So what exactly IS democratic socialism? And is it really that much different from normal socialism?
>>72610378
Pokemon don't have rights.
democratic socialism= nordic countries
lots of public goods paid for by government (healthcare, education, etc)
regular socialism = everything provided by government
see: Venezuela
>>72610378
Normal Socialism, brought about by violent revolution, Democratic Socialism, brought about by the ballot box. The goal is the same Communism. As written by the author of Socialist theory Karl Marx and Fredrich Engels.
>>72610625
>>72610661
Sweden
>tfw you brought a diglet to that gym leader with a raichu and ravaged his bunghole with dig
>>72610715
Holy shit, sweden has open air supermarkets where you can buy boats? fkn awesome
>>72610378
It's a lighter version of socialism without the revolution. What we usually call socialism today (Bernie Sanders, French Socialist Party, etc) is democratic socialism
>>72610378
>what is google
>>72610780
Name the last time Sweden had a food shortage.
>>72610715
Sweden is fast becoming a failed state its not some paradise they harbor terrorists and are genociding the native Swedes.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/15/brussels-terrorist-suspect-featured-in-swedish-documentary-about/
>>72610650
>The goal is the same Communism.
That's not true (at least for modern democratic socialism). The goal is to correct the flaws of capitalism, not to destroy it. It's about reforms, not revolution.
>>72610980
The left Kid looks like the Psychopath from Kinder chocolate.
>>72610625
lots of public goods paid for by government is any state of europe
The difference between spain and nordic countries is the tax burden alocation
Nordic states do not focus on high taxations to bussiness activities or inversor's revenues, that way the enterprise action is not killed as it's on the rest big states
All the taxation relys on the average person, cutting it before and after raw salariy in more steps to keep idiots away from understanding how much they're being robbed
Here at spain who make 13k/year gets soaked 9k by government and he's happy to pay 9k for the shitty services government provide for 9k/year lmao
>>72611029
That is a strawman Frenchie, socialists always say their unique flavor of socialism that hasn't been tried will work or its somehow different but it always has the same results, a failed economy and as things begin to break down they roll out a police state in order to retain power, all while suppressing dissent and or propaganda along with the control of information. They use dishonesty otherwise no one in their right minds would support the failure of marxist economic and social theorys.
It is Menshevism for America, with a soft revolution by election. They were massacred by Bolsheviks in the Russian civil war.
>>72610378
>Bernie Sanders walks into a bar
>"Who here wants a free beer?" he yells
>the patrons roar in unanimous agreement
>Bernie Sanders pulls out a gun and points it at the man behind the counter
>"Now give everyone a free beer or I blow your fucking brains out" he says
>"Who the hell do you think you are?" asks the proprieter
>"A Democratic Socialist" says Bernie
>>72610378
Here's the real answer not all the idiotic 12 year old's answer:
Socialism: the party appoints everyone including the head of the state, you have no say in it.
Democratic Socialism: people elect the government and the head of state.
Hi mother fucker, I HEARD YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT THE FUCKING BEST COUNTRY
WANT MORE STUFF? WE ARE THE FUCKING BEST COUNTRY
TFW 99 PERCENT WHITEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
JAAA VI ELESKER DETTE LANDET
it's best seen where there is a racial divide among classes. if the poor are mostly non-white, while the rich are white, then what you get is democratic socialism - basically the non whites form a voting block and steal as much from the rich whites as they can via legislation.
>>72611442
The problem in Spain and most of Europe is that taxation falls on the working class
Because of this they have very little money and consumer demand is lwo because of low wages
the solution is high wage doctrine where there is progressive taxation and most of the tax burden falls on billionaires.
This is what happened in the US in the early 20th century up until the 80s and it worked very well.
You want low taxes for the working class and high taxes for the top income earners.
>>72610625
Paid for by government? you mean other people right?
>>72610378
It's fascism you can vote for
>>72612245
Yup, you earn way more net over the pond. But you got cheap public transportation, healtcare, free universties, government managed rent system, free job insurance among other other things.
Sometimes argueing about whats better feels like the old urban/rural discussion. It's hard to show the other side what's so beautiful about it. For example I can fully understand that it must be great, to be able choose whatever insurance you need. But on the other hand those are private compnaies. The can go bankrupt, bitch about paying or being ineffective due to marketing, development costs.
I also feel, that all useless third worlders will ruin it. Swedes has already admitted that it "just" takes about 12 years to get them work on average.
>>72612354
the debt burden is spread across society so that people can more easily afford public goods like infrastructure, utilities, roads, defense, education, etc.
When you have private ownership of public infrastructure you get monopolies like Carlos Slim's telecom monopolies in Mexico which he uses to price gauge. All of society looses when public infrastructure becomes very expensive to use
http://www.cnet.com/news/telecom-monopoly-overcharging-mexicans-billions/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=im1QmtfHPb4
Unless you want to turn into Mexico or some banana republic cheap public services need to be provided by the government through progressive taxation. Otherwise you get a society where everything is run by an aristocratic elite (feudalism) much like modern Latin America.
http://www.levyinstitute.org/pubs/wp_708.pdf
>>72610625
>canada is number 6
>south korea is 31
I don't know if I should believe this
Democratic Socialism is when the poor vote to take money away from the rich. Socialism is when they just take the money away from rich without a vote.
It's just a way for justifying the actions of statists. They can't do what they want because they will be called fascists, so they give everyone an illusion of choice to make it look like their actions are justified.
>>72612954
Reality sure is nice, eh?
>a
>fucking
>#6
>>72612862
The problem with US healthcare isn't the service the problem is that due to it being dominated by insurance monopolies (which Obamacare was a handout to) they are hiking prices far faster than the rate of inflation.
>>72612954
You can scrutinize it here
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Index_of_Economic_Freedom
>>72613029
The alternative to taxing the rich and giving people political representation with democracy is feudalism
which I thought Europe had enough of already.
>>72610715
Why does their government give some people boats and canal homes but allows others to freeze in the cold?
>>72610378
It is a delusion created by bored westerners that seeks to have the best of both worlds, but ends up being the worst of both systems.
It's the slow walk into economic and demographic suicide.
It is all the slow increase of government power and control.
Notice how almost all forms of socialism take away guns? That is because it is a decades long process towards indoctrination and communism.
Commie revolutions are just socialism fast forwarded
>>72612866
How exactly does that mean people should have to pay for the healthcare of other people? I dont think most people mind paying for defense/infrastructure that allows the country to function.
>>72613828
I think healthcare is different from public infrastructure
you could argue healthcare either way.
The problem in the US though shows you definitely need regulation to stop insurance monopolies from price gouging.
see
>>72613091
>>72610378
>So what exactly IS democratic socialism? And is it really that much different from normal socialism?
No, it's the same exact bullshit achieved a different way. Marxists, despite all their theories and endless political action, were never able to have a "communist revolution" in any white industrial society, and after the absolute fucking nightmare that was the Soviet Union got exposed to the rest of the world, whites overwhelmingly rejected it. What Marxists realized is that they needed a new strategy to win. For example in the United States the Democrats haven't won the white vote, not once, in a Presidential election since 1964. Therefore their strategy has been to import as many low IQ shitskins as they can because they overwhelmingly vote for socialism, and coupled with their insistence on "democracy" ensures that they merely have to bide their time and prevent anyone from closing the borders and they will mathematically win no matter what.
Here's a fun fact, in the 1980 presidential election Ronald Reagan won by one of the biggest landslides in US history (pic related). But had demographics been what they are today he would have LOST worse than Romney did in 2012 (with Romney actually doing notably better than Reagan with the white vote), and in turn had leftists not been successful with flooding the country with shitskins Romney would have actually won a comparable victory to Reagan's.
>>72614535
Of course. The government needs to break monopolies on industries that allows capitalism to do its job well.
>>72614535
>The problem in the US though shows you definitely need regulation to stop insurance monopolies from price gouging.
Yep, that's the problem. The most highly regulated (and, totally coincidentally, most severely dysfunctional) industry in the entire United States suffers from a lack of regulations. Just a few more laws aught to do the trick.
>>72614985
>The most highly regulated
It's regulated by industry insiders for the benefits of the monopolies known as regulatory capture
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture
there needs to be "trust busting" like there was under Teddy Roosevelt and laws put in place to ensure no more monopolies form.
>>72615449
This is a really radical idea, but maybe you should research into things a little bit before having opinions on very important issues.
The "monopolies" are 100% a function of government regulation, both in the direct sense because it's illegal to compete across state lines so you're forced into buying from a tiny pool of providers, and through about a million regulations that have fucked up the industry so badly that the only practical option you have is to go through this intermediary system of employer, to insurance company, to hospital, to doctor. And then there's about a million regulations that distort and otherwise increase the cost between every one of those intermediaries.
You people make me want to rip my hair out because there's literally no end to how badly you people ruin societies through the process of
>try and "fix" some real or perceived problem via government regulation
>Problem doesn't actually go away, and you just end up with a whole bunch of unintended consequences
>As you don't bother studying economics nor looking at all of the effects of the policies , you just assume that more regulations will fix it
>Repeat ad nauseum until you've completely destroyed the industry
>Declare that this is all the fault of capitalism, and that we would all be better off with a socialist system
I'm to the point where I would welcome a Pinochet-style dictator who would just start mass killing leftist.
>>72616408
I'm aware of how regulatory capture works regulation today exists to help monopolies, but to fix this doesn't mean you want 'no' regulation it means you want better regulation.
We need laws that result in more competition and laws that prevent collusion and monopolies.
