That statement has been made here. There simply has to be a middle ground.
Using the resources of the State to provide the basic needs of people is socialism, and I think great. Providing incentives for capitalism over and above those basic needs is also super.
For instance, security, housing, health care, and a minimum income are all basic needs. Every citizen should be guaranteed them.
It's interesting that communism, for all it's faults and the fact that Russia was basically a Third-world country with First-world weapons, regarded housing, a job and medical care as human rights. They didn't have much to share, though.
I believe they went too far, way too far, but were on a right track. That there was a wealthy power elite seems to bother Conservatives, and yet that they have their own wealthy power elite seems to escape their view. I really don't think they see it.
Neither capitalism nor socialism is functional unrestrained. A mix seems to meet most needs best.
Arf
Democrats as Communists.
The whole thread (30 posts)
- A thought in passing - If Ronald Reagan destroyed communism, - - -
- Central Planning
- COMMIES are on Vacation In Cuba
- I can say one thing for certain
- Move on dot org