Why Socialism Always Results in Tyrannical Rule

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 02, 2016 8:12 PM GMT
    A good read when discussing with those who have tasted the opium that is socialism. Link on next message.
    The only exception IMO is in a few countries where there are abundant resources relative to a sparse population, such as Norway. Even Sweden moved rightward.

    ---------------------------

    The Controlling Elite Love Socialism for the People-Control Properties of the System, But for the Average Citizen the Results Have Always Been Disastrous.

    In the 20th century there have been numerous political systems, but in the latter half of the century there were only two survivors, Socialism and Capitalism. So we have at this time in the Western world, which for all practical purposes controls the world, two opposing political systems. (I have already previously stated that there is no basic difference between socialists and communists. There are, however, some very important factors relating to socialism of which you should be aware. Socialism will not work in a free market economy and, as a consequence it invariably deteriorates into a totalitarian state. Anyone wishing to argue that point is asked to point to one single instance where this was not the result).

    It therefore behooves us to remember who the worst despotic governments of this century were: Nazis in Germany, Fascists in Italy, Communists in the USSR, [Romania, East Germany, Bulgaria, Hungary, Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, Poland, Cuba, North Korea, Cambodia, Vietnam, etc.] and China - each and every one of them a paragon of socialist endeavor. Their leaders; Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin [Ceausescu, Tito, Pol Pot, etc.] and Mao Tse Tung. The outstanding legacy of these individuals is that they each tried to out-do the others in the total number of their own citizens which they murdered. It is a fact that each of these men killed more of their own civilian citizens than they lost in military conflict.

    The reason for this is inherent to socialism. It promises things that it cannot possibly deliver. When socialist politicians in power come to the realization that it is impossible to deliver on their promises and political unrest develops, they have two options if they plan to stay in power. First, they must locate a scapegoat on whom they can blame their inability to deliver. Any Jew can tell you who that was for the Germans and the Russians. The second is to develop, and rapidly so, a state security apparatus to keep them in office - the SS, the KGB, [Securitate, Stasi] etc.

    The basic tenets of socialism are:
    1. Seduce the populace into accepting the government as the arbitrator of all problems; government from cradle-to-grave
    2. Begin delivering on those services to make the citizens dependent
    3. Take away the citizens' guns
    4. Increase taxes on all services while destroying any free market alternative services
    5. Blame the chosen scapegoat for the inability to meet demand for services
    6. Have the centralized national police force round up any dissidents


    Socialism cannot work because the cost of services must be collected in the form of taxes, and this is not a sustainable possibility. The reason is that since government pays for all services, neither the producer nor the consumer cares about the cost, and hence there is an uncontrolled spiral of inflation (today's medical costs are a case in point and healthcare is not yet totally socialized). Furthermore, the government has no funds or assets. It only has the funds it confiscated from its citizens. The total inefficiency of a centralized bureaucracy does not help either.
    Once citizens are weaned on this cradle-to-grave concept and are no longer self-reliant, they become wards of the state and will not accept any reduction of services. The government subsequently has no option but to reduce services, and as popular resistance develops State repression begins. This is the socialist cycle. It has been found to occur in every socialist state in existence to date.

    The current most outrageous examples of this are North Korea and Cuba. These two societies share much in common - both are socialist, both are totalitarian, both have more political prisoners then any nation close to their size, both have non-working universal health care, in both the citizens suffer malnutrition, and both have food and fuel rationing. Their leaders and party members, in the meantime, eat caviar and drink champagne.

    Socialism can never work in any environment. It violates human nature and logic.

    The capitalist economic system differs greatly from its socialist adversary in numerous ways. While the socialist system is a top down centralized arrangement, the capitalist system, which can only exist in a free market economy that recognizes the right of private property, is totally controlled by the market itself. Interestingly, personal freedom, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness can also only thrive in free market economies. Capitalism is a sort of volatile and confusing situation where the capital markets dictate demand, price, and methods of distribution. The reason that the left is so very successful in criticizing capitalism is because it is not regulated and therefore difficult to explain. The reason capitalism works so well is that demand dictates production as well as price, thus avoiding market inequities and shortages.

    Socialism's principal theorem is centralization of markets under government control. This has never worked and there is not one single instance in world history where centralized governmental market manipulation has been successful. This, however, does not deter the Robert Reichs (America's socialist Secretary of Labor who said, "Greedy corporations are screwing their employees, squeezing down wages while increasing profits." This statement, from an economic illiterate who has never in his entire life worked for, or in, a business that made a profit. He appears to me to be a little man with a Napoleon complex, who, while having no clue about anything to do with economics, presents himself as a great expert. Corporate downsizing, mergers, and staff reductions has a great deal to do with international trade policies, NAFTA, EC, WTO, etc. and very little to do with greed.) of this world, who continuously make every effort to centralize economic as well as social and political power for themselves and their Satori masters (the ruling elite).

    George Washington said it best: "Government, like fire, is a good servant, but a fearful master." All capitalist functions are directed at free market concepts. A free market is one that serves society with little government interference. This concept is unpopular with the Satori because in order to attain more and more power they require centralization of all economic, social, and political functions. Because of their poor performance in the political frame they have altered their modus operandi and are now implementing their schemes through judicial activism. These judicial incursions, which by the way, in the United States are in violation of constitutional law, have been sold to the public based on the false misnomer that greedy capitalists don't care about the people, their welfare, safety, or health, but that politicians do.

    This, without doubt, is a ludicrous statement. The capitalist must perform to market standards. Competition will put him out of business if he provides an inferior product or service. He is furthermore constrained by his customers, stockholders, board of directors, lending institutions, as well as numerous laws, and, if all else fails, product liability statutes. In addition there is a veritable alphabet soup of governmental agencies which oversee his product, conduct with employees, public safety, product safety, environmental compliance, and financial performance.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 02, 2016 8:13 PM GMT
    continued from above

    In fact capitalists are over-regulated, which causes a considerable burden to be put on the public in the form of increased prices. A noteworthy fact is: the most egregious acts against the consumer, the environment, and the public in general, have all been made by socialist states.

    http://www.orthodoxnet.com/news/WhySocialismAlwaysResultsInTyranny.html
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 02, 2016 8:28 PM GMT
    I cannot imagine the US ultimately devolving into a totalitarian state if the likes of a Sanders and similar followers were elected. Instead, the economy would collapse, and while force would be needed to control the resulting chaos, eventually the free market system would rebuild, but it would be a slow, painful process.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 02, 2016 8:39 PM GMT
    Great article! I think every person is born with certain talents, and Capitalism is the only system where those talents can be expressed by the most number of people.

    No other political system could select out a Henry Ford to mass produce automobiles, or a Steve Jobs to make computers.
  • rnch

    Posts: 11525

    Feb 02, 2016 8:40 PM GMT
    SF, are you supplementing your height-challenged retirement by being some kind of irritating, annoying, right wing political shill?

    A #FoxFeauxNews huckster of the internet?

    ALL of your threads here are of some conservative, far out right wing nature.

    Don't you have ANYTHING to do in your retirement than pollute the internet??
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 02, 2016 8:42 PM GMT
    S2Ki saidGreat article! I think every person is born with certain talents, and Capitalism is the only system where those talents can be expressed by the most number of people.

    No other political system could select out a Henry Ford to mass produce automobiles, or a Steve Jobs to make computers.

    Before the Berlin wall came down, I was on both sides. The difference was striking.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 02, 2016 8:47 PM GMT
    rnch saidSF, are you supplementing your height-challenged retirement by being some kind of irritating, annoying, right wing political shill?

    A #FoxFeauxNews huckster of the internet?

    ALL of your threads here are of some conservative, far out right wing nature.

    Don't you have ANYTHING to do in your retirement than pollute the internet??

    VillageIdiot,

    You don't even have the intelligence to read what I posted. Could you even write a rebuttal? We all know the answer to that one.

    I don't like to talk about physical appearances, especially because I don't have a public face pic, but your height comment merits an exception. You are an ugly, fat, out-of-shape pathetic piece of garbage. You're lucky the civil service system allows dead weight, with weight being an apt description. Aside for being stupid, you are also immature. When you get dumped, your relationship questions make 18-year olds seem mature.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 02, 2016 9:06 PM GMT
    socalfitness said
    S2Ki saidGreat article! I think every person is born with certain talents, and Capitalism is the only system where those talents can be expressed by the most number of people.

    No other political system could select out a Henry Ford to mass produce automobiles, or a Steve Jobs to make computers.

    Before the Berlin wall came down, I was on both sides. The difference was striking.


    If you were over there for defense purposes....thank you! I remember reading about the differences. Socialism really did a number on the work ethic of the East Germans, not to mention the standard of living.
  • rnch

    Posts: 11525

    Feb 02, 2016 9:25 PM GMT
    socalfitness said
    rnch saidSF, are you supplementing your height-challenged retirement by being some kind of irritating, annoying, right wing political shill?

    A #FoxFeauxNews huckster of the internet?

    ALL of your threads here are of some conservative, far out right wing nature.

    Don't you have ANYTHING to do in your retirement than pollute the internet??

    VillageIdiot,

    You don't even have the intelligence to read what I posted. Could you even write a rebuttal? We all know the answer to that one.

    I don't like to talk about physical appearances, especially because I don't have a public face pic, but your height comment merits an exception. You are an ugly, fat, out-of-shape pathetic piece of garbage. You're lucky the civil service system allows dead weight, with weight being an apt description. Aside for being stupid, you are also immature. When you get dumped, your relationship questions make 18-year olds seem mature.




    SUCH an intelligent, witty, mature, grown up reply!

    Loose your temper easily, do you? And then resort to childish, angry name calling and immature slander?

    An excellent example of the "Short Man Syndrome".



    icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 02, 2016 9:52 PM GMT
    S2Ki said
    socalfitness said
    S2Ki saidGreat article! I think every person is born with certain talents, and Capitalism is the only system where those talents can be expressed by the most number of people.

    No other political system could select out a Henry Ford to mass produce automobiles, or a Steve Jobs to make computers.

    Before the Berlin wall came down, I was on both sides. The difference was striking.


    If you were over there for defense purposes....thank you! I remember reading about the differences. Socialism really did a number on the work ethic of the East Germans, not to mention the standard of living.

    West Berlin was vibrant, exciting, a bit extreme with all the neon signs. East Berlin was dimly lit at night and extremely drab. Scaffolding was all around abandoned projects to fix buildings. The most brightly lit area was the death strip, the grassy area between the two walls that comprised the Berlin Wall.

    I became friends with a family which included 2 brothers in their 20s who escaped from E. Germany, expecting to never see their parents again. They couldn't even tell their parents they were escaping because the Stasi would pick up friends and relatives for interrogation, lasting 48-72 hours. Anyone admitting they knew of escape plans would be imprisoned for 18-24 months. Socialism and the resulting tyranny was really ugly.
  • oldfart

    Posts: 328

    Feb 03, 2016 1:15 PM GMT
    SF, one question: Are highways a "public" good?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 03, 2016 3:35 PM GMT
    Socialism promises everything to everybody but results in a bloodbath for all.
  • SkyMiles

    Posts: 963

    Feb 03, 2016 3:57 PM GMT
    Disagree.

    American-style socialism is awesome! We built roads, bridges, electrical grids, plumbing and sewer systems, we drained swamps, built dams, and cured diseases through public works and public health programs, established workers rights, weekends, a minimum wage, established social security so that the old and the sick don't die of starvation on the streets like they did in droves during the 1930s, eliminated child labor, set safety standards. Business hates all of that and constantly fights against such things tooth and nail as we know from how things were in the early 1900s. Do you really want unregulated industry deciding what can go into your hot dogs again prior to "The Jungle"? Do you want your favorite restaurant to NEVER see a health inspector? Maybe buildings should all go back to being flammable death traps; who needs all those pesky codes and regulations?

    American socialism got us out of the great depression and won two world wars, put a man on the moon and sent probes out into space.
    When your house is on fire, professionals come right away and put it out.

    What has capitalism given us, oh right, "Afluenza Teens" and "Pharma Bros", "Wolves of Wall Street", Enron, Countrywide Financial, AIG, Donald Trump, the Koch Brothers and slavery. Love Canal, massive recalls and thalidomide kids. Given the choice between American style socialism and American style capitalism, I'll take the socialism any day of the week.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 03, 2016 4:13 PM GMT
    SkyMiles saidDisagree.

    American-style socialism is awesome! We built roads, bridges, electrical grids, plumbing and sewer systems, we drained swamps, built dams, and cured diseases through public works and public health programs, established workers rights, weekends, a minimum wage, established social security so that the old and the sick don't die of starvation on the streets like they did in droves during the 1930s, eliminated child labor, set safety standards. Business hates all of that and constantly fights against such things tooth and nail as we know from how things were in the early 1900s. Do you really want unregulated industry deciding what can go into your hot dogs again prior to "The Jungle"? Do you want your favorite restaurant to NEVER see a health inspector? Maybe buildings should all go back to being flammable death traps; who needs all those pesky codes and regulations?

    American socialism got us out of the great depression and won two world wars, put a man on the moon and sent probes out into space.
    When your house is on fire, professionals come right away and put it out.

    What has capitalism given us, oh right, "Afluenza Teens" and "Pharma Bros", "Wolves of Wall Street", Enron, Countrywide Financial, AIG, Donald Trump, the Koch Brothers and slavery. Love Canal, massive recalls and thalidomide kids. Given the choice between American style socialism and American style capitalism, I'll take the socialism any day of the week.

    A capitalistic economy does not preclude public works.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 03, 2016 4:14 PM GMT
    Alpha13 saidSocialism promises everything to everybody but results in a bloodbath for all.

    A bloodbath or misery.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 03, 2016 4:42 PM GMT
    SkyMiles saidDisagree.

    American-style socialism is awesome! We built roads, bridges, electrical grids, plumbing and sewer systems, we drained swamps, built dams, and cured diseases through public works and public health programs, established workers rights, weekends, a minimum wage, established social security so that the old and the sick don't die of starvation on the streets like they did in droves during the 1930s, eliminated child labor, set safety standards. Business hates all of that and constantly fights against such things tooth and nail as we know from how things were in the early 1900s. Do you really want unregulated industry deciding what can go into your hot dogs again prior to "The Jungle"? Do you want your favorite restaurant to NEVER see a health inspector? Maybe buildings should all go back to being flammable death traps; who needs all those pesky codes and regulations?

    American socialism got us out of the great depression and won two world wars, put a man on the moon and sent probes out into space.
    When your house is on fire, professionals come right away and put it out.

    What has capitalism given us, oh right, "Afluenza Teens" and "Pharma Bros", "Wolves of Wall Street", Enron, Countrywide Financial, AIG, Donald Trump, the Koch Brothers and slavery. Love Canal, massive recalls and thalidomide kids. Given the choice between American style socialism and American style capitalism, I'll take the socialism any day of the week.


    Public works such as the transcontinental railroad, telegraph, Panama Canal... can peacefully co-exist in a capitalist economy. That does not make an economy socialist.

    What gave us of the some of the problems you point out was the repeal of Glass-Steagal by Bill Clinton in 1999.

    Country-wide was a symptom of Barney Frank's pressuring of the loan industry to relax lending standards until they ceased to exist. We got what we deserved because congress failed to act.

    The present US debt stands at $19 trillion. In 2010 it was $10 trillion. In order to keep the party going the next 10 years will stack $20 trillion in debt on top of this. If interest rates increase at all the whole thing collapses.

    There is a school of thought that Bernie Sanders should get elected so the collapse happens on his watch. Even though he would have had nothing to do with the collapse, he will be blamed. This would totally discredit socialism for generations.


    Thatcher-on-socialism.jpg


  • SkyMiles

    Posts: 963

    Feb 03, 2016 5:06 PM GMT
    Ah, see my take is the same as yours but opposite. I say that capitalism can and should exist within the framework of American democratic socialism. Capitalism, ok, but with significant and powerful regulatory oversight. Government is, after all, the guarantor of civil liberties and the only agency capable of dealing with corporate atrocities.

    America's take a socialism thinks BIG. Business would never consider curing a disease like polio, sending a man to the moon or landing a probe on a moving comet (ok, that was Europe), delivering health care or providing for public education. It doesn't care about the old or the sick for the plain reason that there's no money it in. Even now, unrestrained business is looking to turn prisons and education into the next profit-hungry free-market fiasco just like they did with mortgages, health insurance and pharmaceuticals.

    The source of the 2008 crash was, overall, a symptom of the corrupting influence of big money in government which hamstrings any effort at achieving practical solutions to real-world problems.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 03, 2016 6:07 PM GMT
    The most innovative space exploits now are done by private enterprise, SpaceX, for example.

    Situation is not all or nothing. A predominantly capitalistic system does not preclude a safety net for the most downtrodden or public works or national defense. That is different than a central government that controls the means of production with high taxation and inefficiencies.

    Worldwide, socialism has a terrible track record, and for reasons in the OP article.
  • SkyMiles

    Posts: 963

    Feb 03, 2016 6:55 PM GMT
    socalfitness saidThe most innovative space exploits now are done by private enterprise, SpaceX, for example.

    Situation is not all or nothing. A predominantly capitalistic system does not preclude a safety net for the most downtrodden or public works or national defense. That is different than a central government that controls the means of production with high taxation and inefficiencies.

    Worldwide, socialism has a terrible track record, and for reasons in the OP article.


    SpaceX is promising but everything they are exists because of NASA and all the technologies it had to come up with to solve the complex issues of space travel.
    I agree that capitalism doesn't have to be all or nothing but that's kind of where we're headed -- toward a corporatist state. All I ever hear about is cuts to our already porous safety net, austerity and misery for wage-earners while the bloated military defense and financial industries keeps growing and growing despite repetitive and truly colossal failures. Meanwhile our infrastructure and public institutions are crumbling away to nothing.
    As you mentioned, the very socialistic countries of northern Europe are well worth emulating in many respects. Health, overall happiness/satisfaction, low crime, low infant mortality, well-functioning education, legal and health care systems, strong environmental protections, creative, highly democratic as well but with competitive industries too. I don't think it has to do with resources relative to population. Iceland certainly doesn't have all that much but is still a high achiever in key metrics for a well-functioning state and about as far from tyranny as you can possibly get. America has, and has always had, absolutely vast natural resources relative to population but only a few benefit from them.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 03, 2016 7:36 PM GMT
    SkyMiles said
    socalfitness saidThe most innovative space exploits now are done by private enterprise, SpaceX, for example.

    Situation is not all or nothing. A predominantly capitalistic system does not preclude a safety net for the most downtrodden or public works or national defense. That is different than a central government that controls the means of production with high taxation and inefficiencies.

    Worldwide, socialism has a terrible track record, and for reasons in the OP article.


    SpaceX is promising but everything they are exists because of NASA and all the technologies it had to come up with to solve the complex issues of space travel.
    I agree that capitalism doesn't have to be all or nothing but that's kind of where we're headed -- toward a corporatist state. All I ever hear about is cuts to our already porous safety net, austerity and misery for wage-earners while the bloated military defense and financial industries keeps growing and growing despite repetitive and truly colossal failures. Meanwhile our infrastructure and public institutions are crumbling away to nothing.
    As you mentioned, the very socialistic countries of northern Europe are well worth emulating in many respects. Health, overall happiness/satisfaction, low crime, low infant mortality, well-functioning education, legal and health care systems, strong environmental protections, creative, highly democratic as well but with competitive industries too. I don't think it has to do with resources relative to population. Iceland certainly doesn't have all that much but is still a high achiever in key metrics for a well-functioning state and about as far from tyranny as you can possibly get. America has, and has always had, absolutely vast natural resources relative to population but only a few benefit from them.

    We just have completely different world views. I don't see the abuses that occur as indicative of a problem with the underlying system, but specifics to be dealt with. The US does not have vast resources that can fuel the kind of generous benefits to the population that someone like Sanders (or even Clinton with her tilt to the left) proposes. It would collapse the economy to an extent never seen.
  • MarcelP

    Posts: 12

    Feb 03, 2016 8:22 PM GMT
    socalfitness said
    Alpha13 saidSocialism promises everything to everybody but results in a bloodbath for all.

    A bloodbath or misery.


    Been to Norway lately? It's pretty damned great. Denmark? A recent poll has found its people to be the happiest on earth. I'm not sure where all this socialist fear-mongering is coming from.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 03, 2016 8:32 PM GMT
    MarcelP said
    socalfitness said
    Alpha13 saidSocialism promises everything to everybody but results in a bloodbath for all.

    A bloodbath or misery.

    Been to Norway lately? It's pretty damned great. Denmark? A recent poll has found its people to be the happiest on earth. I'm not sure where all this socialist fear-mongering is coming from.

    Did you see my comment in the OP prior to including the article where I specifically mentioned Norway? Bottom line - what works in one country doesn't necessarily work in another. Numbers are completely different.
  • JackNNJ

    Posts: 1051

    Feb 03, 2016 8:35 PM GMT
    MarcelP said
    socalfitness said
    Alpha13 saidSocialism promises everything to everybody but results in a bloodbath for all.

    A bloodbath or misery.


    Been to Norway lately? It's pretty damned great. Denmark? A recent poll has found its people to be the happiest on earth. I'm not sure where all this socialist fear-mongering is coming from.


    Not so great anymore. Influx of "migrants" (LMAO, they're MUSLIMS) has been a drain on these social welfare systems, increased crime (in Sweden rape is up 1400% due to Muslim rape) and have made those places less than desirable lately.

    Norway wanted to shunt off some of their problem Muslims to Denmark, which said "Fuck that, you made your bed, lie in it. We've got our own problems with Muslims."

    Sweden is kicking out some 80,000 "asylum seekers" (LMAO, they're MUSLIMS). Finland's getting ready to expel at least 20,000.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 03, 2016 8:40 PM GMT
    MarcelP said
    socalfitness said
    Alpha13 saidSocialism promises everything to everybody but results in a bloodbath for all.

    A bloodbath or misery.


    Been to Norway lately? It's pretty damned great. Denmark? A recent poll has found its people to be the happiest on earth. I'm not sure where all this socialist fear-mongering is coming from.


    Yes, it's ok there but not perfect- not sure I would say great. I do like visiting. Denmark has the highest tax rates in the world. This is fine if you believe the tax money is being well spent. Danes and Norsks generally believe the taxes are well spent.

    Remember also governments of resource rich countries with sparse populations can more easily deliver on promises.

    As with the US, paying taxes is not an optional activity. If you believe your taxes are being used for unethical or criminal purposes - try to opt out. You may get an understanding of tyranny if you do so.


  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 04, 2016 12:22 AM GMT
    It is in my mind that capitalism is the better of the two systems. In an ideal world, everyone has the right to own property, invest his capital in some enterprise and make a profit. This includes providing products and services that meets and satisfy the market demand. It also includes looking after the workers well and ensuring they are paid adequately, not only just to meet their needs but to enjoy their livelihood in opposition to slavery.

    But unfortunately, greed sets in and employers underpay their workers and exploit their energies - only to be paid near starvation wages - a phenomenon that was very characteristic in Britain during in the days of Queen Victoria. Back then, children were sent into mines way below ground while others were sent into mills for long hours of heavy labour. If a child got seriously injured or even dies on the job - too bad. Business must carry on and profits made.

    Trade unions were originally formed out of Christian compassion for the exploited workers, and with it, Karl Marx with his concept of State Socialism. Fortunately for us in the UK, Socialism did not intensify anywhere near to the level of the Communist Bloc. Instead, new laws were passed banning child exploitation from both the mines and the factories, and new laws for schooling and education were passed.

    It was the UK Labour Government's idea to introduce the National Health Service, once the envy of the whole world, built on the public purse created by higher taxation (Compulsory National Insurance for both entrepreneur and worker alike.) Like this, everybody had access to free treatment to health issues, and such treatments no longer confined to the rich while the poor continued to fill the graves, often from a young age (a good story about this is found in Charles Dicken's novel A Christmas Carol).

    Benefits is a drain on the economy. But the very fact that such a system exist demonstrates to this day that employers are often reluctant to pay a decent wage to their workers.

    It will never be a perfect world. But although capitalism is the better of the two systems, over the centuries it has become corrupt through greed, and it does look as if a certain element of socialism has improved the quality of living for many, particularly those without special academic qualifications who still have to earn their keep.