Tag: Communism

A Lesson In Economics. Panera Closes It`s Last “Pay What You Can Afford” Store

Screenshot_20200222-102823__01

The last of Panera Bread`s “pay what you can afford” store is closing. The stores called Panera Cares were created with the goal of not turning anyone away even if they didn`t pay 1 cent. In other words they could eat for free. Panera assumed that other customers would pick up the slack and basically subsidize those who couldn`t afford it. Let`s take the results of this experiment and relate it to the socialist model that is being advocated today.

As you might expect, the freeloaders poured in. Highschool students were coming in everyday after school, the homeless were eating there everyday, all to take advantage of food that was “free”. In the socialist government model this would be the same, everyone would be able to get what they want for free, except instead of voluntary subsidization, it would be mandatory through taxes. At Panera Bread, they soon realized that this “free” model wasn`t working. They couldn`t afford to keep feeding all of these freeloaders and slowly began implementing rules to get the “free” meals. They began rationing meals. They turned away anyone drunk or on drugs, limited students to after school hours, and told the homeless they were no longer allowed to come every day for every meal. In short, the customers weren`t paying because they believed a billion dollar company could afford to give away a few “free” meals. This is the next step in socialist governments- they begin limiting what is “free”. Even though the socialist government model enacts extreme taxes on those who they believe can afford to subsidize “free”, eventually you run out of other people`s money. The final step in this experiment is that the last of the Panera Cares store will be closing tomorrow. The difference between the Panera Store and government however is that government doesn`t close. Socialist government doubles down and uses the military to keep control as laid out in our previous postMeet The New Commies, Same As The Old Commies. The Holodomor & Democratic Socialism“.

Next time you hear a politician talking about free healthcare, free housing, free college tuition, etc, keep in mind how subsidization / socialism worked for Panera bread, and imagine it on a much larger scale that affects your daily life.

Meet The New Commies, Same As The Old Commies. The Holodomor & Democratic Socialism

Meet The New Commies, Same As The Old Commies. The Holodomor & Democratic Socialism

An article came across my news feed yesterday about the Holodomor. Not many people are familiar with it as it has been semi blacked out of history, but for those who don`t know, it was the intentional mass starvation that Russia`s communists used to kill over 10 million men women and children in Ukraine in the early 1930`s. A few key excerpts from the article here titled Holodomor: The Secret Holocaust in Ukraine are posted below. It is a rather in depth article and should be read by all in order to understand what collectivism / socialism / communism is. Just to emphasize this, also quoted from the article- The Soviets had passed gun registration decrees in 1926, 1928, and 1929, and few Ukrainians owned effective weapons. At the height of the genocide, 25,000 people were dying a day from starvation.

Despite a communist push for collectivization, Ukraine’s farms had mostly remained private — the foundation of their success. But in 1929, the Central Committee of the Soviet Union’s Communist Party decided to embark on a program of total collectivization. Private farms were to be completely replaced by collectives — in Ukraine known as kolkhozes. This was, of course, consistent with Marxist ideology: the Communist Manifesto had called for abolition of private property.

Throughout Ukraine, the Twenty-Five Thousanders held mandatory village meetings in which they demanded that all peasants relinquish private farming and “volunteer” to join a collective. Most peasants fiercely resisted. In principle, of course, there is nothing wrong with farmers pooling their resources and efforts in a cooperative venture. But this was not what the communists meant by collectivization. On the kolkhozes, the government owned everything — the land, animals, equipment, and produce. The worker kept no fruits of his labor, and was at the state’s mercy to receive a pittance of pay.

Soviet collectives never succeeded. As the eminent Sovietologist Robert Conquest noted of them, “Wherever they had existed they had, with all the advantages given them by the regime, done worse than the individual farm.” On the kolkhozes, livestock, poorly cared for, easily died, and equipment fell into disrepair. This was because the workers did not own them, nor did they have any stake in the collective. This illustrated the conflict between Marxist ideology and the reality of human nature. Making matters worse, the collectives were organized by the Twenty-Five Thousanders, who, being urban youths, had no agricultural experience; their ignorance of farming basics often became the butt of jokes among local Ukrainians.

But since the kolkhozes failed to produce as predicted by Marxist theory, and with many peasants still refusing to join, Stalin sought a scapegoat. It was announced that the failure of collectivization was due to sabotage by “kulaks.” These were the more prosperous peasants.

In reality, however, Ukraine had never had a distinct social class of kulaks — this concept was a Marxist invention. Those accused of being kulaks were either shot, deported to remote slave labor camps in Russia, or put in local labor details. Few survived.

Ironically, this process killed off the most productive farmers, guaranteeing a smaller harvest and a more impoverished Soviet Union. The remaining farmers did not dare take steps to improve their lands or prosper, for fear they would be reclassified as kulaks. But Stalin accomplished his true goal: destroying leadership that might oppose the complete subjugation of Ukraine.

In 1932, Stalin demanded that Ukraine increase its grain output by 44 percent. Such a goal would have been unachievable even if the communists had not already ruined the nation’s productivity by eliminating the best farmers and forcing others onto the feeble collectives. That year, not a single village was able to meet the impossible quota, which far exceeded Ukraine’s best output in the pre-collective years.

Stalin then issued one of the cruelest orders of his dark career: if quotas were not met, all grain was to be confiscated.

As mentioned above, the article discusses in more detail the horror of the mass starvation of the Ukrainian people and the continued efforts by Soviet communists to confiscate their food. It discusses other targets the communists destroyed including their institutional facilities and the Church.

Keep all this in mind when you hear today`s democrat leaders pushing socialism. As if you can`t learn from the stories of the past, just take a look at the situation and mass starvation currently in Venezuela. And just to put an exclamation point on this, Venezuela`s government has now blocked humanitarian aid from coming in to the country.

I`m going to close out this article with an exchange between NPR host Steve Inskeep and the leader of the Democrat party Alexandria Ocasio Cortez on the subject of her Green New Deal.

Inskeep: “One reason that people who are politically conservative are skeptical of efforts to combat climate change is that it sounds to them like it requires massive government intervention, which they just don’t like,” “Are you prepared to put on that table that, ‘Yes actually they’re right, what this requires is massive government intervention?'”

Cortez: “It does, it does, yeah, I have no problem saying that.”