Is having a fire department police department/post office Socialism ?

[tradeunionsupporter]

Is having a fire department police department/post office Socialism ?

A Socialist Labor Party Statement—
SOCIALISM—ITS MEANING AND PROMISE

This is a capitalist country, not a socialist one. Yet many cities own and run their own hospitals, libraries, transportation systems and utilities. The public schools, state college and university systems are government owned. The federal government owns and controls the FBI, the CIA, the army, the navy, the air force, the U.S. Marines and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Why, it even owns all the national forests and national parks. Yet, who would call these institutions examples of socialism? Who would say that today’s government is socialist because it owns all of these things? Not the SLP.

http://www.slp.org/res_state_htm/socialism_m_p.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mixed_economy

https://www.google.com/search?source...w=1120&bih=581

[tradeunionsupporter]

Myth: The government's services should be privatized.

Fact: Privatizing public goods like defense and natural monopolies like utilities is extremely difficult.

Summary

People buy goods and services from both the private and public sectors. In the private sector, they vote with their dollars; in the public sector, they vote with their ballots. Both sectors have different advantages over each other; the public sector is better at handling natural monopolies (where circumstances prevent competitors on a free market), because voters can control prices through their ballots. Nations that have tried to privatize their natural monopolies have failed disastrously.

Argument

The success of privatization depends on several factors. Unfortunately, most governments have found that they cannot successfully privatize their services.

Even to the most casual observer, however, it should be obvious there is something economically similar between government and the market, even if one can't immediately say why. For example, we know that many services are offered in both the public and private sectors -- such as schools, libraries and hospitals. We know that Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher tried to privatize government services -- and the fact that this could be done at all speaks to a fundamental similarity between the sectors. And even entire economies have been run by governments -- although how well depends on what type of socialism is practiced. The social democracies of Northern Europe have some of the highest standards of living in the world. The socialist dictatorships of the Soviet Union went down in flames.


http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-privatization.htm

[tradeunionsupporter]

What is a Mixed Economy?

A mixed economy is one in which there exists a mixture of free enterprise and government control. In some areas of a mixed economy, the government may even have a monopoly. Most of the developed countries of the world have a mixed economy. The mixture of two different economic philosophies can imply a variety of consequences for a country, some of which are seen as beneficial, while others are neutral or detrimental. Mixed economies are also known as dual economies.

http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-a-mixed-economy.htm

What is a mixed economy?



In:Economics [Edit categories]



Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_a_...#ixzz1zboN6UNp

Answer:

A mixed economy is an economic system that incorporates a mixture of private and government ownership or control, or a mixture of capitalism and socialism


Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_a_...#ixzz1zboQlrpk

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_a_mixed_economy

Definition of 'Mixed Economic System'

An economic system that includes a mixture of capitalism and socialism. This type of economic system includes a combination of private economic freedom and centralized economic planning and government regulation.

Read more: http://www.investopedia.com/terms/m/...#ixzz1zbob3HUO

http://www.investopedia.com/terms/m/...#axzz1zboY8TF4

[Yuppie Grinder]

Nationalized industry is not socialism at all.

[shinjuku dori]

This is last member of SLP on earth's face. At night he slights with DELEON booklet. His mother's panties do not suffice to withdraw his errection.

[Brosa Luxemburg]

Congratulations, shinjuku dori, you are extremely close to being the first member to enter the ranks of my ignore list.

[Yuppie Grinder]

His mother's panties do not suffice to withdraw his errection.

You've gone from being incredibly annoying to being so ridiculous you're unintentionally funny.

[tradeunionsupporter]

Thank you for replying correct me If I am wrong but true Socialism is not State or Government Ownership or Government Planning or Government Intervention in the Economy ?

[Yuppie Grinder]

Yes. Socialism is common ownership of the means of economic production, distribution, and exchange. Government directed generalized commodity production is still capitalism.

[tradeunionsupporter]

Does Socialism promote State or the Government running the Means of Production ?

[Yuppie Grinder]

No. That's not what socialism is. Surplus value extraction by a state is still capitalism. Government directed generalized commodity production is still capitalism.

[cynicles]

The problem is that your trying to understand socialism under capitalist criteria, any true revolution fundamentally changes social relations in society as a whole. The government running something fails to change that relation in any meaningful way beyond changing who sits in the bosses chair.

[Comrade Trollface]

The problem is that your trying to understand socialism under capitalist criteria, any true revolution fundamentally changes social relations in society as a whole. The government running something fails to change that relation in any meaningful way beyond changing who sits in the bosses chair.

That's what I keep trying to tell these Stalinoids about the USSR

[TheCultofAbeLincoln]

It's not socialism, but neither is it the neo-classical capitalism that so many right wingers espouse. Any capitalist who insists that the free market is the best way to determine distribution of every service should never be taken seriously, though unfortunately in the US so many of them are.

This idea has crept over the US like a plague and it needs to be abolished.

For those who are ignorant of the situation in Louisiana, in which sheriffs and private contractors make a profit by housing as many inmates as possible, please check out this 8 part investigation into the system by the New Orleans Times -Picayune. The prison system in the state is a dystopian nightmare, with very little regulation and triple the national incarceration rate (which is, of course, the worlds highest). If nothing else, it's a testament to the value of local journalism.

Louisiana Incarcerated

Or in another state, where, as the New York Times puts it,[FONT=Arial]

Poor Land in Jail as Companies Add Huge Fees for Probation[/FONT]

The title says it all; read the article if you'd like to get angry.

And just a reminder, neither of these publications is by any stretch of the imagination a leftist or anti-business one, just one were there's still a shred of common sense against the right wing tirade left. Or, rather more grimly, they've had to deal with the "success" these programs have brought for all too long.

Another note, these types who advocate the "free market solution" for all basic services are also the clowns who think people will buy that, say, a 50-year lease to run a prison is good for a balanced budget but teachers, firefighters, and police officers pensions are just too much to ask for. Yeah, no ulterior motive behind that ideology

Edit: Jesus Christ I was re-reading that NY Times article and have to post some of it I'm that incensed once again:

CHILDERSBURG, Ala. — Three years ago, Gina Ray, who is now 31 and unemployed, was fined $179 for speeding. She failed to show up at court (she says the ticket bore the wrong date), so her license was revoked. When she was next pulled over, she was, of course, driving without a license. By then her fees added up to more than $1,500. Unable to pay, she was handed over to a private probation company and jailed — charged an additional fee for each day behind bars.

For that driving offense, Ms. Ray has been locked up three times for a total of 40 days and owes $3,170, much of it to the probation company. Her story, in hardscrabble, rural Alabama, where Krispy Kreme promises that “two can dine for $5.99,” is not about innocence.
...
In Georgia, three dozen for-profit probation companies operate in hundreds of courts, and there have been similar lawsuits. In one, Randy Miller, 39, an Iraq war veteran who had lost his job, was jailed after failing to make child support payments of $860 a month. In another, Hills McGee, with a monthly income of $243 in veterans benefits, was charged with public drunkenness, assessed $270 by a court and put on probation through a private company. The company added a $15 enrollment fee and $39 in monthly fees. That put his total for a year above $700, which Mr. McGee, 53, struggled to meet before being jailed for failing to pay it all.


“These companies are bill collectors, but they are given the authority to say to someone that if he doesn’t pay, he is going to jail,” said John B. Long, a lawyer in Augusta, Ga., who is taking the issue to a federal appeals court this fall. “There are things like garbage collection where private companies are O.K. No one’s liberty is affected. The closer you get to locking someone up, the closer you get to a constitutional issue."