Performance Boats Forum banner

1 - 20 of 28 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
84 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Until yesterday I have avoided the Political Rhetoric forum on these boards.

There has been a lot of misuse of the word socialist and socialism in the media and on these boards. In fact in the last 3 years, socialism has become a dirty word that most on the right use as a degrading derogatory term at those who do not share their beliefs. Our country was founded on core principals, in which spirited debate is not only excepted, but encouraged.

I thought it might make for a good intellectual exercise to debate a specific point.

Those against socialism might be quite surprised to know that the U.S. Public Library System is absolute socialism. The Public Library Act was passed in 1857 and has been running smoothly ever since. For those of you that are completely against socialism it would only make sense that you are also against the Public Library System, since it truly is the “poster child” for socialism with a history in Europe going back hundreds of years.

I chose this as the point of debate, since it is far from today’s political rhetoric, yet any argument both for and against can easily be converted to just about any of today’s current political situations, for and against socialism.

For those of you against socialism this should be an easy mental exercise and you should have no problem putting your perspective eloquently below as to why we should abolish the Public Library. If your are a die-hard anti socialism defender, Tea Party member, hard core conservative, here is your chance to help change some minds about your views. Those on the left will see opportunity for respectful rebuttal.

Here are some basic rules:

No name calling (it is so unproductive)
Stay on point (this debate is about socialism in regards to the Public Library only. Start a new thread if you cannot control yourself!)

This all might be asking too much for the completely ignorant, however, no matter what your views, left or right, most of the people on the Political Rhetoric threads are older and have formed their opinions through many life experiences, which I totally respect, regardless if I agree or not. I just want to see if we can have a civil debate.

Here are some philosophical questions:

Does the library cheat publishers, authors, movie makers, and many more out of a fair profit? Does the common good out weigh the negatives? Without the library would a John Grisham book now cost over $100? Does the library have a positive or negative impact on the poor or the rich? Who benefits the most? Who does not? Are the operational costs to taxpayers worth the benefit?


These are just some questions, you will see more

Here is some info from wikepedia:

A public library (also called circulating library) is a library which is accessible by the public and is generally funded from public sources (such as tax money) and may be operated by civil servants. Taxing bodies for public libraries may be at any level from local to national central government level.
Public libraries exist in most places in the world and are often considered an essential part of having an educated and literate population. Public libraries are distinct from research libraries, school libraries, or other special libraries in that their mandate is to serve the public's information needs generally (rather than serve a particular school, institution, or research population), as well as offering materials for general entertainment and leisure purposes.

Public libraries typically are lending libraries, allowing users to take books and other materials off the premises temporarily; they also have non-circulating reference collections. Public libraries primarily focus on popular materials such as popular fiction and movies, as well as educational and nonfiction materials of interest to the general public; computer and internet access are also often offered.

LET THE SOCIALISM DEBATE GET STARTED!

Respectfully,

C-Ya
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,115 Posts
It is rather funny you use the library as the example as I don't see the library as socialist just because the government funds it. First: Use of the library is not mandantory, such is not the case of Obamacare. Second: even though I seldom use the library I see it as another government service available to all for educationial purposes, not unlike the public school system. Sort of an extention of the public schools if you will. Third: If you see the library as a socialist end-product then you must view the Highway system, bridges, tunnels and all the other supporting infastructure as socialist as well. Not to exclude canals, irrigation systems, dams, sewer and water utilities as socialist. Why don't you use the military as an example of communism while you are at it? Just because the government funds a project or such does not mean it falls under the banner of socialism. Our government was created by our founding fathers to better our society by improving the quality of life by providing the resources to construct projects that private individules could not afford. Furthermore with today's technology the library is quickly becoming obsolete. How do book authors and publisher handle the new electronic way of downloading books on say 'Kindles' and with all the info available on the internet one has little use for a library for any type of research with Google just a mouse click away at any hour of the day or night. Plus parking is a bitch around my local library anyway.:D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,449 Posts
It is rather funny you use the library as the example as I don't see the library as socialist just because the government funds it. First: Use of the library is not mandantory, such is not the case of Obamacare. Second: even though I seldom use the library I see it as another government service available to all for educationial purposes, not unlike the public school system. Sort of an extention of the public schools if you will. Third: If you see the library as a socialist end-product then you must view the Highway system, bridges, tunnels and all the other supporting infastructure as socialist as well. Not to exclude canals, irrigation systems, dams, sewer and water utilities as socialist. Why don't you use the military as an example of communism while you are at it? Just because the government funds a project or such does not mean it falls under the banner of socialism. Our government was created by our founding fathers to better our society by improving the quality of life by providing the resources to construct projects that private individules could not afford. Furthermore with today's technology the library is quickly becoming obsolete. How do book authors and publisher handle the new electronic way of downloading books on say 'Kindles' and with all the info available on the internet one has little use for a library for any type of research with Google just a mouse click away at any hour of the day or night. Plus parking is a bitch around my local library anyway.:D
My view exactly 58. I think the gentleman is confused about what a social program is, and what Karl Marx devised as Socialism which took various forms such as Communism, The National Socialist Party (NAZI), and etc. which is still evolving Socialism in Europe.

In a Political Forum we talk about Political Socialism.

However, while I support the Public Library system, if you live in a Liberal area like I do, you would be hard pressed to find books by conservative authors in the local library.
 

·
Red Blooded American
Joined
·
15,853 Posts
The public library is funded from the general treasury. With up-wards of 1000 government agencies sucking funds out of the general fund faster than tax dollars can replenish it, something drastic must be done. Whether it's the library or hundreds of other agencies, departments, operations or groups funded from the treasury, some very tough decisions must be made - post haste - in order to save our government from complete financial collapse.

The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.
Margaret Thatcher

This has now happened all over America and our current administration wasn't smart enough to see that it has.
CUT HERE - CUT NOW!
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,729 Posts
Until yesterday I have avoided the Political Rhetoric forum on these boards.

There has been a lot of misuse of the word socialist and socialism in the media and on these boards. In fact in the last 3 years, socialism has become a dirty word that most on the right use as a degrading derogatory term at those who do not share their beliefs. Our country was founded on core principals, in which spirited debate is not only excepted, but encouraged.

I thought it might make for a good intellectual exercise to debate a specific point.

Those against socialism might be quite surprised to know that the U.S. Public Library System is absolute socialism. The Public Library Act was passed in 1857 and has been running smoothly ever since. For those of you that are completely against socialism it would only make sense that you are also against the Public Library System, since it truly is the “poster child” for socialism with a history in Europe going back hundreds of years.

I chose this as the point of debate, since it is far from today’s political rhetoric, yet any argument both for and against can easily be converted to just about any of today’s current political situations, for and against socialism.

For those of you against socialism this should be an easy mental exercise and you should have no problem putting your perspective eloquently below as to why we should abolish the Public Library. If your are a die-hard anti socialism defender, Tea Party member, hard core conservative, here is your chance to help change some minds about your views. Those on the left will see opportunity for respectful rebuttal.

Here are some basic rules:

No name calling (it is so unproductive)
Stay on point (this debate is about socialism in regards to the Public Library only. Start a new thread if you cannot control yourself!)

This all might be asking too much for the completely ignorant, however, no matter what your views, left or right, most of the people on the Political Rhetoric threads are older and have formed their opinions through many life experiences, which I totally respect, regardless if I agree or not. I just want to see if we can have a civil debate.

Here are some philosophical questions:

Does the library cheat publishers, authors, movie makers, and many more out of a fair profit? Does the common good out weigh the negatives? Without the library would a John Grisham book now cost over $100? Does the library have a positive or negative impact on the poor or the rich? Who benefits the most? Who does not? Are the operational costs to taxpayers worth the benefit?


These are just some questions, you will see more

Here is some info from wikepedia:

A public library (also called circulating library) is a library which is accessible by the public and is generally funded from public sources (such as tax money) and may be operated by civil servants. Taxing bodies for public libraries may be at any level from local to national central government level.
Public libraries exist in most places in the world and are often considered an essential part of having an educated and literate population. Public libraries are distinct from research libraries, school libraries, or other special libraries in that their mandate is to serve the public's information needs generally (rather than serve a particular school, institution, or research population), as well as offering materials for general entertainment and leisure purposes.

Public libraries typically are lending libraries, allowing users to take books and other materials off the premises temporarily; they also have non-circulating reference collections. Public libraries primarily focus on popular materials such as popular fiction and movies, as well as educational and nonfiction materials of interest to the general public; computer and internet access are also often offered.

LET THE SOCIALISM DEBATE GET STARTED!

Respectfully,

C-Ya
I have to disagree with you C-Ya. The term socialism has not just become popular in the last three years by those on the right. Look at videos from the 60's and 70's starring Ronald Reagan when he was arguing against nationalized health care. He threw the term around frequently. The fact is that the right has used the term to scare the average voter into siding with them for years. I do agree that the right more often than not uses the terms: socialism, communism, nazis, etc incorectly to strike fear into the general population.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
760 Posts
The Trouble With Socialism...

Sooner or later you run out of other people's money to spend...

Look at the JACKASSES in Wisconsin and Michigan. The state is broke, and the unions want THEIR money anyway.


Pubic Unions and Private Unions are different. As Rush says, "Who is looking out for the tax payer when pubic sector unions negotiate??"

Sweden has been a big socialist state.....They are doing well right now, but they are moving away from socialism..

Show me where socialism works or has worked!!!!

Close libraries..GOOGLE has replaced them... Close the post office....Close public schools, issue vouchers.

Tax churches! Why should my taxes support churches?
 

·
"On the road again..."
Joined
·
9,356 Posts
I just love it when someone comes in and sets their personal rules of debate in the typical condescending tone like some smiley schoolmarm completely removed from the reality of the outside world.:)sphss

The Public Library is a poor analogy to the workings of a government as a whole. Let's instead discuss the USSR and how that little experiment fell on it's asse in crumpled defeat. We can throw in how Vlad Putin has warned the US from heading down a similar road towards a failed in use philosophy.......

Until then "See Ya....." :)hand
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,070 Posts
Socialized Medicine (ObamaCare) is Socialiam, Thats like Who's in Grants Tomb :)hand
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
375 Posts
I have to disagree with you C-Ya. The term socialism has not just become popular in the last three years by those on the right. Look at videos from the 60's and 70's starring Ronald Reagan when he was arguing against nationalized health care. He threw the term around frequently. The fact is that the right has used the term to scare the average voter into siding with them for years. I do agree that the right more often than not uses the terms: socialism, communism, nazis, etc incorectly to strike fear into the general population.
And the left has been practicing it for years to get people sucking on the teet of government in return for votes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
660 Posts
Socialism is a great idea. It just doesn't work because those in charge of it don't live by the rules and laws they impose of others.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,115 Posts
How many times have we heard "Socialism hasn't worked because the right people haven't been in charge" Just exactly who are the "Right People"? Who appointed them "the right people"? How do we know they are "the right people" Do we get a money back guarantee if it doesn't work? Why do "those people" want to fundamentally change a system that we know works well, has worked well for the last 230+ years and can continue to work well as long as the structure of our society and system is not screwed with? There are plenty of other countries where socialism is already in place and those that are running it seem to be quite pleased with the results. Go there and leave our system alone if you are so unhappy with capitalism.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,616 Posts
Until yesterday I have avoided the Political Rhetoric forum on these boards.

There has been a lot of misuse of the word socialist and socialism in the media and on these boards. In fact in the last 3 years, socialism has become a dirty word that most on the right use as a degrading derogatory term at those who do not share their beliefs. Our country was founded on core principals, in which spirited debate is not only excepted, but encouraged.

I thought it might make for a good intellectual exercise to debate a specific point.

Those against socialism might be quite surprised to know that the U.S. Public Library System is absolute socialism. The Public Library Act was passed in 1857 and has been running smoothly ever since. For those of you that are completely against socialism it would only make sense that you are also against the Public Library System, since it truly is the “poster child” for socialism with a history in Europe going back hundreds of years.

I chose this as the point of debate, since it is far from today’s political rhetoric, yet any argument both for and against can easily be converted to just about any of today’s current political situations, for and against socialism.

For those of you against socialism this should be an easy mental exercise and you should have no problem putting your perspective eloquently below as to why we should abolish the Public Library. If your are a die-hard anti socialism defender, Tea Party member, hard core conservative, here is your chance to help change some minds about your views. Those on the left will see opportunity for respectful rebuttal.

Here are some basic rules:

No name calling (it is so unproductive)
Stay on point (this debate is about socialism in regards to the Public Library only. Start a new thread if you cannot control yourself!)

This all might be asking too much for the completely ignorant, however, no matter what your views, left or right, most of the people on the Political Rhetoric threads are older and have formed their opinions through many life experiences, which I totally respect, regardless if I agree or not. I just want to see if we can have a civil debate.

Here are some philosophical questions:

Does the library cheat publishers, authors, movie makers, and many more out of a fair profit? Does the common good out weigh the negatives? Without the library would a John Grisham book now cost over $100? Does the library have a positive or negative impact on the poor or the rich? Who benefits the most? Who does not? Are the operational costs to taxpayers worth the benefit?


These are just some questions, you will see more

Here is some info from wikepedia:

A public library (also called circulating library) is a library which is accessible by the public and is generally funded from public sources (such as tax money) and may be operated by civil servants. Taxing bodies for public libraries may be at any level from local to national central government level.
Public libraries exist in most places in the world and are often considered an essential part of having an educated and literate population. Public libraries are distinct from research libraries, school libraries, or other special libraries in that their mandate is to serve the public's information needs generally (rather than serve a particular school, institution, or research population), as well as offering materials for general entertainment and leisure purposes.

Public libraries typically are lending libraries, allowing users to take books and other materials off the premises temporarily; they also have non-circulating reference collections. Public libraries primarily focus on popular materials such as popular fiction and movies, as well as educational and nonfiction materials of interest to the general public; computer and internet access are also often offered.

LET THE SOCIALISM DEBATE GET STARTED!

Respectfully,

C-Ya
This entire post is absolute nonsense. :)sphss The term "Socialism" refers to government ownership and or control of a nation's means of production and resources, as opposed to "Capitolism" were most of those things are largely under private ownership and control. Any Capitolist society can use taxation to fund a wide variety of government services without being "Socialist".

P.S. The various forms of socialism (Communism, Fascism, National Socialism, Utopian Socialism, Corporate Socialism etc, etc) are all among the most totalitarian systems of government ever devised, thus they are not well liked by those of us who value individual freedom....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,917 Posts
The problem is not so much the theoretical system of government but the propensity for so many power hungry, money mad, and even incompetent assholes who manage to rise to power and run them...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,616 Posts
the propensity for so many power hungry, money mad, and even incompetent assholes who manage to rise to power and run them...
Is the reason why totalitarian/collectivist systems of government, like the various forms of socialism, are absolutly incompatible with individual freedom.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
84 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
In today’s political atmosphere, it is hard to watch the news without seeing someone on the right not use socialism as a condescending word. I used the library as an example because it would not even occur too many of our fellow Americans how many services that they receive that are socialist based.

First of all, any "public" service to attend to all equally would be socialist. Which means Firemen, and police could be considered socialist as well, because they are paid for by the government, to aid the people. Same with mailman and any other government funded (tax-funded) job. So if the library is publicly funded by taxes, then it is technically socialist. I know that this is an “inconvenient truth” for those that want to rid our government of any form of socialism.

I personally couldn’t be happier that we live in a free market system, capitalism has been very good for me! I have been lucky enough to piss away more money than a welfare recipient will make in a lifetime. However, I realize that we need services for the greater good of the people, which are NOT based on capitalism. I cannot help but wonder when I see a Tea Party activist on television state “we must abolish socialism/we can’t be socialist/he’s a socialist/were turning the country into a socialist society/etc” (you know what I mean) Yet, they have no idea that many services that they depend on are paid for by taxpayers, for the common good. They need to find a new word, because in my opinion they look uninformed and do not look like they know what they are talking about. I actually used the Library analogy when I saw a TV reporter ask a Tea Bagger at a rally “are you aware that the Public Library system a form of socialism?” Needless to say, the activist did not even know how to respond.

The following is based on “a common good for the people” which by definition would be socialist based.

Social Security</SPAN>; Medicare/Medicaid; State Children's Health Insurance Programs (SCHIP); police, fire, and emergency services; the US Postal Service; public roads and highways; air travel (it’s regulated by the socialist FAA); the US Railway System; public subways and metro systems; public bus and light rail systems; rest areas on highways; sidewalks; all government-funded local/state projects; public water and sewer services, public and state universities and colleges; public primary and secondary schools; Sesame Street; publicly funded anti-drug use education for children; public museums, public parks and beaches; state and national parks; public zoos; unemployment insurance; municipal garbage and recycling services; treatment at any hospital or clinic that ever received funding from local, state or federal government (pretty much all of them); medical services and medications that were created or derived from any government grant or research funding (again, pretty much all of them); socialist byproducts of government investment such as duct tape and velcro (Nazi-NASA Inventions); use of the Internet; email, and networked computers, as the Department of Defense's ARPANET was the basis for subsequent computer networking; socialist security departments such as the Pentagon, FBI, CIA, Department of Homeland Security, TSA, Department of Justice and their socialist employees; foodstuffs, meats, produce and crops that were grown with, fed with, raised with or that contain inputs from crops grown with government subsidies; clothing made from crops (e.g. cotton) that were grown with or that contain inputs from government subsidies; VA benefits; government buildings</SPAN> like the capitol in Washington, D.C.; Smithsonian Museums such as the Air and Space Museum or Museum of American History; the Washington, Lincoln, and Jefferson Monuments; the government-operated Statue of Liberty; The Grand Canyon; the World War II and Vietnam Veterans Memorials, and all other public-funded socialist sites, whether it be in your state or in Washington, DC.

My thread does not make me a socialist, whereas, I want to see all of us working in a field together, harvesting crops for the common good (humor) It is mainly to point out that our country cannot operate with certain forms of socialism, some good…some bad. It is just the facts.

Also, I too am not a fan of Obamacare, but I also think that our medical system could not be any more screwed up, in part, thanks to deals with “special interest” groups. However, we are currently at a stage in this country where medical bills are completely ridiculous and something needs to change. My grandfather spent the last month of his life in a coma….the bill for basically sleeping at the hospital was $117,000 for a month…he was 96! (I think that speaks for itself)

Respectfully,

C-Ya

Are any of you aware that we gave US oil companies last year 4.5 Billion dollars in subsidies……does that make any sense?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,364 Posts
Socialism works until you run out of other peoples money.
Sooner or later you run out of other people's money to spend...
Huh? What? You guys are crazy.:D

Is the reason why totalitarian/collectivist systems of government, like the various forms of socialism, are absolutely incompatible with individual freedom.
You're one of a few people here who actually know what he's talking about. Foundational beliefs are so diametrically opposed, it's very often impossible to carry on meaningful conversation here. But you already know that.:)bulb
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
375 Posts
I would suggest that anyone who thinks that socialism is the way to go have a conversation with someone who lived in eastern Europe. I have and they are concerned about the way this country is headed because they have lived through it before.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,020 Posts
the library I see it as another government service available to all D
Is the reason why totalitarian/collectivist systems of government, like the various forms of socialism, are absolutly incompatible with individual freedom.
Yes, political freedom is entertwined with economic freedom.

In today’s political atmosphere, it is hard to watch the news without seeing someone on the right not use socialism as a condescending word. They need to find a new word, because in my opinion they look uninformed It is mainly to point out that our country cannot operate with certain forms of socialism, some good…some bad. . My grandfather spent the last month of his life in a coma….the bill for basically sleeping at the hospital was $117,000 for a month…he was 96! (I think that speaks for itself]


I would suggest that anyone who thinks that socialism is the way to go have a conversation with someone who lived in eastern Europe. I have and they are concerned about the way this country is headed because they have lived through it before.
Yes, perhaps if the library had its own Secret Police, we would take it more seriously. :D

Cya, your premise has been adequately debunked by other posters, so I'll play your game by your rules.
Authors have long seen the library as a necessary evil. If it were truly socialist, the authors would be on a govt. salary, producing books for the library. I can assure you they would be terrible. Try reading a Russian novel sometime, or worse, seeing a Russian movie.
We could abolish the public library, or privatize it. Then people would pay a yearly fee to visit, like the health club. It would probably look more like a book/store coffe shop. It might make more profit on the coffe than the books. You might have to pay authors a nice sum for the privelege of renting out their books. Or conversely, authors might pay you for big displays of their works near the front. It would sell books as well as lend them.
Then they could be put out of biz by Amazon. :D
Why don't we pay a penny every time we drive down the street? It's too unwieldy, just more efficient to levy a tax, and build the road.
Why are govts. formed? To raise taxes.
I'm open minded on finding a new word, but maybe it is you who needs to find a new word.
Now, on to your grandfather. May I ask who paid the bill?
 
1 - 20 of 28 Posts
Top