Nine Myths about Socialism in the US

[Dan J 277]

A goal yes, granted by government decree, no. A person gets a good job at a living wage through hard work and a continuing program of self improvement. If someone does not put out the effort then they have no right to a comfortable life.

But on the other hand, even if someone doesn't put the effort into improving their lives, they are still going to be there. What would you do with them?

[one...two...tree 2,762]

But on the other hand, even if someone doesn't put the effort into improving their lives, they are still going to be there. What would you do with them?

Convert their body into fuel. Use their skin for lampshades and their fat for soap.

[JohnSmith2007 353]

Washington Times is owned and operated by a bonafide nut - Reverend Moon. Do you want me to give you a background on his lunacy?

Huffington is a real nut herself. What is your point? How much input does Moon have on the day to day running of the Times?

[JohnSmith2007 353]

But on the other hand, even if someone doesn't put the effort into improving their lives, they are still going to be there. What would you do with them?

Give them the minimum to maintain life and opportunities to improve themselves. Offer subsidized education and jobs skills training. If they don't avail themselves of those opportunities then let them live on their own devises.

Convert their body into fuel. Use their skin for lampshades and their fat for soap.

Your attitude of others with different opinions make you a real pig.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Give them the minimum to maintain life and opportunities to improve themselves. Offer subsidized education and jobs skills training. If they don't avail themselves of those opportunities then let them live on their own devises.

Your attitude of others with different opinions make you a real pig.

I guess you don't understand sarcasm any better than you understand what socialism is. People like Glenn Beck use all kinds of fear mongering Nazi imagery to describe President Obama...except he's not being sarcastic.

[Dan J 277]

Give them the minimum to maintain life and opportunities to improve themselves. Offer subsidized education and jobs skills training. If they don't avail themselves of those opportunities then let them live on their own devises.

Are you suggesting the actually government help people? How socialist of you!

[_Simpson_ 250]

Myth #9. The US generously gives foreign aid to countries across the world.

The US gives the smallest percentage of aid of any of the developed countries in the OECD. In 2007 the US was tied for last with Greece. In 2008, we were tied for last with Japan.

Despite the opinions of right wing folks, the facts say the US is not on the path towards socialism.

But if socialism means the US would go down the path of being more generous with our babies, our children, our working families, our pregnant mothers, and our sisters and brothers across the world, I think we could all appreciate it.

Bill Quigley is Legal Director at the Center for Constitutional Rights and law professor at Loyola University New Orleans. There is a version of this article with footnotes for those interested. Quigley77@gmail.com

WOW! What piece of ####### this article is

Of the many misconceptions this article presents so that it can make the lefties out there feel good about there opinions it was number 9 that got to me.

Fact,U.S. government distributes more in foreign aid than any other country, by far. What this article does is hide behind the word "percentage" Thus giving the lefty loonies the "proof" they need.

[JohnSmith2007 353]

I guess you don't understand sarcasm any better than you understand what socialism is. People like Glenn Beck use all kinds of fear mongering Nazi imagery to describe President Obama...except he's not being sarcastic.

Beck is a talk show host. Why do people like him and Limbaugh bother you so much? If you don't like them then ignore them! People that allow Beck and Limbaugh to form their opinions for them really don't have much of a brain to begin with. If they didn't get their radical ideas from talk show hosts they would be getting them from each other. The lefts constant drum beat is just embolding them. You want them to shut up and go away? Ignore them.

WOW! What piece of ####### this article is

Of the many misconceptions this article presents so that it can make the lefties out there feel good about there opinions it was number 9 that got to me.

Fact,U.S. government distributes more in foreign aid than any other country, by far. What this article does is hide behind the word "percentage" Thus giving the lefty loonies the "proof" they need.

Yeah, I know. We could give half of our GDP to charity and some leftist would say we still are not giving enough.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Beck is a talk show host.

Exactly! Which gets back to my original remark to you - what in your opinion is Socialism? We can ignore the celebrity megalomaniacs and their political opinions, but what about the others from the Right who echo similar sentiments? That this country is moving towards Socialism? What do they mean, in your opinion?

[Kathryn41 3,205]

Discussion about and disagreement with the comments in the article are fine; insulting or attacking people for their opinions is not. It may help to keep on track if you remember that when people resort to insulting or attacking others personally, it is usually because they are unable to attack the material - it is a diversionary tactic trying to take the topic off course. So, if you want to make your point, provide evidence that supports your position rather than attacking and insulting each other.

[JohnSmith2007 353]

Exactly! Which gets back to my original remark to you - what in your opinion is Socialism? We can ignore the celebrity megalomaniacs and their political opinions, but what about the others from the Right who echo similar sentiments? That this country is moving towards Socialism? What do they mean, in your opinion?

Why do you keep trying to draw me into a circular argument? You very well know what is socialistic and what is not. To argue the semantics is just wasting time. To be clear, socialism is when the government controls private business. When it sets wages, profits and the rules above and beyond safety and trade laws. The things you seem to want fall right square in the middle of the classic definition of socialism as pertaining to the economic markets. Free market is the American way. I know you don't like it but that is just tough sh!t.

[rika60607 215]

I do not understand.

If you rent, you need money tp pay rent, if you own, you need money to pay mortgage and/or taxes.

Hence, if you are below poverty line, chances are, you are homeless. Or live in a trailer park.

Either way though, poverty in the United States isn't as 'ugly' as some make it out to be unless you're by some chance homeless.

[Justine+David 218]

Myth #2. The US already has the greatest health care system in the world.

Infant mortality in the US is 4th worst among OECD countries – better only than Mexico, Turkey and the Slovak Republic.

This is an often touted statistic, but also untrue. It is true that infant mortality rate is regularly used to rate the health of a nation, but the U.S. counts premature births that other countries don't.

Background: A full-term infant is born at 38-40 weeks gestation. Age of viability (able to survive outside the womb with medical equipment) tends to be about 23-24 weeks.

Although it is up to the U.S. hospital's discretion, most doctors will try to at least resuscitate anything that comes out that looks to be about that age and thus count it as a live birth. The problem with this is that many of those infants do pass on either on the table or within the first week of life.

Other countries don't count these as live births even if they do try to resuscitate the infant, so their statistics are skewed. I've even heard of some countries not counting 32 weekers as live births, which is fairly ludicrous because an extremely high percentage of infants at that age survive without any major health complications.

You want your preterm baby to survive? You bet your you-know-what you hope they're in the U.S. We have the best technology in the world and ongoing research to keep them alive and better yet, to limit debilitating conditions like cerebral palsy, blindness, etc etc. This isn't to say that other countries don't have our technologies...but usually we're the ones to start them in the first place.

Edited April 14, 2010 by Justine+David

[Dan J 277]

This is an often touted statistic, but also untrue. It is true that infant mortality rate is regularly used to rate the health of a nation, but the U.S. counts premature births that other countries don't.

Background: A full-term infant is born at 38-40 weeks gestation. Age of viability (able to survive outside the womb with medical equipment) tends to be about 23-24 weeks.

Although it is up to the U.S. hospital's discretion, most doctors will try to at least resuscitate anything that comes out that looks to be about that age and thus count it as a live birth. The problem with this is that many of those infants do pass on either on the table or within the first week of life.

Other countries don't count these as live births even if they do try to resuscitate the infant, so their statistics are skewed. I've even heard of some countries not counting 32 weekers as live births, which is fairly ludicrous because an extremely high percentage of infants at that age survive without any major health complications.

You want your preterm baby to survive? You bet your you-know-what you hope they're in the U.S. We have the best technology in the world and ongoing research to keep them alive and better yet, to limit debilitating conditions like cerebral palsy, blindness, etc etc. This isn't to say that other countries don't have our technologies...but usually we're the ones to start them in the first place.

There are a lot of other numbers that show the problems with the US health care system instead of that one.

The claim that the US has the best healthcare system in the world usually comes for the people that can afford it, and prefer to keep it a privilege that increasingly only the wealth can really afford.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Why do you keep trying to draw me into a circular argument? You very well know what is socialistic and what is not. To argue the semantics is just wasting time. To be clear, socialism is when the government controls private business. When it sets wages, profits and the rules above and beyond safety and trade laws. The things you seem to want fall right square in the middle of the classic definition of socialism as pertaining to the economic markets. Free market is the American way. I know you don't like it but that is just tough sh!t.

Do you know of any real world examples of a truly free market? Any real world examples where a country was absolutely devoid of any socialist policies?