DescentBB

.....to see the South Carolina Congressional delegation putting in for aid from flooding, after standing united in refusing to give funding to NY, NJ, DE after hurricane Sandy. Suddenly, socialism seems really nice, huh?

Wrong usage of “socialism” but I can agree with the hypocrisy.

It's technically socialism because every taxpayer in the country will be helping these affected people out via their tax dollars, money that's given to the government via the IRS. Then that same government doles the money out for disaster funds wherever it's really needed. Now if people donated money to help these people, then it would be charity, and I doubt that would cover the bill for everyone affected either.

As to slick's point, I'd love to hear an explanation from that SC congressional delegation as to why their state deserves federal disaster funds when they thought Sandy victims in three other states were not so deserving.

Still don’t get the fact that socialism is a type of economic/political system, and not simply the redistribution of wealth to people that need it.

Well, if you want to nitpick, you're right. Our government doesn't own or control the means of production and distribution of goods in this country, which is pretty much the definition of socialism. But what we DO have is privatized profit and public risk. It's not a system, but that's what we've got. You don't see boatloads of corporations dipping into company larders to come to the aid of those SC victims, do you? It's the general public that's picking up the tab.

tunnelcat wrote:As to slick's point, I'd love to hear an explanation from that SC congressional delegation as to why their state deserves federal disaster funds when they thought Sandy victims in three other states were not so deserving.

I suspect that the reps and Senators from Delaware, NJ and Virginia are going to want to hear that explanation, too, and the Senators especially, as they can kill any aid bill on the spot via Senate rules.