Thousands of dollars in debt, thousands suffering without healthcare, and a shrinking middle class. These are just a few problems incapacitating the United States. Democratic Socialism would be a much better alternate form of government. It is ever so obvious that the government the U.S. currently holds is dysfunctional and there needs to be a big change. The United States should pride itself for having one of the largest middle classes in the world. With this being said, it should be known that the middle class in the United States is shrinking. “While a majority of citizens in the middle and lower class feel the effects of debt in United States, there is no doubt the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer” (Peel 206). The
They think about how their decisions will create profit for themselves rather than how their decisions can help everyone. “Capitalists no longer benefit everyone, they have now taken advantage of their power (Nederman 882). Democratic Socialism is everything that our current government is not and the path America is heading down will not be a good one unless Democratic Socialism is in the horizon. This form of government can be achieved as it is currently successful in some European countries. Health care to these Socialist countries is a natural born right, as well as education. Women are given paid maternity leave, and college is affordable and sometimes even free in the Socialist countries of Finland, Sweden, Denmark, Iceland, Norway, Mexico, and Brazil. Recently, Britain’s “success of the welfare state strikes at the dynamic which has driven Socialism forward in the past and brought it widespread support” (Davis 505). in Sweden, the Swedish Social Democratic Party remains to be one of the most successful socialist forms of government. Socialistic practices are used daily in the United States whether the majority agrees with it or not. Public schools, Public roads driven on everyday, and even U.S. National Parks are great examples of Socialism. “Though one may not agree with this practice, it is important to consider that you are practicing it by using anything funded by the federal government” (Parry 363). Everything stated above are perfect examples of Socialism. Socialism is no stranger to the U.S. “it is an idea that has been represented in the U.S. and has proved to be successful” (Allen
However, they also had a much wider reaching idea of democratic control over the economy . This is where I tend to disagree with Sinclair and socialism. He mentions corruption in the system at the time and implies that socialism may be a system without corruption. I don’t feel that a political and economic system ran by the people is any less susceptible to corruption than capitalism is. After all, it is still just people and people will do dishonest things for power. America was built on capitalism and it definitely has its flaws, but I feel that it promotes prosperity best when paired with democracy. The socialist movement played a great role in reshaping the US capitalist system. It definitely needed tweaking in the early 20th century, and still does, but the socialist ideas help push us in the right
There are several reasons why the US is not a socialist government, one of the glaring criticisms is that it stifles economic growth. By taking from the successful and rewarding the less-successful, you are naturally going to have less successful people. Is this what Stallman imagined social cohesion to be like? The current state of the US economy, the free enterprise, (or more specifically, private enterprise) encourages creative competition by rewarding those who make (or own) the best
He affirms that the twentieth century ideas of socialism and that it cannot work because of history’s “proof” that people are selfish and governments abuse power. However, he declares that notion “is too simple.” Furthermore, he questions if common sense is from the “utopian dreams of the past,” then why can Lincoln, Roosevelt, or Johnson’s ideas be reevaluated for the present day. In fact, he affirms that the idea that markets safeguard the democracy and freedom that the citizens of the United States hold so dearly is more utopian than those aforementioned. Concluding, he reiterates that by ignoring “socialist” ideas, the established government is doing a great “disservice” to the United States.
Let's take it back to the past in regards to wealth distribution in this country. The fact is that the economy boomed from the end of WWII into the 1970's. “Incomes grew rapidly and at roughly the same rate up and down the income ladder, roughly doubling in inflation-adjusted terms between the late 1940s and early 1970s” (CBPP). Through the 70's economic growth slowed, and the wealth gap widened. Middle-class families were now considered lower class. People relied on the government to help them out with welfare programs. The middle-class class was weakened and the gap grew and grew. There were periods of positive fluctuation, however the middle-class simply never regained it's status that was held in more prosperous times in the past.
In Norway capitalism has been combined with socialism.
In many people's eyes that doesn’t look that bad but if we were to look at the upper-middle class then we can notice a huge jump. The upper-middle class has increased by 16.5%, which is a drastic increase between the years 1979 to 2014. The poor class has decreased by 4.5%. The middle class would decline to the point where there would only be there rich
To some, "capitalistic democracy" conjures up the picture of a utopia where the free market is accompanied by individual liberty and social justice. To others, however, the term is more like a paradox—despite tremendous economic power, the advanced industrial nations are not immune from the evils of socio-political inequality as well as economical disparity. Amongst the capitalist democracies of the world, it is an established and well-known fact that when compared with the advanced industrial countries in Europe, the United States has the worst condition of economical-political inequality and social injustice. Its government is the least progressive, and its social inequalities the most deplorable. To explain the condition in the U.S. today, both the universality of capitalistic democracies and the peculiarities the American system employs—as well as this system's political and historical development—must be examined and explored.
Socialism is a word that has obtained a bad connotation in American society. Politicians are loath to lay claim to it, and often using it to lambast their political opponents with it. Yes in many ways America has seemed to embrace the economic benefits of Capitalism so whole heartedly, thoughts of a tangled bureaucratic mess of welfare and wealth distribution that is so contrary to the American idea of individualism are conjured up at the mere thought of Socialism. In fact many still equate Socialism with Communism and are given to thoughts of the Cold War, and the battle of ideologies that it entailed. Many Americans would perhaps be quite surprised to learn that Socialism had found a place in American society at one time, and that it held a considerable amount of influence over the direction the country would take.
The most often cited cause of the decline of the middle class in the United States is stagnant wages. Between 1955 and 1970, real wages adjusted and inflation rose by an average of 2.5 percent per year. Between 1971 and 1994, the average growth of real wages was 0.3 percent a year. The stagnation of wages has been especially noticeable to middle-class people, who rely very much on the money they make at their jobs. Recessions seem to hit higher income households much harder, which sends them down to the middle class. Middle-income households may or may not be more likely than higher-income households to qualify for unemployment compensation when jobs are scarce. But those who do are more likely than high-income households to receive benefits that replace a greater share of their regular wages, which helps them maintai...
“When people in the United States are introduced to the concept of socialism - whether in the popular media or in a high school class - they are presented with a simple equation: socialism = a crippled economy that fails to meet people's basic needs + a totalitarian government” (Robertson). Robertson proves a good point in saying this, because generally children in the United States grow up either being taught that socialism is bad or evil, which is completely wrong, or they end up being taught nothing of socialism at all. It is until these children are exposed to a socialist government, through education or experience (which few usually have the privilege of doing) t...
Both socialism and democratic socialism overlap and interact with a few different ideologies. The most notable are the intersection between democratic socialism and liberalism. Both liberals and social democrats advocate for a relatively large welfare state, in order to take care of the poor and offer a social safety net. Both ideologies also believe in a sort of collective responsibility to society. They believe the purpose of people is greater than just the individual. Socialism and Liberalism also both see flaws in capitalism and have strategies to address them. Whether it’s replacing them or preventing the downsides.
By 1970, the Socialist Party was showing a growing tendency toward democratic centralism in practice. At the end of 1972 the Socialist Party, changed its name to Social Democrats USA. Since 1973 the Socialist Party USA has focused its attention more on grassroots and local politics, and has dealt with the controversial issue of Presidential politics on a case-by-case basis. Due to America's restrictive and often undemocratic ballot access laws (which have made it almost impossible to break the two-party monopoly on national politics), the party views the races primarily as opportunities for educating the public about socialism and the need for electoral democracy in the US.
During the Second Industrial Revolution two philosophies combated each other on a global scale. Laissez-Fair economics had ruled for the last few centuries and had created many prosperous nations but abuses of power by wealthy men had turned public opinion against it. Ever since its creation, Socialism begged to be placed head to head with Capitalism and it had finally gotten its chance. Laissez-Fair economics and Socialism both have their pros and cons when implemented in society. The battle between these two ideological works its way throughout society alternating between the protests and debates in the U.S. today to the great terror of the Cold War.
America’s upper class has been getting richer since the past three decades, and we have still not found a way to stop this. We have been unable to find a way to distribute America’s wealth equally, so we can have a decent lower class and a good middle class. Inequality has caused many people to struggle in various ways, but their is alway another side to the story.
When considering the well being of all citizens, socialism is the best economic system. Command economies do not work, market economies only provide for the needs of a small elite group of people, and traditional economies are impossible in a world of this size. While there are certainly arguments against socialism, the arguments for it outweigh. Socialism is better because it allows for the government to provide for the basic needs of all citizens—this is impossible in a market economy, and outweighed by the negative aspects of a command economy. In time of great national economic and political turmoil, it is important that a consensus be made as to the best economic system for the U.S. and the rest of the world. In my opinion, this best system is socialism.