Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Socialists are lazy and jealous. Do you agree? Watch

    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Socialists eventually run out of other people's money.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I think that a lot of you and society in general have to accept that people will never all be equal, or have the same income and opportunities that arise from those who can afford more.
    Yes, the richer members of society will always have more opportunites to a certain extent, but they also pay more tax and aren't entitled to any benifits like those of you who are poorer.

    Instead of complaining about rich people's advantages, get on with your studies/job and change things. There's a reason communism has never worked- people will never be equal.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Whether you like it or not, good government has to incorporate some element of socialism as much as it must incorporate some parts of capitalism. A completely laissez-faire government, whether liberal or conservative, would equate to organised anarchy. The problem is trying to strike the right balance in between capitalism and socialism, and at the moment I think that only maybe Scandinavia and The Netherlands have really struck near the mark there.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    You'd rather live in a country where an employer can fire an employee almost whenever he wants?
    no. Strangely enough it's socialists, who want greater rights for workers and restrictions on employers who oppose this...

    You want to pay £6 for a pint of beer?
    no, i do like my ale...what exactly precipitated this remark? there's not really a point here, that i can see...

    You want to have 50-60% of your money stolen?
    no, but tax isn't stealing-it's your duty as a responsible citizen to pay it if you can. And the only people paying 60%tax would be those who, on 40% of their income, would still be rich.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by scanningforlifeforms)
    no. Strangely enough it's socialists, who want greater rights for workers and restrictions on employers who oppose this...



    no, i do like my ale...what exactly precipitated this remark? there's not really a point here, that i can see...



    no, but tax isn't stealing-it's your duty as a responsible citizen to pay it if you can. And the only people paying 60%tax would be those who, on 40% of their income, would still be rich.
    My point here is that all these things happen in one or more Scandinavian country. It's not a social democratic paradise like many like to claim.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    no, I never said they were, but i think we'd be better off if we were a more socialist country than we are now.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by usainlightning)
    I would say yes.
    They are lazy as they expect everyone else to put the hard work in, yet then recieve the same rewards that hardworking people recieve.

    They are jealous as no one should care about what anyone else is earning and should focus on making themselves as successful as possible.
    Did you know 54% of people below the poverty line work?

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alex181090)
    However you have to try an awful lot harder if you dont come from a privileged background. Socialists believe in an even playing field, the current system believes in headstarts for a select few
    Core principle of capitalism- equal oppurtunity
    Core principle of socialism- equal outcome
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Also Socialism ≠ Communism.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by usainlightning)
    Core principle of capitalism- equal oppurtunity
    Core principle of socialism- equal outcome
    Rubbish. The core idea of capitalism is that the state shouldn't be intervening in the economy - for equal opportunity or otherwise. If left completely to their own devices, economies tend to move towards a stratified society where your birth decides what you do. This isn't equal opportunity, or particularly efficient.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    No, socialists are not necessarily lazy or jealous. They are just people who share a view of how things should be done, same with Conservatives like me. It doesnt make them bad people, we just differ in ideas. And if they didnt exist, we would have nothing to argue (AKA talk to brick wall ) with them about. And life would certainly be less interesting. I really shouldnt be writing this, as we get enough stick from them!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by usainlightning)
    Core principle of capitalism- equal oppurtunity
    Core principle of socialism- equal outcome
    Actually no, given that equality of opportunity would require a host of things, including equal access to high quality education, similar parental backgrounds, similar healthcare etc etc.

    To say that Murdoch's kids have the same equality of opportunity as someone growing up in a deprived urban neighbourhood with poor quality schooling and no family stability at all borders on the absurd.

    I wish those in favour of laissez faire capitalism would stop saying that it encourages equality of opportunity (statistics on social stratification are strongly against you on that one).

    If you're going to argue a case, make it vaguely credible.

    Also, it's not a straight dichotomy between laissez faire capitalism and socialism. There are various gradients between the two in addition to alternatives to either.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Andy the Anarchist)
    Actually no, given that equality of opportunity would require a host of things, including equal access to high quality education, similar parental backgrounds, similar healthcare etc etc.

    To say that Murdoch's kids have the same equality of opportunity as someone growing up in a deprived urban neighbourhood with poor quality schooling and no family stability at all borders on the absurd.

    I wish those in favour of laissez faire capitalism would stop saying that it encourages equality of opportunity (statistics on social stratification are strongly against you on that one).
    The trouble for your argument here is that you are employing a very much contested conception of equality of opportunity. It's not as though it is at all clear cut that your favoured version is the right one, and there is easily a sense in which the guy you replied to can be said to believe in equality of opportunity - see section 1 here.

    "Formal equality of opportunity requires that positions and posts that confer superior advantages should be open to all applicants. Applications are assessed on their merits, and the applicant deemed most qualified according to appropriate criteria is offered the position. Alternatively, applicants are winnowed by fair competition, and the winner or winners get the superior advantages." - sounds roughly like what he is talking about.

    As for the empirical data, statistics on social stratification absolutely do not justify your claim. I am becoming more convinced the more I read the subject that biological and hereditary factors play a huge role. Twin or adoptee studies, for example, where twins or adoptees who grow up in very different familial circumstances are studied, show that a lot is down to the nature side of the nature-nurture debate. For example, the following striking graph:

    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by L i b)
    I disagree entirely. To earn a decent salary, whilst perhaps not involving much objective labour (certainly not physical anyway) requires a good deal of effort. Making yourself economically useful for any length of time requires being attentive to the wishes of others.



    Bill Gates is, to me, an excellent example of the failings of socialist logic. They criticise amassing wealth with absolutely no consideration of what it is being used for. Despite doing everything that a socialist would condemn as greedy, Bill Gates is giving away unprecedented billions of pounds to good causes.
    Why is individuals giving money away better than the State spreading the wealth? Apart from the choice aspect.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by L i b)
    I don't think he's done anything remotely wrong, morally speaking.



    Success is about being able to most effectively mould the world into the image to want it to take. Money is the single most effective way of doing that. Sure, it's not the be-all and end-all, but I rather wonder that Mother Teresa wouldn't have done a lot more had she had a few billion quid in her back pocket.
    Thank **** she didn't then. ******* *****.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by wilko1991)
    Why is individuals giving money away better than the State spreading the wealth? Apart from the choice aspect.
    Apart from the most significant part of the issue? Hmm, I don't know.

    (Original post by wilko1991)
    Thank **** she didn't then. ******* *****.
    :eek3:
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by L i b)
    Apart from the most significant part of the issue? Hmm, I don't know.



    :eek3:
    Hah, I've got you.

    And Mother Teresa was a total *****.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What's your favourite Christmas sweets?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.