Snardiff wrote: “That’s the thing that always amazes me about socialists like you” (to Jag, apparently).
Note the us vs. them dichotomy. Snardiff places him/herself on the “us” side and “socialists” on the “them” side.
Unfortunately it isn’t so easy to marginalize other voices.
Here’s the central question:
are there any societal institutions which should be public non-profit or should they all be private for-profit?
I guarantee that in any survey 99 out of 100 people will agree that at least some societal institutions should be public non-profit. (At least 99, but probably more like 99.9.) In other words, 99 out of 100 people will agree that a mixed economy (that is, a mixture of public non-profit and private for profit institutions) is best for the healthy functioning of society. I accept a mixed economy and statistically I bet that Snardiff does as well. Just ask yourself, do you think that all of the following should be private for profit or would you agree that at least some should be public non-profit?
(a) Fire service
(b) Police service
(c) K-12 Education
(d) Libraries
(e) Health care
(f) Military
(g) Parks service
Unless you’re the bastard child of Milton Friedman you will agree that at least one of the institutions mentioned in (a)-(g) (and hopefully more than one!) should be public non-profit. Imagine, for example, a police service that was for hire and only investigated crimes and enforced laws for citizens who paid for their protection. Sounds like a recipe for corruption and injustice, doesn’t it?
So unless you are the 1%, you can’t marginalize other people by howling “Socialism” since you and your interlocutors actually agree that a mixed economy is the best way forward.
