Posted on 08/26/2019 8:07:11 AM PDT by Heartlander
Have you ever looked at your paycheck and thought, “Man, I really wish I earned less money!” I’m going to take a wild guess and say, “Probably not.”
Here’s a similar thought: Do you like big government? It seems like a loaded question, but it really isn’t.
For the vast majority of Americans, a mention of “government” or “politics” doesn’t usually elicit a warm, fuzzy feeling. It’s usually controversial, often divisive. Bring it up at Thanksgiving dinner, and you’ll likely be met with at least one eye-roll.
So, for those of us who don’t want less money and aren’t huge fans of big government, why are so many of us casting ballots for people who want us to have just that?
That’s the stark reality of socialism: less money in our wallets and more lining the pockets of congressmen and senators who complain about income equality, all while earning annual salaries of about $175,000.
You’ve probably heard the criticism before: Capitalism is about greed. Socialism is about charity. But the exact opposite is true. It is socialism that inherently fosters greed.
As noted by Andy Puzder, former CEO of CKE Restaurants Holdings Inc., socialism forces individuals to compete for the limited supply offered by the government. It fosters a scarcity mentality, rather than a healthy community mindset.
Free-market capitalism, on the other hand, is focused on providing for the needs and wants of society, creating a symbiotic relationship between businesses and consumers.
Every credit card swipe is an individual vote determining which businesses succeed and which do not. If a company is not providing value for customers, it will go out of business. That compels entrepreneurs to think of the customer first.
Generally speaking, socialism is a system in which the government owns and controls the means of production. But “free stuff” is now the trendy catchphrase associated with socialism, with the result that it is rising in popularity despite being largely misunderstood.
In fact, a New York Times study found that only 16% of millennials could adequately define the term.
What many erroneously embrace as “socialism” is actually welfare-state capitalism as practiced in Nordic countries.
Advocates of socialism deceptively point to nations such as Denmark and Sweden, but those nations are both ranked as free-market friendly as the U.S.
Then-Danish Prime Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen in 2015 noted that “some people in the U.S. associate the Nordic model with some sort of socialism,” but he disputed the assertion.
“Denmark is far from a socialist, planned economy,” he said. “Denmark is a market economy.”
Citing Denmark and Sweden as successful examples of “socialism” only blinds us to the horrific effects of actual socialism.
“Health care for all” — the signature promise from socialists — sounds compassionate. Eliminating income inequality has an almost moral vibe to it. However, promises of “free stuff” are at once unrealistic and accompanied by a hefty price tag.
When added together, so-called “Medicare-for-All” ($32 trillion), Social Security expansion ($188 billion), “free” college ($807 billion), paid family leave ($270 billion), and student-debt forgiveness ($1.6 trillion), all proposed by Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., would collectively add nearly $35 trillion to the national debt over the next decade alone.
That’s in addition to the $12.4 billion baseline deficit increase projected over the next decade and $22.4 trillion in current national debt.
The hard fact is that nothing is free. What some may perceive as a “win,” such as single-payer health care or “free” college, has to be funded by taxes taken out of our own paychecks.
So, how much more in taxes would we be looking at?
Under a Sanders presidency, middle-class Americans making $75,000 to $100,000 a year would likely pay $13,000 in additional taxes each year.
Just ask residents of Europe in general and France in particular about the true cost of a large welfare state. Europeans have to work on average more than two months longer each year than Americans to pay their tax bills. Those in France have to work more than six months of the year for their government — twice as long as Americans labor for Uncle Sam.
Do we have so little confidence in ourselves and our fellow Americans that we think the government can spend our money better than we can ourselves?
That’s where socialism begins — but unfortunately, not where it ends.
Socialism is a failed experiment — it has laid waste to economies around the world. Moreover, it has come hand-in-hand with human rights abuses at the hands of totalitarian governments.
“We lived in a world swarming with invisible eyes and ears,” said a defector from the Soviet Union when asked about the constant state surveillance he lived under there.
The testimonies of the victims of socialism are chilling and provide cautionary tales of the true cost of socialism.
Take Daniel Di Martino. He grew up in socialist Venezuela and penned an opinion piece for USA Today recounting the failure of socialism in his home country.
Di Martino recalls how the socialist regime imposed price controls and nationalized private industries, causing production to plummet.
In response, the government placed rations on food and basic supplies. It was common for Di Martino to have to wait hours in line to buy even staples such as flour and toothpaste.
The Venezuelan government began to print more money in an attempt to compensate for massive spending increases. That added fuel to the inflationary fire, and prices began to double every few weeks.
Failing to learn from Venezuela’s experience (or perhaps being unaware of it), Rep. Alexandria Ocazio-Cortez, D-N.Y., has endorsed requiring the Federal Reserve to print more money for her spending proposals. But according to Di Martino, “this is exactly what produced Venezuela’s nightmare.”
The failure of socialism is widespread, and the stark differences between socialist utopia and socialist reality is the worst-kept secret of its advocates.
A recent example of socialist reality — this one from closer to home — underscores the point: Sanders had to cut the working hours of his own campaign staffers in order to pay them the $15 an hour minimum wage he has advocated other employers should be required to pay.
Therein lies the problem: What sounds good theoretically doesn’t always work in the real world. Let’s not choose that grim reality for America.
Copyright 2019 The Daily Signal
Help us champion truth, freedom, limited government and human dignity. Support The Stream »
Do you like big government?
~~~
Yes.
The hardcore lefties actually do.
Some will admit it to you. Many wont.
It’s what they really want.
They fear everything else more than they fear powerful politicians and over-reaching bureaucrats. It’s a big scary world, and everyone from big mean corporations all the way to your fellow man are never to be trusted, neither with money, nor freedom. All previously failed socialist experiments simply were not totalitarian enough to suppress defiance, but a hardcore lefty is willing to try again.
Very good article!
If this nation is to survive more than a couple more decades we urgently NEED guys like this to get the word out to their fellow Millenials.
Otherwise once enough of us die they are on-track to absolutely vote in socialism.
The only ones who will benefit will be the unproductive deadbeats who refuse to work. Everyone else all the way down the income scale will be paying extra for it. If not from income taxes then it will be from increased prices caused by the increased taxes. No one will be exempt from paying more, even those who think they will be getting off free. Costs always roll downhill in one form or another.
bkmk
This. Part of the reason millennials are supportive of socialism is because they believe the money will come out of somebody else’s paycheck. They fail to comprehend that the threshold for “rich” is going to be a lot lower under a socialist paradigm. I have a coworker who along with her boyfriend make a little over $100K a year. When I mentioned that if they were to marry, they would be part of the evil rich that “need to pay more” I thought she would faint. She thought “rich” started at making in the millions per year. Guess again.
Absolutely, and as more is handed out, the more will be needed to feed it’s self. Not long before the threshold is lowered to EVERYONE. While they might have free medical care and a universal basic income, they will be living in their cars with 3 kids because rent and costs of living will be astronomical. The socialist economic model will have a whole lot of people living in tents and hogans like a third world country. It’s already beginning to happen in socialist demographics now.
Make no mistake, the Left likes the power of big government. In the United States, the Constitution, Congress, and Supreme Court get in the way of fully wielding this power, but they'll try anyway.
They believe that this can all be paid for by soaking the evil rich while they get a free ride. They are told there is plenty of money...just in the wrong hands and big government will play Robin Hood and equal things out. Remember Obama’s spread the money around BS? Trouble is that taxing the “rich” at rates of 70%+ will not begin to pay for this even if being “rich” starts at $100G. The real rich aren’t dumb and will flee the country taking their money and businesses with them. Of course the liberal elites and Hollywood types will be exempt
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.