|
Movies Books Music Food Tv Shows Technology Politics Video Games Parenting Fashion Green Living more >

Lunch » Tags » Economics » Reviews » Socialism and Wealth Distribution

Socialism and Wealth Distribution

1 rating: 5.0
Obama's economic plan
1 review about Socialism and Wealth Distribution

This professor says it all!!!!!!!

  • Oct 16, 2009
  • by
Rating:
+5
An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never failed a single student before,
but had once failed an entire class.
--------------------------------------------

That class had insisted that Obama's socialism (and wealth redistribution) plan worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich; it would be a great equalizer.

The professor then said, "OK,
we will have an experiment in this class on Obama's socialism plan."

All grades would be averaged and everyone would receive the same grade, so no one would fail and no one would receive an A. 

After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. 
The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy.  

As the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who had studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too, so they studied little.  
The second test average was a D! 
No one was happy. 

When the 3rd test rolled around, the average was an F. 

The scores never increased, as bickering,
blame and name-calling all resulted in hard feelings, and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else.  

All failed, to their great surprise, and the professor told them that socialism (and wealth redistribution) would also ultimately fail, because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great, but when government takes all the reward away, no one will try or want to succeed. 

It could not be any simpler than that.

 
I think this pretty much says it all.  Capitalism is not perfect, but anything else and all we have is socialism and a welfare state.  Is that really what you want?

 

 

What did you think of this review?

Helpful
10
Thought-Provoking
8
Fun to Read
8
Well-Organized
7
Post a Comment
October 16, 2009
I would just like to point out that the banks were bailed out during the Bush administration aided and abetted by the Democrats of course. Just goes to show you how corrupt they ALL are down there.
October 16, 2009
To me, it doesn't matter who did what, the point I'm trying to make is that our government, whether it's Bush or Obama or whoever, is basically saying to us "you people are too damned stupid to run your own affairs, so it's up to Big Daddy government, meaning us, to protect you from yourselves doing anything more stupid than you already have. After all, we're your president, speaker of the house, mayor, governor, etc, and we are so superior to you that we rival God"
October 16, 2009
I agree with you that goverment should govern as little as possible but that can still create a lot of problems in society. We here in Iceland now face huge depts created by the privately run Banks that the Goverment did not regulate or pay enough attention to, so the actions of free people in the free market has plunged Iceland in the greatest dept it has ever faced, much more than any left wing goverment we have had, has ever created, the irony is sickening of course. I do not believe in socialism nor neo liberalism, it´s a classic damned if you do, damned if you don´t situation.
October 16, 2009
In the US, there are monopoly laws to stimulate competition. Of course, no one has paid attention to any of those laws for years unless one company called the government to complain and none of the banks ever complained. Seems that is what happened in Iceland as well. Do you notice that those offices that were supposedly created to protect us are the very ones who are screwing us the most now? The FDA in the US for instance. How many medicines have had to be recalled because the testing process was rushed? Same principal as the banks. I don't mind the government enforcing laws, but I do NOT want them telling me what sexual positions I can use in the privacy of my bedroom
October 16, 2009
Free enterpise, capitalism run amok. No government regulation, we can take care of ourselves. yeah sure. That crap only leads to what you see before you now. No fan of capitalism here. Of course the big problem is that whatever man sets his hands on inevitably becomes corrupt, so I'm in favor of making things as simple as possible so that they can corrupt it as little as possible. The Gandhian way would have been great if we only had a few hundred thousand more Mahatmas and had started out in the 10th century.
October 16, 2009
Now there I totally agree. Man screws everything up. That's why I say that government should take care of making sensible laws and leave the lives of people alone. I hate the idea that we, meaning the citizens not the government, spend billions to bail out banks and auto makers. I'm afraid that if it had been left to me, I would have let them fail and to hell with our economic underpinning. There is no "perfect" system. Even "perfect" communism does not of itself. It needs another guiding principal, either religion or perhaps, like the hippies, drugs, for it to work for any length of time. There is no easy answer, but I do know that I do not want my government telling me that I can't do something because it's "bad" for me. Let me decide what is bad for me. If I don't want to wear a seatbelt and I die in a car crash, what the hell does that matter to Obama or Pelosi or congress? Yet, if I'm caught without a seatbelt on, our government can extort money from me. Does this make sense? Will socialism, or Nazism, take care of this? YES!!! They will shot me for not wearing a seatbelt.
October 17, 2009
Drugs ruined the hippie movement. Hardly shoot you. You can also decided for yourself whether or not your granddaughter wears a seatbelt when she is in your car, but is it really fair for you to make that decision for her? And since she is hardly old enough to really understand the full implications of not wearing a seatbelt, is it really so demonic of a governmental agency to step in and allow her to at least reach maturity so she can thumb her own nose at the government?
 
October 16, 2009
As a socialist all I can say is...yeah. But I'm not going to get that from Obama because he's about as close to being a socialist as John McCain is. Okay, maybe one degree closer. But Obama is so middle of the road that it's an embarrassment to even hear him called a socialist, much less a communist. The guy just bailed out the fucking banks and a bunch of failing businesses for Christ's sake! How much more of a capitalist can one possibly be?
October 16, 2009
Agreed to a point. He bailed out the banks because if they had failed completely, the entire economic base of the US would have failed completely. It was welfare for businesses and it will work just as well as the welfare system for individuals. No, I do not accuse Obama of being a communist, a socialist or even a philanthropist. He is a politician, and he and his party want more and more control over each citizen's personal and private lives. One way to do that is to reduce everyone to the same level, socially, economically and in every other way. After all, when was the last time you heard a fourth generation welfare recipient criticize the hand that feeds him or her? If we all owe everything we have to the government and become economically dependent on them, what do we have to work for? Kinda makes life meaningless, doesn't it?
October 16, 2009
In socialist democracy "we" are the government. Where does the government get the money to give us in order to make us dependent upon them? From us. So who really has the power?
October 16, 2009
In theory, I agree, but the American people have been so conditioned to give up whatever for the good of the country that they don't really do much. If people would actually stand up and take control, we would not have the power hungry politicians. Ted Kennedy (RIP) was a perfect example. He did not represent his constituents well, but those same people kept reelecting him, not because he was good or listened or represented, but simply because he was the last Kennedy. Obama is also a politician. This means that he is basically owned by at least one and probably more special interest groups and will screw the American people at the behest of these groups. "We" complain bitterly about the high cost of gas, or energy, or food while "we", sheep that we are, spend the extra money to buy. We complain and nothing else. I guess what I'm saying is that we have allowed our almighty god....whoops, government to dictate every little detail of our lives for so long that perhaps we deserve to be subjugated. The average American does nothing about it anyway
October 16, 2009
It's a capitalist society and it's our patriotic duty to consume, whatever the cost--and I mean that in every sense of the word. They are our masters. Pick who you want to be owned by, at least then you'd be making a choice. Right now you're owned by Big Business which in turn owns the government. No comment on Ted Kennedy because you're a friend.
October 16, 2009
I liked Ted as much as I liked any politician. I am sorry he is gone. Consume. How can someone making minimum wage consume? Even two people making minimum wage have little left after they pay bills. So, our wonderful government gives them welfare, free medical care, food stamps, subsidized housing and free child care. Do those people then go to school or work harder to find better jobs? I don't think so. They vegetate, hold out their hands and stop doing anything. But hey, at least everyone has enough to eat and a roof over their head. That's all that's important anyway!!!
October 16, 2009
You just explained how they do it. After they get all that free public aid, they go knock over some gas stations and spend the money buying dope which they then sell on street corners. This gives them more than enough money to spend on Gucci bags and all the other stuff that their Capitalist masters tell them they have to have. The people making minimum wage put it on their credit cards and then declare bankruptcy, but they still get the Gucci bags etc. Gotta have all the trappings today or you just aren't anybody. I hope you're getting the truth amongst the sarcasm.
October 16, 2009
Now there you have me. It does make life meaningless
October 16, 2009
Not to Gucci.
October 16, 2009
It will. Remember, in socialism there is no Gucci, or filet mignon, or Rolls Royce cars or designer jeans. All will be the same
December 21, 2009
YES!
 
October 16, 2009
Thanks for posting.  This is a really interesting take on Obama's economic plan.  I bet that you have tons to say about the President himself, too!
October 16, 2009
Obama is really no different from many other presidents. He has his own agenda and wants to do things. Some of them I agree with and some i don't. However, it does seem that the last few presidents have very little respect for our Constitution and/or Bill of Rights. Every president since Carter seems to have tried to trample on both documents
December 21, 2009
Don't you mean since Nixon?
 
October 16, 2009
There are so many degrees of socialism, that test you were describing sounds more like communism to me than socialism. Take Sweden for example many Americans would describe that country as socialistic but that does not mean you are not allowed to be rich there (or poor for that matter), but they and and most scandinavian country have a wellfare state and whats the result, much lower crime rate than USA, better health care and pretty impressive educational system. Of course it means higher taxes but you Are the state and it´s democraticly elected, so you get something in return. It seems to me that too many Americans are so afraid of goverment run things, like all that must the evil communism that we were fighting all these years, but of course that is just exaggerating the facts. But that of course does not mean that the welfare state is perfect and without flaws, like all man made systems it´s never perfect but I still think that USA would benifit tremendously with a goverment run health care system. Iceland has a democratically elected goverment and sometimes it swing to the right and sometimes to the left but all goverments here have supported the health care system. The main problems we Icelander have to face now are the problems that badly regulated capaitalism did create, our banks became huge and their owner filthy rich but with the credtit crunch they all went bankrupt and the depts will have to be paid by the common man in Iceland, and those depts are infinitely higher than the taxes we pay for our Health Care system. So at least the benifits of the well fare state in Iceland are much higher than unbridled capitalism ever produced, all we have left of that is the highest dept Iceland has ever faced.
October 16, 2009
Americans equate socialism with all sorts of evil. Obama is currently being compared to both Stalin and Hitler. (We're such an embarrassingly naive and ignorant people.) It's a commonly accepted fact here that you cannot have a socialist democracy despite evidency to the contrary in the form of countries which already have such a system. A national commentator (Glenn Beck) recently stated that in Sweden a man is 600 times more likely to die of prostate cancer than he is America because of their government run health program. Of course he simply threw that number at his audience without bothering to tell them where his statistics came from. I suspect that I may well have been the only one watching his program who wondered about that however.
October 16, 2009
One thing that is indisputable, though, is that when the government, any government, takes over the private lives of its citizens, then there is no more advancement. The Nazis and the Communists were taking over peoples' lives for bad reasons. I think that perhaps Obama and Pelosi THINK that their motives are good, but no matter how good the motives, total government control can never, ever produce a good outcome. Look at our welfare society. Generation after generation of people who contribute nothing but more children to overpopulate, yet leeching off the system. Do these people advance anything at all? Yet that will be the outcome of what Obama and Pelosi are proposing. There is a wonderful saying.......THAT GOVERNMENT GOVERNS BEST THAT GOVERNS LEAST. I believe that and I believe in Jefferson, the fellow who said that. Jefferson, Franklin, Washington and the others were wise idiots. If they could have forseen the Bushs, Clinton, Carter, Pelosi and Obama, they would never have rebelled and would have been happy to have remained a part of the British Empire
October 16, 2009
Ha Ha that statistic is such a balony, I can´t remember how many times Sweden has come on top of all kinds of polls checking how well things are run, how healthy the citicens are, how low the crime rate, how good the educational system and how many finish higer degree´s of learning, how easy it is to raise a child, etc ad nauseum and most of the time it´s Sweden that comes on top. My friends who have lived there are all full of glowing reviews and that doesn´t mean that you can´t become very rich there, there are plenty of multi millionaires in Sweden,(nobel was one) of course they pay higher taxes than they would in USA but that´s the price of the well fare state.
October 16, 2009
I think you are missing one essential point. In Sweden, Iceland, etc, you people actually seem to trust your leaders to do the right thing. We have not had leaders worthy of our trust for nearly 100 years. All of the leaders of the US have been self serving criminals who only became leaders because of the power and wealth that comes with being in congress, the senate or being president. I didn't trust Clinton, I didn't trust Bush and I don't trust Obama or Pelosi or Reid, or McCain or.,,,,,
October 16, 2009
Ha Ha perhaps, but I must tell you since the bank crash here in Iceland our trust in the goverment and Politicians has fallen dramatically. The most common attitude is full of Cynicism, sarcasm and Irony if not downright hatred.
October 16, 2009
Congratulations!!!! You are now officially an American citizen
October 16, 2009
And what caused all that cynicism? Capitalism. The banks failing. Money. or the lack of money. As you said Uke,our leaders have become such because of there desire for power and MONEY which are actually the same thing. You've just made the case for socialism.
October 16, 2009
No, I've just made the case for democracy. We in the US have not had a democracy for years and years. Capitalism works well only when it is controlled by the "people". The American people have not had a voice for years and the sad part is that the American people purposely gave up their voice. Socialism is an economy of a government that rules every aspect of the citizen's lives. I do not like that. I want to make my own decisions, even such stupid decisions as to what I eat or where I can smoke a cigarette or whether I want to wear a seat belt when I drive. Socialism is a failure of a government to properly make competition fair, which is a perfect statement of what the US government has done. When capitalism fails, and it has, then the only answer is socialism which makes everyone equal except, if you recall your Orwell, some animals are more equal than others.
October 16, 2009
That was communism which is a totally different animal. and as for smoking bans, I'm glad as a non-smoker with an allergy to cigarettes that after 58 years MY health/comfort/happiness/need to breathe was finally taken into consideration even it did mean that the government had to step in for it to finally happen!!! (sorry, it's a sore point) But going to back to the original point; how can you not alow that a government that is totally responsive to and manipulated by it's economic system and the greed of it's leaders doesn't serve as an indictment of capitalism? Why must there be competition? What's so important about having 10 new models of cars each year when none of them get any better mileage than they did the years before--they just look a little different? What's so important about making sure that your kids wardrobe is out-dated so they can nag you to death thus forcing you to go out and spend a fortune on theings they don't need which will just be out of style by next year anyway? It would be fine if we were talking about competition in any field that really matters, but we're not, let's face it.
October 16, 2009
The end result of communism and socialism is basically the same. Having said that, I agree about the idiocy we have made of competition. Again, though, it's the people not the system. The US has fuel efficient cars in the 1950s and 1960s. Then, the government decided that they were too efficient so the used the excuse of air quality, created the pollution control devices, mandated them on every car, and the oil companies cashed in big. Did Americans do anything? Yes!!! They complained as they paid. I agree about smoking to a point. If you don't like smoking, there should be places where smoking is not allowed. However, now there is NO place in public where a smoker can smoke. In fact, Ohio is trying to pass a law that will not allow smoking even in a private home. Is that fair? Basically, our government will eventually get to the point where they will come into your bedroom and tell you what positions you can use to have sex. That's what it is coming to. By that time, your socialism will be complete. Everyone (except the elite and out political leaders) will be completely equal
November 19, 2009
I was spat upon and called a baby killer after I came back from Nam. After that kind of hate from the very people I thought I was fighting for, hate mail is nothing. It's simply the usual love from the people who let their government, or their religion, or their friends or whoever, do their thinking for them
December 21, 2009
I wasn't one of the people who spat on you. And as Ornleifs has tried to point out Capitalism and Socialism do not mean the same thing as Freedom and Tyranny. It's just as  possible to have a Democratic socialtist republic as it is to have a Captiaistic fasist state.
 
1
What's your opinion on Socialism and Wealth Distribution?
rate
1 rating: +5.0
You have exceeded the maximum length.
Photos
Socialism and Wealth Distribution
Details
Related Topics
Laissez Faire Capitalism

Economics

The Communist Manifesto (Penguin Classics)

The Penguin Classics edition of Karl Marx' and Friedrich Eng

This economic recession (2008)

What are the affordable luxuries during an economic recessio

Barack Obama and Palestine: Barack Obama makes his push for Palestine | The Economist

Peace Talks

First to Review
© 2014 Lunch.com, LLC All Rights Reserved
Lunch.com - Relevant reviews by real people.
()
This is you!
Ranked #
Last login
Member since
reviews
comments
ratings
questions
compliments
lists