Like it or not, America is now seriously debating socialism By Rich Lowry

[mystery-ak]

Opinion
Like it or not, America is now seriously debating socialism

By Rich Lowry

July 30, 2018 | 6:53pm | Updated

It’s begun. We’re having a debate over socialism.

Not over whether it’s fair to call Democrats socialists. Not over whether socialism has been good for Venezuela or some other faraway, unfortunate country. But no-kidding socialist policies right here in the United States.

The press attention to a new study of the costs of Medicare for All, or universal health coverage paid for by the government that goes much further than ObamaCare, is a sign that it is a live issue.

Popularized by the socialist Bernie Sanders, Medicare for All is not just a fringy left-wing talking point anymore. It’s a fringy plank of a growing element of the Democratic Party. A raft of prospective Democratic presidential candidates have endorsed the policy, while about a third of Democratic members of the House have joined a caucus devoted to it.

more
https://nypost.com/2018/07/30/like-it-or-not-america-is-now-seriously-debating-socialism/

[GrouchoTex]

I've actually had someone on the left argue with me on a bizarre point.
Their new trial balloon they are floating out says that the fact we hire police and firemen, prove that we are a socialist republic.
Their logic is we give our money, by way of tax dollars, to be protected locally, and all they want to do is simply insure that this is done nationally.
Of course, there are several things wrong with this argument.
One is that we know this would be just a crack in the door, where VA/Medic-aid type health insurance would be just around the corner, along with what any other social ills they think the tax dollar will cure.
Not to mention the fact that local communities decide what is best for the safety, whether to contract first responders, or have a volunteer fire department, for example.
Why so many think a nanny state solution to local issues is such a great idea is beyond me.
Frankly, the nanny state is the easy button to them, and seems intellectually lazy.

[catfish1957]

The hard core socialist dims are plotting to confiscate IRA's / 401K's for a nationalized one stop national social security system.

That is their Holy Grail.

[ABX]

I think we should change that to 'openly debating socialism' (and other forms of collectivism).

We've been overtly dabbling in various levels of socialism and collectivism since at least the Woodrow Wilson era if not before.

[Frank Cannon]

Well isn't this a good thing? Listening to these Millennial Hipsters touting it they have no idea what it is about. This is an excellent time to have a full out discussion on the topic.

[LMAO]

Well isn't this a good thing? Listening to these Millennial Hipsters touting it they have no idea what it is about. This is an excellent time to have a full out discussion on the topic.

 I agree. This gives a good chance for it to be fully scrutinized. So far it’s been mostly one-sided

[ABX]

I agree. This gives a good chance for it to be fully scrutinized. So far it’s been mostly one-sided

The problem is our side is not good at laying it out.

You have some like Walter Williams, but not someone with the hip appeal and intelligence combination. We also need to come up with some stronger debate lines. We've been using the same old lines for years while the left is constantly evolving.

[Wingnut]

Well isn't this a good thing? Listening to these Millennial Hipsters touting it they have no idea what it is about. This is an excellent time to have a full out discussion on the topic.

You can't have a conversion with people like this:

[dfwgator]

The hard core socialist dims are plotting to confiscate IRA's / 401K's for a nationalized one stop national social security system.

That is their Holy Grail.

The other "Holy Grail" is to control Housing,  by passing regulations to make it virtually impossible for private citizens to be landlords.

[INVAR]

Well, when you have self-identifying "Conservatives" having discarded principles for 'winning' pragmatism - arguing the benefits of collectivism because their guy is in office, is now their song as well.

I guess it's true;

[skeeter]

Well, when you have self-identifying "Conservatives" having discarded principles for 'winning' pragmatism - arguing the benefits of collectivism because their guy is in office, is now their song as well.

I guess it's true;

Sigh. Is it too much to ask for just one thread where Invar doesn't turn & fire on Trump supporters?

[Wingnut]

Sigh. Is it too much to ask for just one thread where Invar doesn't turn & fire on Trump supporters?

He doesn't have the ability anymore.

[INVAR]

Sigh. Is it too much to ask for just one thread where Invar doesn't turn & fire on Trump supporters?

Stop apologizing for Big Government Collectivism simply because your president and party subscribe to it now, and you won't give me a reason to.

[Axeslinger]

Sigh. Is it too much to ask for just one thread where Invar doesn't turn & fire on Trump supporters?

@skeeter
Sensitive much?

[skeeter]

@skeeter
Sensitive much?

@Axeslinger

Your sentence appears to have two fragments lacking a coordinating conjunction. Judging by the question mark I assume you are requesting information.

Now if you could please rephrase I'd be happy to oblige.

[skeeter]

Stop apologizing for Big Government Collectivism simply because your president and party subscribe to it now, and you won't give me a reason to.

Apologizing? Hell I'm respectfully asking you to finally at long last stop mewling about those nasty Trump supporters on threads that don't have anything to do with them.

If you insist on continuing thats fine but I can't be faulted for trying.

[INVAR]

Apologizing? Hell I'm respectfully asking you to finally at long last stop mewling about those nasty Trump supporters on threads that don't have anything to do with them.

You can ask.

And as I said - Big Government Collectivism and Trump supporters have a whole bunch to do with one another these days.