Notes on Why Socialism is So Bad By James Reed

Here are some points, just as if one was taking notes in a university lecture about why socialism is so bad. The only difference is that if one was in such a lecture at any Australian university, one would not be hearing this side of the debate, only about the evil inequalities of capitalism and the free market. But it is lies and ideology from the Left New Class, as it has not been socialism which has lifted the majority of people out of grinding poverty, but the free market when it is permitted to operate freely, and that includes China as well, which would never have reached its present state of development with a socialist planned economy.

The core reason why socialism fails and free enterprise succeeds is based upon human nature. If one is given the opportunity to secure resources and property for oneself, one will work tirelessly to do so. But, if a salary is given, come-what-may, and little benefit goes to the individual, there is no incentive to work hard, just to get by each day. There cannot be great social progress that way. And, on a wider scale, planning for the whole economy is a bigger disaster, since there is too much information to process, even with super-computer, to be able to make realistic decisions. Hence economic disasters and massive waste.

It is worth going over the basics, since, if they can be trusted, surveys are showing the youth getting increasingly interested in socialism. I can tell you that the socialists are present pushing their poison on the students at lunch time at the universities, but there is little presence from Christians and free enterprise students, who are perhaps scared of being bashed, or intimidated by the socialists.

https://nationfirst.substack.com/p/why-socialism-makes-inequality-worse

"Leftist governance worsens inequality in cities like New York and nations like Venezuela, despite socialism's goal to eliminate it.

Ideologically-driven leftist policies increase economic hardship, favouring bureaucracy over practical economic growth.

Complex regulations benefit large companies at the expense of small businesses, creating barriers and increasing operational costs.

Over-regulation by leftists skyrockets living and housing costs, making middle-class life unaffordable in cities like San Francisco.

Leftist leniency on crime exacerbates violence and unemployment, further harming economic stability and safety in their regions.

It's worth exploring how socialism ends up giving rise to greater inequality when it is a political system that, in theory, is supposed to flatten out those inequalities.

So what gives?

Well, you wouldn't have to be a genius to guess that it is the policies of leftists (anchored less in reality and more in ideological fantasy) that lead to more people suffering economic hardship.

Let's look at burgeoning bureaucracy, or, in layman's terms, 'big government', which the leftists seem to be so much in love with.

They think that bringing more laws, regulations, and fines into existence helps the average Joe and punishes large companies.

In reality, it is the exact opposite.

Large companies have the means (such as an army of lawyers and consultants) to navigate a more 'complex' regulatory environment.

Who it hurts is the entrepreneur and the small businessman, who struggle to keep their establishments afloat amidst of all that red tape.

And that higher level of regulation also translates to higher prices for goods and services.

You might have noticed that the cost of living tends to be insane in leftist-dominated cities.

Most people would instinctively know that $120,000 a year is a lot of money.

However, in places like San Fransico, Sydney, or London, the cost of living is so insane it can barely afford you a middle-class lifestyle.

The leftist habit of over-regulating is also the reason why houses become so expensive.

Not many new houses are built, and what is built has to be up to the 'code.'

So, in time, demand naturally exceeds supply, and the result is a real estate market where only the rich can play.

And let's not forget about leftist habits of increasing arbitrary taxes, which (surprise surprise) hurt the middle class the most.

The wealthy have the means of dodging such taxes, and the poor are effectively 'locked' into welfare because a so-called 'progressive taxation' system means that earning an income could actually mean making less money than then the benefits already being received.

Finally, there is also the leftist habit of being lenient on crime to the extent of effectively legalising it.

Crime rate skyrockets, there is violence on the streets, and drug use becomes common.

As a result, businesses close down, and jobs become fewer, making the situation even more miserable for hard-working Joe.

One should never be fooled by the leftist rhetoric – the outcome is what matters.

Voting for a leftist in the hope of addressing inequality is like pouring gasoline on fire, hoping it gets extinguished.

Remember folks: the freer the market, the freer the people.