Social Democracy

[CityGirl]

Attempting to understand where 1/2 the country wants to go.



In general, contemporary social democrats support:

• A mixed economy consisting mainly of private enterprise, but with government owned or subsidized programs of education, healthcare, child care and related services for all citizens.
• Government bodies that regulate private enterprise in the interests of workers, consumers and fair competition.
• Advocacy of fair trade over free trade.
• An extensive system of social security (although usually not to the extent advocated by democratic socialists or other socialist groups), with the stated goal of counteracting the effects of poverty and insuring the citizens against loss of income following illness, unemployment or retirement.
• Moderate to high levels of taxation (through a value-added and/or progressive taxation system) to fund government expenditure.

Social democrats also tend to support:

• Environmental protection laws (although not always to the extent advocated by Greens), such as combating global warming and increasing alternative energy funding.
• Support for immigration and multiculturalism.
• A secular and progressive social policy, although this varies markedly in degree.
• A foreign policy supporting the promotion of democracy, the protection of human rights and where possible, effective multilateralism.
• As well as human rights, social democrats also support social rights, civil rights and civil liberties.

Critics advance the following arguments:

• The regulations placed on the market by social democracy tend to limit economic efficiency and growth, and impede the creation of wealth that may be needed to alleviate global poverty.
• Social democracy places unacceptable constraints on individual rights in order to reach its societal goals.
• Social democratic programs sometimes entail large government outlays, which can result in sizeable budget deficits.
• State provision of education, health care, childcare and other services limits individual choice (and requires users to pay twice if they opt to use privately-run services).

Social democrats reply along the following lines:

• Social democratic policies actually enhance individual rights by raising the standard of living of the great majority of the population, increasing social mobility, raising the power of workers and consumers in society.
• The unregulated market that fiscal conservatives advocate is incapable of addressing global poverty and inequality in an equitable way.
• Social democracy stabilises economic conditions by providing economic security to individuals and eliminating the threat of extreme poverty.
• By restricting some economic rights, social democracy makes the market more fair (for small businesses and consumers, for example).
• The argument that social democratic governments spend too much and run up deficits is undermined by the record of conservative administrations (e.g. in the United States and the United Kingdom) which have run up unprecedented deficits.

source: wikepedia

 

[Av8r3400]

I am not a socialist, I believe in social justice. Social justice can work and does work in a democratic capitalist society.

This was written in another thread and I think has some relevance here. I don't want this to be a rant against Vin, I do value his point of view. I would like to know what the phrase "Social Justice" means.

Social Justice. Is this linked to the "Social Democrat"?

Would someone who is more enlightened than me care to explain?

 

[CityGirl]

This was written in another thread and I think has some relevance here. I don't want this to be a rant against Vin, I do value his point of view. I would like to know what the phrase "Social Justice" means.

Social Justice. Is this linked to the "Social Democrat"?

Would someone who is more enlightened than me care to explain?

Social justice, sometimes called civil justice, refers to the concept of a society in which justice is achieved in every aspect of society, rather than merely the administration of law. It is generally thought of as a world which affords individuals and groups fair treatment and an impartial share of the benefits of society. (Different proponents of social justice have developed different interpretations of what constitutes fair treatment and an impartial share.) It can also refer to the distribution of advantages and disadvantages within a society.

Social justice is both a philosophical problem and an important issue in politics, religion and civil society. Most individuals wish to live in a just society, but different political ideologies have different conceptions of what a 'just society' actually is. The term "social justice" is often employed by the political left to describe a society with a greater degree of economic egalitarianism, which may be achieved through progressive taxation, income redistribution, or property redistribution. The right wing also uses the term social justice, but generally believes that a just society is best achieved through the operation of a free market, which they believe provides equality of opportunity and promotes philanthropy and charity. Both the right and the left tend to agree on the importance of rule of law, human rights, and some form of a welfare safety net (though typically the left supports this last element to a greater extent than the right).

Social Justice features as an apolitical philosophical concept (insofar as any philosophical analysis of politics can be free from bias) in much of John Rawls' writing. It is fundamental to Catholic social teaching, and is one of the Four Pillars of the Green Party upheld by the worldwide green parties. Some of the tenets of social justice have been adopted by those who lie on the left or center-left of the political spectrum (e.g. Socialists, Social Democrats, etc). Social justice is also a concept that some use to describe the movement towards a socially just world. In this context, social justice is based on the concepts of human rights and equality.

 

[daedong]

This was written in another thread and I think has some relevance here. I don't want this to be a rant against Vin, I do value his point of view. I would like to know what the phrase "Social Justice" means.

Social Justice. Is this linked to the "Social Democrat"?

Would someone who is more enlightened than me care to explain?

I think CityGirl has posed the answer.

Is it socially just to pay a CEO squillions and a laborer less than $10 an hour?

 

[CityGirl]

I think CityGirl has posed the answer.

Is it socially just to pay a CEO squillions and a laborer less than $10 an hour?

Why are CEOs always villianized for their earnings? I'm more offended at the amount of money entertainers and atheletes are paid but noone ever seems envious of people who play for a living. Why is that? I'd much rather see the CEO making millions than the "players" who make millions and then condemn CEOs for their salaries.

 

[Hutchman]

Vin-yes and no! If a CEO has worked hard, educated himself, and helped his company be successful he should be rewarded well for his labors. If there's no incentive of financial reward for the sacrifices required to climb to the top of a company, then nobody would bother. On the other hand, you take a guy like Nardelli, who ran Home Depot into the ground, and give him a $250,000,000 golden parachute for his failure, then it's obscene.
CG, why the disdain for athletes? As long as people are paying to see these athletes play why shouldn't they be paid millions. It's just a business like any other. From a business point of view-I don't know what Albert Pujols makes, probably at least 10 million a year, but I'll guarantee you he brings in much more than that for the Cardinals.
Hutch

 

[CityGirl]

Vin-yes and no! If a CEO has worked hard, educated himself, and helped his company be successful he should be rewarded well for his labors. If there's no incentive of financial reward for the sacrifices required to climb to the top of a company, then nobody would bother. On the other hand, you take a guy like Nardelli, who ran Home Depot into the ground, and give him a $250,000,000 golden parachute for his failure, then it's obscene.
CG, why the disdain for athletes? As long as people are paying to see these athletes play why shouldn't they be paid millions. It's just a business like any other. From a business point of view-I don't know what Albert Pujols makes, probably at least 10 million a year, but I'll guarantee you he brings in much more than that for the Cardinals.
Hutch

I'm pointing out that CEOs are the object of attack with class warfare. It seems those who are highly paid in the entertainment sector are immune to these attacks and it doesn't make sense. They make stupid money just like CEOs but they are never condemned for their pay. Noone seems to think they are paid too much. Why do we value entertainment(luxury services) more than the labors of people who provide valuable services(necessary services)...doctors, teachers, firemen, paramedics, law enforcement, nurses, mechanics, farmers, business owners, etc.? It's a double standard. Necessary services should not be able to make money but luxury services should?

 

[bczoom]

CG, why the disdain for athletes? As long as people are paying to see these athletes play why shouldn't they be paid millions. It's just a business like any other.

For the most part, most athletes and entertainers could care less about those that pay their salaries. For those that fall in that category, that won't get a dime of mine.

Most recently, my daughter's chorus wanted to sing the National Anthem at a major-league baseball game. The team had nobody else lined up to sing it. They wanted over $5,000 dollars to ALLOW these school kids to sing the Anthem.

SCREW THEM!!!!

 

[American Woman]

I'm pointing out that CEOs are the object of attack with class warfare. It seems those who are highly paid in the entertainment sector are immune to these attacks and it doesn't make sense. They make stupid money just like CEOs but they are never condemned for their pay. Noone seems to think they are paid too much. Why do we value entertainment(luxury services) more than the labors of people who provide valuable services(necessary services)...doctors, teachers, firemen, paramedics, law enforcement, nurses, mechanics, farmers, business owners, etc.? It's a double standard. Necessary services should not be able to make money but luxury services should?

I have to agree it's crazy how much money athletes and CEOs are paid.
Services like Law enforcement,nurses,firemen,paramedics aren't paid anything compared to Athletes. But I bet when when your house is on fire, you get trapped, and badly burned.... you would want the Paramedics there "now" and nurse waiting with the doctor waiting to take care of you while a police officer makes a report to find the guy that set your house on fire, and the teachers that taught these valuable professions will be worth more to you at that time than any Athlete, or CEO.

 

[daedong]

CityGirl

You have looked at my question with one eye open and one closed, open the other eye and look at the how little others earn. I honestly have no beef with people that earn mega bucks, that is the capitalist part of a democratic capitalist society. The issue is the inequity between the haves and the havenots. That does not imply that everyone earns the same, it is not about just taking from the rich and giving to the poor. Its more about the poor being entitled to some of one's nations overall wealth.

 

[johnday]

.
Services like Law enforcement,nurses,firemen,paramedics aren't paid anything compared to Athletes.

Agree %100 with AW. But what would be a solution? Those services, except for the Nurses, are paid for by the taxpayer. I've nothing but the highest respect for these professions, but the only way I can see to raise their wages, is to raise taxes. And we all know how popular that is. I know, and have dealt with many LEOs, and fireman/para's. The ones I didn't personally know? Crap, they won't even accept a cup of coffee from you after they've helped you out. True thanks to these guys, and a handshake, seems to be enough. But that doesn't put food on the table, or fuel in the car. A lot of these guys, especially the FireFighters, work 2 jobs, and it's not because of greed.

 

[RedRocker]

Y'all are misspelling social justice, it's spelled "Communism".

 

[Spiffy1]

CityGirl

You have looked at my question with one eye open and one closed, open the other eye and look at the how little others earn. I honestly have no beef with people that earn mega bucks, that is the capitalist part of a democratic capitalist society. The issue is the inequity between the haves and the havenots. That does not imply that everyone earns the same, it is not about just taking from the rich and giving to the poor. Its more about the poor being entitled to some of one's nations overall wealth.

There are no doubt CEOs as well as floorsweepers not worth $1/hour let alone $10 or $10K - ironically it is TOO MUCH socialism not too little that promotes this in a capatalist society:

Everything is supply and demand - if more people are allowed [and have incentive] to gain experience (but with high minimum wages companies hire so lean it's hard for exceptional people to advance from 'floorsweaper to CEO anymore' not to mention how many companies are moving operations to other countries), the CEO pool becomes much greater: allowing the board of directors much greater options and the abuses to become transparent.

Yet again I say, as long as there is incentitive not to work [abusive unions or government handouts] too many will take the easy way out. Yes, there will be a few who get caught unfairly in underpaid jobs, and a few on top who abuse their company payrole - but once again, pure supply and demand will offer opportunity and punish greed much quicker than any government ever could.

Heck, if Obama wins today, I'm quite tempted run down to the welfare office myself tomorrow and sign up for everything I can get my hands on: why should his cronies be the only ones living off all this printed money.... moreso why should I work only to pay for printing all this money for a bunch of lazy fools to live easy?

 

[CityGirl]

CityGirl

You have looked at my question with one eye open and one closed, open the other eye and look at the how little others earn. I honestly have no beef with people that earn mega bucks, that is the capitalist part of a democratic capitalist society. The issue is the inequity between the haves and the havenots. That does not imply that everyone earns the same, it is not about just taking from the rich and giving to the poor. Its more about the poor being entitled to some of one's nations overall wealth.

Thank you, Sensei. I'm honored you see my one open eye. The other one is closed right now secondary to a corneal abrasion sustained while using a small crowbar to pry it open.

 

[ghautz]

For the most part, most athletes and entertainers could care less about those that pay their salaries. For those that fall in that category, that won't get a dime of mine....

Chances are those athletes are in your pockets without your permission. Around here, the football, basketball, baseball and hockey teams are playing in stadiums paid for with taxpayer money and have sweetheart deals giving them more tax money.

 

[rlk]

But what would be a solution? Those services, except for the Nurses, are paid for by the taxpayer. I've nothing but the highest respect for these professions, but the only way I can see to raise their wages, is to raise taxes. And we all know how popular that is.

johnday, you make a good point, except I think we can pay higher wages to these professions by eliminating government waste. I don't know about where you live, but here in North Carolina, I see a lot of waste.

Recently some NC government agencies were asked to cut their budgets by 3%. You should have heard all the complaining from the head of those agencies over loosing 3%.

In my 40 years experience in the business world, I have never seen a budget I could not cut by 10% and never impact services or the end product. If a simple minded middle manager like me can find 10% waste in a budget, think what someone who is better trained could find.

Bottom line, not every problem is solved by a tax increase like many/most democrats believe.

Bob

 

[daedong]

There are no doubt CEOs as well as floorsweepers not worth $1/hour let alone $10 or $10K - ironically it is TOO MUCH socialism not too little that promotes this in a capatalist society:

Everything is supply and demand - if more people are allowed [and have incentive] to gain experience (but with high minimum wages companies hire so lean it's hard for exceptional people to advance from 'floorsweaper to CEO anymore' not to mention how many companies are moving operations to other countries), the CEO pool becomes much greater: allowing the board of directors much greater options and the abuses to become transparent.

Yet again I say, as long as there is incentitive not to work [abusive unions or government handouts] too many will take the easy way out. Yes, there will be a few who get caught unfairly in underpaid jobs, and a few on top who abuse their company payrole - but once again, pure supply and demand will offer opportunity and punish greed much quicker than any government ever could.

Heck, if Obama wins today, I'm quite tempted run down to the welfare office myself tomorrow and sign up for everything I can get my hands on: why should his cronies be the only ones living off all this printed money.... moreso why should I work only to pay for printing all this money for a bunch of lazy fools to live easy?

The top end of town have many forms of assistance or protection so the fact of the matter is you don't live in a simple capitalist society.

Thank you, Sensei. I'm honored you see my one open eye. The other one is closed right now secondary to a corneal abrasion sustained while using a small crowbar to pry it open.

I do hope the abrasion does not get infected and the eye returns to normal. I often wonder how people that lose the sight in one eye focus properly.

 

[CityGirl]

The top end of town have many forms of assistance or protection so the fact of the matter is you don't live in a simple capitalist society.



I do hope the abrasion does not get infected and the eye returns to normal. I often wonder how people that lose the sight in one eye focus properly.

Oh, I am focused just fine. It's the peripheral distractions (from the left) that I can't see too clearly.

 

[American Woman]

Agree %100 with AW. But what would be a solution? Those services, except for the Nurses, are paid for by the taxpayer. I've nothing but the highest respect for these professions, but the only way I can see to raise their wages, is to raise taxes. And we all know how popular that is. I know, and have dealt with many LEOs, and fireman/para's. The ones I didn't personally know? Crap, they won't even accept a cup of coffee from you after they've helped you out. True thanks to these guys, and a handshake, seems to be enough. But that doesn't put food on the table, or fuel in the car. A lot of these guys, especially the FireFighters, work 2 jobs, and it's not because of greed.

It's like everything else our Government spends out taxes on. They mind spending billions on luxury or in your face stuff, while most tax payers would rather pay more to the law enforcement,firefighters/para's. Florida is growing and taxes are going towards widening lanes and rebuilding roads and bridges. That is needed...but they are putting palm trees and decorative bushes and flowers in the mediums. That's a lot of money to for the plants, planting, and upkeep. What happened to just keeping the grass mowed on it? It bugs me to see this while the law enforcement,firefighters/para's are driving around it to protect the community. I know a lot law enforcement,firefighters/para's that are working two jobs to make ends meet. Like I said before, " These people will be worth more to you at the time you need them."

.

Recently some NC government agencies were asked to cut their budgets by 3%. You should have heard all the complaining from the head of those agencies over loosing 3%.

Probably because it might affect their pay? Oh wait.....not the heads.....
They don't want to get rid of the cushy toilet paper and aroma sprays in the bathrooms

Bottom line, not every problem is solved by a tax increase like many/most democrats believe.
Bob

 

[Spiffy1]

The top end of town have many forms of assistance or protection so the fact of the matter is you don't live in a simple capitalist society.

No doubt it is no longer a simple capitalist society, but I don't understand the top end part?

My arguement is that going back to true capitalism corrects unjust [I won't say unequal, as I still say a lazy moron deserves everything he aspires] situations faster than government with far less unjust carnage.

 

[daedong]

No doubt it is no longer a simple capitalist society, but I don't understand the top end part?

My arguement is that going back to true capitalism corrects unjust [I won't say unequal, as I still say a lazy moron deserves everything he aspires] situations faster than government with far less unjust carnage.

Doesn't matter now

 

[Spiffy1]

Doesn't matter now

Still not sure I get the top end thing, but afraid you're right: at this rate China will soon be a better example of capitalism than the US.

 

[ddrane2115]

For the most part, most athletes and entertainers could care less about those that pay their salaries. For those that fall in that category, that won't get a dime of mine.

Most recently, my daughter's chorus wanted to sing the National Anthem at a major-league baseball game. The team had nobody else lined up to sing it. They wanted over $5,000 dollars to ALLOW these school kids to sing the Anthem.

SCREW THEM!!!!

this is just wrong, and you are right, screw them!