RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment

writing for godot

Where Socialism Flourishes, Conservatives are Quiet

Print
Written by David Bass   
Monday, 22 July 2019 10:55

The right wing of the political spectrum is hyperventilating about socialism at every opportunity these days. Every progressive Democratic proposal to provide universal healthcare, affordable college educations or combat climate change is painted as socialist. Anti-immigration and anti-socialism rhetoric are the centerpieces of the right’s fear mongering for the 2020 election cycle.

Yet where socialist systems are deeply ingrained at the Federal level and in my home state of North Carolina, conservative politicians who have the power to dismantle them have shown no interest in doing so.

According to Merriam-Webster, socialism is:

1 : any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods.

2a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property.

One glaring example of Socialism is the Veterans Administration’s healthcare system. The Federal government owns – exclusively – the entire means of production and distribution for veterans’ healthcare. The VA owns 170 hospitals, 100 nursing homes, more than 1,000 outpatient sites, and employs over 320,000 full-time health care professionals.

Most veterans cannot choose their healthcare providers. Only veterans with long distances to travel or long wait times to get appointments are allowed to go outside the VA system.

That’s socialism!

Wouldn’t it work better if the government were the payer but not the provider? With a special benefits package for veterans, Medicare could pay the bills and our veterans would have the same choice of doctors, specialists, hospitals, pharmacies, and outpatient clinics as senior citizens.

Why haven’t conservatives called for the dismantling of Socialist VA healthcare system?

Another example of Socialism operates here in North Carolina. The Tar Heel State responded to the repeal of Prohibition in 1933 by establishing a state-owned liquor distribution and retail monopoly that continues to this day. The state of North Carolina owns – exclusively – the entire means of distribution and retail sale of liquor.

If you want to purchase a bottle of bourbon, you have to buy it from a state-owned store. The state-owned stores have to obtain their inventory from a state-owned distributor. State law forbids private enterprises from engaging in these commercial activities.

That’s socialism!

Why haven’t conservatives called for dismantling the state-owned liquor monopoly in North Carolina? A sale of both the retail stores and the distribution business could net the state several billion dollars in a one-time windfall, in addition to ongoing, lucrative ad valorem and sales tax revenue.

I’m very curious to see how conservatives would try to tap dance around these questions.

Every time a conservative politician or pundit starts railing about Socialism, they should be asked what they are doing to dismantle the Socialist systems operating right under their noses. If Socialism is so bad, and their party has political power, I’d expect them to be tearing these systems apart with heightened urgency.

Let’s start asking.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 

Comments  

 
0 # RICHARDKANE.Philadelphia 2019-07-23 18:17
I wish you mention Socialism in Scandinavia,
 
 
0 # tidyidy 2019-07-26 08:04
One has to wonder about the date of the Merriam-Webster definition. I often go to that dictionary first when I want to understand a word that has a very broad modern usage, to find a traditional base. Next, I explore other and more modern dictionaries before reading a little in the writings of professionals and practitioners.

The definition of socialism is no longer so narrow.

And why are there only two choices: capitalism or socialism? Aspects of each may be more suitable in a given sphere of influence; why can we not consider suitability? Why can we not have both? and in a variety of combinations.

The world now operates on the assumption that the means of exchange is the most important consideration not only in trade, but in politics/power/ control, health care, education ... Assuming that the well-being of human beings and the Earth are more important would result in very different choices.

At the very least, how about equity?

L&B&L
 
 
0 # Depressionborn 2019-08-05 09:22
An 86-year-old widow who contributed every week to her pension while working was stripped and left destitute after her local council took away her $50,000 life savings. They claimed she saved too much money and was only allowed to have a maximum of £16,000 in savings. She was a former chambermaid and received means-tested housing benefits where she lived. She saved £50 a month for 20 years to be able to be independent in her old age. The government has not merely left her destitute, they are still raking her through the courts and demanding fines and penalties.

This is a classic example of how socialism works.
 
 
0 # Depressionborn 2019-08-05 09:25
Most veterans cannot choose their healthcare providers. Only veterans with long distances to travel or long wait times to get appointments are allowed to go outside the VA system.
not here, we can go anywhere we want.
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN