Socialism

What’s new today

Our # 1 describes the fundamental problems with socialism. #2 relates how the unions are propping up Occupy Wall Street and are putting together an Occupy Washington to go after Republicans.  #3demonstrates governments are not simply crazy in the USA, but they are in Europe as well.  It seem it is now against the law to claim water can prevent dehydration.  My final posting today, #4 talks about how 14,000 wind turbines in the USA have been abandoned.  It seems when the subsidies run out and the turbines start to need maintenance, it cheaper to abandon them.

1.  Socialism's Fundamental Flaws

…..In the Soviet model THE STATE OWNED THE MEANS OF PRODUCTION THUS ALL WORKERS WERE EMPLOYED BY THE STATE -- essentially each working for everyone else, the collective, but not directly for themselves. This was effectively a compulsory altruism which, because not being a primary human drive, introduced a fatal systemic flaw to an economy so bereft of incentives as to engender the famous Russian quip: "WE PRETEND TO WORK AND THEY PRETEND TO PAY US."

As if one were not enough, THE SECOND FATAL FLAW WAS THE ELIMINATION OF THE FREE MARKET AND ITS REPLACEMENT BY THE PLANNED ECONOMY -- where supply and demand were in the hands of technocrats and not the invisible hand of free-market capitalism. The resultant low productivity was easily outpaced by free-market capitalism which produced guns and butter as well as social programs. Economic non-competitiveness, accompanied by suppression of human rights and political freedoms ASSURED SOVIET SOCIALISM'S ULTIMATE DISPATCH TO THE DUSTBIN OF HISTORY, TO JOIN ITS OTHER SOCIALIST ITERATIONS, NAZISM AND FASCISM.

TODAY'S WESTERNIZED SOCIALISM CASTS OUT DOCTRINES OF CENTRALIZED PLANNING AND NATIONALIZATION OF ENTERPRISES, AND INCORPORATES DEMOCRATIC GOVERNANCE, RULE OF LAW, VARYING DEGREES OF PUBLIC SERVICES, SAFETY NETS AND ENTITLEMENTS, ALL EXISTING PARI PASSU WITH FREE-MARKET CAPITALISM. Yes capitalism, the most effective economic system extant because it harnesses instinctive self-interest, close cousin to man's primordial drive of self-preservation, of millions of people bustling about in pursuit of economic advantage to ultimately produce, on average, the greatest amount of wealth, for the greatest number with the least amount of pain overall. So SOCIALISTS HAVE LEARNED THAT NOT ONLY CAN THEY LIVE SIDE-BY-SIDE WITH CAPITALISM, BUT THEY ARE DEPENDENT ON IT AS THE WEALTH GENERATOR TO FUND...WELL, SOCIALISM!

However, the Western economies have recently slowed to a crawl, causing soaring national deficits which some governments have attempted to mitigate with reduced spending. In several nations this has impacted public services and threatened entitlements causing widespread public protests ranging from peaceful to violent, while world stock markets have dropped precipitously and turned volatile. We're facing an economic crisis of potentially global proportions which, THOUGH IT MAY HAVE HAD ITS GENESIS IN THE 2008 SUBPRIME MORTGAGE BUBBLE, IS NOW ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE UNDERLYING AND GROWING SOVEREIGN DEBT CRISIS, WHICH THREATENS ENTIRE ECONOMIES WITH COLLAPSE. The common denominator: The involved nations are democracies, increasingly encumbered with the unsustainable social spending of the welfare state. Unsustainability is the fundamental flaw of Westernized socialism.

The origin of this flaw resides in the all-too-common human failing -- THE DESIRE TO GET SOMETHING FOR NOTHING -- OR AT LEAST NOT AT ONE'S OWN EXPENSE. This proclivity is one to which politicians shamelessly pander. Having government offer "free" entitlements lures people into repeatedly voting for politicians who promise to deliver ever more of such. This mutually reinforcing voter-politician cycle is an example of the phenomenon of positive feedback….

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/11/socialisms_fundamental_flaws.html#ixzz1e9j2tRSS

A couple of things I totally agree with in this article.  First it identifies Communism, Nazism, and Fascism as all socialists programs.  Secondly, it identifies modern socialism not as owning the means of production (the classic definition), but as having gone beyond that point.  Third it describes the relationship between the capitalistic portion of today’s economies and the socialistic portion.  If you read this you will realize why cutting spending should result in a robust recovery as spending more squeezes out the capitalistic portion of the economy.  This is a good read.

2.  Occupy Congress—At Least the Republican portion of it

The 2012 election is almost a full year away and nobody knows who is running against President Obama, but that didn’t stop MARY KAY HENRY, THE D.C.-BASED NATIONAL PRESIDENT OF THE SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION (SEIU), FROM ANNOUNCING LAST WEEK  THAT HER ORGANIZATION ENDORSES PRESIDENT OBAMA FOR RE-ELECTION. That’s not surprising — while many unions have exhibited political independence, SEIU officials have long been among Obama’s closest and most loyal allies in Washington — but what was notable here was how brazenly Henry exploited the language of the Occupy movement to justify her endorsement of the Democratic Party leader: “We need a leader willing to fight FOR THE NEEDS OF THE 99 PERCENT . . . .Our economy and democracy HAVE BEEN TAKEN OVER BY THE WEALTHIEST ONE PERCENT.”

But now SEIU’s effort to convert and degrade the Occupy movement into what SEIU’s national leadership is — a loyal arm of the DNC and the Obama White House — has become even more overt, as Greg Sargent reports today:

One of the enduring questions about Occupy Wall Street has been this: Can the energy unleashed by the movement be leveraged behind a concrete political agenda and push for change that will constitute a meaningful challenge to the inequality and excessive Wall Street influence highlighted by the protests?

A COALITION OF LABOR AND PROGRESSIVE GROUPS IS ABOUT TO UNVEIL ITS ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION. GET READY FOR “OCCUPY CONGRESS.”..

http://www.salon.com/2011/11/19/heres_what_attempted_co_option_of_ows_looks_like/singleton/

Occupy Wall Street is dying, but the left is trying to get a little more mileage out of it before it totally collapses. 

3.   EU bans claim that water can prevent dehydration

EU officials concluded that, following a three-year investigation, THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE TO PROVE THE PREVIOUSLY UNDISPUTED FACT.

Producers of bottled water are now forbidden by law from making the claim and will face a two-year jail sentence if they defy the edict, which comes into force in the UK next month.

Last night, critics claimed the EU was at odds with both science and common sense. Conservative MEP Roger Helmer said: “THIS IS STUPIDITY WRIT LARGE.

“The euro is burning, the EU is falling apart and yet here they are: highly-paid, highly-pensioned officials worrying about the obvious qualities of water and trying to deny us the right to say what is patently true.

“If ever there were an episode which demonstrates the folly of the great European project then this is it.”…

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/8897662/EU-bans-claim-that-water-can-prevent-dehydration.html

If you are simply stupid in the private sector, people laugh at you.  If you are stupid in the public sector, people are tied up in knots by you. 

4.   Wind Runs Out of Power

Minnesotans for Global Warming report that in the last 30 years, the United States has had 14,000 wind turbines abandoned. Apparently, once the subsidies and the wind run out, these 20-story high Cuisinarts are de-bladed and retired. This means more bats and migratory birds will live.

From Minnesotans for Global Warming: “The symbol of Green renewable energy, our savior from the non existent problem of Global Warming, abandoned wind farms are starting to litter the planet as globally governments cut the subsidies taxes that consumers pay for the privilege of having a very expensive power source that does not work every day for various reasons like it’s too cold or the wind speed is too high.”…

http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber/archives/46519

Green energy dies when the green subsidies run out.  We should be researching wind and solar power, but we should not be forcing people to buy the power and subsidizing it as we currently are.