what is /pol/ opinion on Democratic Socialism
what are the pros and cons to it
>>65494445
>what is /pol/
/pol/ is a board for the discussion of news and current events
>>65494445
>>65494445
>Finland
>happy
pick one
either we are drunk most of the time, or we are on depression meds, or both at the same time, or we are passed out.
>>65494495
then what is /news/ and if that's enough for you Willow Bernie Sanders being a Democratic socialist
>>65494445
Give money to the poor by raising taxes which in turn makes more people poor, and therefore needs more tax raises to make up for the poor it ever creates.
It is a broken system.
>>65494445
PRIVATIZE EVERYTHING
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/02/socialist-paradise-of-sweden-reportedly-moving-to-private-healthcare/
>>65494445
It's socialism by mob rule. More and more gibs me dat until there are no gibs left to take. Then collapse.
It can possibly work in countries with a sense of unity, but not with heavily multicultural societies where half the country is composed of welfare leeches, like the US
>>65494644
Stop spreading stupid shit you loser.
>>65495269
NO
Democratic Socialism is a wonderful system to install if your society is culturally and ethnically homogeneous. This is because Democratic Socialism thrives in societies in which citizens trust and rely on each other, because it is easier for them to hold one another accountable for their actions due to familiarity.
The US, however, is one of the most culturally diverse regions of the world. And the unfortunate consequence of diversity is that citizens lack trust with one another. Given the size and scope of the US, this issue becomes particularly hard to manage.
In other words, trying to install democratic socialism and diversity at the same time is a recipe for failure. It doesn't work, and never will.
Ahh yes, DemSoc Scandinavia, proud inventor of such products as Legos and
Any economic or political system not built around capitalism either completely halts or slows down scientific advancement
>>65494445
>Sweden
>happiest in the world
go fuck yourselves
On paper it looks nice.
In practice it creates cuck countries.
>Democratic Socialism
>Social Democracy
What is the difference?
>>65495483
>Democratic Socialism is a wonderful system to install if your society is culturally and ethnically homogeneous
I population like that doesn't require socialism because people take care of each other on their own
>>65495483
Well said
Pros: Hight standard of living for everyone
Cons: You will be cucked
Works very well in monoethnic and monocultural societies where everyone shares the same values. Doesn't work very well at all otherwise.
>>65494445
it's bad generally for it tends to suck any and all national economic potential into the budget via oppressive taxation, driving innovation and high-end professions abroad
it's good if you figure out a way to have a piece of such a bloated budget, be it through gibsmedats or public bids for your business, have a company overseas like in Panama and channel your gains there, get every competitior on board in an unofficial cartel and your children's children's futures will be provided for with no value add on your part
I'm afraid it's inevitable - UBI is coming like it or not since there won't be enough employment opptys for the majority of population and so it will be enacted to pacify the masses
>>65494445
All democracy is weak. We need to suspended it and have a fascist government for a while to deal with all the Muzzies and migrants.
Only white people can handle some measure of democracy, and even then monarchical constitutional monarchy works best, with a strong monarch.
Humans need strong leadership.
>>65495483
>Democratic Socialism is a wonderful system to install if your society is culturally and ethnically homogeneous
>>65495794
>You will be cucked
No?
>>65494660
>then what is /news/
SFW
>>65496795
whats /int/ then
>>65495483
When democratic socialism was installed in Germany and Sweden, they were under the conditions you describe. They didn't work.
The problem is that wealth creates sub-replacement fertility rates and the young eventually can no longer afford to take care of the old when they're outnumbered. We're currently seeing this in the US with the failing of the social security program.
Because of falling birth rates these countries create things like the Turkish guest worker program, which has been a huge failure, and more recently allowing millions of economic migrants into their countries, and I don't have to tell /pol/ that the Syrians are bigger welfare leeches than the Germans who already could not sustain themselves, simultaneously raping everything.
The countries are no longer homogeneous because of democratic socialism, not in spite of it.
The result of this is that, rather than lose control of the country, the German and Swedish governments impose laws that forbid questioning them, their intentions, the facts they put forth, their policies, etc.
The final stage of this will be when the crime, rape, and other factors build up to such a point as to force the hand of ethnically European people into throwing their governments and invaders out. What is important to look at then is how they address the issue of socialism; do they perpetuate the cycle, or break it. Alternatively, do those who they they haven't given enough away regain power and institute full-blown communism.
We should also be looking at countries like Japan and how they handle sub-replacement fertility. Until now they've been extremely reluctant to allow anyone in and are trying to boost their population without immigration. Their success in this is almost directly tied to the success of democratic socialism in a post-scarcity world.
>>65495705
>I population like that doesn't require socialism
Forms of government work because they synergize with the population.
It doesn't "require" socialism. But socialism works wonderfully with it.
>>65497289
>The problem is that wealth creates sub-replacement fertility rates and the young eventually can no longer afford to take care of the old when they're outnumbered
What we really need to do is let the population numbers fall. What the argument keeps turning into is that "We need more people because we need more people".
The reality is that we're reaching a point where for a lot of forms of labor, people aren't really needed anymore. Technological advances are putting us in a position where you could cut down the labor of a 100 low-education manual workers to just 10 high-education maintenance workers.
This insistence that we NEED more people really needs to fucking stop; We don't. What we need is a small and easily manageable set of highly educated overseers.
The problem with democratic socialism isn't that it exists. It's that it doesn't adhere properly to nationalism like it should. And more of these democratic socialist countries *did* adhere to these nationalistic tendencies until recently.
>>65497117
swf /bantz/
>>65494445
>democratic socialism
>social democracy
>same thing
The first is creating socialism through democratic voting, the other is swj capitalism
>>65499059
Holy shit you are retarded.
People have been discussing increased automation for decades or possibly a century. and it still hasn't happened yet. It doesn't happen overnight. It won't be anywhere near what you describe for hundreds of years.
If the working class is to pay for the welfare class then they have to outnumber the welfare leeches by several times. Being white won't magically fix that money is finite and has a fixed value.
It's not "hurrdurr we need more people" it's simply that the many can't look out for the few when their roles are reversed and a society with any substantial guaranteed income incentivizes the people to acquire only that because it's enough.
Socialism of any form does not work over a sustained period of time, nor can it.
>>65500368
Yes, we're definitly not seeing accelerating returns, and the field of robotics is definitly not expanding. All the massive productivity gains are achieved because people work harder.
>>65500496
That's not what I said, faggot. Keep telling yourself that flying cars are just over the horizon then wondering where they are 20 years after your prediction.
>>65500799
I'm not talking about flying cars. I'm saying the reason wages have been crashing is because we have more people than we need, but push them all into employment. And the reason we have more people than we need is because more and more jobs are done by machines instead of people. You think bringing manufacturing back will bring a lot of jobs? Forget it, factories are full of robots nowadays. There's a reason the service sector is everywhere and its wages are as low as legally allowed.
Stop immigration, stop the population expansion, and we can finally have decent wages again, without the job reductions through machines killing us.
>>65494445
this basically
>>65494562
Who would win, 300 leftists or one helicopter?
I think the perfect sistem would be democratic national socialism.
If you see sweden before the flooding of refugees there was almost a perfect country, but they had to fuck it up because "muh rycism"
>>65501020
But there are always going to be things that machines can't do and were still very far from a society where machines do all the work. There are plenty of manufacturing jobs left in the right industries as well.
It's certainly an issue that we have to face at some point, but now is not the time. Nor is it relevant to the topic of aging populations. You would also have a hard time with things like China's one-child policy anywhere in the western world.
Socialism is not compatible with aging populations, and regardless of where you think the population level should be, that has no bearing on the effectivity of socialist programs.
