Shouldn't the U.S. become a Socialistic- Democratic Country?
598484
I have a better question...do you even know what a socialist democratic society is? Its like communism, it does not work, it will not work, it has not worked. Therefore the answer is that U.S. should not become a socialist democratic country because it would not work. Look at the USSR, Cuba, China, Vietnam and old governments in Latin America. If you look at all, IT WAS A COMPLETE DISASTER!!!!!!!!!!!!! And China? yeah it only has nuclear weapons and fussion and fission bombs as well as that the U.S is totaly dependent on it, thats the only reason why it still survived, but are the people happy? NO, HA!!! not in a million years-well only the government that is rich is, but otherwise it is no. China is lucky that it has a spiritual side instead of materialism. But U.S. is not, we are materialistic and involved in a consumer society. Hence we would fail miserably as a Socialist-Democratic Country. No one would be happy.
995536
USA is not a democracy. It is a republic.
927200
The first answer from lareddawg is as correct as the second answer is absolutely WRONG! The philosophy of the American left is socialists and anti theme to the concept of America as a republic.\nNote Art 4, Sec. 4, founded as a Republic...The founders detested the concept of democracy as a government form that has historically always failed.
365429
nope, socialism starts with a revolution and finaly ends in a revolution (like i experienced, more than 2000 people died, it was like a war, we payed the price of freedom). \n  a war can be stoped only with a peace treaty or a pact. the pact can be signed by common agreement or can be imposed by a third party, organization or single but strong country.\n  it wouldn't be wars if people would care only about their lives, their friends, their little pleasures, their jobs ...there will be no war when there will be no human pride\n  exemple: i am fisherman, i like chess, i love barbecues with friends, i strongly believe in mohamed. you are a taxi driver, you like tennis, you love going in pub with friends and you don't believe in mohamed's words, you don't believe god or allah exists aso. this is offence, how can you say this? this is sin, i must kick your ass ... why can't we stop and play chess today and tennis tomorrow? \n .... and like pride isn't enough, we have the envy. why are americans wealthy and we are poor? maybe because americans have justice, respect or are punished buy the law, are organised, live in concurence, do their job, lots of them are workoholics while we have coruption, we are disorganized, i don't work to get a contract but i pay a bribe, i killed the guy from the tribe next door because he forgot to were a mask on his face ... no, this doesn't count .... americans are wealthy and we are poor because bush steal oil and they have contacts with the aliens. \n  while the pride and the envy will rest deep inside us, we'll have war .. that will stop with a peace treaty or a pact. \n  anyway, is good that some of those engaged in war are developing their technology for the guns to destroy only guns and not humans .. while the others goal is to kill as much as they can.
338134
The U.S. is a representative republic. A true democracy would never work on a large scale.
898034
No.  People have differing priorities, and differing work ethics.  Some work very hard to become educated, and then work very hard at their jobs.  They earn their higher standard of living.  Others choose not to pursue education at all,  but work extremely hard to compensate, and still do well.  Others choose to focus on having children, whether or not they can support them.  Some don't work at all.\n\nIn the USA, lifestyle is very much about choices people make in their lives.  Not everyone has the same range of choices, but it is still very possible to go from rags to riches, or at least comfort and security, purely because one works hard.  \n\nThere are far too many people ready and willing to simply exist, and let others do all the work.  They are already an unfair burden to society; your proposal would guarantee their numbers would increase dramatically.  Additionally, with no hope of reward, the inventive, pioneering, adventurous spirit of so many Americans, encouraged by our current society, would be suppressed, and oppressed, in yours.\n\nI'm not advocating money as God, or capitalism over democracy.  Socialism does have it's place, in certain applications.  A equal-for-everyone health care system, for instance, or a flat tax for all Americans over the poverty level, no exceptions, would do much to solve some of the problems we face today.  Extending it to an entire social system is doomed to failure, however, for the very simple reason that all people are not created equal when it comes to their willingness to work.  Those who won't do not merit the rewards of those who will.
92917
There is not, nor has there ever been, a purely socialist state.
364420
as of now, yes. with our increasingly socialist views, within 25 years we will be tied with China, who is actually turning capitolistic, eventhough they won't admit.  as we conform our society "not to offend", and "not to make to much money" with government laws, we are turning socialist.  to remain the superpower, we need to stay away from government interference in business. now in order to prevent monopoly, we must have some, but it is the consumer who must drive gas prices down, and the consumer who must demand an alternate energy source.  a new energy source will determine the next superpower
1127598
Actually the U.S. is a republic, not a democracy.  \n\nI'm not going to argue politics with a foreigner.
1003871
No, just look at us here in America.  Though suffering a decode of defeats the Democratic party still have a huge number of followers, all waiting for the chance to vote themselves a welfare check.\n\nLook at the poor souls in New Orleans they sat there waiting for the Government to help them before even considering helping themselves.\n\nIt is a truely pathetic side of the human race, but Socialism in every method it has ever been tried has failed, because it rewards laziness and punishes success.  Relying on the government is a one way ticket to despair.
824408
Well the most socialist that includes a free market and democratically elected government that I know of is Sweden.. Their gov. guarantees all of what you said Housing, Education, Health care, retirement as well as child care. This government has gotten so large that  65- 70% of all workers work directly or indirectly for the government. then again close to 70% of their paycheck goes to taxes. \nThis is the best unbiased example I can give of a free socialist state.\n\nThat choice is a perfectly valid choice for some people and the Swedes seem reasonably happy with it.\n\nThat said, I am not an advocate of a similar system here. Here are my reasons why\n-The Swedish economy per capita went from being one of europes strongest at the turn of the century to one of the weakest\n- High taxation rate drives private capital elsewhere and is one reason why the Government itself is the majority employer in Sweden. This has greatly reduced individual opportunity  to make any significant improvement in economic status..\n-with the Government providing housing health care and child care there is little use for marriage as an institution. The primary purpose of marriage is to provide a financially stable and nurturing environment in order to raise a family. In Sweden the Government has taken over these rolls  You may disagree with me but the statistics speak for themselves close to 50% of all couples in Sweden do not marry and the numbers are increasing. This in turn has lead to a negative population growth the birthrate in Sweden in among the lowest in the E.U.\n- In the end with a negative population growth and huge entitlements from the govt the populace ages and the whole system begins to collapse on itself. this is already starting in Sweden. this to a much lesser degree is happening here when it comes to social security to give you an example.\n\nI chose Sweden because it is a Socialist society born of democracy and not of totalitarianism as in such places as Cuba. this most embodies the path advocated by American socialist. I have tried to relate in an honest and unbiased  presentation the facts and why I object to that type of system and left the rhetoric to others. My point is a socialist state such as Swedens when transfered to a much more populace state like the US has even more difficulty sustaining itself. Sweden has managed to do it only by having a modest population and having the good fortune of substantial Oil revenues to bolster the tax base. My other point is that The big brother government tends to break down basic social structures over time, stiffel entrepreneurship and personal wealth generation and lessen opportunity that is the back bone of what has made America what it is.\n\nYou might look at Sweden and say sounds like paradise and you are entitled to that choice it is as valid as mine. I am not saying socialism is wrong. I am saying it is wrong for me and I believe wrong for my fellow citizens.
653218
If you're asking if America is a democratic nation, then the answer is yes.\n\nThe United States of America is actually a democratic republic.  It is a democracy, in the fact that there is direct election of representatives.  However, these representatives are the ones that actually make the decisions, the ones that make the laws (hence the Republic).  \n\nA republic is a form of government that has a special "class" or elect that make the governmental decisions (laws, etc) that govern the nation.  In our case, the elect are the representatives and senators at the federal level, as well as your local representatives (state, local) that make the decisions.  \n\nBecause these members are elected, then we have a democracy as well.  However, a true democracy would require the votes of everyone on every issue (direct democracy).  It would be a little bit tough with a population of 300 million.
1104455
crap! i learnt that this year. i forgot about the first question. but i do know that there are socialist democracies. those scandanavian countries and there are some in europe. socialist democracies are basically where they have freedom unlike in the USSR but the government will do things for the people like give free health care, free education, stuff like that. \nhope i answered ur question
862861
I don't see how it could unless its a hypothetical question where reality is ignored.  In todays world look at all the countrys where there is Communism-Cuba,North Korea ,Vietnam, Russia, China and economically from the ones I mentioned only one is doing well-that being China. Cuba , North Korea and Russia have a very high Unemployment rate,  in North Korea there is widespread famine among the people while the leader enjoys shark fin soup and has his every whim fulfilled, in Russia  crime is out of bounds with the Mafia having a firm grasp.  Compare these countrie to the ones that have a socialistic type of Goverment - Germany, in fact most of the European Countries and although life is not perfect evryone makes do-unemployment is at a  acceptable levels  and all the peole lead  satisfying lives with ,because it is socialistic,all having access to healthcare. Socialism simply means that the people financially support their country by taxes and also reap the benfits.  Considering the ridiculou high cost of medical care in this country socialized medicine is one of the options being considered to solve this crisi.  Communism in theory-all share equally- is good but has never worked on a larage ascale for in very country that its been put in place the people in power soon get corrupted simply because all the power is theirs and the people are put secondary to their wants.  Socialism is where  the goverment works on the same basias democracy-people vote into power those they wish to govern but there are more laws that govern their everyday lives and there are more benefits like healthcare available to  all comparable to PPO's but private insurance is also available for those who wish it.  Goverment does influence more the daily lives but freedoms are still   comparable as those in a  democracy.
1185102
No.  It is an outdated and flawed system that is representative of qualities similar to that of the British empire in which our forefathers fought so desperately to get away from.  We are becoming the United Empire of America....it is a very scary time in our history.  I think politics have outgrown the fair representation of Americans.
680628
If I have to explain the difference between a democrat and a socialist to you then you are indeed in need of more help than i can provide you perhaps you should have studied while you were in school. but I will tell you this democrats believe in civil liberties that our founding fathers fought and died for Unlike your dictatorship government currently in charge that you would refer to as Republican. We believe that if a government wants to spy on its citizens it should present probable cause and persue a warrent... not will nilly spy on every law abideing citizen of the U.S.
663976
ugh, i just answered this to find you removed it, here I go again.\n\nActually the word 'socialist' better describes todays 'democrats'.  People can still have liberal ideals without having them freakishly to the left of reality.\n\nLiberals are basically the ones who think a world wide utopia is possible if they 'live and let live'.  They are unable to mentally comprehend the fact that there are others in this world who do not tolerate views different than theirs.  Liberals, for some reason, are hypocritical in most of their thinking.  For instance, since they don't like George W. Bush, they think that a man who gassed to death over 30 thousand of his countries innocent people should be left in power, and defend the lives of people on death row, who were convicted of the most heinous crimes known to man.  Yet liberals for some reason think it is OK for a mother to kill a child.  \n\nLiberals also say it is wrong to discriminate by race/ religion (as do conservatives), but then the liberals turn around and make laws that give benifits to some, and not all, such as 'affirmative action'.  If that is not hypocrocy, what is?\n\nBasically Socialists, Liberals, Democrats, all stand for the same things.  They want to take businesses away from the ones who built them, and give them to the government to run, and give out free stuff to everyone.  What they fail to realize is that over time, the few who are working to support everyone else, will get tired of doing all the work, and the work will gradually decline, thus leading less to distribute.  Eventually we will be sitting in bread lines, waiting for our government rations, because it doesn't matter how hard you work, you will get the same amount of bread as the lazy democrat in line next to you.