free? The question is do you have control over how much you pay and what you get or does some bureaucrat determine those factors? Central planning doesn’t work. Who is trying to move into North Korea? Government dictating prices, payments and services offered by doctors, hospitals, and nursing homes is not good. It wouldn’t be any better at the college level. Why would we want to turn our collegiate system into the wonderfully ineffective and inferior system of a public high school? The first semester and often the first term at most public colleges for a large percentage of students is bridging them from high school. Most people no longer graduate in 4 years partially due to this fact. Free is expensive in that either the quality will go down as it becomes almost universal or the cost will go up to accommodate those who are not serious students who want a chance to party and maybe learn something. We lose site of the fact that something has value if it is perceived to have value.

Socialism is immoral because it is based upon envy and legalized theft. As long as someone gets wealthy by providing a legitimate (legal) product or service without force, theft, or fraud, it is none of my business how much they make or have. People who provide extraordinary innovations should receive extraordinary rewards. Free enterprise has changed the world. It has provided more wealth, a better standard of living, unleashed more human innovations than most people could have imagined, and has enabled humanity to live more meaningful lives. Would one rather live Greece or Singapore?

Free Enterprise is the difference being controlling one’s life and slavery. In slavery, everything is said to be free. You have free food, free health care, free job training, free housing, and guaranteed work. One example is prison. One gets three hots and a cot. Of course with prison, you tend to miss things like vacation, family time, choice of amenities, and even choice of roommates so the analogy is obviously not identical. I believe one of the biggest losses in prison or slavery is the loss of a sense of purpose. I contend that socialism also produces a decline in one’s individual sense of purpose and control over his or her destiny. It violates human nature and tries to redesign the laws of economics. Society after society has found that if you box with the invisible hand, you will be knocked out. In the long run, market forces are like the power of the ocean. You can try to restrain or redirect it, but it will eventually overcome any obstacles. The free enterprise system is empowered by market forces and harnesses them. The invisible hand is a far more effective distributor of wealth the iron fist of the bureaucrat.

I reject socialism because it rejects the some of the most important things in life. It rejects the right of people to run their lives. It rejects the right of people to make choices for themselves. It rejects reality and embraces fantasy. It rejects mathematics in favor of crushing debt, taxation, and economic and innovative stagnation. Sanders thinks it is immoral for a small number of people to own a significant portion of the wealth. I think it is immoral to cut off the engine of innovation that have made us all wealthier, more connected, and empowered than any other generation of humanity. I hope my fellow Americans let that old man’s ideas stagnate in the swamp of failed experiments.

One thought on “A discussion of socialism”

  1. From Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged, the story of The Twentieth Century Motor Company;

    Well, there was something that happened at that plant where I worked for twenty years. It was when the old man died and his heirs took over. There were three of them, two sons and a daughter, and they brought a new plan to run the factory. They let us vote on it, too, and everybody – almost everybody – voted for it. We didn’t know. We thought it was good. No, that’s not true, either. We thought that we were supposed to think it was good. The plan was that everybody in the factory would work according to his ability, but would be paid according to his need.

    “We voted for that plan at a big meeting, with all of us present, six thousand of us, everybody that worked in the factory. The Starnes heirs made long speeches about it, and it wasn’t too clear, but nobody asked any questions. None of us knew just how the plan would work, but every one of us thought that the next fellow knew it. And if anybody had doubts, he felt guilty and kept his mouth shut – because they made it sound like anyone who’d oppose the plan was a child-killer at heart and less than a human being. They told us that this plan would achieve a noble ideal. Well, how were we to know otherwise? Hadn’t we heard it all our lives – from our parents and our schoolteachers and our ministers, and in every newspaper we ever read and every movie and every public speech? Hadn’t we always been told that this was righteous and just? Well, maybe there’s some excuse for what we did at that meeting. Still, we voted for the plan – and what we got, we had it coming to us. You know, ma’am, we are marked men, in a way, those of us who lived through the four years of that plan in the Twentieth Century factory. What is it that hell is supposed to be? Evil – plain, naked, smirking evil, isn’t it? Well, that’s what we saw and helped to make – and I think we’re damned, every one of us, and maybe we’ll never be forgiven …

    “Do you know how it worked, that plan, and what it did to people? Try pouring water into a tank where there’s a pipe at the bottom draining it out faster than you pour it, and each bucket you bring breaks that pipe an inch wider, and the harder you work the more is demanded of you, and you stand slinging buckets forty hours a week, then forthy-eight, then fifty-six – for your neighbor’s supper – for his wife’s operation – for his child’s measles – for his mother’s wheel chair – for his uncle’s shirt – for his nephew’s schooling – for the baby next door – for the baby to be born – for anyone anywhere around you – it’s theirs to receive, from diapers to dentures – and yours to work, from sunup to sundown, month after month, year after year, with nothing to show for it but your sweat, with nothing in sight for you but their pleasure, for the whole of your life, without rest, without hope, without end … From each according to his ability, to each according to his need …

    “We’re all one big family, they told us, we’re all in this together. But you don’t all stand working an acetylene torch ten hours a day – together, and you don’t all get a bellyache – together. What’s whose ability and which of whose needs comes first? When it’s all one pot, you can’t let any man decide what his own needs are, can you? If you did, he might claim that he needs a yacht – and if his feelings are all you have to go by, he might prove it, too. Why not? If it’s not right for me to own a car until I’ve worked myself into a hospital ward, earning a car for every loafer and every naked savage on earth – why can’t he demand a yacht from me, too, if I still have the ability not to have collapsed? No? He can’t? Then why can he demand that I go without cream for my coffee until he’s replastered his living room? … Oh well … Well, anyway, it was decided that nobody had the right to judge his own need or ability. We voted on it. Yes, ma’am, we voted on it in a public meeting twice a year. How else could it be done? Do you care to think what would happen at such a meeting? It took us just one meeting to discover that we had become beggars – rotten, whining, sniveling beggars, all of us, because no man could claim his pay as his rightful earning, he had no rights and no earnings, his work didn’t belong to him, it belonged to ‘the family’, and they owed him nothing in return, and the only claim he had on them was his ‘need’ – so he had to beg in public for relief from his needs, like any lousy moocher, listing all his troubles and miseries, down to his patched drawers and his wife’s head colds, hoping that ‘the family’ would throw him the alms. He had to claim miseries, because it’s miseries, not work, that had become the coin of the realm – so it turned into a contest between six thousand panhandlers, each claiming that his need was worse than his brother’s. How else could it be done? Do you care to guess what happened, what sort of men kept quiet, feeling shame, and what sort got away with the jackpot?…

    And this is what the Left- and, perhaps knowingly or perhaps unwittingly, the Socialist-Democrats- want for America and the world. And they have to be stopped, and it can’t be done politically.

    Eventually a leader will emerge and the Left will pay- dearly- for the destruction they have wrought on America.

Comments are closed.