Do Americans Really Want Socialism?
We’re being told by some that the people of the United States want socialism. The thing of it is, we already have a mild form of socialism. In it’s now famous “We Are All Socialists Now” cover, Newsweek wrote:
The U.S. government has already—under a conservative Republican administration—effectively nationalized the banking and mortgage industries. That seems a stronger sign of socialism than $50 million for art. Whether we want to admit it or not—and many, especially Congressman Pence and Hannity, do not—the America of 2009 is moving toward a modern European state.
Such socialist/communist policies have a long history in the United States. Democrats and Republicans have contributed to these programs.
The public school system is a socialistic system. People who don’t send their children to the public schools or have no children are forced to pay for the schools. The public schools are mostly indoctrination centers. Yes, there are some relatively good public schools, but for the most part, government education in the United States is a failed system that perpetuates socialism.
There are many things that can’t be taught in a government school, and there are things that must be taught. All by the force of government. There are now laws forcing the same-sex and transgender insanity on students. God was booted out long ago. The State is now a god. Maybe even “the God” for millions of people since the State is the No. 1 provider (with confiscated and fiat money) for so many.
Much of what our government has been doing for more than a hundred years is straight out of the Communist Manifesto of 1848:
Abolition of Property in Land and Application of all Rents of Land to Public Purpose.
A Heavy Progressive or Graduated Income Tax.
Abolition of All Rights of Inheritance.
Confiscation of the Property of All Emigrants and Rebels.
Centralization of Credit in the Hands of the State, by Means of a National Bank with State Capital and an Exclusive Monopoly.
Centralization of the Means of Communication and Transport in the Hands of the State.
Extension of Factories and Instruments of Production Owned by the State, the Bringing Into Cultivation of Waste Lands, and the Improvement of the Soil Generally in Accordance with a Common Plan.
Equal Liability of All to Labor. Establishment of Industrial Armies, Especially for Agriculture.
Combination of Agriculture with Manufacturing Industries; Gradual Abolition of the Distinction Between Town and Country by a More Equable Distribution of the Population over the Country.
Free Education for All Children in Public Schools. Abolition of Children’s Factory Labor in its Present Form. Combination of Education with Industrial Production.
Some of the above planks have been challenged. We still have an inheritance tax, but it’s been modified with hard work from constitutionalists. The graduated or progressive income tax is the big one. It is criminal that anyone should have 30 percent of his or her income confiscated by our government. We have the Federal Reserve. It’s worse than a national bank. Where in the Constitution is there any mention of the Federal Reserve?
There’s still a push for the government to regulate the Internet by the FCC.
The one institution that perpetuates the socialist/communist principles?: “Free education for all children in public schools.”
Many point to Social Security and Medicare as success stories. For the first people to benefit from the programs, yes, the programs have been a success. But now they are on the verge of bankruptcy.
When the Social Security program was passed into law, not everyone was required to participate. But as the system was running dry, more people were forced into the program so their “contributions” would keep the program solvent.
Social Security has been described as “the world’s biggest legal chain letter.” When Social Security was implemented, the maximum amount any one person paid into the system was $60 per year—a total of two percent from employee and employer of a maximum $3000 per year. Today, the percentage is 12.4% on $128,400 per year. This compulsory “tax” is said to be a “contribution,” as in the “employers contribution portion of Social Security.” Try telling the Social Security Administration that you no longer want to “contribute.”
The Social Security Administration estimates that those born in 1877 (and who retired in 1942) got an average of 36.5 percent real rate of return on their Social Security contributions, while those born in 1950 will receive on average a 2.2 percent return. Those born in 1975 will get 1.8 percent return. It’s even worse for future workers.
The government should have seen this coming when Ida Fuller received her first Social Security check:
Ida Fuller was the living (and dying) example of the built-in flaw of the Social Security program. Ida Fuller received her very first Social Security check, issued by the United States, on January 31, 1940. Thirty-four years and $20,000 in retirement benefits later, she died at the age of 100. Her total “contribution” to the program: $22. Her first check, $22.54, matched her total “investment” in the program.1
In 1935, there were 45 people paying into SS for every one person receiving benefits. Today, that ratio is about three to one.2 Is it any wonder the SS has been described as the “world’s biggest legal chain letter”?
Social Security is a pay-as-you-go retirement program. Those paying in now are paying those receiving benefits now. Social Security works like a chain letter. Some people have described SS as a “Ponzi scheme,” named after Charles Ponzi, a con artist who bilked people of a lot of money. How did he do it? He would tell people that he would pay them a huge return on their investment within a few months. Then he would take their money and pay off the previous investors. It worked great for the first ones to (unknowingly) get in on the scheme.
Ponzi then used his early “investors” as testimonials to attract new “investors.” After a time, the number of investors ran out, and so did Ponzi with their money. Ponzi had worked the “pyramid scheme”: the people at the top (those who get in early) receive the benefits that are being paid in from those at the bottom (those getting in late). The following appeared in Parade Magazine (March 28, 1976): “Social Security is a wonderful plan. People say it’s going bankrupt. Don’t believe them. It works. I know. My uncle reached 65 and he sent in the appropriate forms. In a week he received a wonderful letter: “Dear Mr. Gold. Welcome to the Social Security System. Attached is a list of ten names. Just send $100 to each name on the list and retype up a new list with your name at the bottom. But remember, don’t break the chain!’”3
The Government’s role in Social Security is like the Berlin Wall. East Berliners wanted freedom so badly, that they escaped to the West. So many wanted to escape from the lack of freedom in the east that a wall was erected to keep them in. If Social Security is such a good deal for everyone, then why is it that so many people want out?
But isn’t a little bit of socialism OK? Look how prosperous we are. There are two big reasons that we seem to be solvent at the present time. First, we can print money as we need it. Second, we can defer paying off our nation’s huge national debt that’s in the trillions.
I found the following from an article on why the national debt is not such a big deal:
[A] big difference between you and Uncle Sam is that the federal government has a central bank to manipulate the economy, the currency, and interest rates to make life easier for Washington policymakers.
But that’s exactly the point. The federal government has a lot more financial flexibility than an American family to manage its mountain of debt. (Money)
The operating word is “flexibility.” Where is the “central bank” getting the money so the federal government can be “more flexible”? It prints it! You and I can’t legally print money. Friends, this is what’s wrong with socialism. Germany printed money until it became worthless. Venezuela is printing money, and it’s worthless. Toilet paper and water are worth more.
Socialism fails when the government runs out of other people’s money through taxation and when it prints so much money to cover its expenditures that it becomes worthless.