The Kids are Socialists Because Capitalism is Dickslapping the Planet
Holly Wood, PhD 🌹

What an infantile screed. As for the emotional manipulation at the end, well that speaks to why “the kids” today seem so incapable of forming a coherent argument using facts and reason, rather than virtue-signalling. The cult of “I’m a better/more caring person than you” is running rampant, and articles like this are proof of that.

I often find it ironic that those who pillory capitalism will expect to be paid according to their worth should they write a (propaganda) article, or book, or should they sell a product. If they started a business, they would seek to make as much profit as possible. If there were too many rules in place that affected their business, they would be unhappy. If the government placed a huge tax on their profits, their business would suffer. If they sold their services in any sector, they would expect to receive money for those services. They choose to buy certain products and not others, because the free market gives choice. In other words, the free market is fine when it works for them.

Furthermore, those who pillory capitalism are often referring to crony capitalism, which is the unholy alliance between corporate greed and government control. This is what has led to states that are “ literally at the stage of collapse”. When we use taxpayers money to bail out bankers who speculated wildly with their client’s funds, we have crony capitalism. A free market would allow those banks to fail and incentivize competitors to come up with a better business model to avoid making the same mistakes. The free market encourages creativity, and gives the little man a chance. When a conglomerate of suits and politicians decide to intervene, often to assure their own profit margins, ordinary people who want a choice of goods and services lose out. This, and not the ability of the consumer to CHOOSE where they can put their own money, is“dickslapping” the planet, as the author so eloquently writes.

I see the author has neglected to mention the fates of advanced socialist states. When she made the dubious claim that “the most advanced capitalist states are literally at the stage of collapse”, she gave no examples, preferring to use her hyperlinks to tell us that capitalism is responsible for empty homes — of course, neglecting to mention that a building company agreed to sell those homes to the highest bidder, and that the government has failed to build enough homes for ordinary people. But back to socialist states. She makes no mention of the cost of state intervention, no mention of massive state programs that are going bust, and thus taking the taxpayer with them. Medicare and Medicaid, the largest drivers of America’s debt, went unmentioned. The National Health Service here in Britain, where I live, has been in constant crisis for years, with politicians only scrabbling behind their chairs in Parliament to find extra cash, rather than making it more efficient. High taxation did not get mentioned, even though that discourages business productivity — something that even the Democrat President JFK knew when he cut taxes during his term. And of course, the author never mentions countries like Venezuela, which is currently facing a massive economic crisis, where there are shortages of food and little money to improve people’s lives.

Most importantly, she never mentions the inability of socialism to incentivize hard work, high productivity and its tendency to discourage success by encouraging resentment of wealth. Therefore, socialist states, unless cognizant of the value of the free market, foster stagnation both in economic and social terms. Socialism refuses to accept that everyone cannot be “the same”, and that the state has no right to impose equality of outcome upon everyone. Under the free market, we get equality of opportunity, and the rest is down to the individual. Whatever we gain or lose is down to us, and we can choose to work as hard or as little as we wish. The socialist project is that everything can be fixed with large-scale state intervention. The state does everything better. And what is invariably the result? Higher taxes, inefficiency (because state bureaucrats invent jobs for themselves), higher regulations and the eventual insolvency of what sounded like a good idea. Clear examples of this are Medicare and Medicaid.

I was going to comment on this article line by line, but some of the lines are really so risible, and full of hyperbole and emotional manipulation that it isn’t worth my effort. But I should expect this from my generation: emotions trump facts.