The U.S. Border Patrol reported that over 6,000 Venezuelans journeyed over 3,000 miles to illegally cross the U.S. border in April.

If socialism is so great, why does history constantly show citizens of socialist nations immigrating to capitalist nations in enormous numbers — but never the other way around?

Maybe Nancy Pelosi should send "The Squad" down to show Venezuelan socialists what they're doing wrong.

Ann Pavalock

Bayou Vista

Locations

Recommended for you

(64) comments

Robert Braeking

[thumbup]

Ed Buckner

Ann Pavalock, you honestly don't understand what socialism is. (You're not alone in that.) I wrote a couple of pages about the subject a year or two ago and it was published here: https://kurtz.institute/the-human-prospect/one-word-socialism . Your implication that it is a comprehensive insult or alternative to right-wing Republican ideas is simply false.

Carlos Ponce

Ed Buckner, Ann Pavalock understands "socialism".

Michael Jozwiak

But you don't. Look at the 'socialist' nations across Europe -- medical care for all, education opportunities for all, care for seniors and children. Why aren't Norwegians, Swedes, French, Germans, etc. not crowding our borders???

Ed Buckner

Carlos Ponce, your assertion that she does understand is not evidence that she does. Did you read my short essay? Even Mr. Jozwiak, who is generally correct, seems not to have grasped my point (he certainly may not have read my bit, of course) about the correct definition. Mr. Ponce's form of "argument" is to say, over and over, "Did not"--"Did, too"--"Did not"--"Did, too." Never advancing the points or arguments. What *could* he do instead? He--and Pavalock, too--could actually address points being made, could say something like "Buckner wrote 'xxxx xx xxxxxx,' but here's why that isn't correct: "yyy yyy yyyyy." That might lead to actual exchange of ideas.

Carlos Ponce

Most of the countries you mention do not consider themselves "Socialist".

Carlos Ponce

Ed Buckner, I read your diatribe and found it lacking.

Don Schlessinger

Actually people are coming from Europe to America. The reason you don't hear about it is that people from those countries is that they are here LEGALLY.

Jim Forsythe

2016-2017, people who overstayed their visas accounted for 62 percent of the newly undocumented, this includes people from Europe.

Until all come together, and come up with a policy that all agree with, this problem will never be fixed. Changing how we approach undocumented people every few years, will never fix the problem.

Ed Buckner

Agreed, Jim Forsythe. To fix the problems, we must recognize complexity and deal with reality as it is, not just as one ideological or political dogma or another insists it is.

Carlos Ponce

Those with Visa overstays will increase as ICE and CBP are stuck babysitting and handling those who come to the border citing "Joe sent me."

Carlos Ponce

Those with Visa overstays will increase as ICE and CBP are stuck babysitting and handing those who come to the border citing "Joe sent me."

Jim Forsythe

In the past 10 years, visa overstays in the United States have outnumbered border crossings by a ratio of about 2 to 1.

Until we address the whole problem, nothing will change.

The number of visa overstays has not slowed down, and have not slowed for any president.

To blame just one person, does not place the blame to the group that is causeing the problem. Until a large majorty of the House and Senate decide to fix the problem, nothing will change.

Carlos Ponce

Overstay rate was 1.21% or 676,422 according to CBP up to FY 2019.

https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/20_0513_fy19-entry-and-exit-overstay-report.pdf

That number was down from 739,478 from October 2015 through September 2016 according to AP.

But since CBP's mission has changed, expect the number to increase.

Jim Forsythe

The number of visa overstayers change from year to year.

The total for the past years have been large.Until we change the way we handle this, we will contuine to have a problem.

No group in DC has fixed the problem, and will not until they work together.

Carlos Ponce

What will fix it? Place more agents on the job specifically tasked to identify, investigate and deport unless there is a legal reason for residence. But the current administration has them doing something else.[rolleyes]

Jose' Boix

As we continue to debate "the good, the bad and the ugly" of this great Country,

let us just consider the words spoken by the then UK Prime Minister Tony Blair (January 2003), during his address to British ambassadors in London:

“First, we should remain the closest ally of the US, and as allies influence them to continue broadening their agenda. We are the ally of the US not because they are powerful, but because we share their values. I am not surprised by anti-Americanism; but it is a foolish indulgence.

For all their faults and all nations have them, the US are a force for good; they have liberal and democratic traditions of which any nation can be proud.

I sometimes think it is a good rule of thumb to ask of a country: are people trying to get into it or out of it? It’s not a bad guide to what sort of country it is.”

And these once again are just my thoughts!

Michael Woodson

A couple of possibilities:

1) Because capitalists are willing to abandon their community to advance their own interest, while socialists will endure adverse conditions to try to improve things.

2) regardless of how great socialism may or may not be, getting embargoed by the world's premiere superpower is not great

Ed Buckner

Carlos Pence declares, "Ed Buckner, I read your diatribe and found it lacking." But it is worth noting that calling it a "diatribe" or declaring that Ponce "found it lacking" tells the reader exactly nothing about why my arguments are supposedly not persuasive. Ponce could, if he really disagrees with me, explain why he does and why anyone else should choose his views over mine. His statement, presumably aimed at another reader, about whether other named countries are "really" socialist makes it doubtful that he actually read my short essay. (Neither he nor anyone else is obligated to read my words, of course--but anyone who wants to claim I'm wrong looks foolish if they don't even appear to have read what they purport to be rejecting.) Here's a simple test for anyone who asserts that he disagrees with what I said: "Sum up what Ed Buckner gave as the correct definition of socialism."

Carlos Ponce

Ed Buckner, your incorrect spelling of a person's name reflects poorly on your education.

Ed Buckner

Typos may indeed indicate some carelessness on the typer's part--but that's a long way fro from reflecting much on my education. I've seen typos in nearly every posting on these pages, and it seems clear they are not well correlated with much of anything. Carlos Ponce fails quite basic logic tests, whether I get his name right or not--but I do prefer to get people's names correct and I apologize for failing in that.

Gary Miller

Carlos> I subscribe to the idea of my best literary teacher that correctly transmitting an idea is much more important than proper spelling. If you mis spell every word but successfully transmit your idea you have then correctly used your language.

Carlos Ponce

Gary Miller, when one misspells a word, that is understandable. However, when one misspells a word especially someone's name ON PURPOSE that is showing disrespect especially when that word or name is right in front of you.

No disrespect to your literary teacher but my Danforth teachers taught me spelling is important.

Ed Buckner

Carlos Pence, I'd also note that, when you're declaring what countries consider themselves "socialist," you should also note that leaders from FDR to Joe Biden have been "denounced" as socialist who did not consider themselves to be socialist. So, are you saying that Sweden is not socialist because they don't use the label but that Biden is, whatever label he uses?

Carlos Ponce

Again, you need to spell correctly, Ed Buckner.

Ed Buckner

See above comment, Mr. Ponce.

Gary Miller

Carlos> Correct spelling is important to people who think it is important.

Carlos Ponce

Gary Miller, my Danforth teachers taught me correct spelling is important.

Gary Miller

Norway and Sweden rejected all socialist policies in the last decade. They adopted capitalism. The Russians also adopted capitalism after the fall of the Soviet Union but have slipped back under Putin.

Ed Buckner

Mr. Miller, if those two nations "rejected all socialist policies" then is it unreasonable to call Democrats who seek to install policies like those found in Norway and Sweden socialist? If Biden/Harris push for extended daycare, support for preschool, stronger medical care for all, higher taxes on wealth and upper incomes, are all those things desirable--whatever they are labeled? Are you someone who thinks there is a "correct" definition for "socialism"--and if so, what is that? Perhaps you are logically consistent--I hope so.

Gary Miller

Ed> Both those countries were socialist and said they were. Progressives still incorrectly call them socialists.

Ed Buckner

Gary Miller, you're missing my point (spelled out a bit better in my short essay published by "Human Prospect"--https://kurtz.institute/the-human-prospect/one-word-socialism ): no one "incorrectly" uses the label, because it does not have a single "correct" meaning. Those who use it as an all purpose insult, like Carlos Ponce, AND those who use it as an all purpose positive, like many progressives (sometimes even me) are often enough using it in quite different ways. Norway and Sweden have apparently changed their consensuses on what to label themselves, as is their right, of course. And both certainly have strong capitalistic, free enterprise economic engines. But they both still have high enough taxes to support robust social safety nets, universal health care and public education, etc. When Carlos Ponce, et al, attack Dems for supporting similar things by calling the policies "socialist," it makes sense that progressives push back by call themselves "socialist." The "correct" definition of any political label is whatever the parties discussing it mean, provided all mean the same thing. And meanings change, as "liberal" robustly illustrates.

Carlos Ponce

Go with the accepted definition. To do otherwise is intellectually dishonest.

Charles Douglas

I see where Beijing Joe's son Hunter who travels the world getting rich off the American Taxpayers, has been exposed for using the "N-Word" as if it was going to be banned, and he was not going to get his portion of usage in! Word is he even used it referring to his Dad's old pal Barack Obama!

Obama is the same man Beijing Joe said was the only clean-cut, well spoken, good LOOKING African-American he had ever seen! Two things: How could any African-American with a good conscience, vote for this man who has done absolutely zero for the BLACK race other than enact laws with his KKK buddies in the Senate to unfairly incarcerate them for decades! In FIFTY years all this RACIST has done was to call us names and low rate and lambast us, yet he has BLACKS supporting him! Hunter did not learn to use that derogatory term by himself!

The Apple always falls near the tree! Think about that! What has Big Al Sharpton said about this? How about AOC? Nancy Pelosi? Lying Chuck Schumer? How about any Liberals anywhere? How about CNN, NBC, OR ABC? ANSWER: NOT A [censored][censored]... word! This is the kind of deceptive, double standard BS going on in the USA today! Wake UP America!

David Hardee

Charles, you are spot on. Those individuals you list are avoiding any dastardly act that would damage their reputation with the Blacks. And the TV networks you list are so embedded with LGBT personnel that they will avoid reporting dastardly deeds because the LGBT community has been riding on the back of blacks pretending to be partners. The LGBT(s) have used the accomplishments of Blacks as the pattern to obtain their Civil Rights identity. Once the Blacks awakening to the pandering and manipulation perpetrated on them the entire structure and power base of the progressive liberals will collapse and crush these Judas sheep.

As to socialism , in all its many forms is what we are seeing as the disguise of all the developing (the USA included) nanny state(s). We recognize the nanny state when the government will promise that their governance will provide what will get them popular enough to get your vote. Then the nanny state will have the power to perpetuate itself by Raising Your Children - which is one of the announce promises' from the progressive liberal Big Tent where all are welcomed and no one will be judged and the individual's freedoms are unlimited even to, imaging your Gender, and the Common Good is subjected to and oscillates with a multitude of Me-ism(s).

Welcome to the progressive liberal nanny USA all you that want to come and get nannied.

Robert Braeking

If we want to welcome the masses with open arms, as apparently the Biden administration does, what is keeping us from opening a free port of entry as was available earlier in our country's history? My family emigrated from Europe in the early 1900's. My father's family entered at Ellis Island and were processed by the immigration services. My mother's family entered at Indianola, Texas and Galveston. Some who entered at the time were not carrying advance authorization to emigrate. Their documentation was stamped 'WOP', but they were still allowed to enter. If we have the capacity to absorb millions of immigrants as we did at the turn of the 20th century, what is so difficult about processing the immigrants in an orderly fashion rather than encouraging and enriching the Mexican cartels?

Carlos Ponce

Remember the port of entry that was at the "Quarantine Station" located on Pelican Island built in 1892. Not everyone was allowed in. At one time the Quarantine Station doctor was accused of being anti-Jewish because of the large number of turn downs of those of the Jewish faith.

The Historical Marker reads:

Unregulated entry of immigrants through the Port of Galveston in the late 1830s greatly contributed to local outbreaks of yellow fever and other communicable diseases. The young city instituted quarantine measures in 1839 and in 1853 built Texas' first quarantine station on the eastern tip of Galveston Island. Yellow fever returned to plague the community in 1867 and 1868.

A larger quarantine station, built by the city in 1870, was destroyed by hurricane winds in 1875. The state built new facilities in 1879 and again in 1885 at a site in Galveston known as Fort Point. Ships suspected of harboring infected crew, passengers, or cargo were not allowed to enter Galveston's port. A new station, built on nearby Pelican Island by the state in 1892, was destroyed in the storm of 1900. Texas built its last quarantine station at the Fort Point site in 1902. This station merged with Federal operations in 1919.

A federally funded 10-structure quarantine facility, secured with the help of Galveston's Federal Liaison Colonel Walter Gresham, was completed here on Pelican Island in 1915. The station was noted for its serene and beautiful

grounds, which included oleanders, palms and Bermuda grass. However, the park-like atmosphere did not interfere with the station's purpose of inspecting ships bound not only for Galveston but for Houston and other Galveston Bay ports. Pelican Island Federal Quarantine Station, which closed in 1950, inspected an estimated 30,000 ships that brought an estimated 750,000 immigrants to Texas during its 35 years of operation.

Gary Scoggin

FYI- we now have vaccines for Yellow Fever and many others of the diseases immigrants carried in the 1830’s.

Ed Buckner

So, Carlos Ponce, you wrote, "Go with the accepted definition. To do otherwise is intellectually dishonest." That implies that there exists an "accepted" definition of socialism. Please advise what that is and how we know that it's "accepted." To refuse to disclose this would, surely, be intellectually dishonest, yes? I'll have a followup question or two after I learn what definition you think is accepted.

Ed Buckner

So, Carlos Ponce, serious question: does a government functioning like that constitute "socialism"? Why or why not?

Dan Freeman

Socialism is not a useful way of assessing countries. I prefer thinking of the Nordic model , which comprises the economic and social policies as well as typical cultural practices common to the Nordic countries (Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden). This includes a comprehensive welfare state and multi-level collective bargaining based on the economic foundations of free market capitalism, with a high percentage of the workforce unionized and a large percentage of the population employed by the public sector (roughly 30% of the work force since healthcare and higher education as well as some companies like utilities, mail, rail transport and airlines are usually state-run or state-owned). However, the Nordic labor market is flexible, with laws making it easy for employers to hire and shed workers. Although it was developed in the 1930s under the leadership of social democrats, the Nordic model began to gain attention after World War II. We need to consider this as a useful alternative to the oligarchy that rules in the US today.

Carlos Ponce

The Nordic Countries don't have a comparative population to that of the United States.

Gary Scoggin

This is a valid point and a reason we need to be careful about extrapolating these countries to scale to the US. For example, Denmark has approximately the same GDP as Denver, Colorado.

Ed Buckner

Carlos Ponce is right in part--the Nordic countries are generally much closer to ethnically homogenous than the US is. But two comments are pertinent: 1. How, Mr. Ponce, do you think that changes how the US should consider adopting the Nordic model? and 2. What is "the" accepted definition of socialism that you have declared you know? (If the answer is too long and complex for a quick post here on The Daily News site, please cite a reference or give us a link. Inquiring minds want to know.)

Ed Buckner

It is well worth noting, IMNHO, that Carlos Ponce responds to various posts but does not reply to my quite reasonable request to tell us all what the "accepted" definition of "socialism" is. And he pontificates about "intellectual dishonesty." Could be he's only pretending that there is one and that he knows what it is?

Ed Buckner

Wisely said, Mr. Freeman. It will be interesting to see whether Mr. Ponce, et al, agree with you or offer insulting scattershot labels--or actually comment on the ideas you offer. I hope it's the latter, but I'm not optimistic.

Carlos Ponce

Jesus loves you, Ed Buckner!

Ed Buckner

Carlos Ponce, I have never disputed that you are a Christian and believe that Jesus loves me (while I'm an atheist who does not believe as you do). What I do dispute is that you are intellectually honest. If you are, tell me--and everyone else--what the correct ("accepted") definition of socialism is, so we can discuss socialism--the subject of the LTE on which this entire sequence of posts hangs.

Carlos Ponce

Look it up in a dictionary.

Ed Buckner

Carlos Ponce, which of these is correct: "Socialism is a political, social, and economic philosophy encompassing a range of economic and social systems characterised by social ownership of the means of production. It includes the political theories and movements associated with such systems. Social ownership can be public, collective, cooperative, or of equity."--wikipedia. OR, from The Daily Item, "Socialism, at least in its present European context, represents the idea that when society is lifted from the bottom, everyone rises. It seeks to affirm the right to living wages, sabbath rest, fair treatment, and the ability to unionize. It charges the wealthiest with caring for the poor through taxation. It establishes health care as a human right and universally accessible. University education is made affordable because investing in young people ensures the future of a nation.

The poor are given special consideration through subsidized housing and food. It is a systemic way to love the neighbor."

OR from Encyclopedia Britannica, "Socialism, social and economic doctrine that calls for public rather than private ownership or control of property and natural resources. According to the socialist view, individuals do not live or work in isolation but live in cooperation with one another. Furthermore, everything that people produce is in some sense a social product, and everyone who contributes to the production of a good is entitled to a share in it. Society as a whole, therefore, should own or at least control property for the benefit of all its members."

OR, from "economics help" on the difference between socialism and communism: "The main difference is that socialism is compatible with democracy and liberty, whereas Communism involves creating an ‘equal society’ through an authoritarian state, which denies basic liberties. Democratic socialism in the west involves participating in democracy to seek an incremental reduction in inequality."

When I know which you think is correct/accepted, Mr. Ponce, I'd like to inquire further if I may.

Carlos Ponce

Look it up in your Funk and Wagnalls.

Ed Buckner

As requested, I looked "socialism" up in Funk and Wagnall's, Mr. Ponce. Here's what it said--"What does the word socialism mean?

Part of speech: noun

A system that at the public collective ownarship of land and capital, and public management of all industries." Therefore, Mr. Ponce and the original letter-to-the-editor writer, Ann Pavalock, and others should stop attacking "The Squad" or Nancy Pelosi or Joe Biden/Kamala Harris--none of whom have *ever* supported socialism by that definition. And that definition, as Mr. Ponce I suspect knows (and therefore wouldn't accept it in re Dems) does *not* say that supporting taxes on wealth or on the richest or universal healthcare or daycare for children or strong public education or trillions for infrastructure or policies that make unions effective, etc., etc., is right or wrong, good or bad. Ponce and Pavalock can certainly oppose all such policies, but declaring them to be "socialism," is, to use Mr. Ponce's phrase, "intellectually dishonest."

Ed Buckner

I should add, Mr. Ponce, in case you notice the typos in the definition--I copied and pasted the definition *exactly* as it came from F&W http://www.funkandwagnalls.com/

Carlos Ponce

The definition is correct, your summation, i.e. interpretation is off.

Ed Buckner

Carlos Ponce, you seem to think you're arguing with me, when in fact you are rejecting very basic, straightforward logic: A. You declare that there is only one correct definition for a label. B. That label clearly does not apply to the Nordic countries, which you correctly (based on those assertions) declare are not socialist, despite high, progressive taxes and strong public safety nets, etc. BUT C. You and the LTE writer are willing to consider Biden-Harris-Pelosi Dems "socialists" without any basis at all. (It cannot be because of their support for high, progressive taxes and strong public safety nets, etc.--you already exempted Nordic countries from the label based on that. And it cannot be because they accept the Funk & Wagnall's definition--they do not. So why? Apparently just because you say so, with no logic or evidence to support you in saying so. It would be like I declared that Carlos Ponce is an honor graduate of the University of Idaho-Boise in economics.)

Carlos Ponce

There is no logic in Ed's post.

Ed Buckner

"There is no logic in Ed's post." I told you Carlos Ponce is an honor graduate in economics from the University of Idaho-Boise! And he pretends he's a Christian. Proof? Evidence? Not in this chain of posts.

Carlos Ponce

Christ will judge if I am Christian, not some atheist. And I've never been to Idaho.

Ted Gillis

Carlos is now “Spock”.

Ed Buckner

The tricky thing for Carlos Ponce was to graduate, with honors, in economics from the University of Idaho-Boise without ever setting foot in the state. A triumph of distance learning? I mean it is quite clear that in the universe as Carlos Ponce sees it, no logic or evidence or even any argument is needed. Just say anything. (And if he can do it, so can anyone else.) It would probably have been interesting to have an actual exchange with an opponent of socialism or of progressive ideas who could argue, use logic, marshal facts.

Ed Buckner

Carlos Ponce was taught, at U of Idaho (or maybe earlier at Dartmouth?) that "diatribe" is the correct word for a reasoned, thoughtful disquisition, whereas F&W sez-- What does the word diatribe mean?

Part of speech: noun

An abusive discourse; invective." They teach mighty weird ideas at U of I and Dartmouth.

Carlos Ponce

Typical of an Ed Buckner post .... all lies.

Ed Buckner

Carlos Ponce has demonstrated for all to see, right here in this chain of posts on this forum (not just in past posts) that he has no grasp of logic or argument, no ability to think systematically at all. Is Dartmouth or U of I or his religion to blame? No way to know. A man who cannot follow or respond to basic, straightforward logic is perforce an unreliable witness or opponent on any subject whatever. A man who thinks "diatribe" and "socialist" are both mere arbitrary labels that he can bandy about just as he pleases, unmoored to reality, is surely no credit to his educators or beliefs or organizations. But he is fun to banter with (does that make me a sadist? maybe).

Gary Scoggin

"Never argue with an idiot. They will bring you down to their level and beat you with experience." Mark Twain.

Welcome to the discussion.

Real Names required. No pseudonyms or partial names allowed. Stand behind what you post.
Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.

Thank you for reading!

Please log in, or sign up for a new account and purchase a subscription to read or post comments.