Can Socialism Succeed?
By bobmnu
@bobmnu (8157)
United States
July 21, 2009 1:23pm CST
I received this as an email and it caused me to think, Why should someone work harder if they were not rewarded for their efforts.
They story is one of a professor who claimed that he never fail a single student but did fail a complete class. He had a class that thought socialism was the way to go so he said that he would grade the class as a group and not as individuals. Everyone would work for the common good. The first test had the usual range of grades and the class received a C+ for their efforts. Those who studied and received high grades were upset, while those who did very little were very happy. The next test the top students did not study as much while the middle and lower student studies very little. The class received a D for their efforts. Everyone was pointing and blaming others. The last several test the class received an F. Even the top students could not bring up the class average to passing so on the last test even they did not study. With no reward for good work even good workers give up. How long will the rich work to have more and more of their money taken in taxes?
Can redistributing the wealth really work?
2 people like this
6 responses
@uath13 (8192)
• United States
21 Jul 09
That would be pure socialism. There could also be another form in which the less fortunate are given a certain amount to meet their "basic" needs. Those who work hard & excel then get to go above & beyond that. That system then provides for all & gives incentives to work.
1 person likes this
@uath13 (8192)
• United States
22 Jul 09
Definitely not, though it does include being able to go to the doctor without being forced into indentured servitude.
All the gadgets & amenities you'd have to earn. That's the part that keeps it from being fanatical socialism. Fanaticism is always going too far.
1 person likes this
@Debs_place (10520)
• United States
21 Jul 09
I work in a place where everyone gets the same raises; there is no such thing as merit pay; it is strictly longevity.
I bust my butt as do most of the people I work with during the day...but there are some slackers. When I work at the same place, 2nd or 3rd shift; there are definitely more slackers.
1 person likes this
@Debs_place (10520)
• United States
22 Jul 09
I wish we had a union. We are promised raises that don't come. It is amazing how people all hear the same thing and misunderstand it.
I prefer working it makes the time go faster but when people take advantage of you on dump on you...I get aggravated. So I work hard with or without the incentive it is the way I am. But I think a union at least adds some protection.
I also work in a job where I have a high probability of getting injured. If we don't recover from our injuries within 3 months we become unemployed. I don't think a union would allow that.
1 person likes this
@gewcew23 (8007)
• United States
21 Jul 09
What is the point if your hard work is going to be punished only to benefit someone who does not the will to work at all. It would be like this, you can work and make two thousand dollars a week, or you can stay home and make one thousand dollars a week. The caught is if you are going to go to work we are going to take a thousand dollars from your paycheck to pay those that do not want to work. Why would you want to work, excluding your self respect. The only problem is what would happen if everyone just gave up on working and turned to government to meet their need. Who would provide those needs in the first place?
1 person likes this
@bobmnu (8157)
• United States
22 Jul 09
A friend of mine was in a bad relationship and choose to end it by moving away. She was able to get welfare, but when she tried to get off the workers tried everything to convince her to stay at home. She figured that she had to get a job that paid $35,000 a year to break even with welfare. She is now making $40,000+ but has to drive 100 miles rt two days a week for her job. Her parents instilled in her a sense of pride and she could not stay on welfare. As you say too many people find welfare comfortable and a nice life style. As cold as it sounds we have to have a three tiered system of welfare. One for the people who are working poor and index benefits so they can work their way out. The second tier is a basic three meals a day and a roof over their head with a little left over for clothing. Poverty is uncomfortable and not nice. The third is for those who are too physically or mentally unable to work. These would basically be the people who are being cared for by someone else.
@eaforeman6 (8979)
• United States
21 Jul 09
No. What can work is returning to American made, and stop sending our companies and jobs over seas. They know what will work. It worked before and can work again, but they want one world order which means that they have an agenda and reasons to choose the other path.
@Destiny007 (5805)
• United States
22 Jul 09
No.
Socialism has failed everywhere that it has been tried.
Even China has begun using capitalistic principles in it's economy.
1 person likes this
@ra1787 (501)
• Italy
21 Jul 09
In the real world something like that is not going to succeed, but that is an extreme situation, where there is no individual benefit. It is required a high degree of social responsability to have a system like that to work, and we are still too individualistic to have a system where the outcome of work is evenly distributed among everyone.
But a system where something is taken from the richest to give everyone the basics is very possible and is likely to work fine.
1 person likes this
@ra1787 (501)
• Italy
22 Jul 09
Well the point is that if everyone did work as best as they can for society's sake everyone would deserve to have richness. The point is that in the real world people won't work if they don't personally gain something so true socialism is just an utopia, people would just stop working and exploiting those who work for them.
But i believe that society should guarantee some basic human rights, regardless of how much a person earns, healthcare and education are not services they are rights, so it is not leeching if people have to pay tax to make everyone use them.
It is like saying that if you are killed by someone, that person should not be prosecuted if the killed person didn't pay taxes.
1 person likes this
