The divisions in this election are deep and widening across the country. When I called this “an age of rage” years ago, I noted that the rage historically tends to burn off in time. We are clearly still at the flow rather than the ebb stage as rage politics continues. However, the most worrisome elements of this period are fundamental changes being demanded to our constitutional and economic systems. A new poll by The Economist/YouGov is consistent with other polls showing rising support among Democrats for socialism. More Democrats (38%) prefer socialism to capitalism (25%). Other polls show 60% had a favorable view of socialism and only 32% had favorable views of capitalism.
Capitalism is still favored by 79% of Republicans in comparison to only 5% favoring socialism. The poll of independents showed 44% favored capitalism, with only 21% favoring socialism.
As I wrote in Rage and the Republic, the success of this Republic was a mix of Enlightenment and free-market principles. It was the combination of economic and political liberty that produced the most successful republic in history. This is the 250th anniversary not just of our Revolution but of the release of Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations.
The founders knew that true individual liberty could not be achieved without economic freedom. Smith’s idea of the “invisible hand” offered an idea of individual economic freedom where the individual tastes and choices of citizens drove whole economies.
As I write in Rage and the Republic:
“While he never visited the United States, his theories seemed quintessentially American to many of his generation. For a revolution that was triggered by tariffs and fueled by events like the Boston Tea Party, Smith’s general principles read like an economic version of Common Sense. It was a type of declaration of independence not just from the British policy of mercantilism (emphasizing British exports over imports) but from economic controls over individual productivity and self-determination….
In summary, Smith was first and foremost viewed as a political theorist, and his economic theories were closely tied to his views on the natural liberties of humanity. He saw capitalism as a liberating system that gave individuals the wealth and resources to pursue their chosen paths. Conversely, he saw government controls and subsidies as forms of control and potentially forms of suppression of the human will. If people are to be truly free, they must have the resources to pursue that freedom. The government dole can become a type of servitude or at least a subterfuge for citizens. If they are dependent on the government, they are never truly free.”
I believe the key to our surviving and thriving in the 21st Century will be preserving what I call a “liberty-enhancing economy.”
The rise of the Democratic Socialist Party has fueled the trend away from capitalism with calls “to dismantle the capitalist state.”. Many of the rising candidates have spent years working the anti-capitalist movement. For example, Senate Democrat nominee James Talarico appeared intent on bringing a touch of Trotsky to Texas. In a video from a climate forum, Talarico is shown declaring capitalism an “oppressive system” linked with white supremacy and that it must be “dismantled” to achieve a better world. It is reminiscent of Leon Trotsky, who denounced the “fundamental evil of the capitalist system” and called on citizens to free themselves from its oppression.
As a state representative, Talarico addressed the 2020 climate conference with an attack on capitalism:
“I’m so thankful that you asked this question and also thankful that young activists have really drawn the link between climate change and White supremacy and capitalism in our country … And I think only ending the ways that all three of those oppressive systems work together are we gonna be able to begin the process of dismantling them.”
Talarico’s views closely parallel socialist and communist talking points online. Democratic Socialists of America has challenged people to “Imagine the end of capitalism.” Those words in the Democratic Socialists of America manifesto offer Americans a world without landlords, debt, mandatory work hours, and “food, education, energy, medicine, and transportation… are common goods and utilities.”
The DSA is premised on the same stated objective of Talarico, declaring that there has to be “a revolutionary transformation to replace the capitalist social order based on exploitation and oppression.”
Other candidates have sought to pander to this radical mob. Recently, California Gov. Gavin Newsom thrilled the mob by declaring that “nostalgia is not working,” adding that “capitalism as we know it doesn’t work either.” He also recently said that the DSA is the future of the Democratic Party.
The Framers understood that political rights mean little without economic freedom. Capitalism offered citizens the ability to transcend class and social barriers, to advance as far as their skills and labor would take them.
Together, those political and economic theories created the most prosperous and stable democratic system in the world. That system is now under attack on both sides.
“You know, when people’s voice start getting squeaky and really high pitched, usually they’re lying. And Ashley Moody knows that I’m not a socialist,” Nixon said, claiming to only join DSA because she aligns with them on “fighting for adequate public housing, as well as fighting for quality health care, as well as making sure that we are getting our veterans off the street, taking big money out of politics.”
The success of politicians like Zohran Mamdani in promising to introduce people to the “warmth of collectivism” has only worked due to a young generation with no memory of the failure of the socialist systems in the last century.
As I explain in “Rage and the Republic,” the French economy collapsed, as the British economy had earlier during the “winter of discontent” under Labour Prime Minister James Callaghan. Britain was even forced to seek a loan from the International Monetary Fund.
Both France and Britain would later reintroduce capitalist policies and roll back socialist policies to stop the economic collapse.
We also tried collectivist policies in cities across this country, including a commune on Long Island called Modern Times (now called Brentwood). It lasted about ten years before collapsing.
Yet, candidates such as Colorado’s Democrat congressional candidate Melat Kiros recently declared that there is nothing more American than socialism.
In places like New York, that message has resonated more with young college-aged voters than with blue-collar voters. Indeed, the DSA admits it has not done well at attracting actual blue-collar workers. Indeed, almost one-third of DSA members earn over $100,000.
This election is being fueled by temporary economic fluctuations in gas prices and other conditions. Those are real issues that citizens must grapple with. However, a more fundamental debate is just beginning over the economic principles that will guide this country in the future.
Jonathan Turley is a law professor and the New York Times best-selling author of “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution.”
An analogue to MAGA seems to be metastasizing on the Left: “MADF: Make America Disintegrate Faster.” To all those who hate Trump far more than they love their country: are ya happy now that the “fundamental transformation” BHO promised is gathering steam?
NOTE TO SUPREME COURT:
Communism is unconstitutional per the absolute enumerated powers and restrictions on government in Article 1, Section 8.
Communism is unconstitutional per the absolute 5th Amendment right to private property.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________
“In this sense, the theory of the Communists may be summed up in the single sentence: Abolition of private property.”
– Karl Marx, Communist Manifesto
Republicans only oppose socialist policies that benefit the poor and moderate income people–like subsidized health insurance (Obamacare), like free or reduced cost school lunches, subsidies for child care, special education, Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid.
Republicans LOVE policies that benefit the wealthiest–like bailouts for corporations, tax abatements, tax subsidies, and things like the following: Trump required Intel to give the government 10% of its stock to receive $9 Billion in federal grants that had already been approved by Congress under the Biden administration. Trump approved Nippon Steel’s $14.9 Billion acquisition of US Steel but only if Nippon gave Trump the power to veto certain actions. Nvidia and AMD had to agree to give the government 15% of the revenue they generate from the sales of chips to China. Why are we allowing ANY sale of chips to China in the first place?
It’s all relative, but in MAGA world, use anything to attack Democrats. None of the “socialist” policies of the Republicans benefit most of us, but those of the Democrats do. We don’t want to see any kids go hungry at school because it’s hard to learn when you are hungry, and it benefits us all if parents are able to work because they get help with the high cost of child care. It benefits all of us for more people to have health insurance–preventative care is much better than waiting until you get sick with things like cancer or diabetes that need to be detected and addressed promptly. Special education is expensive, but it’s worth it for kids who need help addressing the barriers to education.
Nailed it.
Both of you are peddling the fantasy that the Democratic Party has promoted a tax code free of sectoral preferences.
The Constitution guarantees freedom, including the freedom to exercise dominion over one’s private property and all assets.
The freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution allow Americans to establish and operate charities, free hospitals, and businesses of any kind in the private sector, using private funding from donors.
There is no such thing as capitalism in American fundamental law.
Congress has no power to tax for individual, specific, or particular welfare, or for favor or charity.
Congress has the power to tax only for debt, defense, and the “general Welfare,” which includes basic infrastructure such as police and fire services, roads, water and sewer systems, electricity, post offices, etc.
Social Security and Medicare may not be taxed for and do not constitute “general Welfare” as they serve merely 18.7% of the population.
There’s very little freedom in “ownership” of assets. Government taxes property including cars by registration on a sliding scale. Taxes on clothes is in place and Government. Food is not taxed. Eat all you can afford while minimizing the remainder.
BS FROM ANON AS USUAL
Fun Fact:
Ken Paxton abandoned his longtime wife and mother of his children for a registered Democrat
A lot Texas Republicans are about to go through a breakup in favor of a registered Democrat today.
JFK, Monster
By Timothy Noah
“I knew that John F. Kennedy was a compulsive, even pathological adulterer, given to taking outlandish risks after he entered the White House. I knew he treated women like whores. And I knew he had more than a few issues with his father about toughness and manliness and all that. But before I read in the newspaper that Mimi Alford’s just-released memoir, Once Upon A Secret: My Affair With President John F. Kennedy And Its Aftermath, described giving Dave Powers a blow job at JFK’s request and in his presence, I didn’t know that Kennedy had an appetite for subjecting those close to him to extreme humiliation.
He may have been a cad and an adulterer but JFK was a great president. By now it should be obvious this attribute is orthogonal to leadership quality. Sal Sar
I keep wondering why Trump didn’t talk about any of these points in his closing arguments to vote Red yesterday. Instead, he talked about the reflecting pool for like 30 minutes and mused about how it should be named after him. Isn’t there a mythical tale warning us of the dangers of a narcissist obsessed with a reflecting pool???
TDS INFECTED ANON!!
A 45-year controlled experiment: East Berlin versus West Berlin. One was capitalist, the other socialist. It was a controlled experiment, because you had the same people, language, culture, history, and geographic location. Everything was the same except the economy: planned (East) versus free market (West).
Result: virtually nobody from West Berlin tried to “escape” to East Berlin, but so many people in East Berlin tried to escape to West Berlin that they had to build a wall. I visited both sides during the Cold War – tour buses were allowed to go from West to East, and back again, through Checkpoint Charlie. The difference was stark: West was wealthy, bright, colorful; East was drab, gray, and poor.
A 100+ year contolled experiment: Finland versus the United States. Finland’s healthcare system is a tax-funded universal public model (which one may call ‘socialized’). Finland is the happiest country on the planet and the 8th healthiest country on the planet. The United States ranks last overall among high-income countries in major international health system performance studies, such as the Commonwealth Fund’s 2024 and 2026 reports comparing wealthy nations, and 23rd in the latest 2026 World Happiness Report (with a score of 6.816 out of 10).
Finland is not a socialist country. Its economy is not planned, but free-market. It uses a free market with price signals in which private companies decide what and how much to buy and sell. Please stay on topic. It is a fantasy of the Left that Scandinavian nations are socialist. They’re not.
Neither is the US. Most Democrats (Socialists and not) simply believe that higher taxes to ensure every American gets equal access to healthcare should be a human right. THAT is what they are asking for. That is the difference between Finland and the US. Social programs work to improve the health and happiness of a country. But the GOP loves to punish the poor for being poor. It’s so very Christian of them.
Neither Finland nor the United States is socialist. They are both free-market economies. And it was pretty low-IQ of you to say “controlled” experiment between those very different countries, when I had pointed out that the Berlin case was controlled because of the same people, language, culture, history, and geographic location – all of which are vastly different between the US and Finland.
Notice where people are fleeing from and to. If all immigration barriers were lifted, would more people migrate *to* the US or *away* from it. Obviously, people want to come here.
And whey you say silly, childish things li,e “the GOP loves to punish the poor for being poor,” you have removed yourself from rational discourse and labeled yourself as an indoctrinated idiot. You did it to yourself.
“the GOP loves to punish the poor for being poor,”
==
I missed that one. It’s difficult to discern whether this is just an exercise in rhetorical games or if he actually thinks that is anything but a nonsense phrase. The only way it could possibly make sense is if you defined ‘punishment’ to mean something normal people would regard as features of everyday life, such as criminals going to prison, obstreperous juveniles getting expelled from school, loosely wired people who pick fights with police officers getting arrested, people who ream out their work supervisor getting fired, people who max out their credit cards being told they’re no longer utile as an instrument of payment, vagrants being told they cannot camp out at the sidewalk and pester passers-by, and people being told by county social workers that if they’re able-bodied persons of working age, there isn’t any cash for them in the public treasury bar that which is contingently available for 27 weeks or so.
“I missed that one.”
Did you also miss that his sentence structure clearly states that “higher taxes” “should be a human right”?
The supposed 100-year controlled experiment comparing Finland and the United States is neither a controlled experiment nor proof that socialized medicine produces superior outcomes. The two countries differ fundamentally in population, geography, demographics, culture, economics, and social conditions. Comparing their outcomes does not isolate healthcare financing as the determining variable.
Finland’s first-place ranking in the World Happiness Report measures subjective life satisfaction, not healthcare effectiveness. Attributing that ranking to government-funded healthcare is an unsupported assumption of causation.
Furthermore, the Commonwealth Fund’s 2024 study did not even include Finland among the ten countries evaluated. Its finding that the United States ranked last does not establish that Finland’s healthcare model is responsible for its performance.
In fact, Finland has significant healthcare shortcomings of its own. The OECD reports that 8.6% of Finns experienced unmet healthcare needs, compared with an OECD average of 3.4%. Finland’s own government reported that 12.4% of those needing medical care in 2024 did not receive it.
The fundamental fallacy is confusing correlation with causation. Finland’s happiness and health rankings do not prove that government-funded healthcare produced those outcomes, any more than America’s healthcare shortcomings prove that private enterprise caused them.
Comparative evidence can inform healthcare reform, but presenting two fundamentally different countries as a controlled experiment and declaring socialized medicine the proven cause of Finland’s success is political advocacy masquerading as empirical science.
Anonymous – well said. I wish you would use a screen name since your comment is one of the best ones I’ve seen recently.
As for political advocacy masquerading as empirical science, the anonymous commenter to which you responded outed himself as a political propagandist rather than a rational commenter by saying Republicans’ favoring of free markets over a planned economy stems from their desire to punish poor people, which is so absurd that only an indoctrinated fool would actually say that on a comment board, and show everyone he is a fool.
Wow, that’s a very nice piece of sophistry. Don’t see many of those around here.
While nicely written it’s still a classic deflection and a fundamental misunderstanding of policy analysis. No health economist claims comparing two nations is a randomized, laboratory-controlled experiment. It is a comparative policy analysis, and the data is isolated to specific, objective endpoints—not just “happiness” metrics.
When American mothers are four times more likely to die in childbirth than Finnish mothers, and American infants are twice as likely to die before their first birthday, the variable being isolated is the financing mechanism. Finland treats prenatal care as a universal public good with a 99.6% participation rate, while the U.S. rations it based on insurance status and corporate profit margins.
Furthermore, weaponizing Finland’s recent 12.4% “unmet needs” metric is an exercise in statistical deception. According to the OECD, Finland’s unmet needs are driven almost entirely by wait times for non-emergency appointments following recent local administrative shifts. Conversely, unmet needs in the United States are driven by cost, high deductibles, and a lack of insurance. There is a huge structural difference between waiting longer for a routine checkup and being forced to skip chemotherapy entirely because it will bankrupt your family.
Pointing out that a universal system is currently managing a post-pandemic scheduling backlog does not magically equalize it with a private system where millions of people are completely priced out of basic human survival. That isn’t empirical science; it’s just corporate healthcare apologetics masquerading as logic.
I think Ester Duflo was awarded a Nobel for that kind of thinking. She and her husband, anon.
Don’t leave out the genetics of Finland’s indigenous population and adaptation to the geography and climate.
Then move to Finland DF ANON
Crickey! For the last hour and a half I have been inundated with texts and calls from GOP superPACS and candidates to vote against socialism, communism, and ye gads, Marxism.
As a lovingly registered Republican that can’t be good news. My party is indeed in trouble. It feels desperate with the amount of texts and calls.
I better go vote and make sure the Democratic candidate gets my full support so these calls and text can stop.
Last night I dreamt that hungry wolves devoured a herd of sheep.
Turley is an old dog with the same old tricks.
I will turn my attention elsewhere.
Every Turley post ever written:
“Democrat X is silly/corrupt/communist/rage-filled. As I write in my book (which you can buy HERE for the low, low price of $34) Democrats will be the downfall of western civilization! Also – political rage is bad and Democrats should learn not to be so angry. In conclusion, while I don’t agree with President Trump on everything, I will still defend everything he does because of something, something, white nationalism and me getting invites to write op-eds for the NY Post. Also – Mark Elias is mean because he called me Mike Lindell with tenure.”
Good- get the F off this site!!!
“This election is being fueled by temporary economic fluctuations in gas prices and other conditions. Those are real issues that citizens must grapple with.” Written like the elite that Professor Turley is. When was the last time he restrict buying certain types of food because he couldn’t afford the gas to get back and forth to his job every day? Does he even know what a pound of ground beef costs? If he wants to talk socialism, then have him explain why Trump is paying massive subsidies to farmers instead of letting them earn a working wage cause he had go to war in Iran and inflate diesel prices, get in a tariff battle with Canada and screw up the cost of potash and flood the market with foreign beef which eliminated ANY profit American cattle farmers could make. But do continue your fear-mongering, Professor. We know it sells your books and gets you invites to Fox News. We’ll remember whose side you were on when the dust settles – and how you’d rather stick up for the GOP who have destroyed this country over the past 10 years.
There is no modern country where socialism has worked. It is a panacea. Marx said religion was the opiate of the people. Socialism and its goal communism actually meet that definition.
Au contraire mon Ami,
Democratic socialist ideas and policies have worked.
Norway, Finland, Denmark, Iceland, and Sweden. Also Austria with housing. And of course healthcare in the majority of countries around the world.
Are you saying religion is…socialism? Mmmm…it’s more like authoritarian rule.
“Democratic socialist ideas and policies have worked.” “Norway, Finland, Denmark, Iceland, and Sweden.”…..
Still selling apples and oranges as the same fruit, are you? Hardly worth the squeeze. The high information voters know why.
Not apples and oranges. High information voters KNOW it’s not an apples and oranges distinction. It’s the low info voters who can’t make the distinction.
“Au contraire mon Ami,”
Aw, so Cute! Now Georgie X shows us the French he learned from commenters here.
“ROLF!(sic”) Hilarious! Crickey! (X can’t decide if he likes to pretend he’s British or French or Republican or Democrat Socialist!
So the government says the quack down the street is your doctor, do you let him operate? My body, my choice?
The government DOES say the quack down the street is you a doctor, who do you think makes sure doctors are trained properly? Who do you think sets the standards?
STFU ANON. TDS INFECTED LOSER!!
Socialism is an economic ideology characterized by social ownership of the means of production, which can include government ownership but also cooperative or collective ownership.
How many Companies has trump bought on behind of the country as President?
Intel, Korea Zinc, US Rare Earth, L3 Harris, IBM, Global Foundries, Vulcan Elements, Sandbox AQ, MP Materials, iPulse.
So who is the socialist?
Not to mention the subsidies he’s paying to farmers because he’s DESTROYED their ability to make a profit through his tariffs and wars. And who is embracing Russia, North Korea and China more than anyone? TRUMP. He’s the real communist.
No he didn’t ‘destroy’ anyone’s ability to make a living in farming or any other sector.
Socialism destroys every nation where it’s adopted. Look at Venezuela as an object lesson. It was the fourth richest nation in the world and was on its way toward solving its economic inequality problems (I lived there in the early 1970s). Socialist-leaning governments started gaining power there in the 1970s and 1980s, and by 1998 Hugo Chavez went full-on socialist. Now Venezuela is an economic basket case and a full 8,000,000 Venezuelans have fled (out of a population in the 20s of millions), the largest displacement and the worst refugee crisis in Latin American history. A few years ago I met up with an old Venezuelan friend of mine, who described the starvation problem in that country that he, as a 75 year old, had never seen before Chavez. And yet ignorant, spoiled college kids who have never known a day of hunger in their lives, actually believe the lies – because they’ve been indoctrinated by Marxist professors who refuse to allow a conservative or libertarian onto the faculty to provide viewpoint diversity.
Nope, you forgot to mention the Nordic countries. They have very successful socialist policies and programs.
No, they had high taxes and spent a great deal on subsidized services. They also had odd curios like the stupefying wealth of the Wallenberg family. Unions were more important in Sweden, but the model of industrial relations they followed was more collaborative than in other countries.
Yeah, high taxes and subsidies that everyone pays and benefits from. That’s why they are successful and the taxpayers are glad for it.
In the US people are generally hap0y with a fire department but so much with public education, X.
oh gawd, now he’s gonna start using “yeah”
X, you’re always pretty dumb, but saying Nordic countries are socialist is perhaps one of the dumbest things you’ve ever said. They are not socialist, they are market economies. Even the prime minister of Denmark had to publicly announce that, because so many dim-witted American leftists were falsely saying Denmark was socialist.
https://www.investors.com/politics/commentary/denmark-tells-bernie-sanders-to-stop-calling-it-socialist/
Oldmanfromkansas,
Nope. Didn’t say they were socialist countries. YOU did. I only said they had successful socialist policies and programs. They are a successful mix of capitalist AND socialist ideals.
You’re a little confused.
X – NOPE (your favorite word, pardon me while I barf) –
You don’t even know what socialism means. Socialism is not a synonym for government spending. It’s an economic system in which a central planning committee decides on prices and quantities, what people get paid and how much of everything people should get. The central planning committee functions in place of the free market pricing system.
Maybe educate yourself on what socialism is before commenting about it? Just a thought.
Oldmanfromkansas, I never said it was a synonym for government spending. I have no idea where you got that from.
You’re stuck on the very basic dictionary definition. Socialism comes in many ‘flavors’ and many are more of a mix between capitalism and some form of socialism. You know, nuanced stuff. Not the hardcore strict black and white definitions many on the right seem to attach themselves to.
You’re still thinkin of ol’ Soviet style socialism/communism kind of mentality.
Perhaps it’s you who needs to get better educated on the nuances of socialism and its many ‘flavors’. Because there are indeed some ‘flavors’ that do work and are highly beneficial to the societies who adopt them.
Socialism is an invention of an obscure little mans economic philosophy picked up later by eq7ally unsuccessful philosophers, X. Good grief. Hi ho hi ho it’s off to work we go was their motto.
GSX, unpack this statement you made a while back. Oldman is correct.
“What we are seeing is not state-controlled socialism, but Democratic Socialism, which is remarkably different from what Turley and those in the MAGA-verse want to believe. The truth is that many democratic socialist policies actually do work, and they have functioned successfully for years in places like the Nordic countries.”
OldManFromKS,
I would also note, former Swedish Finance Minister Kjell-Olof Feldt, a lifelong Social Democrat, said,
“What we believed in as young socialists simply turned out to be impossible in practice.”
“The whole thing with democratic socialism was absolutely impossible. It just didn’t work.”
What they have are successful free market economies. From which, they then have high taxes to fund their social programs. But without a successful free market economy, they could not, and would not have anything to tax from.
Also of note, everyone in these countries pay high taxes. In 2019, low-income Danes were paying a marginal tax rate of 56% and middle income of 57%.
They also have a VAT consumption rate of 25% on every sale.
As the one good annony pointed out, trying to compare one of the Nordic countries with America is not even close to the same.
Upstate – yup. It’s a wonder that after so many years of failed promises, some people still believe in those promises. As P.T. Barnum said, there’s a sucker born every minute.
Upstatefarmer, ummm…no.
The claim that low-income Danes pay a 56% marginal tax rate is mathematically and legally impossible. In Denmark, the 55.9% rate is the topskat—the absolute highest tax bracket reserved exclusively for top-tier wealthy earners. Low-income workers face a base rate closer to 36% to 40% depending on the municipality, and they pay 0% on their initial earnings thanks to Denmark’s generous personal tax-free allowance (personfradrag).
Furthermore, quoting Kjell-Olof Feldt completely strips his remarks of historical context. When Feldt critiqued “young socialism,” he was talking about the failed 1970s push to have the state seize corporate equity. Rejecting state-owned factories didn’t mean abandoning democratic socialism; it meant pivoting to modern social democracy. The Nordic countries intentionally use a highly competitive free-market engine to generate wealth, but they aggressively tax and regulate that engine to fund universal healthcare, debt-free higher education, and robust labor protections.
Finally, complaining about a 25% consumption tax ignores the concept of the social wage. An American worker might pay lower direct income taxes, but they have to turn around and independently pay thousands of dollars a year for private health insurance premiums, massive deductibles, university tuition, and commercial childcare. In the Nordic model, those crushing life expenses are completely absorbed by the state. It isn’t a net loss; it’s a highly efficient system that buys a baseline of economic security that Americans must go into deep personal debt to acquire.
This is why critical thinkin is important.
MLK was a socialist. Youre not in Kansas anymore.
Autumn weather is the best! Which season is your favorite?
MLK knew nothing and cared nothing about markets, capital allocation, &c. Outside of his wheelhouse.
Odd is it not? France pays a huge amount of their GDP on social programs (depending on the source it ranges from some 30% to just over 50%) and yet they are going on what? 3-4 weekends of rioting? And it is not just in France either. Images and videos of rioting in Germany, Italy, Belgium.
In Germany, the campaign group, “Gen Z regelt” or “Gen Z takes charge” (yeah, I laughed too!), claims they want better education and lower living costs. Yet the videos show more than a few of them looting, with estimates of 1,000 to 1,500 rioters. Nothing says protest for education and lower living costs like looting a Apple store. Oh, and dont forget the throwing of Molotov cocktails at police either.
Some of it is rent-a-crowd produced by outfits like LFI, some are common criminals, some are predatory squatters from various parts of the Arab world and parts adjacent, some of them are functional juveniles who have never acquired an adult way of adjusting to discontent. All should be dealt with harshly and none should be treated as a negotiating partner or a client population to propitiate.
Supposedly, the ratio of public expenditure to GDP is 0.56 in France and they’ve run up huge debts. Most of their presidents and prime ministers over the last 50 years have been the recipients of diplomas from elite institutions — France’s grandes ecoles. They have a reputation for a rigorous exam-driven promotional system in the civil service. Oh well.
==
A country with a contextually large military, large debt service burdens, and an amply staffed police force and prison system can get by with a ratio of public expenditure to domestic product of 0.40. You’re welfare system should be actuarially sound, and they commonly are not. (France’s retirement age is too low, to take one example). You could get by with public expenditures on subsidized services of about 12% of gdp and public expenditure on income transfers of about 10% of gdp. You need to define your clientele carefully and work to avoid perverse incentives.
==
You also need to avoid imposing administered prices bar on services provided by government agencies, government corporations, and private natural monopolies and avoid setting such prices too low.
==
Your land use planning should be devoted to avoiding overloading public works, containing externalities, nuisance abatement, and beautification. It should not be strangling real estate development.
==
You shouldn’t have collective bargaining in the public sector. Outside of a few sectors, collective bargaining representation should be in the hands of company unions.
==
Freedom of contract and association should be the default setting, with few qualifications.
“Odd is it not? France pays a huge amount of their GDP on social programs (depending on the source it ranges from some 30% to just over 50%) and yet they are going on what? 3-4 weekends of rioting?”
It’s not that odd. Being granted a decent living without the necessity of actually earning it confers some temporary advantages on the parasite class. In addition to not needing to exert any effort to obtain food and shelter, the members of that class are afforded the copious time necessary to indulge in all sorts of behavior, from protests to vandalism and assault, on the slightest pretext. Sometimes no pretext is required at all. Those parasites could vastly improve their lot if they applied the effort they invest in protests (etc.) to productive work in a competitive economic environment, but they appear to be incapable of understanding that.
I agree with one part of what S. Meyer says that supports the theory that a blind hog can find an acorn. The United States has had a mixed economy since 1776. The people that claim they want capitalism only have never experienced it for themselves. Left to its own means, capitalists would destroy much of the country if they got richer. Capitalism gives you Elon Musk’s data centers in Memphis, where he did whatever he wanted with no concern for the communities. Capitalism gave us the Gilded Age, where workers attempting to unionize could be shot. Socialism alone would likely stall economic growth and those polled have no idea what such a system looks like either.
I suspect the 79 % of Republicans who favor Capitalism don’t really understand what a truly capitalist society looks like, and if they did, they’d reconsider. The same goes for the 38% of Democrats who favor socialism. The poll, which covered many issues, shows a high degree of dissatisfaction with the economy and the state of the nation. Turley cherry-picked the one thing he could find to enrage his base by focusing on Socialism vs. capitalism, which isn’t generally understood.
@enigma
You are a long time troll, years’ long, always very ignorantly contrary, and we have no way of knowing if you are even black. Go blow.
Ah, James, is that the best you have, “we have no way of knowing if you are even Black”? What did you really add to the discussion.
He’s a real estate agent in Florida.
Thanks for the fantasies.
Well lets see. Musk has made not only himself wealth, but thousands of others wealthy. And created well paying jobs for ten of thousands along with non-related secondary jobs.
Socialism has a long, bloody history of taking the wealth from people, redistributing it to everyone else and making everyone generally poorer except those central planning party members at the top. Oh, and the bloody part, that was the deaths of tens of thousands if not millions of people who either disagreed with the central planning party members at the top, or those who died of starvation from the failed policies of those central planning party members at the top.
Call me crazy, but I think I would rather have capitalism. I sure as heck would not be where I am today without it.
Nor would you.
Mr. Enigma fancies that Mr. Potter in It’s a Wonderful Life is a businessman of the modal type.
Musk does employ tens of thousands of people with relatively high paying jobs and little security. Musk fired or ran off about 6,500 people from Twitter when he took it over, another 14,000 from Tesla, 600 from SpaceX (which has since seen a net increase) and 264,000 from the federal government thanks to doge. He’s been a job eliminator, not a net creator. You didn’t address what he is doing in Memphis, not giving a damn about the residents.
I didn’t say Capitalism was better than Socialism or vice versa. I am saying that Americans have never seen a society that was pure Capitalism though we have seen what it’s like when Capitalism runs buck wild. BTW, there is a history of people starving in America.
The notion of ‘malinvestment’ hasn’t occurred to enigma.
==
The reduction in force at Twitter occurred in the course of dismantling their political censorship operation. The elimination of federal positions was consequent to the discovery that they weren’t doing much in the way of productive work.
DOGE didn’t know anything about the jobs they were cutting. You, apparently don’t know how DOGE was actually working.
Chuckles. Which of your cousins was axed?
What kind of job security is he expected to provide? You do your job, the one you were paid to do, you stay employed. You dont do your job, or like those useless employees at Twitter who did nothing (I watched her Tik Tock video of her day at work, amounted to about an hour of “work”), you get fired.
As for the other ones, free market dictates market demands. I have been reading about a number of restaurants in CA that are closing due to weak demand, higher labor costs, energy costs etc. Are those owners some how responsible to ensure their employees job security if customers dont show up?
What is he doing in Memphis?
When have we seen capitalism running buck wild?
Sure. There are people starving all over the world to include first world countries. There is no magical economic system that will solve all problems. No one is entitled to anything and I am not responsible for others well being. Nor should I be expected to pay for their well being.
Since I wrote tis elsewhere, you don’t have to believe a word but I encourage you to research anywhere what Musk did (and is doing) in Memphis.
“Elon Musk became the world’s first trillionaire on a Tuesday morning so uneventful that the stock market barely noticed it was rewriting human history. One moment he was merely the richest man alive; the next, he had crossed into a category previously reserved for fictional villains, Renaissance monarchs, and the occasional oil‑soaked empire. Financial journalists scrambled to update their vocabulary, discovering that “billionaire” suddenly sounded like a starter title, “mogul” like a hobbyist, and “trillionaire” like something requiring a cape, a lair, and a dramatic lighting budget. Musk, naturally, treated the milestone with the same solemnity he applied to everything: he ignored it. He moved on to whatever project he believed would make him even more indispensable to the world.
That project, as it turned out, was already humming along outside Memphis. Not humming in the metaphorical sense — humming in the literal, turbine‑driven, sleep‑destroying sense. Musk had quietly built a constellation of AI data centers on the city’s outskirts, the kind of industrial complex that looks like the future from far away and like a mistake up close, close enough to smell it. He described them as essential infrastructure for the next century, the backbone of artificial intelligence, national defense, global logistics, and whatever else he decided to invent before breakfast. He didn’t describe them as the reason residents woke up with headaches, coughing fits, and utility bills that looked like ransom notes.
The land he chose was neither empty nor forgotten. It was a community — majority Black, historically burdened by industrial pollution, and already fighting for basic environmental dignity. Musk’s companies knew this. The federal government knew this. The residents, however, were kept blissfully unaware until the construction noise began, then the trucks, then the smell, then the realization that something large, loud, and uninvited had moved in next door.
The turbines were the first clue that Musk’s Memphis project was not the benign “innovation hub” his press releases promised. Twenty‑seven of them, installed without permits, without environmental studies, and without the courtesy of informing the people who would be inhaling whatever they produced. Musk’s representatives told regulators the turbines were temporary backup generators, which was adorable, like calling a battleship a canoe. These turbines were the primary power source for the data centers, roaring day and night, pumping emissions into the air while the company insisted everything was “within acceptable limits.” The company never clarified who “acceptable” applied to, though the answer was clearly not “the people living next to them.”
Residents began reporting headaches, nosebleeds, asthma attacks, and a general sense that their neighborhood had been transformed into a low‑budget dystopian film set. The noise was constant, a mechanical drone that vibrated through walls and made sleep optional. Utility bills soared as the local grid strained under the load. Environmental monitors — the ones that should have been installed before construction — were conspicuously absent. The community had been cut out of the process entirely, a detail Musk’s companies treated as a minor administrative oversight rather than a violation of federal law.
The truth eventually surfaced, not because Musk’s companies volunteered it, but because independent investigators and environmental advocates began asking questions. They found the turbines, the emissions, the lack of permits, the absence of environmental studies, and the general attitude of Musk’s empire, which seemed to assume rules applied only to people who couldn’t afford lawyers. They discovered Memphis had been treated as a testing ground—a place where regulations could be ignored, communities inconvenienced, and consequences outsourced.
Lawsuits followed, as they tend to do when a trillionaire builds an industrial complex without telling anyone. Residents demanded accountability, remediation, and the basic respect of being informed about what was happening in their own neighborhood. For a brief moment, justice seemed possible. A federal judge took notice. The Environmental Protection Agency began asking questions. The Department of Justice requested documents. Musk’s lawyers, who had perfected the art of sounding confident while saying nothing, prepared for battle.
Then the government changed its tune.
The Department of Defense intervened, declaring Musk’s data centers “critical national security infrastructure.” They said the turbines powered AI systems essential to defense readiness. Shutting them down would jeopardize national security. They argued the courts should defer to the executive branch. The residents, they implied, should understand that some sacrifices were necessary for the greater good. The greater good, apparently, did not include clean air, environmental safety, or Memphis.”
In the last week, Musk has offered to buy approx. 419 homes if the owners agree to not participate in a lawsuit. Musk says they will receive market value, but what is market value for a home where there’s an increase chance of cancer, and continual noise pollution? I encourage you not to be one of those to simply deny the facts without attempting to see if they’re true.
Capitalism running buck wild is what’s happening with data centers all over the country.
I agree people not doing their job should be removed. We could use DOGE as an example of removing people without knowing what they were supposed to be doing and having to hire critical people back, if they were willing.
It’s not an example of that. They work quickly and that bothers you.
IOW, he made a capital investment and professional complainers are peeved.
Spot on. The state of economic education in secondary schools and colleges here is dire.
Enigma, I agree.
It’s just Election Day filler until the results start coming in later in the day.
Yup. The party has been captured, period; and additionally, it is part of a gloal regime that wants the entire planet to look like this. If you vote for dems, you are voting for the USSR circa 1983, or possibly, at this point, a blend of that and Iran or Saudi Arabia. I think we could not possibly be this stupid, but apparently, many are. This is not going to end well; it just isn’t, one way or the other.
No, you’re voting for something which resembles the PRI regime in Mexico, ca. 1980.
Dear Mr. Turley, Thank you for the great and informative article once again.
“X” seems to be having quite the hay day with their various comments. One stood out as a threat to Republicans, which is terribly sad and I might add scary. I voted last week and wrote a straight Republican ticket. I haven’t always done this; however, the Democrats have issued threats to attack the President and his people. I felt it necessary to vote this way, even down to the County Coroner position. It is hard to listen to anything the Democrats say. There is always violence behind it. Abdul El Sayed is a misogynist. This is part of the culture he comes from and we, the Americans, will not tolerate a man like that in the U.S. Senate.
“But! It will be different THIS time when WE do it!”
Yet, history tells a different story.
Trump has lied about everything – he promised improved affordability, he promised no more wars in the Middle East, he promised a release of the Epstein files, he promised to fight corruption in DC. Instead, he started a tariff war, caused massive inflation, ballooned the deficit, started a war in Iran, is protecting Epstein’s pedophile ring (which includes him) and is profitting from his presidency to the tune of billions of dollars. This is one Republican who is voting Blue. Trump and his ilk need to go.
Nice leftist Democrat talking points.
This Independent voted straight Republican this morning, in person.
Has nothing to do with Trump. It has to do with the threat the leftist illiberal Democrats represent to this country. They have told us they want to pass laws to ensure they never lose an election again. That is called one party rule. That is the antithesis of the Constitution and our Republic. They have also stated they will pack the court to ensure those laws of their one party rule cannot be over turned. The DSA arm of the leftist illiberal Democrat party have stated they want to get rid of the presidency and the Senate to ensure their one party rule.
So you’re ok with the government under trump buying ownership in companies?
That just means buying stock, which is done by both private and public actors as an investment (such as public pension funds). As long as the government does not own 51% of the company, there is no problem. Currently the US does not own over 50% of any private company.
OldManFromKS,
That right there. Although government agencies are not known for making good investment decisions. Look how some of CA, or IL pension funds are so underwater.
What I would of liked to see, the government taken my SS taxes, put them into investments in the stock market, even index funds. My SS account would look a heck of a lot better today than what they have done with it.
Or, better yet, let me take my own money, invest it in a index fund since I started working as a teen, I would be a lot better off now, maybe even able to retire early.
It’s the business of government to produce public works. Roads, bridges, sewers, sidewalks, water works, gas and electric plant (now and again), ports, air terminals, buildings to provide workplaces for government workers and sites for government clients, dams. The occasional irrigation work, public square, trade mart, or arena. That is public investment. If there’s to be government involvement in rail services, it’s the legal work necessary to acquire the right of way. The franchise to build and operate the rail is something to auction off.
“This Independent voted straight Republican this morning”
I’m calling it “defensive voting”. This libertarian did the same, except that there are a few local races with candidates running unopposed in which I didn’t bother to cast a vote. In past elections I would pick and choose, and write in a suitable (or occasionally, lampoon) candidate in races where I was not satisfied with the ballot nominees. Not this time: this was strictly a case of “voting against” by means of “voting for”.
“this was strictly a case of “voting against” by means of “voting for”.
Mega-dittos!! I voted against another Mayorkas becoming DHS Secretary, as well as the rest of that motley crew.
@Upstate
Yup, great and simple comment.
‘College aged voters’, who are in 2026 generally 20 years behind the maturity curve, are the last people we should be turning to for salience. If we willingly hand the country over to spoiled children with everything that is apparent now, I don’t know what else to say. And yet, in our laziness, comfort, and reticence, we seem to be prepared to do exactly that.
Polymarket: Politics
https://polymarket.us/category/politics
[BTW: Kalshi has an interesting prediction market for the ‘SCOTUS & Courts’]
Kalshi: SCOTUS & Courts
https://kalshi.com/category/politics/scotus-courts
“More Democrats (38%) prefer socialism to capitalism (25%)…”
But do they know what socialism is? We have a mixed economy, but capitalism is the engine. That pays for the social features in our mixed economy. Socialism destroys our engine and causes social programs to fail.
S. Meyer,
Reading the DSA website, they put a nice warm and fuzzy spin on what they think socialism is, but it is the same old socialism with the authoritarianism hidden as some kind of Democracy. It is not.
You don’t know what socialism is. Because it’s not the kind of socialism you think it is. We already have a mixed economy of socialist and capitalist systems in place. Bet you didn’t know that.
“You don’t know what socialism is…”
Enough is too much!!
A. Yes we do.
==
B. No you don’t.
GSX, your total knowledge is less than zero because you are wrong so frequently. You define socialism in many different ways while avoiding its true meaning.
What do you find in common with all the so-called socialist nations? Autocracy and failure. We survived because of capitalism, which, if diluted too much, will destroy the nation and remove our basic freedoms.
S. Meyer,
It seems modern Democrats define the word socialism kinda like how they define gender: There are 97 different definitions or genders.
As we know the traditional definition of socialism as,
noun
However, while looking up that definition, I came across this,
“While in the past social democracy and democratic socialism both referred to movements seeking a fully socialist system, the two terms have diverged. Today’s social democracies retain a capitalist system overall, while democratic socialism rejects capitalism fully, and seeks to establish a decentralized socialist economic system within a democratically run government.“
“and seeks to establish a decentralized socialist economic system“
And that ^^ seems like a oxymoron to me. I dont think they know what the definition of socialism is, what it is supposed to be, or how to implement it. And if they did, they would screw up on a massive scale of the tens of thousands if not millions dying kind.