Socialism works great when you can just keep borrowing money and making resources out of nothing. It's paying it back that's the problem.
Note, this is true for all forms of socialism, including national socialism.
You can't create resources out of nothing. Resources are physical. If you print money you are just directing resources into the hands of the people you give the printed money to. It doesn't create any new resources for them. Someone has to be robbed.
Let me rephrase that. Socialism works great when you can print money out of nothing, or borrow it, and then use that money to buy resources from people that still believe your money had the same value that it did before you borrowed/printed more of it.
It seemed to be working great until millions of sand niggers showed up and started taxing the shit out of the system while not paying anything back into it.
Which wouldn't be a problem with proper border control.
Wrong.
Hitler's Germany did not have any undesirables, yet it too was funded with borrowed money that it couldn't pay back.
Even further back than that, Rome did not have niggers (sand or otherwise) on its welfare system. They were all "whites", or at least, Mediterranean Europeans. Still collapsed.
Whenever you allow a government to borrow money on behalf of a tax-paying people, they will do so, because it buys votes, and they will never be held accountable for the debt.
Reject all economic left. Communism, socialism, all of it. Anything that allows others to dictate how money is spent, is evil and unsustainable.
Hitler's Germany did not have any undesirables, yet it too was funded with borrowed money that it couldn't pay back.
I'm sure it was totally the social programs and not The entirety of the Jewish controlled world, including the 3 largest world powers attacking them that caused them to collapse, nope it was because they had socialism in their name. Remember Germany went from a wartorn ruin to a world power in less than a decade because of the pro-German policies of the National Socialist government.
Even further back than that, Rome did not have niggers (sand or otherwise) on its welfare system. They were all "whites", or at least, Mediterranean Europeans. Still collapsed.
Rome's collapse was due to many Many reasons; mass influx of a foreign, alien culture (northern Europeans), a sprawling size that made management of distant territories with the available technology nearly impossible, the increased reliance on foreign auxiliaries in military who had more loyalty to their commanders than to the Roman State as a whole which ties into the insane amounts of political backstabbing, petty power plays, and civil wars. Claiming it was because of "socialism", when the Roman system didn't resemble modern/Post-Marx socialism at all is extremely short sighted. Also saying that an empire that lasted between 800 and well over 2000 years (depending on what you count as "Rome") collapsing means that it's economic system is faulty is incredibly dumb.
Whenever you allow a government to borrow money on behalf of a tax-paying people, they will do so, because it buys votes, and they will never be held accountable for the debt.
I don't see how that is relevant.
Reject all economic left. Communism, socialism, all of it. Anything that allows others to dictate how money is spent, is evil and unsustainable.
You've just described virtually every economic system ever implemented.
It seems like you're trying really hard to force this "Socialism bad" meme but the examples you picked show the exact opposite, Germany was elevated from a burning ruin to a world power, and Rome lasted for 2000 years before collapsing to unrelated reasons (but wasn't even really socialist in any modern sense of the word, unless you think anything less than Ancap is socialism).
(post is archived)