What! Socialism in America? Say it isn’t so.
Better start the protests now.
Progressive Bloggers
Your opinions…
 | tildeb on Female Erasure – Boys in… |
 | The Arbourist on Shouldn’t We Be Deportin… |
 | SM on Shouldn’t We Be Deportin… |
| The Arbourist on Life Has to Be Fought For… |
| The Arbourist on University Encampments –… |
The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation
- Canada sanctions 'extremist' Israeli settlers
- Loblaw agrees to sign grocery code of conduct — but only if competitors do, too
- Cool weather, rain to aid in fight against fire threatening Fort McMurray
- Poilievre still won't say if he'll scrap government's capital gains tax hike
- Ontario's 'Crypto King' arrested after 18-month investigation
- How the West's plan to punish Russian oil backfired | About That
- Divorce left me struggling to find love. I found it in an AI partner
- Darren Dutchyshen, longtime TSN broadcaster, dead at 57
- Ottawa getting ready to ditch costly, error-prone Phoenix pay system
- IN PHOTOS | Best of Cannes red carpet arrivals
Blogs I Follow
bleatmop
Mystro
The Arbourist
Dead Wild Roses 
11 comments
January 23, 2012 at 12:50 pm
bleatmop
I remember him talking about this on Real Time. A great video that should be shared more frequently. I may not agree with Bill on everything, but when he is right, he’s right.
LikeLike
January 23, 2012 at 1:01 pm
The Arbourist
Agreed. He is good on some issues like religion and politics, but on others such a feminism and women’s rights it is an entirely different story.
LikeLike
January 23, 2012 at 1:41 pm
Reneta Scian
Ditto. I still don’t see a model that is purely socialist working, but I do see a mixed social democracy working… Capitalism on luxury items, socialism for all necessities, or at least that is how I see it. It still irritates me though that the reason most people are against socialism is because of religiously motivated backlash from the cold war.
LikeLike
January 23, 2012 at 1:47 pm
The Arbourist
Pure models of just about any political system do not work. The problem is that many people do not have a clue about what exactly socialism is, or they have some distorted caricature that makes them afraid. Please see any Glen Beck clip as the propangandistic fear mongering he partakes in is atrocious.
We can reverse the question and ask, what is so amazing about capitalism?
LikeLike
January 23, 2012 at 2:17 pm
Reneta Scian
Nothing, but because of the support of capitalism it seems feasible to have a model that limits the damage of capitalism, while giving people that as a platform for certain industries. Capitalism as it is in America makes the cost of living unreasonably high. It’s not that capitalism is even remotely amazing, and I don’t like it understanding it’s effect, but people would have a hard time letting go of it and I consider the blended as a feasible alternative, that could please everyone. Perhaps though capitalism is never a good ingredient regardless of how you make the soup.
LikeLike
January 23, 2012 at 6:32 pm
bleatmop
Reneta: The cost of living in the US is actually lower than what it is in Canada.
http://www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/compare_countries_result.jsp?country1=Canada&country2=United+States
The median average income is higher in the US as well.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median_household_income
LikeLike
January 23, 2012 at 7:44 pm
Reneta Scian
I was just remarking that capitalism contributes to cost of living. I know it’s different in other places, but it is capitalism that is driving up the cost of basic necessities both directly and indirectly via market effects. Corporate Greed under this form of capitalism blossomed into what we see with wages not meeting the inflation via free market. Infrastructure helps with cost of living and income, but even that gets neglected when corporations (the primary entity depending on it) shirks off on taxes leaving it up to the rest of us to maintain. The point I am making is that capitalism in markets with goods people need wreaks havoc on the poor, but there are other factors in play that double bind the problems facing the poor under it.
Capitalism has led to rampant profiteering on goods and services which put pressure on the lower economic classes, coupled with markets based on profits rather than assets. Corporations don’t try to solve the resources issues with assets, progress and development. Instead the prop up the market and invest money into perpetuating the problem for the sake of profits. This has led us to a market where the supply and demand has been artificially hedged in a way that is beneficial to them and detrimental to all others. Companies intentionally withholding in order to keep demand at a profitable level, all the while circumventing the system through tax breaks, political donations, and under the table politics.
We won’t see a decrease in alternatives to high demand goods, or solutions to our energy problems, or a more concerted effort against inflation as long as it is profitable to keep it problem going. Why are Electric Vehicles only an “affordable option” to people who make over 150K/yr? Why aren’t companies working to make efficient technologies publicly available? Because companies make more money keeping you dependent on petroleum, and vehicles made out of high demand “non-renewable” resources. The means to drive costs down with more efficient technology and research is being stonewalled. The powers that be profit off of controlling the market, laws, lawmakers, and through other power grabs to keep their shares high, and money flowing through Wall Street.
They keep it expensive to become independent because it takes their power over you away. It’s a game played at our expense with the cards stacked against us and every avenue to avoid playing blocked like a giant game of monopoly. They make it difficult and expensive to avoid playing their game, everything from solar technology & electric vehicles to industrialized food production. They control the market, the costs and the demand for the products made not the consumer. So yes, there is many factors contributing to the pinch we all feel in our pocket books (cost of living and income), but arguably in the end the effect is a result of unchecked capitalism (which hurts its poor, and the economies of other nations as well).
LikeLike
January 23, 2012 at 8:32 pm
Alan Scott
The Arbourist ,
You pick a strange example for Socialism . A bunch of guys with an average annual income of $ 1.9 million, who play with a brown leather ball . Meanwhile poor people go around and sell beer, peanuts, and popcorn in the stands, getting paid much less. Socialism is no more fair than capitalism .
LikeLike
January 24, 2012 at 2:38 am
Vern R. Kaine
There’s a lot that goes into the “cost of living” basket, but residing in both countries I can personally attest to the difference, even in Alberta where there’s no pst.
Cell phones – avg bill in USA, $80/mo. avg bill in Canada for similar minute usage, $240/mo.
Cable, phone, Internet: about the same. about $150/mo for all three.
Food: way cheaper in USA (Nevada, Texas). Either larger quantities for same price (ex: cereal), or lower prices for same quantity. Beef and veggies quite a bit cheaper down here.
Fuel: saw it <$1.00/L last time I was home – been a while since I had seen that! :) Haven't gassed up recently but I believe it was about $3.20/g here.
TV side note: CRTC needs to get out of the dinosaur age. Satellite in Canada (Bell) still an expensive joke for what one gets vs. down here.
My personal preference is the more capitalism the better, but I think we need a good mix of socialism and capitalism to realistically function. Average folk can't hack it in a more capitalistic society. They're too slow to adapt and they get eaten alive, so they need a safe haven in the same way we protect endangered species. haha
LikeLike
January 24, 2012 at 11:45 pm
The Arbourist
Alan, it seems like sometimes you’ve gone to school to take classes on how to miss the point of ideas and issues I often post on the blog. I ask of you to watch the video again and think in the broadest terms possible about the general concepts of socialism as defined in the video, and capitalism also as defined in the video. Now attempt to see where one might see some benefits of the NFL way of running things versus the way the MLB runs things.
I’m certainly not asking you to come over the dark side or anything, but merely be somewhat charitable and not join the throng of people who when they see the word socialism all they can see is the very face of the devil herself.
LikeLike
January 25, 2012 at 1:23 pm
Vern R. Kaine
Unfortunately a lot of Americans see things as far more of a political or socio-economic slippery slope than they are. Restricting clip sizes or fully automatic assault rifles means the government’s going to prevent you from being able to legally defend yourself, or having a single-payer health care system means that everyone will be forced to start goose-stepping lest they be tossed into FEMA camps for reprogramming.
In Maher’s example, just because Green Bay operates under the business model they do of a community-owned team, it doesn’t mean the league or the country is going to socialist hell in a handbasket. It simply means that in a particular market, that market adjusted to find the right mix of public vs. private that just so happens to be more advantageous there than it would be, say in a market the size of New York. Same as if you find a single company that can operate well with 100% employee ownership and a CEO pay capped at 20x the company’s lowest earner.
I think Maher did a great job of attacking the irrational fear of so-called “socialism”. If he’s trying to suggest we just let a federal government spread it around to everything because it’s inherently better all-around, I’d disagree but I don’t think that’s what he was doing here (not that you’re saying he was, Bleatmop, I’m just sayin’).
LikeLike