Deseret News | Socialism needed

Reader comments
Readers' forum: Socialism needed

132 comments | Read story

Lew Jeppson | 10:27 a.m. July 16, 2009

Look, there is no question that the rise of the self-regulating market in the 19th century has resulted in unprecedented accumulation of wealth and technology, but it is also profoundly unnatural considering the long communal history of man (from the standpoint of the average person, it was rammed down our throats). Thus the fierce tensions within our society and system.

RedShirt | 10:50 a.m. July 16, 2009

To "Anonymous | 10:16 a.m." we haven't had unfettered capitalism since before WWII. It sounds like you would rather roll over and let the government take control of your life.

Remind us again how well that has worked out for the USSR.

Captian Kirk | 10:58 a.m. July 16, 2009

The Author fails to understand that it is through the government that the unfairness is created.
Large corporations and other special interests can accomplish their goals only because government is allowed to redistribute wealth.

Government is not and never will be used to create fairness. It is the very institution by which unfairness is enforced.

The only way to stop this from happening is by limiting government to its true constitutional role NOT expanding government.

Comments continue below

Frank Castle | 11:02 a.m. July 16, 2009

re: Hypocrisy | 9:14 a.m. July 16, 2009
//To say that Corporate Socialism doesn't exist is beyond ignorance....

We cannot be held hostage to big corporations, their price fixing, bad investments, and failures. //

I think Oligopoly is the term you are looking for. Just look at the # of gas companies and major media corporations

It is so much easier to control prices or the flow of information with a finite number of options.

I will say this for the price of gas... the inefficient state run companies in a majority of the world are equally to blame.

//We need to have regulations. We cannot just "allow" the "free market" to work itself out.//

I don't know about regulations but its obvious there needs to be some oversight.

mark | 11:02 a.m. July 16, 2009

Anonymous | 7:30 a.m. July 16, 2009

"Beloved list?" What a strange thing to say, it is just a list. I was going to respond to the rest of your post, then I realized that the rest is just as bizarre as "beloved list."

You are an example of the arrogance of the ignorant.

Howie | 11:05 a.m. July 16, 2009

Socialism and freedom can't operate in the same space.

Socialism constricts motivation of the individual. It kills the drive for the greater good. It diminishes the charitable heart. But most importantly–it is always implemented by force not choice.

Freedom allows the individual to be motivated. It increases the charitable heart. It awakens the greater good. But most importantly–it implemented by choice not force.

RedShirt | 11:13 a.m. July 16, 2009

To "wallofvoodoo | 10:15 a.m. " how about we have all individuals pay all of their payroll taxes too. Did you realize that most of your SS money is paid by your employer?

To "Lew Jeppson | 9:44 a.m." the natural "communes" that you speak of are small groups where people watch out for their neighbor. We have those now, but it is not called Government, it is through either friendships with our neighbors or local support. Turning things over to the government is no better than the ancient greeks worshiping a statue and expecting it to speak.

The federal government cannot understand the needs of every community, the communal attitudes can only exist on the local level if they are to be successful. By the time the national level is involved, it has become bloated with red tape and people either seeking more power and control or people who just want an easy job with no actual work involved.

mark | 11:15 a.m. July 16, 2009

Mike Richards | 7:48 a.m. July 16, 2009

I sure hope you are on the streets helping the hungry and the homeless, I really hope you are. I sure hope you are one of those "good people." But I don't know if you are. I deal with the homeless on a regular basis, and I can't say as I have ever seen you there. In fact, I never see any of your "good people" there. Ever. Tell you what, give me your phone number and I'll give you a call next time I have a homeless person that needs your help. But just remember a lot of the time it is in the middle of the night, and they are drunk, and smell really, really bad. Or they might be covered in bugs, or have parts of themselves rotting off. Odds are they have soiled themselves. You might not want them in your pretty car. No I never see any of your "good people" there. Not once. Time for them to step up to the plate.

Mike Richards | 11:27 a.m. July 16, 2009

At the apex of the problem is the question of force. If the Government is allowed to force us to do good to each other and to care for each other, then we have to ask how the Government obtained that Right.

The Constitution does not confer upon the Government the Right to force us to do good. If it's not in the Constitution, then where is it? That's right, it is self-granted authority taken by those in authority to rule over the rest of us because of their "mandate".

It doesn't work that way. We the People retain all rights not exclusively granted to the Government. Exclusive can also be written, "enumerated". Something that is enumerated is found on a list, sometimes with a number. Exclusive means that the right is not communal, that the people do not share ownership of those rights with the Government.

We control corporations with our purchasing power. No one forces us to buy GM or Ford. We make that choice. If we disagree with the corporate ideals and ideas, we refuse to support that corporation.

When forced into socialism by the Government, we have no choice.

Anonymous | 11:27 a.m. July 16, 2009

re: Still doing corporate socialism | 9:40 a.m. July 16, 2009

Lets not stop with W, Obama, and their silly policies. The 2 Presidents before them are equally culpable.

What do all 4 have in common? Ivy League degrees. coincedence? I doubt it!

mark | 11:27 a.m. July 16, 2009

Question | 8:35 a.m. July 16, 2009 you bleat:

"So what are you socialists going to do when the producers get tired of carrying you?

What are you going to do after you no longer have the rich to steal from?"

You know something, I have worked very hard all of my life, I would sure like to put my work history up against yours. Any day. No one has ever carried me.

Something else, I am not against capitalism. In fact I dig it. But if you people think what we have here is free market in this country, or that we have had anything close to it for years, you have been fooled. Unregulated capitalism does not lead to free markets, in fact just the opposite.

Another thing, I enjoy people being able to make money and get ahead, but I will tell you, Question, I am getting mighty tired of carrying the rich and having them steal from us.

Roy Rogers McFreely | 11:30 a.m. July 16, 2009

re: Lew Jeppson | 9:44 a.m. July 16, 2009

//The natural unit of society is the commune... but for the record, the natural unit of society is, throughout all history, the commune. //

Good call Lew & I don't disagree.

But, I draw the line at sitting around, holding hands, & singing Kumbaya.

Ultra Bob | 11:32 a.m. July 16, 2009

To RedShirt | 10:04 a.m.

You’ve done it again. The word “free” means uncontrolled, you can’t have a “free market” with rules. Perhaps you really mean we need a “fair” market. That’s where everyone has to play with the same set of “rules”.

Get out a babylon | 11:33 a.m. July 16, 2009

Come on ye christian soldiers, nothing in this life really matters if you know your going to heaven! So why waste your time bangin your head against the bricks in this tower of babel?

mark | 11:39 a.m. July 16, 2009

Richards, you bleat: "If there are not enough "good" people to help the helpless, then can people be foreced to do good?"

Mike, no one is forcing anyone to be good. NO one.

It is called taxes, and all successful societies have them. They must if they are a complex society. You just don't like where some of the tax money is being spent. Fine, neither do I. But you should really get off the kick about force and gunpoint's and all that.

Paying taxes is the law, and yes in this country, as well as all other's, when you break the law you should be held accountable. Sometimes by force. But I doubt there are many tax cheats being held at the point.

Anonymous | 11:41 a.m. July 16, 2009

re: RedShirt | 10:50 a.m. July 16, 2009

//It sounds like you would rather roll over and let the government take control of your life.

Remind us again how well that has worked out for the USSR.//

I have to agree w/ Red shirt

Sadly, I've known people who would rather have the goverenment or employer provide for them materially and let their "Sunday hangout" do their thinking for them.

Just so long as they have plenty of leisure time to watch reality TV, Celebrity news, go 4 wheeling, etc...

Well, my friends. It Does NOT work that way! Give any aforementioned entity an inch and they'll take a mile and your soul.

Mike Richards | 11:53 a.m. July 16, 2009

Mark,

Do you make choices for me? Should your causes be my causes? Should I force you to walk with me and hold to my values?

No to all of the above.

Just because you have chosen a different path of service than I have chosen has no bearing on whether you are "good" or whether I am "good". There is enough need to go around so that all of us can select a cause.

Good for you for helping those that you choose to help. That choice is yours. Although I might invite you to be part of "my" group, I would never force you to participate.

The Government, though socialism, will determine who is "worthy" to receive assistance and will determine who will be forced to assist.

That "plan" might not help the group that you assist right now and you might be left without the means to help your preferred group. But, under socialism, that choice will not be yours to make.

mark | 12:14 p.m. July 16, 2009

Mike, what are you talking about? Man, you ramble on.

michaelh | 12:21 p.m. July 16, 2009

For those who are proud Mormon Democrats the prophets have endlessly preached and issued first presidency messages that condemn not only communism but those who support it as anti-Christ and traitors to the constitution. You can revel in your own brilliance for so only so long the justice of God awaits you. Meanwhile those you champion are working to enslave you.

Umm... | 12:22 p.m. July 16, 2009

So, I have a question for Mike Richards:

In this comment thread, you have repeatedly mentioned that people should not be forced to do "good" and you have also mentioned the fact that the rights not enumerated in the Constitution are reserved to the people.

In your opinion, does that apply only to the Federal Government and it's dealings with businesses and taxes, or does that apply to the state governments as well? Does it apply to situations other than business/welfare/taxes?

Anonymous | 12:45 p.m. July 16, 2009

Mark say, "I am getting mighty tired of carrying the rich and having them steal from us."

How, exactly, have the rich stolen from you? The rich own companies that provide jobs. They pay far more taxes than the rest of us ever will. Many give millions to charity, funding medical research and many other good causes. How, exactly, are you carrying the rich? If you buy the goods produced by their companies you help them stay in business, which enables them to continue employing people and paying a higher percentage of taxes than you pay. How will society be helped by getting rid of the rich?

Ultra Bob says, "the word “free” means uncontrolled, you can’t have a “free market” with rules." The term "free" when used with the word "market" refers to being free of government controls. It does not mean being free of all controls or rules. Basic economic principles rule the free market. Without following those rules businesses fail, unless artificially propped up by government, which only temporarily allows a business to continue ignoring sound principles.

New Yorker | 12:54 p.m. July 16, 2009

Christopher,

Get a grip. If you want socialism move north.

@anon 10:16 | 12:57 p.m. July 16, 2009

Liberal lover! You don't connect the dots very well do you? Don't you know that the brainwashing media and left in this country has put large corporations with repubs for the past 10 years and now its thought that is true. Just take a look at the characters that are part of the Obama administration; the czars and such and where they are comming from. The government is melding with huge corporations like GM and financial institutions. Now health care. You are missing the boat on this one. Keep blaming Bush and repubs while the real evil corporate govt. takes charge.

U-turn | 1:17 p.m. July 16, 2009

If you think that Socialism/Communism is the answer, go to some of those countries who have been doing it for a couple of decades or more and count the bums and homeless people on the street; they're everywhere.

Greed may be one of the faults of Capitalism, but greed is no foreigner to Socialism, Communism or Marxism. The difference between Capitalism and these other "alternatives" is that the greed just shifts to the state; you become a peon while the government becomes your master.

You want Socialism, you will get it; but don't whine when you find yourself with no private property, waiting in lines everywhere for your
"rations," and your religion is atheism as demanded by the state.

Socialism and Communism is greed epitomized; you want everything free without having to pay for it. You will pay for it, with your rights; your paycheck will become increasingly smaller, and the state will own you.

Everything that glitters is not gold. Socialism is fools gold!

Anonymous | 1:19 p.m. July 16, 2009

Conservatives parrot economic myths. The free market is a catch all term. The free market is a fable. History and nature shows us that as the number of player in any segment of an economy decreases, there is a point where the cost of competition is exceeded by the benefits of cooperation.

I guess, Fox News omitted the story of the large cell phone providers increasing the cost for exceeding the number of text messages by the same amount. You had five corporations with the same increase what are the odds of this happening. Notice, not one came in lower to compete.

Look at what corporation did to your hamburger, health care and peanut butter. Heath care has increased at one to two times the rate of inflation. Has "competition keep prices down? How is an bacterium that lives in fecal matter ending up in your burgers?

Mike Richards | 1:38 p.m. July 16, 2009

To 12:22,

Force is force, not matter the entity, whether it is the Federal Government, the State Government, the local Government or a neighbor who is a bully.

The question, as I see it, is whether I have "signed on" to governmental intrusion into my life or whether the government just decided that it could do a better job of managing things than I could.

We have a United States Constitution that dictates to the Federal Government what the people have allowed it to do. We have a Utah State Constitution that dictates to the Utah State Government what the people of Utah allow their government to do. We have city charters that dictate to the City Government what the people of the city allow their city government to do.

In no case can any level of Government decide for itself what authority it has - independent of the Constitution or Charter that restrict that authority.

Taxes are necessary - for the explicit projects that we have assigned to the various levels of Government to undertake for and in our behalf - and for nothing else.

You asked for my opinion and that is my opinion.

RedShirt | 1:53 p.m. July 16, 2009

To "Anonymous | 1:19 p.m." how about we look at economic facts. During the early 20th century the US and Europe were are fairly equal grounds when it came to improving their GDP. Over the last 40 years as Europe has adopted more and more socialist programs, the US has maintained a higher GDP increase each year.

For example, the average increase in GDP for the US since 1970 has been 3.07%. Meanwhile, Europe has remained at 2.4%. The more interesting thing to note is that the more socialist the country, the smaller the growth. France has averaged 2.5% growth, Germany 2.05%, UK 2.36%, and Denmark at 1.89% average growth in GDP since 1970. If you look at the data for the various regions around the world, the more socialist programs are adopted, the slower the growth in GDP.

One economic fact cannot be denied, and that is, the more a country adopts socialism/communism, or any form of government where the power to produce is put into the hands of government, the worse their economies do.

Hmm..... | 1:57 p.m. July 16, 2009

To Mike Richards:

Thank you for your opinion. To expand a little bit more:

Do you then believe that, although it is not enumerated in the Constitution, there is a right to privacy?

Do you also believe that laws should not be passed based on "good" as defined by religious doctrine?

Mike | 2:09 p.m. July 16, 2009

What a load of Bull Crap this letter is. We need to get the government mostly out of ours and businesses hair.

Anonymous | 2:22 p.m. July 16, 2009

Well said, Christopher. The Founding Fathers built a governmental structure that is responsive to the needs and voice of the people. Our Democratic-Republic is ideally designed to allow our society to learn from the past. And one thing we have certainly learned is that many public goods and services are exploited by private sector profiteering to the detriment of individuals and society at large. By contrast, many "luxuries" are best handled by the private sector in competitive markets. A mixed economic system is earning its place as the superior approach to human societies.

Spread the word!

Anonymous | 2:24 p.m. July 16, 2009

RedShirt | 1:53 p.m. What are you talking about? I pointed to economic facts that when you have many providers you the fre market works through competition. With few providers they cooperative.

I've lived in Europe. There's a vast difference between the quality of life and the quality of life. There's a difference between living to work and working to live.

Cancer cells grow more rapidly too.

When you talk about GDP in a nation where one percent owns 55% of our national wealth, workers pay when adjusted for inflation has dropped since the seventies. Yes, the rich are wealthier.

I could walk safely unarmed in Europe. Utahans need to be armed up to their teeth to drive through Heber.

If my friend's's daughters do well in school they can go to any university in the world. Their class went to Vienna for a week.

I had there Mercedes to drive, I took the trains and subways.

I never saw a government owned store in Europe in three years. Yo heard less whining there. It's not that bad.

Anonymous | 2:27 p.m. July 16, 2009

European socialist build the Mercedes Limbaugh drives. They build Porsche, Audi and BMW. Capitalist perfect cars made by socialist. :-)

@ Galt | 2:30 p.m. July 16, 2009

Is your byline taken from Ayn Rand's "Atlas Shrugged" as in "John Galt"?

Reading many of the comments that have been posted increase my desire to declare a strike--like John Galt did in Rand's novel--against an all-knowing government and its supporters who desire to leach off of the work, ideas, and intellectual capital of others.

Mike Richards | 2:50 p.m. July 16, 2009

To 1:57,

The Right of Privacy is enumerated in the Constitution. Amendment IV is one place that shows that we retain that right.

I believe that you have the role of Church and State reversed. The State "shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;". The constraint is on the Government, not on the Church. People are free to select the Church of their choice and to follow the doctrines of that Church. Churches do not legislate. Our Representatives legislate.

NO CHURCH has the right to FORCE its doctrine on either its members or on those outside its membership, including any admonition to do "good". Every Church has the right to promote its doctrine without interference from the Government. Every Church has the right to encourage its members and even those outside its membership to join with it in good causes.

Force is a concept that is antithetical to Freedom. Compulsion is a concept that is antithetical to Agency. Any Government within the United States that uses force to compel us to do "good" understands neither "goodness" nor the role of Government.

RedShirt | 3:29 p.m. July 16, 2009

To "Anonymous | 2:24 p.m." I was pointing out that as a country adopts more socialist policies, their GDP growth rate decreases.

You may have felt safe, but, according to Interpol 2001 data, the US is much safer than Europe. The following are the number of crimes per 100,000 people for a few countries:

4161 - US
7736 - Germany
6941 - France
9927 - England and Wales

Yes they have fewer homocides, but your chances of being involved in a crime is much higher there than here.

RE: Mark | 5:04 p.m. July 16, 2009

A silly list, and one based on socialistic criteria,

and as such the US will NEVER be on the top of it.

If you USE HONEST criteria, US is always on top of everyones list of HIGHEST STANDARD OF LIVING, and BEST PLACE TO LIVE.

After all, how many people are trying to sneak in to norway?

To RE: Mark | 5:21 p.m. July 16, 2009

"After all, how many people are trying to sneak in to norway?"

Depends on where they are coming from and how many oceans they have to swim to get there...

Ultra Bob | 5:53 p.m. July 16, 2009

Seems like one conservative says that a Free Market must have government controls, another says a Free Market means being free of government control or rules. It sure looks to me like the conservatives change the meaning of words to fit the propaganda they are selling.

See: RedShirt | 10:04 a.m., Anonymous | 12:45 p.m.

Re; Anonymous | 7:07 p.m. July 16, 2009

Your part right. Greed got us where we are today, but it is the greed of Americans wanting more and more entitlements that is destroying our country. Something for nothing never works. Capitolism has produced the greatest society in the history of the world. Capitolism generates opportunity, socialism destroys opportunity for anything but entitlements. I will take capitolism and free market competition any day over nanny state where no can is allowed to get ahead!

To all the | 7:59 p.m. July 16, 2009

LDS people who stand up for the democratic socialism, for one... I'm confused at how you can support such a messed up concept. For two, find and read a book by Ezra T. Benson called An Enemy Hath Done This, and then see what you think about socialism. I think we need to quit puckering up to Obama and his fame, and stand up for what makes this country great. I'm sick of these socialistic viewpoints that push for the worsening of our country. Why do you people hate our kids so bad? Some guy in an earlier post is so happy that we're paying for his health coverage. So I'm sure he's all about this nationalized health coverage. Wait a second...Aren't social security and medicare going broke? How do you dems figure that all the sudden, without fixing two huge problems at hand, you're going to be able to implement a bigger goverment take-over. This is nuts! This along with cap and tax will be two of the most damaging bills we've ever seen if signed.

TucsonUte | 10:00 p.m. July 16, 2009

If letter was intended to offend the public or get a response from readers--it has worked.

Socialism is nothing more collectivism. It is something that our country has fought against since its existence. Now, it seems that the seed of collectivism has thrived in our country internally through liberal academics, politicians and others who despise our Constitution. The collectivism that is being advocated by the letter writer is the polar opposite of those individuals who fought and died to preserve the freedom of capitalism.

Collectivism is now being disguised in the form of the global warming movement, excessive taxation (in the name of fairness) and non-productive social welfare programs. The goal is always the same: annihilation of our economic system, destruction of religion, dismissing morality and the denial of individual accomplishment.

Individuals like Mr. Conway are too willing to surrender their freedom in exchange for the "so called" merit of socializing our nation for the greater good. For some reason, they believe government control is fairer than the individual. My money is on the individual and freedom.

mark | 12:35 a.m. July 17, 2009

RE: Mark | 5:04 p.m. July 16, 2009 you bleat:

"A silly list, and one based on socialistic criteria,"

Really? Tell me what criteria the list is based on, would you? You don't know do you? I didn't think so.

You also yammer: "If you USE HONEST criteria, US is always on top of everyones list of HIGHEST STANDARD OF LIVING, and BEST PLACE TO LIVE."

Really? Show me the list.

mark | 12:53 a.m. July 17, 2009

Redshirt I'm not sure where you are getting your crime stats. I'm getting mine from Nationmaster, they say it is the most recent data.

You claimed:
4161 - US
7736 - Germany
6941 - France
9927 - England and Wales

Nationmaster states:

85.5517 per 1,000 people - UK
80.0645 per 1,000 people - US
75.9996 per 1,000 people - Germany
62.1843 per 1,000 people - France

In fact Canada, Norway, Italy, Switzerland, Spain, Ireland, all have lower crime rates then the US of A.

Where did you get your stats?

mark | 1:02 a.m. July 17, 2009

Anonymous | 12:45 p.m. July 16, 2009

"How, exactly, have the rich stolen from you?" The rich have stolen from all of us.

"The rich own companies that provide jobs." I have said it before and I will say it again, I have never in my life worked for a rich person. I have never been provided a job by a rich person.

"They pay far more taxes than the rest of us ever will." They have far more then the rest of us ever will.

"Many give millions to charity, funding medical research and many other good causes." Good for them.

"How, exactly, are you carrying the rich?" The rich can only make their money off the labor of the working class

"If you buy the goods produced by their companies you help them stay in business, which enables them to continue employing people and paying a higher percentage of taxes than you pay." Are the only goods produced, produced by companies of the rich?

"How will society be helped by getting rid of the rich?" I never said to get rid of them.

mark | 1:06 a.m. July 17, 2009

Also, I am not talking about the well off, but about the super rich.

Let's be honest here, the rich would not, could not, exist without the working class, but the working people can very much exist without the rich.

Thomas Jefferson | 4:55 a.m. July 17, 2009

Most here need to Google "The Proper Role of Government Benson" and do some serious reading.

Anyone who supports socialism, in any way, shape, or form, is thoroughly out of touch with and totally ignorant of what the United States of America is all about--what the Founding Father intended.

If you honestly think socialsim is the answer, then PLEASE do yourselves, and the rest of us, a favor and move to:
1 Norway
2 Iceland
3 Australia
4 Luxembourg
5 Canada
6 Sweden
7 Switzerland
8 Ireland
9 Belgium

mark | 7:06 a.m. July 17, 2009

That is the worst idea ever. No country has been truly successful with major government control. Anybody that wants socialism is foolish. The only greed worst than personal greed is governmental greed. Obama is going to destroy this country.

corruption | 7:39 a.m. July 17, 2009

Corruption is a dark part of human nature. If you think there isn't corruption in socialism you have your head in the sand. In socialism or capitalism there will be those who abuse, take advantage, and seed dishonesty. The problem is that socialism will never appeal to individual interest and therefore will never run optimally because the individual will never perform at their best because they have no incentive to do so. The government has never done one thing, not even the military (I know because I am an active duty member) without tremendous waste, innefficiency, and corruption!

We have to deal with corruption, dishonesty no matter what. You pick. Do you want to deal with it in a open capitalistic society where at least with the evils of corruption/dishonesty at least there exists the option of tremendous individual freedom to grow, excell, and achieve without bounds or do you want to deal with dishonesty and corruption in a society where you will be a lemming running with the pack and never be rewarded for your individual talents, energy, efforts, and work? Good bye to philanthropy. The government will take it first!

Robert | 8:04 a.m. July 17, 2009

Too many lazy people who haven't learned to think for themselves, especially the neo-cons, accept Anne Rand junk for their source of political thought. She was almost as bad as Ann Coulter and Galt was a pig.

ec | 8:18 a.m. July 17, 2009

To:| 9:26 a.m. July 16, 2009
"The producers are getting tired of carrying the non-producers. Why do you think we are trying to force the rich to give something back to us?"

Is this a joke? What are the rich taking from you? Also, if they were "non-producers" they probably wouldn't be rich--they more than likely have worked very hard to get where they're at. They pay quite a bit in taxes too.

To: @Dave | 9:49 a.m. July 16, 2009
"You forget that the corporations cannot be held accountable by the people. The government can."

Another jokester? People hold corporations accountable all the time by not buying their products.

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.