That's not a very good response. I have always heard that those quotes were by Wilde and Wolfe and a few minutes research provided several confirmations.
I'm sorry, @PHG1960, but the links you posted are from low quality sources. Please cite primary sources or a high value site such as Wikiquote or Quote Investigator.
I like it. It's pithy. What I don't love is shifting definitions of socialism. It has gone from "workers owning the means of production" to "something vaguely Swedish". I think that, like terrorism, the word has lost all meaning. People should say what they mean.
It is certainly pithy. But it makes absolutely zero sense if you think about it for ever a short amount of time. If we're in danger of running out of money, having less of it, or keeping vast quantities of it in the pockets of the wealthy, doesn't eliminate that danger. If the problem were that we don't have resources to allocate, then allocate fewer of them. Regardless of what definition of socialism you want to use, it's still just dumb on its face.
There are many other problems (and good things) about socialism but it does rely on forcibly taking your money and using it for the perceived good of the whole. I tend to agree with Churchill that democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others.
In what way is it an ignorant quote. Pretty accurate if you ask me. A system built on the premise of needs and wants met by the capacity of the state, means that the state become the arbiters of what is deemed necessary and what is excessive, become the arbiters of who can own what.
As the cost of living increases, resources become scarcer, populations increase, ect. - all these things mean less money-per-person. And that means deciding to take actions such as (but not limited to as creative dictators have proven) reappropriating ownership (stealing), reduction of population (killing), forcible reduction in cost of living by not providing the basic necessities. And for their unpopularity, even more methods of authoritarian control are peddled, in the realm of surveillance, CI's, murdering dissenters.
No part of socialism at any degree is about fiscal responsibility, you suckle off the state and you give as much as is demanded, and in times of shortage, you have, and get nothing.
As the cost of living increases, resources become scarcer, populations increase, ect. - all these things mean less money-per-person. And that means deciding to take actions such as (but not limited to as creative dictators have proven) reappropriating ownership (stealing),
Notice how the wealthy just keep owning more and more and any competition that arises is just bought to maintain the monopoly.
reduction of population (killing),
How many have died or committed suicide because they cant afford to both eat and heat their homes. I am not talking developing nations, In the UK the reliance on food banks is ridiculous while leaders like Boris Johnson say his £250,000 second job is chicken feed.
forcible reduction in cost of living by not providing the basic necessities.
This is the hallmark of capitalism
And for their unpopularity, even more methods of authoritarian control are peddled, in the realm of surveillance, CI's, murdering dissenters
Socialism is all about spending everyone else's money in the name of the greater good but fortunately most Socialists are smart enough to completely take all the money from the people who pay for everything. I'm also a fan of "Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the rest."
Sloths sleep 15 - 18 hours a day and average movement per day is 41 yards. No real incentive to move more or faster when you food is just hanging there where you are.
As the cost of living increases, resources become scarcer, populations increase, ect. - all these things mean less money-per-person. And that means deciding to take actions such as (but not limited to as creative dictators have proven) reappropriating ownership (stealing), reduction of population (killing), forcible reduction in cost of living by not providing the basic necessities. And for their unpopularity, even more methods of authoritarian control are peddled, in the realm of surveillance, CI's, murdering dissenters.
No part of socialism at any degree is about fiscal responsibility, you suckle off the state and you give as much as is demanded, and in times of shortage, you have, and get nothing.
As the cost of living increases, resources become scarcer, populations increase, ect. - all these things mean less money-per-person. And that means deciding to take actions such as (but not limited to as creative dictators have proven) reappropriating ownership (stealing),
Notice how the wealthy just keep owning more and more and any competition that arises is just bought to maintain the monopoly.
reduction of population (killing),
How many have died or committed suicide because they cant afford to both eat and heat their homes. I am not talking developing nations, In the UK the reliance on food banks is ridiculous while leaders like Boris Johnson say his £250,000 second job is chicken feed.
forcible reduction in cost of living by not providing the basic necessities.
This is the hallmark of capitalism
And for their unpopularity, even more methods of authoritarian control are peddled, in the realm of surveillance, CI's, murdering dissenters
What happens when the 1% owns 99% of all the money. We are headed there.