I have been letting this topic marinate, until the urge could not be resistd anymore.

1.) Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.

2.) A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.

3.) Abolition of all right of inheritance.

4.) Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.

5.) Centralization of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.

6.) Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State.

7.) Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.

8.) Equal liability of all to labour. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.

9.) Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equable distribution of the population over the country.

10.) Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, etc....

Most of that above list is unconstitutional. But look at how many exist today.

Planks #2, #5, #6, and # 10 are already present, or were present in the last 50 years. During the Kennedy administration, there was a 91% income tax on the highest earners at that time. This country has already given way to socialist policy during the great depression, when it was believed that government intervention would be the savior. Even to this day, many are taught in schools, it was FDR's policies that paved the way for recovery.

It is the abolishment of rights that allows socialist policy to function, more specifically privacy. One of the main reasons i oppose state provided health care is because it instantly blurs the line between your privacy and government. Socialized health care also has a serious question mark in regards to more prestigious medical school graduate's income vs less prestigious school graduate's. Does a doctor from Harvard have the right to charge more than the state is willing to pay for the average person, therefore excluding all those who cannot afford top notch health care resulting in class based hostility.

I love how people are now calling government intervention in the markets socialist, when the same scenario happened over 75 years ago. But do remember. A society that leans more towards more free markets will always be more productive than their left leaning counterparts. It is apparent in cyclical recovery as citizens of the US are far less impacted in terms of overall wealth, buying power, and access to goods and services. Believe it or not, there were always people who were able to pay for things in "cash". The people who have done well with their finances are actually being rewarded with higher purchasing power relative more specifically to imports.

There are 380 million gallons of gasoline used daily. This is giving a weekly saving of about $3.8 billion to consumers and producers. Farther left economic leaning countries will face more harsh realities...