Economic Corner 43 08/04/2026

The USA has reached two hundred and fifty years.

Starting off as a fiscal capitalistic country with tons of financial imbalances, regardless that they were legal. .

Now a populace, getting larger and larger, within the usa seems to want the usa to become what it was never, a place for all in it to be content.

We will see, but I will end with what I always do for all governments anywhere or anytime in humanity.

their most negative times are always built in the times suggested as positive or acceptible, their gilded ages, their glorious or advertised wins is usually the times where the seeds of the worst times were laid.

The titular question is , why are non rich americans against socialism?

The questions are clear

G)What do people in the USA consider socialism?

E)What variations of opinion do people in the usa have in defining socialism?

M)What percentage of people, whether citizens or not, whether americans or not, in the united states of america are opposed to socialism?

K)What aspect of the USA implements socialism?

Before anyone can answer the question " why are non rich americans against socialism" ,

G) what do people in the usa consider socialism. New York City has a socialist party, which isn't the democratic socialist party. NYC also has a libertarian party and green party and others. But what is socialism? I bet socialism is different for the socialist party in comparison to the democratic socialist party. My point? I am unconvinced that socialism has a majority accepted definition. And absent said majority accepted definition, any question on the populace of three hundred and fifty million plus in the united states of america opinion on said idea goes into automatic argument. Cause the point of the titular question is a matter of opinion from majority consensus, not the opinion of individuals.

E) and what is socialism. Some people think socialism is a system with an absence of fiscal capitalism. Some Don't.

M) With so many variations of definition to socialism, who is opposed to socialism? can it be calculated? can it be known? or is it an assumption?

K) Lastly, where is socialism already implemented? Some will say the entire welfare programs in the usa are socialism. In Nippon/Japan they are stated as such, but people don't always view welfare programs as socialsim in the united states of america. so...

Is the issuse of the democratic socialist creating a wedge in the party of andrew jackson OR are multividing lines simply being treated with their proper presence. One of the prblems in many human organizations is the falsehood of unity, the asusmption of a collective united behind something when it is a group of various tribes or sects who exist through a loose arrangement that isn't strong enough to handle all the groups sway. It can be similarly noted that the reforms or libertarians in the party of abraham lincoln are a similarity to the democratic socialst plus greens in the party of andrew jackson. The falsehood is the structure of the two party system as adequate for all the parts that the two parties try to umbrella . The usa does have a history of parties of governance splitting/dying/merging/mutating so it is clear that the democratic socialsts and the fdrr corporate members of the party of andrew jackson can't survive together forever, int he same way the Maga and the reagan corporate members of the party of abraham lincoln can't survive together.

I think the donkeys fdr wing feels, government can be an avenue for fiscal capitalism, not a tool for socialism living side by side with ffiscal capitalistic private sector.

The reason no universal affordable healthcare , or universal affordable housing or universal childcare has happened is lobbies, not any party of governance

The problem in the usa has always been the faithful or hopeful financial assessments. Those in the usa who feel a middle always exist or that the usa can change into something are the people who have always pushed the usa along. mno matter the race: phenotype/gender/religion/language/geographic descendency /or other.

But the questions are clear.

Can the usa be an engine for fiscal capitalism while fund socialism? The USA has never financially been able to provide for all who live in it. NEVER.

circa 1492 native american peoples, were blockaded or murdered from the fiscal capitalistic environment by whites for whites fiscal betterment.

early 1500s, black people were enslaved to whites , so the usa wasn't a place for black positive living.

1865 was the end of the war between the states. The UTZ indigenous peoples were murdered by the federal government from nineteen hundred to ninteen hundred and three. The civil rights act whose biggest beneficiary were women was signed in nineteen hundred and sixty five. The USA went to a fiat currency, not backed by gold in the nineteen hundred and seventies to handle future financial wobbles based on their military power or calculative ability.

The United states of america has never financially supported ALL the humans in it. NEVER. So how can in the year two thousand and twenty six it change to do so? five hundred years of genocide or enslavement or abuse can not be undone in decades. If it can? we will see. But it is clear that abet against the usa is wisest.

The idea that fiscally wealthy people should take less in a country founded by ENSLAVERS is a historical insult. but ford vs dodge prove that it is illegal in the usa to go against profiteering.

The hopeful or faithful in the usa, after its two hundred and fifty year anniversary are tasked with the challenging of having hope when the myths or legends the usa has professed, from its very infancy, have to be called in, and no cards can even be placed on the table.