pditzler
New Member
I'm here to analyze literature and be a cool kid, and I'm all done being a cool kid.
Posts: 16 
|
Post by pditzler on Jan 30, 2016 21:37:20 GMT
With the 2016 presidential election showcasing so many candidates, one surprisingly popular man is Bernie Sanders, a self-declared Democratic Socialist. In a land made great by capitalism and the freedoms it permits and the resulting competition that pushes innovation, a more moderated system of wealth distribution is a dangerous thing to propose. Sanders, and a growing number of Americans, believe this is no longer the case. Sanders thinks socialism could be a solution to such polarized wealth distribution in today's society, also arguing it would allow more freedom for economically disadvantaged minorities.
As Ronald Wright said, "Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat, but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires." (I know it's pretentious to quote people, but I really like the quote.) The American dream has bred citizens to blindly think there's always a strong possibility they can be rewarded with comfortable living for their work. Sanders's capitalistic opponents argue that socialism may destroy the American dream. The American dream is an individual's rise through the economic ranks to be able to comfortably provide for their family. It is plausible to think socialism would greatly infringe upon the idea of economic class mobility, when it may condense the extremes to create more of a middle ground.
Do you believe the American dream could survive a swing into a socialistic economic structure? Do you think American exceptionalism relies primarily on the American dream? How do you think America could maintain its grand reputation in other ways if its capitalistic innovation is challenged?
|
|
|
|
Post by aamornwichet on Jan 31, 2016 2:10:28 GMT
Peter, I think this is a really interesting point to bring up. Sanders being a Democratic Socalist has been curious point of discussion this election. The American Dream is based off the idea that no matter where a person comes from, they can succeed immensely. This is the foundation of American Capitalism. Socialism has always been seen as the opposite of capitalism. So naturally a complete shift from a capitalist to a socialist structure would surely make the American Dream crumble.
But this is the interesting thing, many of the proposals of the Democratic Socialists would make the American Dream far more obtainable than than in the current capitalist system. Surely free education, higher minimum wage and a smaller wage gap would make it much easier for everyone to live a comfortable/successful life.
This is because American Ingenuity doesn't rely solely on the capitalist systems, it also derives from a long rooted belief in defiance, equality and the common man. This belief system is much more similar to the Marxist beliefs of the socialists than an anarchist Capitalist society that some other presidential candidates seem to think we live in. American has been and should continue to defend the American dream. Our entire history has been us fighting against things that infringed on our dreams. When we believe communists, fascists and despots are challenging our way of life, we will fight to defend that because we aren't communists, fascists or despots. That is what makes us so great, we are the perfect (awkward?) combination of all of the above.
|
|
|
|
Post by rcb1008 on Feb 1, 2016 1:19:21 GMT
I agree with Amanda, the proposals that Bernie Sanders makes through his campaign would create a more level playing field for those wishing to achieve the American Dream. I think what makes this election so intriguing is that people are so open to dramatic change, yet so afraid to accept the outcome. We are a diverse nation, but naturally people are afraid of what they are not. As Amanda said, what makes Americans special is our ability to find a "perfect" balance between differences. Economically we are devout capitalists, but that doesn't mean we can't learn and build upon our foundations from what other countries are doing more successfully.
So to answer Peter's question, yes, I definitely believe that the American Dream can survive in an economic environment influenced by socialism. The American Dream, our roots, sprung from a land where "all men are created equal," but in modern times, equality on a monetary level is (most likely) worse than ever before. With money being as influential as it is, an environment where more people have the ability to wield the power of their money will, as a result, strengthen the success of the American Dream.
|
|
|
|
Post by ryanwalchonski on Feb 1, 2016 23:41:16 GMT
Peter, to answer the first part of the discussion you brought up, I don't think that the American dream could survive socialist tendencies, especially as they become more prevalent. First off, socialism is based upon creating everything equal, as you stated, but just assuming that creating more "income equality" actually betters a person's way of life is a flawed argument in of itself. In fact it is one of the many fallacies of the socialist state, a failed system that can be seen to this day in many Eastern European countries. If someone migrates to America under a Sanders presidency they might earn his dream wage of $15 an hour if they can get a job. Not only would Socialist policies such as an arbitrarily high minimum wage decrease the chances of a migrant worker landing a job in an even more competitive job market, there would most likely be an extreme inflationary period, as companies are trying to compensate for lost profit due to high wages. In essence, if migrant workers seeking a job could actually land a job, there cost of living would be ridiculously high. Would they be directly earning more money? Yes they would, but that doesn't necessarily mean a better way of life.
The American dream was built upon the ideals of Laissez-Faire economics. Capitalism allows migrant workers to obtain jobs where they get payed for the amount of goods/services they can produce in a given amount of time. "Evening the playing field" actually destroys many jobs that job-seekers hope to obtain. The American dream is as you said, the yearning to better you and your family's economic standing, but this can't be achieved if the migrant can't find a job in the first place which would be the outcome of a socialist state.
|
|
|
|
Post by carlsonchris on Feb 5, 2016 1:54:05 GMT
Ryan(Beil)and Amanda,
There could be definite problems created by raising the minimum wage. To add on to what Ryan said, raising the wage could have far reaching consequences on all of society. One problem that would arise is that it could kill the manufacturing industry. Outsourcing is already a major problem, with many jobs getting shipped overseas, and raising the minimum wage would only worsen it. Who in their right mind would pay $15 dollars to a worker to make a shirt, when you can pay a worker next to nothing to do it in a foreign country? Also, I personally fear the impact that raising the minimum wage would have on small businesses. Take an industry like home health care; the average cost per hour is $20 per hour. It's simply not sustainable to pay a worker $15 when you are only charging $20, that is even before you include mileage reimbursements and overtime. Raising the minimum wage would destroy the small companies, and through that a large chunk of the middle class. When you think of the American Dream, the first thing that comes to mind is the suburban home with a white picket fence, essentially the middle class. So raising the minimum wage might actually destroy the American Dream not help it.
|
|
|
|
Post by ryanwalchonski on Feb 7, 2016 16:15:25 GMT
I agree Chris! Not only would America lose the manufacturing it's so desperately trying to hold onto, but it would also raise corporate taxes, generally, the more the employee makes, the more the employer has to pay. Like you said, in the case of the small business, the company could no longer afford these workers and would have to liquidate the positions. Amanda, I would be curious to hear which presidential candidates think we live in an Anarcho-Capitalist society? Any form of government interference with the market is automatically intruding on the ideals of Anarcho-Capitalism, which would mean no military, healthcare, taxes, police and everything else the government provides. So, the idea that a candidate who is running for office is basically wanting to diminish his or her own power when they become president is unlike any of the candidates I am aware of.
|
|
pditzler
New Member
I'm here to analyze literature and be a cool kid, and I'm all done being a cool kid.
Posts: 16
|
Post by pditzler on Feb 7, 2016 17:44:10 GMT
Ryan W and Chris:
I'm not super well versed in economic politics, but you both suggest that the middle class would crumble under socialist governing, although the middle class is already disappearing significantly. One of Sanders's goals is to reduce the number of people living in the extremes of wealth and poverty to recreate more of a middle class. I'm aware his routes to doing this are questionable, which makes him less than an ideal candidate, (there never is an ideal candidate though), but which actions would you suggest the next president take in order to recreate the middle class? Would you be in favor of any form of a minimum wage raising or any increase in taxing the upper class? As society currently stands, it seems as though the American Dream is already vanishing with the middle class, when it's difficult for many lower class citizens to rise from the bottom when the upper class is laughing down at them.
|
|
|
|
Post by lisasortino on Feb 7, 2016 21:46:52 GMT
Peter, to answer your one question, I think that increasing the tax rate of the upper class would not be a good way to preserve the middle class. If you want the American dream to stay alive, overly taxing the wealthy, people who may have worked very hard to get there, is not going to motivate anyone to be successful and make more money because they will end up getting taxed more than they should. The American dream is based off of that motivation to be successful. How can individual success and prosperity be achieved in socialism where the government owns and controls everything? Even if Bernie Sanders did create more of a middle class, there would always be extremes of the wealth and poverty. This shows that socialism is an overly idealistic economic belief that could not be successful in American society.
|
|
|
|
Post by jesswang on Feb 7, 2016 22:17:46 GMT
Chris and Ryan, I disagree that raising the minimum wage would be detrimental to our economy and small businesses. Maybe $15 an hour is a bit of a reach, but any increase in the minimum wage would be beneficial to millions of people. The United State is one of the last developed countries to still have a minimum wage under $10, and that's embarrassing. Australia, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Ireland, Germany, and France are just a few of the many developed countries with minimum wages over $10 (it's true: google it). None of these countries have shown the negative side effects of raising the minimum wage like you two suggest would happen in America. Compared to all those countries, America's measly $7.25 is a complete embarrassment. It is not a radical idea to raise the minimum wage in America, it's simply us trying to catch up to the rest of the developed world. Even a dollar more an hour can have drastic effects in allowing impoverished families to work towards achieving the American Dream.
|
|
pditzler
New Member
I'm here to analyze literature and be a cool kid, and I'm all done being a cool kid.
Posts: 16
|
Post by pditzler on Feb 7, 2016 22:22:38 GMT
That's a good point, Lisa, and I've definitely thought about that, and it's why I would never advocate for a drastic tax increase on the rich, as many of them have worked hard to get to that point and deserve the wealth. There always needs to be a reason for people to persevere, as that's a large reason as to why communism could never work. That reason for persevering is what the American Dream embodies, and it's why it has been so crucial in America's success.
I just think our current form of capitalism has allowed many corporations to become absurdly wealthy and that we shouldn't brush aside the possibility of increasing their taxes to some extent to help rebuild the middle class. I don't mean they should be burdened with ridiculous taxes, but I think the scales are currently tipped too heavily in their favor, and that's what is financially crushing a large part of the American population. Feel free to disagree. I'm interested in hearing other people's ideas on how we can improve America's economy to keep people motivated to succeed.
|
|
|
|
Post by ghulamcontractor on Feb 7, 2016 22:29:03 GMT
I think the American dream could survive under a socialist economic system, and it could flourish. It gives more people that do not have the requirements to continue their education/career a chance to get a swing at what they want to do. Increasing tax rates on the upper class leads to a bigger middle class as more educated people are able to find work with a free education. This could also give rise to bright minds that are not able to receive an education because their family does not have enough money to support them. As a result, more successful businesses could be created that are able to employ the growing middle class. Of course extremes would exist, as they always do, but the whole point is to close this irregular huge gap. However, Lisa, as you said it is possible for motivation to decrease as a result. In the end, I believe the pros outweigh the cons. Every situation involves a compromise...
|
|
|
|
Post by sfarmand on Feb 7, 2016 23:13:39 GMT
Ryan W. and Chris, I think you two have some very legitimate concerns about Sanders' proposal to raise the minimum wage, but I think that, given that certain precautionary measures are in place, raising the minimum wage would actually greatly benefit the economy and help more people achieve the American Dream.
The point about outsourcing assumes that nothing would be preventing the companies from moving their manufacturing facilities offshore. However, most proponents of a hike in the minimum wage also support legislation that would disable companies from utilizing most types of outsourcing and international tax havens. Also, the idea that small business owners would be forced to raise prices (leading to inflation) it not supported by evidence. A 2013 study by Alan Krueger (former Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors) found that, on average, small business owners earn 4-5 times more compared to their employees. Forcing these people to pay $7 more to provide decent wages to their employees would not force them to raise prices; they would still be making significantly more income than their employees earn.
Lisa, your argument for capitalism based on increased motivation would be valid if monetary gain were responsible for most human motivation, but this does not seem to be the case. While money is undoubtedly an important incentive, much of what we do is fueled by intrinsic motivation and a natural desire to have a sense of purpose. If money were the sole motivator, people would never do volunteer work or donate to charities.
|
|
|
|
Post by sfarmand on Feb 7, 2016 23:32:22 GMT
Lisa and Peter, I concede that Sanders' plans may be too ambitious given the current state of Congress and national opinions. That being said, I think that "overly idealistic economic belief" would describe capitalism more accurately than it would describe socialism. Capitalism presupposes the idea that we all begin on an equal playing field, and that people's achievements are solely the results of decisions made through freewill, but this is not entirely true. We are all influenced by countless external factors that are outside of our control from he moment of conception. Simply because a person is at a genetic disadvantage or born into a poor family does not mean that he should be confined to a miserable life. Socialism is simply an attempt to normalize the inherent inequalities that are present in society.
The reason that socialism proposes that we equalize these differences by taking money from the wealthy comes from a concept known as 'decreased marginal utility of wealth'- as a person become wealthier, the value of additional wealth decreases. This would justify taking money from the rich and giving it the poor- the poor benefit more than the rich suffer by the transfer of wealth. One common concern is that the people earning this welfare are not actually at an inherent disadvantage. Rather, they are feasting off of the rich because of their own laziness. This is a major issue that socialism faces, although there are measures in place to deal with it (such as validating that people benefiting from such programs are actively looking for employment).
Like Peter said, feel free to disagree!
EDIT: Something I didn't include is how socialism can help us achieve the American Dream. According the James Trustlow Adams' definition of the American Dream, the same one that Congress has adopted, it is a "dream of social order in which each man and each woman shall be able to attain to the fullest stature of which they are innately capable, and be recognized by others for what they are, regardless of the fortuitous circumstances of birth or position". Socialism aims to overcome these very inequalities and "fortuitous circumstances". While aspects of capitalism are important in any economic system to maintain growth, the importance of socialism cannot be undermined to have a just and equitable society.
|
|
|
|
Post by lisasortino on Feb 7, 2016 23:34:23 GMT
Yes Ghulam every situation involves a compromise. But you say that America could flourish in socialism because more educated people are able to find work. Obviously that means that people need to be educated. But do you think that increasing the minimum wage (a belief of socialists) will motivate people to get an education when they have a job getting paid minimum wage which is enough for them?
Peter, I agree with you that some big businesses are not taxed as they should be. It seems that the middle class ends up paying the most which is unfair. I agree that it is important to have a good economy to keep people motivated to be successful, there is obviously a happy medium and many people disagree as to what that is.
|
|
berniesanderscansuckmyfatcock
Guest
|
Post by berniesanderscansuckmyfatcock on Feb 9, 2016 2:01:28 GMT
@allyouretardswhosupportsocialism, Socialism encourages people to be more lazy. It makes being poor more appealing so people will have less drive and less ambition to succeed. People know the government will catch them when they fall, so they don't bother trying. You can see in nearly if not all of the socialist countries in Europe, the unemployment rate is much higher. Capitalism and social darwinism is a must for all modern economies and people to succeed. It is not meant for everyone to be rich or everyone to succeed. This is impossible. You just have to do what YOU can to make sure YOU succeed.
|
|
