Many political viewpoints exist in this world. Each of them have statistics, solutions, testimonials, and heartfelt messages to support their respective views. It easy to slip into a utopian pitfall if we think with our emotions and not with our heads.

One of these pitfalls is socialism. By the previous sentence, I have no doubt enraged the communist sympathizers reading this. There have been more than a few letters to The Daily supporting a socialist government, each quoting statistics and anecdotes to back up their solution. Let me reassure our socialist students by acknowledging that socialism is indeed a good idea. No reasonable leader would wish poverty on any segment of the population.

The problem is that socialism does not work. It is the antithesis to personal liberty. It is the ultimate disguise of tyranny. It does not work, despite all its goodwill.

Yes, there are countries that have successful socialist republics. But they are dependent upon other nations for their livelihood and are embarrasingly weak. Strong socialist nations, such as China and the former U.S.S.R, are miserable faliures. Humanity, in these nations, became just another problem for the government to deal with.

There have been collections of books written on the falacies of socialism. For the sake of brevity, here are five arguments against any government who wishes to control the wages of its hard-working laborers. I will spare the excessive statistics and speak from my heart, just like my socialist counterparts.

1.) DISTANCE

In most communist or socialist nations, the wealth is controlled from the seat of government. This poses a problem with accessibillty. If these Unites States were to become entirely socialist, Washington, D.C. would have the final control of your hard-earned money, perhaps using Austin as a redistribution point for the region that once was Texas. Does Washington have any idea of needs of the good people of Denton? I have a hard enough time with lines at the post office and at the DMV. Why would I trust the federal government to control my health care, or anything else for that matter?

2.) GETTING A JOB

The economy would be severly damaged by a socialist regime. One of my passions in life is designing. I regularly design logos, letterheads, T-shirts and websites. Occassionally I may charge, but mostly I do it as a free service to my friends who can't seem to find the font and size selectors on their word processors. I would like nothing more than to advertise and do this for a living, while working my way to a Bachelors degree. But I cannot.

I know nothing about how the Internal Revenue Service works and what penalities may be imposed on me if I make a single, innocent mistake. I do not know how to obtain a local vendor permit, nor do I have a knowledge of laws that could easily be violated. I do not have time at this point to take business classes to learn those things. All I want to do is design for money!

Why is that so complicated? Because somebody thought that it would be better if the government made money instead of the people. How many small businesses have been destroyed or aborted by fear of complex taxation? A dormant, foolish Congress in the early 20th century gave birth to the monster which is the IRS.

Meanwhile, I'm stuck waiting tables for a heartless, nationwide corporation-- A monster in its own rite. Dear Lord, help me when I graduate.

3.) MUTUAL POVERTY

If the socialist nation does well, its people are wealthy. While there are an elect few in the seat of power who would make a significantly greater income, 99 percent of the people would be given the same salary. That seems fair. There would be no more upper, middle or lower classes.

But think about this scenario: If the nation has an economic collapse, the entire nation is poor. No chance of rising out of the ashes and working to rebuild the economy with your own business. You would be at the mercy of an oligarchy to make sure you get your bread and Vodka at the end of the month, like you were promised when the currency became worthless.

4.) NO WAY OUT

If each State and community were to have its own laws and customs, true diversity would flourish. Not so in a socialist administration.

There is only one identity in the socialist unit: The nation. One law, one culture. Even the architecture would reek of the capital's.

If the ruling party were to make a law you did not agree with, there would be no where to run. Emmigration is near impossible in strict communist nations. There would be no running to Canada, nor even to Oklahoma to avoid the law. The law would be absolute anywhere. For example, if the nation were to outlaw abortion, it would be illegal everywhere. If you believe in choice, then you should join me in opposing socialism.

5.) SAVING MONEY

A dear friend of mine informed me that the FDA had once considered classifying individual ketchup packets as a vegetable in public school lunch programs. Obviously, this move would have been approved as a measure to save money. But how ridiculous is that idea?

All government commitees seek to save money and cut corners whenever they can. So do small businesses. Entrepreneurs have to consider their profit margins. To that, my friend said, "You might as well keep the government out of it." I'm forced to agree.

THE KINDNESS OF OUR HEARTS

Another friend of mine, who happens to be a self-described "red communist", argued the virtues of a free market with me. This is a guy who has found common ground with men like Josef Stalin (who murdered 30 million people to enforce his regime) and Mao Tse Tung (who murdered 60 million in his "cultural revolution" in China).

He had me convinced to a point. He pleaded that the only way to eliminate poverty and to ensure equality is to have a government resdistribute the treasures of the nation to each person equally. With enough bureaus, he said, there would be enough watchers and police officers to make sure that all are taken care of.

I asked him what he was doing to eliminate poverty in this country.

He told me that he was once active with the Texas Socialist Party, and votes in the primaries to make sure that socialists, or at pro-Union candidates, recieve plenty of votes.

I did not hear anything about personal sacrifice on his behalf.

I asked him again, "What are you doing to eliminate poverty? Are you giving to food banks? Do you help the illiterate to read? Are you sharing your paychecks with your roomates, and redistributing the cash evenly? Do you even let commuter students sleep over at your apartment overnight?"

He would not answer.