,
9 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
That is not remotely close to the definition of socialism. It's not about safety nets or the welfare state on steroids. By definition, it's about "socializing" costs for the middle class, as in 2020 Democrat proposals like "free" education, child care, the Green New Deal, etc.
It's long past time to strip socialists of this "safety net" camouflage. That's how they peddle their ideas to working people who justifiably worry about damage to the capitalist economy that might jeopardize their jobs, paychecks, and consumer buying power.
Socialism always tries to mask itself as the welfare state when people start thinking about what "socializing" huge portions of the national economy actually means in practice. The Left plays on the compassion of voters to soothe their anxiety about losing control of their lives.
Look at Obamacare. It was sold with endless complaints about those who could not afford insurance, as though it was a giant welfare program, but in practice it most certainly does NOT create a "safety net" that affects only the poor. It affects EVERYONE, mostly for the worse.
You can have a vigorous free-market capitalist economy with a very generous "safety net" without a shred of socialism. In fact, if you want that safety net administered efficiently, at reasonable cost, and without excessive fraud, you MUST keep socialists far away from it.
When socialism creeps into the picture, you're talking about the State controlling large sectors of the economy to "socialize" the cost of an ever-expanding list of "rights" that everyone "deserves" to enjoy for "free."
Socialism by definition contradicts the principle of allowing those who can afford to pay for goods and services exercising their economic freedom to buy from competitive providers. EVERYONE has to give up freedom and "shop" with the State so the costs can be socialized.
Those who claim socialism is just about "safety nets" for the destitute are trying to camouflage socialism as tax-and-spend liberalism, which was also horrible but at least made a sharp distinction between providers and beneficiaries, and tried to pay its bills with tax hikes.
Young people seduced by romantic ideas of socialism need to understand: YOU will suffer. YOU will be controlled. YOU will pay for others, they will pay for you, and none of you will understand or control how the money moves around. It's not a safety net. It's a spiderweb. /end
