4081
4082

South Park - Safe Space - "In My Safe Space" (youtube.com)

VirginWizard69 が 投稿

並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A
あなたは単独のコメントのスレッドを見ています。

残りのコメントをみる →

[–]unruly_peasants 123ポイント124ポイント  (62子コメント)

Don't believe Barnie's propaganda. There is no such thing as Norway. And Denmark doesn't exist.

[–]Sail2525 49ポイント50ポイント  (29子コメント)

So you're saying Bernie's "democratic socialism" would work in a homogeneous white country with massive oil profits? Now that I think about it, Norway has a LOT of experience with a democratic socialist party...

[–]ScenesfromaCat 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

Denmark is the only democratic socialist or even remotely democratic socialist (like if we're including the healthcare and education policies of every other major 1st world country) state with a higher GDP than us. The rest are lower. Germany, Denmark, Sweden... all have less money than us. And also racism problems. Like us.

EDIT: GDP per capita*. They have a lower GDP than the US.

[–]pointsOutWeirdStuff 7ポイント8ポイント  (17子コメント)

I'm not being facetious here but can someone explain to me why homogeneity is relevant? cause I've heard this many times expressed like its really obvious but then no one explains why all the people being white for example would make democratic socialism work better

[–]PrimativeJoe 13ポイント14ポイント  (3子コメント)

It's less to do with race and more that people of the same race tend to be within the same social and economic classes.

[–]smokeyjoe69 10ポイント11ポイント  (0子コメント)

And culture, often plays a part.

[–]ciobanica -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

Well, you know, they are as long as you have minorities to take upthe poorer people role. Otherwise they tend to fill all econ classes, as is tradition.

[–]ciobanica -2ポイント-1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Well, you know, they are as long as you have minorities to take upthe poorer people role. Otherwise they tend to fill all econ classes, as is tradition.

[–]Sail2525 7ポイント8ポイント  (4子コメント)

Nation-states have a much more stable culture and a narrower range (not necessarily less, but less issues) of internal social conflict. A society premised on high levels of social support generally cannot handle the internal cultural, but especially economic, stress high levels of pluralism brings.

It's no surprise that Denmark and Norway can get away with things that France, Italy, and Spain cannot. Successful socialism and xenophobia are usually correlated. People might be willing to sacrifice for a nation, or even a state, but eventually limits are reached.

[–]anavar____ -5ポイント-4ポイント  (7子コメント)

Less crime when everybody is part of the same culture.

[–]off_the_grid_dream 7ポイント8ポイント  (4子コメント)

Ummm. Having grown up in a town of only whites. I believe it is the amount of money you have, not your race that determines if you steal from/hurt others or otherwise break the law.

[–]anavar____ -5ポイント-4ポイント  (3子コメント)

The facts and statistics would show you are wrong. There is less crime in homogenous areas than heterogenous ones. No one is claiming areas are crime free, just that certain areas have less crime. Homogenous places like Norway and Denmark have very little crime and most of their crime is in areas where they actually have immigrants.

[–]off_the_grid_dream 6ポイント7ポイント  (2子コメント)

They also have very little poverty. I have been to Denmark and 11 other countries including Cuba, Costa Rica, Fiji, Australia, NZ, Vanuatu, New Caledonia, Germany, Austria, Czech Republic, US. From those experiences I can tell you money is THE major factor for crime in all of those places. Denmark had the cleanest streets and the fewest poor people in any country I have been to so far.

[–]ciobanica -2ポイント-1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Yeah, i mean when you all agree killing the jew/black/arab/etc isnt a crime, but a duty, the murder rate goes down for some reason.all of a sudden.

[–]ciobanica -2ポイント-1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Yeah, i mean when you all agree killing the jew/black/arab/etc isnt a crime, but a duty, the murder rate goes down for some reason.all of a sudden.

[–]moeburn 5ポイント6ポイント  (1子コメント)

Yeah fuck it let's not try.

[–]Sail2525 9ポイント10ポイント  (0子コメント)

It's weird how that attitude never seems to apply to freedom.

[–]Wisefool157 -1ポイント0ポイント  (5子コメント)

I laugh every time reddit brings up examples of successful "socialism" and they are these tiny nations with massive profits able to support their entire population. At the same time, these redditors ignore the massive U.S. population, ignore the fact that we really only push paper and export bullets in this country, and then go on to argue for the staying of illegal immigrants while also arguing for the expansion of immigration into this country. Liberal land must be something else.

[–]Sail2525 2ポイント3ポイント  (3子コメント)

I get it if that's the kind of country people want. My knowledge of history and human nature makes me skeptical of such a society, but reasonable minds can disagree. But you can be socialist, or you can be diverse and have an open border policy. Pick one. The progressive base at this point is one big contradiction.

[–]mrpeabody208 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

What isn't a contradiction in US politics? The ACA doesn't work because it's trying to be a social safety net and a corporate giveaway at the same time. A Republican candidate tells the pope to leave climate science to the scientists. The Democratic president supports a capitalist trade agreement along with his congressional opponents who spent the previous seven years calling him a socialist. Some Americans have no problem denouncing sex education while decrying abortion. Dollars are the standard unit of political participation in a country that claims to be a democracy (the best one, too).

We pretty much face forwards and walk backwards, unless we're facing backwards and walking forwards. I'll say this for progressives, of which I am nominally one: at least there's some sort of consistency of outlook. They want a more egalitarian society. Damned if they're sure how they're going to get it, but if you gauge the progressive outlook on the contradictions I mentioned, you might see consistency rather than contradiction.

[–]Wisefool157 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

I can completely understand if people want that kind of country too. Who wouldn't? The reality is its just not feasible in the U.S. at this time. We need to figure out a way to create jobs with sustainable incomes for the majority of our people. I'm not talking about jobs at Walmart Wendy's or 7/11. That should be the #1 priority. More people will not help the situation. The workforce is flooded. Our middle class is shrinking and those that remain with families are on the verge of breaking. A policy like the ACA has only contributed to the demise.

[–]raohthekenoh 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

The idea of a society with high levels of entitlement and government spending has to by definition keep people from immigrating en masse and becoming a part of that. I never got how people have trouble putting that together when the most socialist countries end up being the most exclusionary. No surprise there.

[–]ciobanica 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Yeah, i mean its not like the US has the biggest economy in the world. Poor guys just couldn't compete with them nordic profits.

[–]captmarx -1ポイント0ポイント  (1子コメント)

We are much bigger oil producers and economically and resource wise superior to those countries in every way. Applying their successful policies won't work as well as it does there, it'll work much, much better.

And sorry friends, you're being straight up racist or at least buying some straight bs from racist. Black people don't magically make economic principles and proven policy action moot–all those Mexicans immigrating in doesn't make deregulation, lack of help to middle class families, and trickle-down economics any less idiotic.

[–]Sail2525 -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

We're being racist because you're supporting an ideology that usually has racist elements. I'm so confused.

[–]Grumpy-Pants 20ポイント21ポイント  (11子コメント)

i've heard of those places, they're the places with tiny populations with what appears to be the most homogeneous populations on the planet, u can learn about them on the internet, they are real places my friend!!

[–]pointsOutWeirdStuff 1ポイント2ポイント  (9子コメント)

I'm not being facetious here but can someone explain to me why homogeneity is relevant? cause I've heard this many times expressed like its really obvious but then no one explains why all the people being white for example would make democratic socialism work better

[–]Grumpy-Pants 2ポイント3ポイント  (2子コメント)

probably because we're hairless apes and are less likely to share with hairless apes that don't look or act like us. tragic, i know.

[–]registered2LOLatU 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Cool I know where a lot of hairless apes live, let's let them move in with you.

[–]smokeyjoe69 4ポイント5ポイント  (3子コメント)

You need a productive culture that functions well as a society with very little corruption. Its not only being homogeneous its being homogeneous and having a cohesive culture. It is very difficult to achieve democratic socialism without near perfect stability, without that kind of culture, Bureaucracy and corruption will grow massively out of control. Technically you could have more than one homogeneous culture working together but the historical conditions haven't created that kind of environment. And there are not many cultures as incorruptible as the Scandinavian ones.

It is sometime associated with immigration but it is not necessarily the same thing, as the immediate issue with immigration is the toll on the welfare state. Which has sped up the process of the systems growing to a point of unsustainability. That's one of the reasons it as been failing in southern and western Europe and why even Sweden is having massive problems with maintaining their system amongst heavy north Africa and middle eastern immigration.

America is a nation of immigrants so It would be particularity hard to adopt in the US for that reason amongst many others. We cant even have a "small" government without bureaucracy getting so diluted and out of control that we are practically already spending and getting taxed as much as a Democratic socialist nation. This makes me very skeptical at our ability to maintain the necessary levels of efficiency for the system to work. Another issue is regulations, even though the scandanavian countries have higher taxes they also have higher degrees of capitalism and economic freedom which allows growth in the lower and medium levels of the economy. Growth that gets chocked out by often well intended regulation that corporations can either survive because of market share or get around with loopholes, while new growth and SME's (small and medium sized enterprises) are crushed. This enforces income inequality as control of economic capital shifts towards big companies who supply large amounts of low paying jobs, limiting opportunities for individual empowerment.

[–]Recursive_Descent 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

Man, I just don't believe that. We don't in any sense of the word have a small government. We have an absolutely enormous government, and people like Reagan did that. We just have relatively shitty social programs.

Our military-industrial complex is enormous, more than 50% of all world spending. And yet, we don't have money for education?

And it's not like this would be some working class coup either. The people who support Bernie are more likely more educated and have a higher income than any other candidate right now.

I'm a college educated white male making >150k. My demographic is decidedly in favor of Bernie (on the democratic side). My demographic, which has been booming, is trying desperately to stimulate our country. And you just don't want it.

So you know what, fuck you. If Bernie doesn't win, and Hillary or some republican do, and my taxes get lowered, I'll be happy taking the money knowing I did everything in my power to help you ungrateful assholes. But not really. It is frustrating though.

[–]smokeyjoe69 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I dont disagree with what you are saying. That's why I put small government in quotes.

I dont think we should spend as much as we do on military. I also look at how the money is spent and the source. For example since the federal government took a heavier hand in education in the 1980's we have spent billions of dollars standardizing it and making it worse. Innovation in education needs to be regional and the central government for hopefully obvious historical reasons should not have undue influence on the educational narrative.

What Reagan said was very different from how he governed forever melding a real ideology with completely separate governance in the minds of many people.

Reagan was a big government corporatist in practice nothing about him was free market.

I want to stimulate our country by creating conditions that allow stimulation I want to empower people not just give them a stipend which largely enforces conditions for poverty in the long run. I don't want to waste money in a bureaucracy that spends way to much, way too inefficiently and often on the wrong things.

If you are so desperate to help people give to charity your money will go a lot farther.

I am ok with supporting the fallen, less so with enabling conditions for poverty, which is a tricky line to walk when dealing with policy. Also I'm not for increasing spending on much of anything until we reorganize the methods by which we spend to avoid the perpetual and unsustainable waste, debt and financial policy leading us to create artificial value, destroying our economy and handing China the keys to the future of the reserve currency once they go through their transitional economic slump. This is because I also care about the general welfare, I just look at the source of how the general welfare is raised instead of well intended but impractical policy that often ends up limiting opportunity and enforcing inequality in the long run.

[–]z_mcon -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

Funny that an answer like yours is blatantly ignored here on Reddit.

[–]Grotburger -1ポイント0ポイント  (1子コメント)

They can't. The homogeneity argument works right up until Australia is mentioned. Australia is more 'melting pot' than the US and manages universal healthcare, good public education, a high minimum wage and gun control.

[–]foxh8er 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Downvoted for being accurate. Classic Reddit.

Australia also managed to miss the global recession because of effective economic policies and the mining boom. All that and pizza still costs around the same it does at my place (although internet and video games are shit).

[–]Pourtaste 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Imag-I-naation, ahem, iii-maaag-I-naaaa-tion...

[–]bluntmasterflash 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

The President doesn't make the laws and congress couldn't pass gas right now unless you paid them.

[–]RedditIsRacistBro 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-09-29/teslas-hit-by-180-tax-in-denmark-as-green-goals-get-left-behind

Free education isn't free.

[–]daeger 0ポイント1ポイント  (4子コメント)

Because all that's stopping us from becoming New Norway is a few policy changes. It's that simple, right guys?

[–]CatBagels 3ポイント4ポイント  (2子コメント)

Because when faced with the reality that our country isn't the happiest or best in any category except "defense spending", we should insufficiently debunk and belittle the suggestion that our country should implement the most successful policies of the most successful countries, right guys?

[–]chreymo 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Unless of course the people who created that data have a super progressive agenda, and Scandinavia isn't actually the happiest place in the world... luckily, data has never been used to deceive or manipulate people, especially using vague metrics like "happiness", which all scientists know is highly quantifiable

[–]anavar____ -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

The most successful countries? They have higher rates of suicide, depression, mental illness. They have homogenous populations. There are countries with similar policies that have had nearly 0 success.

[–]unruly_peasants 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Policy changes involving adopting a single payer health care program like other rich countries, for example. Yes. That would be good for our overall economy and society.

[–]tempaccountONLY 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

Norway does exist, but it has 3 million less people than New York City. Denmark too. YMMV with their policies.

[–]unruly_peasants 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

So, NYC is one of the wealthiest places on earth. If California was an independent country, it would be one of the largest economies in the world. Why does the population size matter anyways, exactly?

[–]Enthused_Llama 0ポイント1ポイント  (2子コメント)

Combined population of Denmark and Norway: 10.6 Million

Population of Ohio: 11.5 Million

[–]unruly_peasants 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

Tell me how that is relevant?

[–]Enthused_Llama 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

If you can't see how population might be important you've got no business discussing this.

[–]Free_Joty 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Us= Norway yeah buddy

[–]smokeyjoe69 -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

You need a productive culture that functions well as a society with very little corruption. Its not only being homogeneous its being homogeneous and having a cohesive culture. It is very difficult to achieve democratic socialism without near perfect stability, without that kind of culture, Bureaucracy and corruption will grow massively out of control. Technically you could have more than one homogeneous culture working together but the historical conditions haven't created that kind of environment. And there are not many cultures as incorruptible as the Scandinavian ones.

It is sometime associated with immigration but it is not necessarily the same thing, as the immediate issue with immigration is the toll on the welfare state. Which has sped up the process of the systems growing to a point of unsustainability. That's one of the reasons it as been failing in southern and western Europe and why even Sweden is having massive problems with maintaining their system amongst heavy north Africa and middle eastern immigration.

America is a nation of immigrants so It would be particularity hard to adopt in the US for that reason amongst many others. We cant even have a "small" government without bureaucracy getting so diluted and out of control that we are practically already spending and getting taxed as much as a Democratic socialist nation. This makes me very skeptical at our ability to maintain the necessary levels of efficiency for the system to work.

Another issue is regulations, even though the scandanavian countries have higher taxes they also have higher degrees of capitalism and economic freedom which allows growth in the lower and medium levels of the economy. Growth that gets chocked out by often well intended regulation that corporations can either survive because of market share or get around with loopholes, while new growth and SME's (small and medium sized enterprises) are crushed. This enforces income inequality as control of economic capital shifts towards big companies who supply large amounts of low paying jobs, limiting opportunities for individual empowerment.

[–]sfengi 0ポイント1ポイント  (2子コメント)

I can't believe there are idiots out there that could possibly believe implementing Norway's governmental polices in the US could ever be effective. What fucking idiots.

[–]BlueSentinels 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

I know because whenever our country has ever adopted socialist policies like FDR's new deal it turned out to be a total bust! /s

[–]sfengi 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

No need for the /s. I would call skyrocketing the deficit and not fixing the unemployment rate a bust.

[–]Thatguymorganwall -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

Well lets take a look at Sweden!