CONGRESS AND SOCIALIST ORGS.

They cannot leave economic management up to popular vote and they know it. It is a diversion tactic. "See, I'm more democratic than you." They don't realize just how few people in the world really want to be responsible for the enormous responsibility of managing an entire economy. The only way to manage an entire economy is to develop an algorithm that is fool-proof and not dependent on certain factors such as state of the economy prior to socialization, what the economy specializes in (most economies are big producers of only a few things) and what the labor market is like. Without such an algorithm plus realtime access to every bit of information imaginable about productivity, a regulatory agency could not regulate with anything resembling efficiency. Simply put, even an industrial economy is too complicated for people to manage by debate. It has to be subjected to realtime simulation with something like a quantum computer. You would have to write reporting software that could simulate every possible scenario and find the best looking scenario that is most likely to occur based on current levels of productivity, flow of resources and the state of the labor force. The problem of why Socialism cannot work is glaringly obvious to anyone in college that is a Computer Science major. I've for the hell of it tried to postulate such an algorithm and the logistics are literally impossible. You'd never get the data you'd need fast enough to make it work. That's why when liberal arts majors saying it can work I point to Russia and say, "and thus is the result of Socialism, thy economy collapses into a singularity and consumes everything in society."

People still think they can win the war on drugs by sending people to prison for non-violent offenses despite the fact that every administration has upped resources to law enforcement and the end result has never been a drug usage rate approaching even 5% in the past 25 years. So no, I think there will always be quacks that will think it can work. #2, not outright destroy it. Ridicule it, debunk it, make it glaringly obvious that only morons believe in it. Deride their values and socially engineer society to find their values repulsive. That would of course involve reducing sympathy for the poor, but that's not a price to have to pay. That's merely a sign of social evolution IMO.

I took this list directly from the DSA Website; guess they are keeping some of their members low key for some reason.

I wonder if Russia is still involved in a War with the USA which the USA hasn't caught on to yet? No Country would dump it's idealogy - especially when so many from the enemy camp are still "friends of the revolution". It appears that Western Economic interests may have blinded the US Govt, State Dept, etc., into expanding economic ties into the former Soviet Union Republics with no way to recoup losses if it goes bad. I'm of the personal opinion that the Russians are pushing the US to its limits through proxies, e.g., terrorists, etc. that will eventually give them control of a number of governments, their strategic resources and once accomplished, elevate and give rise to a newborn Soviet Union - of sorts....

Ah, but you make a mistake common to conservatives when discussing liberals (socialists in this case). That mistake is in assuming that what you are attempting to optimize is the same as that of the liberals. You see, the demoncratic socialists (DS) are not at all interested in optimizing any particular element. They are interested in fairness that is defined as equality of outcomes.

When anyone postulates that a fair society is the best outcome, ask that socialist which of these outcomes they would consider to be the most fair. In situation one, 10 people have a hundred dollars and 10 people have fifty dollars. In situation two, every person has forty dollars. Then ask why they would prefer a situation where everyone is equal but worse off? An honest socialist will prefer situation two. This should demonstrate the difference between their value system and your own.

They cannot have fairness because there is no efficiency. Without efficiency they cannot plan properly and without proper planning there can be no "fairness" or "social justice." Without it, they won't know what to produce and what to give to whom. They will create a society that is perpetually denying citizens goods and services simply because there isn't enough to go around for everyone.

Well, at least one of them won't cause any problem, she's dead. Still running for congress, but nonetheless dead.

Bernard Sanders-VT,Chair, Cynthia A. McKinney-GA, Co-Chair, Peter DeFazio-OR, Co-Chair, Maurice Hinchey-NY,Co-Chair, Major Owens-NY.Co-Chair, Nydia M. Velazquez-NY, Lane Evans-IL, Maxine Waters-CA, Earl Hilliard-AL, Ed Pastor-AZ, Lynn C. Woolsey-CA, George Miller-CA, Nancy Pelosi-CA, Fortney "Pete" Stark-CA, Henry A. Waxman-CA, Xavier Becerra-CA, Julian C. Dixon-CA, Esteban Edward Torres-CA, George E. Brown-CA, Bob Filner-CA, Diane DeGette-CO, Corrine Brown-FL, Carrie P. Meek-FL, Alcee L. Hastings-FL, John Lewis-GA, Neil Abercrombie-HI, Patsy Mink-HI, Luis Gutierrez-IL, Danny Davis-IL, Julia Carson-IN, John Olver-MA, Jim McGovern-MA, Barney Frank-MA, John Tierney-MA, David Bonior-MI, Lynn N. Rivers-MI, John Conyers-MI, Bennie G. Thompson-MS, Melvin L. Watt-NC, Donald Payne-NJ, Jerrold Nadler-NY, Charles Rangel-NY, Jose E. Serrano-NY, John LaFalce-NY, Marcy Kaptur-OH, Dennis Kucinich-OH, Stephanie-Tubbs-Jones-OH, Sherrod Brown-OH, Elizabeth Furse-OR, Chaka Fattah-PA, William Coyne-PA, Carlos A. Romero-Barcelo-PR, Robert C. Scott-VA, James A. McDermott-WA.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.