First, Even if you do get a job in socialism its more likely one you don't want. Its also probably a job you'll suck at and one that is dangerous. If and when you F**K up, they usually say its your fault and gulag you or kill you. Government after all to socialists is infallible. In fact its God.
Second, wages are the same regardless whether you're a janitor or a scientist. There's no incentive to do the jobs. Placement is usually not based on merit but a labor lottery. A janitor who simply sweeps the halls of say the Gumshoe department store or some government office building in Moscow will go home after his shift with the same pay as a man who busts a gut at a steel mill or as an air traffic controller or say an architect. There is no real incentive for students to learn skills or achieve anything or even to invent. There is no profit motive and you do not have the time or freedom to put your ideas on paper. Have to go to work.
BTW, while we Americans used to work 40 hrs a week, in the USSR and China its even longer. In China for instance 120 hours. Some workers have to put in shifts for 24 hrs. One woman died and all she got was $134 a month in wages.
third problem as I said is no profit motive. I pretty much covered most of it already but I want to bring up something. Profit to a socialist is considered theft by executives. Meanwhile in socialist countries, 0.001% of the population, the heads of the state and the party enjoy unbelievable wealth.
The lifestyles of the heads of China are greater than our own CEOS whereas, in America, low income earners at McDs and BK and others who make just under the poverty limit enjoy a far greater lifestyle than China's middle class or what would've been the middle class in Russia during the days of the USSR.
Also two people summed up why socialism failed big time! Mahatma Gandhi and Pope St. John Paul 2nd:
The mahatma:A Nation's greatness is measured in how it treats its weakest members...
St John Paul 2:a nation that kills its own children is a nation without hope.
While Stalin sez: Death is the solution to all problems! No man, No problem!
Hitler:How fortunate for governments that the people they administer do not think!
In socialist countries like Germany, they offed the sick and the weak. Europe and Australia also does this. They have forced sterilizations, abortions of the retarded and euthanasia. Its also been happening in the USA for some time as well and getting worse.
Dehumanist Europe is now worse off now than they were under despotic kings of the dark ages. They have not gotten better. They may be economically better than they were 100 years ago (thanks to America paying for their military I might add) they may have advanced technologically but they have discarded morality or what little they had. The church is powerless and irrevevant in the new Europe and its getting that way here too.
The future of the No-Longer-Useful Idiot.
Which is why Bishop Romney and Caliph Obama
IMPOSED RomneyCARE/ObamaCARE —
and why the stinking, hated, GOP left THEMSELVES
and their families EXEMPT (and Moslems, of course).
Slaves are fully employed and the dead aren’t counted. Problem solved.
The Purge is based on this in part.
Note the writer's emphasis that the "scheme of Socialism" requires what he calls "the power of restraining the increase in population"--long the essential and primary focus of the Democrat Party in the U. S.:
"I have suggested that the scheme of Socialism is wholly incomplete unless it includes a power of restraining the increase of population, which power is so unwelcome to Englishmen that the very mention of it seems to require an apology. I have showed that in France, where restraints on multiplication have been adopted into the popular code of morals, there is discontent on the one hand at the slow rate of increase, while on the other, there is still a 'proletariat,' and Socialism is still a power in politics.
I.44
"I have put the question, how Socialism would treat the residuum of the working class and of all classes—the class, not specially vicious, nor even necessarily idle, but below the average in power of will and in steadiness of purpose. I have intimated that such persons, if they belong to the upper or middle classes, are kept straight by the fear of falling out of class, and in the working class by positive fear of want. But since Socialism purposes to eliminate the fear of want, and since under Socialism the hierarchy of classes will either not exist at all or be wholly transformed, there remains for such persons no motive at all except physical coercion. Are we to imprison or flog all the 'ne'er-do-wells'?
I.45
"I began this paper by pointing out that there are inequalities and anomalies in the material world, some of which, like the obliquity of the ecliptic and the consequent inequality of the day's length, cannot be redressed at all. Others, like the caprices of sunshine and rainfall in different climates, can be mitigated, but must on the whole be endured. I am very far from asserting that the inequalities and anomalies of human society are strictly parallel with those of material nature. I fully admit that we are under an obligation to control nature so far as we can. But I think I have shown that the Socialist scheme cannot be relied upon to control nature, because it refuses to obey her. Socialism attempts to vanquish nature by a front attack. Individualism, on the contrary, is the recognition, in social politics, that nature has a beneficent as well as a malignant side. The struggle for life provides for the various wants of the human race, in somewhat the same way as the climatic struggle of the elements provides for vegetable and animal life—imperfectly, that is, and in a manner strongly marked by inequalities and anomalies. By taking advantage of prevalent tendencies, it is possible to mitigate these anomalies and inequalities, but all experience shows that it is impossible to do away with them. All history, moreover, is the record of the triumph of Individualism over something which was virtually Socialism or Collectivism, though not called by that name. In early days, and even at this day under archaic civilisations, the note of social life is the absence of freedom. But under every progressive civilisation, freedom has made decisive strides—broadened down, as the poet says, from precedent to precedent. And it has been rightly and naturally so.
I.46
"Freedom is the most valuable of all human possessions, next after life itself. It is more valuable, in a manner, than even health. No human agency can secure health; but good laws, justly administered, can and do secure freedom. Freedom, indeed, is almost the only thing that law can secure. Law cannot secure equality, nor can it secure prosperity. In the direction of equality, all that law can do is to secure fair play, which is equality of rights but is not equality of conditions. In the direction of prosperity, all that law can do is to keep the road open. That is the Quintessence of Individualism, and it may fairly challenge comparison with that Quintessence of Socialism we have been discussing. Socialism, disguise it how we may, is the negation of Freedom. That it is so, and that it is also a scheme not capable of producing even material comfort in exchange for the abnegations of Freedom, I think the foregoing considerations amply prove." EDWARD STANLEY ROBERTSON
bkmk