Posts Tagged ‘socialism’

h1

The Little Red Hen

April 20, 2012

The Little Red Hen

– by Doug Smith –

attributed: Summit Sun 8 July 1971

Little Red Hen

Once upon a time, there was a little red hen who scratched about and uncovered some grains of wheat.  She called her barnyard neighbors and said, “If we work together and plant this wheat, we will have some fine bread to eat.  Who will help me plant the wheat?”  “Not I,” said the cow.  “Not I,” said the duck.  “Not I,” said the goose.  “Then I will,” said the little red hen, and she did.

 

The wheat grew tall and ripened into golden grain.  “Who will help me reap my wheat?” asked the little red hen.  “Not I,” said the duck.  “Out of my classification,” said the pig.  “I’d lose my seniority” said the cow.  “I’d lose my unemployment insurance,” said the goose.

Then it came time to bake the bread.  “That’s overtime for me,” said the cow.  I’m a dropout and never learned how,” said the duck.  “I’d lose my welfare benefits,” said the pig.  “If I’m the only one helping, that’s discrimination,” said the goose.

“Then I will,” said the little red hen.  And she did.

She baked five loaves of fine bread and held them all up for the neighbors to see.  They all wanted some, demanded a share.  But the red hen said, “No, I can rest for a while and eat the five loaves myself.”

“Excess profits,” cried the cow.  “Capitalistic leech,” screamed the duck.  “Company fink,” grunted the pig.  “Equal rights,” yelled the goose.  And they hurriedly painted picket signs and marched around the little red hen singing, “We shall overcome,” and they did.

For when the farmer came, he said, “You must not be greedy, little red hen.  Look at the oppressed cow.  Look at the disadvantaged duck.  Look at the under-privileged pig.  Look at the less fortunate goose.  You are guilty of making second-class citizens of them.”

“But….but,” said the little red hen.  “I earned the bread.”

“Exactly,” said the wise farmer.  “That is the wonderful free enterprise system; anybody in the barnyard can earn as much as he wants.  You should be happy to have this freedom.  In other barnyards, you’d have to give all five loaves to the farmer.  Here you give four loaves to your suffering neighbors.” And they lived happily ever after, including the little red hen, who smiled and clucked: “I am grateful.  I am grateful.”

But her neighbors wondered why she never baked any more bread.

h1

Healthcare: Stealth Socialism

October 26, 2009

Stealth Socialism

26 Oct. 2009 | IBD

Sen. Snowe: Finger on the trigger of a single-pay system? AP

Sen. Snowe: Finger on the trigger of a single-pay system? APView Enlarged Image

Health Reform: Congress’ planned health care revolution will be bad enough without a government-run option. With it, Euro-style socialism becomes inevitable. It’s time for a bipartisan way out of this disaster.

Last week proved Democrats want as much big government control as possible in the huge medical sector of the economy. The president’s advisers said he’s still committed to a government-run public option, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi lined up three versions of such a plan and the Senate majority leader announced a public plan with a state opt-out.

Why is the public option back at all? It seemed dead after a study earlier this year indicated such a plan would mean private health insurers could lose nearly 120 million customers.

Described as being “prized by liberals as a fundamental pillar of reform,” the public option is really a way to put capitalistic America on a path toward socialized medicine.

Senate Banking Committee Chairman Barney Frank, a longtime co-sponsor of single-payer legislation, said in July, “I think the best way we’re gonna get single-payer, the only way, is to have a public option and demonstrate its strength and its power.” Why not just enact single-payer? “We don’t have the votes for it,” Frank replied.

The public option was conceived by leftist organizations such as the Campaign for America’s Future years ago because polls showed the American people liked private health insurance and would never go for a direct government takeover. Ex-Sen. John Edwards’ presidential campaign embraced it as “stealth single-payer,” and the campaigns of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama followed suit.

Renegade Republican Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine may be the one to thank if this new medical entitlement becomes reality, at a time when government accountants warn that Washington is spending the country toward a fiscal doomsday.

The president is reportedly smitten with Snowe’s public option “trigger” — an idea that comes down to this: If private insurers charge customers more than Uncle Sam dictates as they deal with all the new costs Washington imposes, the federal government will become their unfair competitor and wreck the private health insurance industry.

With or without a government-run option, the Democrats’ radical transformation of the greatest health care system in the world still means reams of new regulations on private insurers, including the likely end of anti-trust protection.

It means fines for those — especially the young — who won’t buy what will become high-priced insurance. It may slap uncooperative employers with an 8% payroll tax. And it may impose a $460 billion, 5.4% income tax surcharge sure to kill private sector jobs.

It’s time for new ideas, like the expanded private coverage options of the Patients’ Choice Act, backed by Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., and Sens. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., and Richard Burr, R-N.C.

As Ryan warns, the federal government would run health care “with the compassion of the IRS, the efficiency of the Post Office and the incompetence of Katrina.”

h1

Cartoon: Uncle Sam’s SCAR | Socialism

October 19, 2009

h1

Obama: We’re This Close

October 13, 2009

We are this close to our goal of SOCIALISM

[picapp src=”b/0/4/8/Obama_Makes_Remarks_cd58.JPG?adImageId=5408087&imageId=6771059″ width=”500″ height=”354″ /]

h1

Economics Professor

July 10, 2009

An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never failed a single student before but had once failed an entire class.

That class had insisted that Obama’s socialism worked and that no one would be poor  and no one would be rich, a great equalizer.

The professor then said,  “OK, we will have an experiment in this class on Obama’s plan”. All grades would be averaged and everyone would receive the same grade so no one would fail and no one would receive an A.

After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B.

The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy.

As the second test  rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too so they studied little.

The second test average was a D! No one was happy.

When the 3rd test rolled around, the average was an F.

The scores never increased as bickering, blame and name-calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else.

All failed, to their great surprise, and the professor told them that socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great but when  government takes all the reward away, no one  will try or want to succeed.

Could  it be any  simpler than that?

h1

Obama’s Red Chorus

June 9, 2009

IBD 4 June 09

Socialism: Is Hugo Chavez emerging as a sort of tropical Greek chorus for the Democrats’ ongoing redistribution schemes? It says something that he cheers every time a new act of socialism is performed in the U.S.

Rest assured, Venezuela’s self-described Communist commandante does not wish us well. But Obama’s administration has managed to awe him with its takeover of General Motors.

 “Hey, Obama has just nationalized nothing more and nothing less than General Motors. Comrade Obama!” Chavez cheered on Venezuelan TV Tuesday. He gushingly added that he and Cuba’s Fidel Castro would now have to work harder just to keep up.

 It underlines two things: just how closely the Venezuelan strongman watches what’s happening in the U.S and just how badly it resembles his own war on private property.

Unlike Cuba’s Fidel Castro, who shot his way into a Marxist dictatorship, Chavez has achieved his “socialist revolution” by manipulating institutions, particularly legal ones.

He’s been at it for 10 years, picking off companies one by one, using legal technicalities unrelated to his true aim of state ownership for all means of production. It ought to worry people that what’s happening at GM is perfectly recognizable in Caracas.

In 2004, Chavez began by expropriating cattle ranches in Venezuela, saying he only wanted to clarify property rights, not confiscate land. End result: Virtually all productive land now is in his hands, redistributed to his loyalists in serfdom.

After that, he went after the U.S. oil industry, snagging prizes like Exxon Mobil’s $1 billion heavy-oil complex on the Orinoco River in 2007, citing a different legal issue: tax disputes.

He did similar expropriations with steel, cement, ports, banks, sugar, rice, pretty much any industry that was viable.

Running out of companies to steal, he now persecutes private media — not, he claims, to stifle dissent, but to protect children from smut, his pretense for shutting down RCTV in 2007.

For the last remaining nonstate TV station, his concern is now environmental desecration, with Chavistas using the pretense of some old antlers on the wall of a Globovision executive following an open-ended state raid as the excuse to shut down the TV station.

Whatever Chavez’s legal concerns are, the punishment is always the same: expropriation and more power to the state, the two pillars of socialism.

The GM case is in this league and should give Democrats pause, because they also are using legal pretenses to justify a takeover.

Obama administration officials invented a right for themselves to muscle in on existing company owners, using bailout cash as an instrument of expropriation over the rights of bondholders.

They also used bailout cash as a green light to distribute gravy to their United Auto Workers union cronies, handing them a disproportionate stake in the company, illegally favoring unsecured debts over secured debts.

In so doing, they expropriated property without compensation, broke 150 years of contract law, and made Chavez proud.

Make no mistake: The Venezuelan dictator does not wish us well. He’d like to see all of our institutions crash to the ground and put the U.S. into the same socialist morass he’s in.

He knows that one act after another on this GM model in the U.S. will end in state socialism, with all the poverty, misery, shortages, noninvestment and lack of freedom that now plague Venezuela.

The Obama administration officials involved in the GM takeover may not think their action will harm the system, but they’re wrong.

Chavez is watching closely and will follow their example, hitting more American companies on similar pretenses abroad.

Unlike them, he thinks private property is itself the enemy and now has a new tool. Exxon officials have pointed out convincingly that the continuous vilification of oil companies by Congress helped to embolden Chavez to steal Exxon’s assets abroad.

One hopes the Obama administration thinks hard about what Chavez is telling them: “They’re criticizing him because they say he’s moving toward socialism — come Obama, ally with us on the path to socialism, it’s the only road,” Chavez declared on Venezuelan state TV in March. “Imagine a socialist revolution in the U.S.! Nothing is impossible.”

h1

Newsweek: Socialist Now

April 9, 2009

Does anyone remember when the motto for Newsweek was “We separate fact from fiction”?

They stopped using that slogan when many of us were quoting it and adding “Yes – Newsweek separates fact from fiction – and then prints fiction.”

Don

newsweek

NOTE THE COMMENT BELOW: (written by Linda.C)

A great commentary on our free enterprise system!  Don:

Socialism fails and milton friedman was right. His DVD series is wonderful and shows exactly why 2.0 unemployment, under socialism, is still miserable.

The economy is the exchange of goods and services. And the economy accelerates when people really want to exchange goods and services. When you have rewards to creating something that others want, as in capitalism, you get motive to innovate new products through creativity and technology. If you have a bunch of people doing this, you exchange these goods and services and create jobs and wealth.

Under socialism, people stay complacent in their situation. there is relatively any motivation to create products that other people want, and this creates a domino effect. (you can motivate others to produce cool products if they want other peoples’ cool products). however, high taxes eliminates the motivation for many. And for this reason, most of the good products come out of capitalists countries.

There is not a set amount of wealth in this world. It can be created and people can join in by creating something that people want. Obama’s policies seek to make everyone equal by stifling competition and innovation — trickle up poverty.

So everyone is equal financially, and unemployment is very low — but everyone is just above poverty. Cuba has low unemployment, but there are no mansions and nothing to shoot for.

Furthermore, people stop progressing. People stop learning from failures.