Late capitalism sucks

Tldr;
The government screwed up the economy with the response to covid, so the proposed solution... give the government complete control of the economy???

Socialism means government control of the economy.

These lockdowns which further enriched the ultra-wealthy are government control of the economy.

You are an imbecile.

Socialism means worker control of the economy.

Which never actually happens. What *actually* happens every single time is GOVERNMENT control of the economy…and horrific abuse of the citizens…and mass murder on an unprecedented scale.

You are a pathetically ignorant fool.

There are a few ways to implement worker control… one is a worker’s state, a dictatorship of the proletariat under a Marxist-Leninist centralized state… or organizing the trades into unions and councils with or without the state. Proletarian organization from below is much more effective than bureaucratic and centralized direction of workers.
Look at Chiapas, Rojava and several anarchist collectives all over the world. They are all autonomous, decentralized and organized without a state and are not authoritarian.

There would be no corporations, just collectives.

yeah that 'll work read some f:**ing history
.
BTW not picking on janitors per say (I've worked as a Janitor in the past) I just wouldn't work for a company run by a committee of Janitors cause they would be out of business in a week. maybe a month if there business was janitorial services. you cant run a business by committee especially a committee that has no idea how to run a business,

Also an aside I knew a Janitor for a public school system that made a hell of a lot of money over 110 k by the time he retired his pension alone is probably more than you currently make I say God bless him it is not class class argument it is a expertise argument . If I need some one to clean up a mess I would hire a janitor if I need some one to run a business I will hire a businessman .

There might be a committee of janitors if it is a syndicalist style of socialist organization, but any free society is free to organize producers how they see fit. The important aspect of a committee or council in any trade is that they are elected. Under capitalism, you cannot elect your boss, or your management, how profits are used, company moves, etc. that is why capitalism and democracy are incompatible.

If you read history, you will find that the anarcho-syndicalists of Spain expropriated private property and collectivized, claiming their workplaces for the workers. Productivity increased and impoverished people became better off.

Bull shit By the way I love how leftist use straw man augment the America sucks because .... inset argument then blame capitalism. the United States has not had a capitalist economy in decades. since the end of WW II at least or since Woodrow Wilson Fundamentally changed America with the federal reserve and the income tax.
The United States is at best a mixed economy with the primary components being Corporatism/fascism and socialism.
A capitalist society does not run 30 trillion dollar deficits, a socialist nation (or fascist) nation does. a capitalist nation doesn't allow massive monopolies like face book and google control the flow of information in the media a corporatist and fascist nation would, A capitalist nation would not let a conglomerate of giant pharmaceutical companies dictate health and welfare policies, or allow such companies to tell people where they can travel and or shop, a fascist or corporatist nation would. The UNITED STATES NEEDS A LOT MORE CAPITALISM NOT LESS.

The only place anywhere in the world, anything close resembling a "commune" style economy, ever worked is in the Amish in communities of Pennsylvania and Ohio; And they succeed only for the following reasons

1 They are monotheist communities
2 They are heterogenous societies the very opposite of woke multi cultural "utopia's"
3 They operate as a separate sub set of a much larger and the still some what free economy of the United States
.

That is an absolutely terrible argument, and incredibly false. The United States is not even remotely socialist, first off. In agreements like NAFTA, construction of oil pipelines, globalization in general, the country is still trying to appropriate or confiscate communal or indigenous land for the purpose of private investment and development. We are trying to destroy socialist nations like Cuba and China with embargoes and tariffs, even though they are some of the few Marxist-Leninist states left.

The United States economic policy has been shifting toward neoliberalism for half a century now, a literal return to free market "hands off" policy, rather than flirting with any socialistic course. Conservative and liberal leaders alike have been doing anything to appease the capitalists and produce a welcoming business climate. This has been done through attacking unions and their rights, austerity measures, a shift toward privatization of education and the biggest of them all: cutting corporate taxes.

These policies have still resulted in manufacturing jobs leaving the U.S. to exploit cheap labor overseas, greater gains for the wealthiest Americans and an indistinguishable lower and middle class. Wealth is trickling up, not trickling down as Reagan had forecasted.

What do you mean a capitalist nation does not allow for monopolies? That is exactly what capitalism produces. And seeing as you're espousing some libertarian manifesto, the folks at your think tanks are literally insisting the repeal of antitrust legislation and stopping the breakup of monopolies. It's part of the "free market" policy.

You seem to not know what socialism, fascism or capitalism are. Let me explain capitalism. Capitalism is a private mode of production and establishes an unequal society of property owners and non-property owners. The latter sell their labor to the former, and are in a constant struggle for economic freedom, which they are not afforded as a dispossessed class. Workers don't even own what they produce. Their employers do, and that is how the employers make their gains, at the expense of the working majority. To say we need more of this is ludicrous.

The Amish are not the only modern example. With 300,000 in Chiapas, Mexico, the EZLN have seized a number of territories that are autonomous, and they work in collectives, and provide through networks of mutual aid. They literally operate better than the Mexican government, and have greater healthcare.

Nice classism btw

The former option is not ideal, while the latter is not acceptable.

For now at least, what was done to us is something we can attempt to reverse and hopefully recover from.

If socialism is forced on us, we'll never recover. It would be the end of the US.

Good

And that's the problem right there. While I love America and want to fix what's wrong with it (which is a never-ending task, as it should be) a socialist wants to tear it down and replace it with something that's proven, time after time, to be far far worse.

I don't like the mismanagement of Venezuela. I won't say that was solely due to socialistic policies, because several factors unrelated contributed to their problems of shortages and economic woes, like reliance on oil, U.S. sanctions, literally devaluing the currency and so on.
What I can say is state intervention has built up economies in the past, including for China and Russia, and even for more market economies.

Ponder this: we are easily the wealthiest nation on the planet, and still we are the only nation in the developed world not to guarantee universal healthcare to its citizens. We are last in worker benefits. Among the worst for wealth inequality. You really think that continuing to allow elites and their multinationals to guide economic policy, and continue to screw over domestic workers is the best path? Wouldn't things be better if workers had a greater say, greater control? If our economy was more democratized? That is what leftists want. And be honest, do you really think they have democracy in the one-party communist states or Venezuela?

I don't think it's accurate to blame Venezuela's issues entirely on over-reliance on oil. Many middle eastern countries have no other significant revenue and they're thriving. Of course, it's possible that those running Venezuela were not only corrupt, but utterly incompetent. I think only one of those descriptions applies to the middle eastern countries.

Regarding China and Russia, just imagine the types of booming economies they would have if they combined capitalism with freedom! China will likely end up dwarfing our economy anyway. I've long felt that we would eventually become a second rate power to them, much as the UK has become a second rate power to us now. Nothing particularly shameful about that, imo. But it's just not in the American DNA to be in second place, thankfully.

I don't know why you have to go down the health care rabbit hole, since we're not likely to agree, and it seems like a non-sequitur, subject-wise. Do you believe it's a right? I do not, since nobody has a right to the goods or services of others. If we could afford it, yes. But our free-spending politicians have pretty much put that idealistic dream out of reach with their greedy pork barrel spending. Given the current political climate with Dems pushing through multi-trillion dollar spending programs, just how far into debt do you think we should go? If your answer is to raise more taxes, that won't do. The golden goose will only lay so many eggs. Eventually, even well intended but naïve liberal spenders like you will have to realize we cannot sustain our current, and definitely our imminent deficit spending.

Regarding your comment about giving power to the workers, aside from how disgustingly that reeks of socialism (or the failed promise of communism) all I have to say is, stop being a worker if you don't like the existing setup. Or, at the very least, work within the system to make it better. No, I don't like it when a company stomps on an individual. But I also have to say that the individual doesn't have to let themselves get stomped on. They should quit whining, and develop another stream of revenue, IF they feel that strongly about it.

We actually have that freedom.

I've done that, and it was at a time when I had practically nothing other than serious debt, so I know it can be done.

We don't think that socialism is too extreme of an alternative to result in this. we think that socialism IS what results in this.

Trump literally praised China for its handling of COVID-19, which was far better than our response, but ok.

wait, how was China's response better than ours? it was unethical and violated human rights. And I do criticize Trump for praising China's human rights violation. Not all Trump supporters agree with literally everything Trump says.

How did they violate human rights in fighting COVID? Making people wear masks?

they WELDED people shut in their homes, causing them to starve to death. That is what China did.