Skip to comments.Rolling Stone: America Should Replace Capitalism With Socialism
Posted on 01/04/2014 4:15:35 PM PST by mandaladon
The next time you wonder just how far to the left Rolling Stone magazine is, consider that in its first issue of the new year, it actually published an article calling for capitalism to be totally abolished in America and replaced with a socialist structure wherein people didn't need to work, all assets were taken over by the government, and redistributed to the masses.
Fasten your seatbelts before continuing further:
1. Guaranteed Work for Everybody
Unemployment blows. The easiest and most direct solution is for the government to guarantee that everyone who wants to contribute productively to society is able to earn a decent living in the public sector...A job guarantee that paid a living wage would anchor prices, drive up conditions for workers at megacorporations like Walmart and McDonald's, and target employment for the poor and long-term unemployed people to whom conventional stimulus money rarely trickles all the way down...Imagine a world where people could contribute the skills that inspire them teaching, tutoring, urban farming, cleaning up the environment, painting murals rather than telemarketing or whatever other stupid tasks bosses need done to supplement their millions. Sounds nice, doesn't it? Sounds nice? And where would the money come from? And what would the goods and services produced by so many people requiring higher wages cost? How would people afford them?
Keep your seatbelts on, because the author has an answer:
2. Social Security for All But let's think even bigger. Because as much as unemployment blows, so do jobs. What if people didn't have to work to survive? Enter the jaw-droppingly simple idea of a universal basic income, in which the government would just add a sum sufficient for subsistence to everyone's bank account every month...
(Excerpt) Read more at newsbusters.org ...
Does nobody study history over there?
The only field in which Rollong Stone has less credibility than economics is music.
Problem is, they already ran out of other people’s money.
Yep. After millions of dead and millions more suffering because of socialism, Rolling Stone is gonna make it work this time. “We promise...we won’t kill millions this time...pinky swear!”
PATRIOTS: America Should Replace Rolling Stone With Just About Anything.
What we have is crony fascism.
America is based on Liberty.
Not womb to the tomb statism.
Does the plan include rock stars?
The easiest and most direct solution is for the government to guarantee that everyone who wants to contribute productively to society is able to earn a decent living in the public sector...
Of course the author misses the point that when someone
doesn’t want to contribute to society, they will be
FORCED to contribute, and not necessarily in the work
of their choice, OR the location of their choice.
Do they think they can just pack up and move anywhere?
Sorry not allowed.
It would appear not.
History does repeat itself, especially when you
don’t pay attention the first time.
The magazine sucks and so does the band.
Under socialism, the headquarters of Rolling Stone will look something like this...
rolling stones would go out of business because everyone would be too poor to buy such expensive toilet paper
Hey Rolling Stone, if you love Socialism so much how about you take one for the cause and cough up the cash out of YOUR bank accounts how does that sound, do we have a deal
If these rolling stoners love socialism so much, why don’t they give away this rag of a paper for free?
My toilet paper should be replaced by Rolling Stone.
If you want to live in a socialist country pick one and go; there is nothing stopping you!
I have that as a bumper sticker; but it is mostly images - causes them to have to think. Libs are not used to doing that.
Hey, I have an idea, let’s change Rolling Stone into a Rock and Roll magazine! Wow, I think I just hit on something brilliant!
We kind of already have. I would call it the fascist version of socialism.
And everybody should have a pony, and a bazillion dollars and no one should ever have to work again and oh... world peace no disease or fat people cause everyone will be gorgeous with free plastic surgery and no one will ever have to eat brussel sprouts again.
So, you are saying there are benefits of socialism?
That isn’t an article, it’s a stoned dorm room conversation. “Share the land, man.” Right. Get out your farming tools, sonny.
Do they not remember Greece, Spain, Portugal? Greece is in a heck of a fix because of this and that was a year or two ago. This is insanity.
Oh no, those dozen or so old dirty hippies that still read Rolling Stone might read the article...and immediately forget it.
I am sad to report that yes, there would be a benefit to socialism, with respect to the demise of a certain washed-up “rock and roll” magazine that hasn’t been relevant since they put Dr. Hook on the cover back in ‘73.
intresting that the only people who advocate socialism are people who have never lived under it and can’t escape it.
Waiting for the stone to roll over them
many socialist places have dropped it because of this fact.
Gotta love how leftist rags- that nowadays rely almost solely on advertising revenues from eeevil profit-seeking companies to stay afloat- are always so rabidly anti-capitalist...
Rolling Stone: why wait? If you hate capitalism why don’t you begin distributing your rag for free?
That is, if they remain in business. Dictators work on whims. I would be careful Rolling Stone. You may get what you think you wish for.
You have to make it out of the womb without being aborted first.
And what has kept Rolling Stone in ink but the free market fueled by capitalism!?! Idiots all...
Rolling Stone became irrelevant after Hunter Thompson’s and Ben Fong Torres” writing stopped being publish by the rag. Around 1970, I believe.
Hahaha, this has as much credibility as Paul Krugman. Even middle school economics are lost on these idiots. Another attempt to resuscitate a magazine with less circulation than barbed wire catalogs.
I think every rich socialist should pay for what they want. Every democrat worth more then $250k should pay 100% of their wealth to the government. Pay back is a b1 tch
Try an experiment... round up all of the Rolling Stone employees, confiscate all of their homes and other “real” properties, put them all in section 8 housing, allot them equal pay $4 - $5 per hour but only if they work 60 hours a week in a job they all do, minimal bread, water, flour, rice, beans and an occasional horse they can slaughter and see how they’d prefer to live 4 years later.
Rolling Stone still exists? Who knew?
Speaking of how biased they are, was reading about the rock group Kansas - back when lead guitarist and songwriter Kerry Livgren got saved and became a Christian, their next album had a few songs with an evangelical theme. Not only did RS trash the album, they trashed Livgren personally, calling him “Kerry Liver”. Just goes to show, when those who (usually unwittingly) follow Satan encounter something of God, they usually respond with anger and hatred. It’s the easiest way to spot them.
Ok, let the government take away Jann Wenner’s money, take away his magazine, and turn it all over to conservative propagandists after the right-wing conservative takeover of the federal government. Isn’t that, in some ways, what they want, except for the specifics of WHO is doing the expropriation?
It’s funny how conservatives and libs want to alternately denigrate or accept bearded men in strange clothes, depending upon their beliefs? (Duck Dynasty bearded men in strange clothes versus bearded hippies in strange clothes.)
Sure, we’ll listen to Rolling Stone. After they showed their unmatchable sophistication by putting a terrorist on their cover.
Leftists also want to bury old dead white men and their wisdom and achievments.
But of course not Marx or Trotsky or Stalin or even (near-dead) Castro with his boot on the neck of millions of blacks.
That’s a screen cap from STALKER: Call of Pripyat, right?
The BEM (Booger Eating Moron) who wrote the article referred to FDR's NRA as a great idea. It did put a lot of people to work. People who were desperate to work, because they had no notion of "welfare," "food stamps," "unemployment insurance," and hundreds of other state and federal support programs, that for all intents and purposes, rewards long term joblessness.
To put it bluntly, they didn't have 60+ years of training NOT to work for their grandparents and parents. A great number of the unemployed have no will to work, work ethic, nor the patience to work hard to achieve what they want. Not all, but a high number. A few years back, an incredibly busy BBQ restaurant in Olathe, KS has to close, because they couldn't find enough employees in a city teaming with teens and twenty-somethings from middle class and affluent neighborhood. They were offering starting wages over $10/hr, and they couldn't find enough workers. They even went so far as to set up transportation, driving people from the KCMO "inner city" the 25 or so miles, each way, to the jobs, but after the first or second paycheck, they stopped working. They had to close the restaurant.
Of course the author misses the point that when someone doesnt want to contribute to society, they will be FORCED to contribute, and not necessarily in the work of their choice, OR the location of their choice. Do they think they can just pack up and move anywhere?Sorry not allowed.
You make a very good point here. And even if they did want to pack up and move, where would they go?
So burger flippers would make the same wages as a neurosurgeon? This BEM ("Booger Eating Moron") doesn't realize that his perfect view of communism has been implemented and can be viewed quire easily, since those societies are incredibly successful. All you have to do is find a bee hive or an ant colony. These societies have a strict cast system, and their entire lives are dedicated to the hive, with no self interest.
That's where the idea of communism fails: Human Nature, and wishing to improve one's life is a part of humanity. With total equality, why would anyone sacrifice to do a really difficult job, when there's incentive. Why would medical students go through residency for years of long hours and low dollars if there's no financial incentive to do so. Which is why communist governments do all they can take away peoples' humanity. Of course, as with the insect hive, there's a strict cast system, but rather than being imposed by biology, the government imposes the cast system on the population, usually at a terrible human cost, for example, Stalin's oppression of the Ukraine, where between 4 and 10 million Ukrainians were methodically starved to death in less than 3 years, a rate even faster than Hitler's genocide against the Jews.
After many "revolutions," the people who helped tip the balance for the "new boss" are quite often "eliminated," for the simple reason that if they could help bring down a government once, what would stop them from doing it again..."
I retired at 62 years old because the actuary tables said I would get more money from the government via social security than if I waited until I was 66 and eligible for full retirement social security benefits. The government is betting that you die early.
At my income level I was paying the max to social security every year. The government actually lost money by my early retirement. If I was allowed to work full time and also draw social security at 62 years of age I would have. I know how to add and subtract, thus I retired.
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.