Socialism's Eventual Result

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
81

[quote]TheTick42 wrote:
The left-leaning guys who are posting have more patience than I do. Or less sense…

Do you really think you are going to get an American-style Conservative to see reason? To bend or compromise even a little? I read a few of these comments, not many, and it’s just the same old crap. No thought, no depth. Most conservatives couldn’t find the correct definition of “Socialism” if you put it on the screen,
[/quote]

I agree with this, but it is sometimes healthy to go head to head with people that have opposite ideas than yourself.

communism is an socialist ideology, so it is not so weird that think communism = socialism. Actually both the term socialism and communism are broad terms. Socialism is the broadest and includes everything from socialdemocrats to anarcho-syndicalists, while communism is used as a term describing the autoritarian regimes in eastern-europa, the marxist socialist ideology and it is a term thats used to describe a classless and stateless society. So I think that most people are having a hard time defining it properly.

ps. nazism is only socialism in the name, but it was a mix of all ideology with a extra twist of racism. You can find hints of liberalism, nationalism, conservativism, royalism, socialism, even some anarchist influences to and the list goes on and on. What made the nazi/fascist movement bad though was its ultra-militarism, racism, ultra-socialconservativism and its elitism. Its not the leftiest on this forum that holds those ideas, so I dont know how socialist or leftist they where.

82

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
And here is where your lack of experience comes in. When I ran my companies HR dept we’d have people refuse a lower paid entry level job because it was not enough over what they’d make on unemployment.

What do you say about that?

This may sound crazy but I think there is hope for you.
[/quote]

In the course of your life you have come into contact with people who refused a job that they thought was too low-paying. What does this prove? What generalization are you (fallaciously) trying to make?

Since anecdotal evidence seems to be acceptable in this discussion: my childhood friend’s parents became addicted to painkillers while we were in high school. He worked his ass off through and after school, trying to support them, never having time or money for a college degree. Now he is 24, uneducated, and barely scraping by.

I, on the other hand, am the son of a professor. I had been to every continent save for Antarctica by the time I was 12. I lived half of my childhood in New York and half in Europe, where I became fluent in multiple languages. I am about to attend one of the best schools in the country…and I had connections there and at most of the others.

His lot in life was not his own doing, and neither has mine been. I SHOULD surrender part of my income in the future so that men and women like him, vulnerable as they are, can see to the health of their families. Because every kid on this planet deserves to be healthy. Or do you disagree? Be careful, Jesus is listening.[/quote]

One of the best posts I have read in this forum, Kudos smh23.

83

[quote]Bambi wrote:

Although the headlines says tax breaks they are described as ‘subsidies’ within the argument itself.

[/quote]

Thank you for highlighting you ignorance for me. In your feeble mind letting someone keep more of what they earn is the same as giving them money. I may understand that coming from a dumb kid, but from your friend the professor, who claims to have a PhD in business, it’s a sad reflection on his skills as a professor.

84

[quote]garcia1970 wrote:

[quote]reddog6376 wrote:

[quote]garcia1970 wrote:
I know you hate the idea of the common good of all. I know that you probaly are doing ok and make enough for your family and such. I’m not going to debate the economic necessity of the social safety net with you.

I get it. You’re greedy. You’re probably against everything that Roosevelt did to create the middle class too. Do you know what life was like in America before that legislation? Should we go back to the days of child labor and no minimum wage, no collective bargaining? No healthcare for the poor and old? A country without a middle class? I think this all sounds very good to you. It does not sound good to the bottom 98% of us, though.

The sad thing is that you probaly are one of the middle class, too. You think you’re rich b/c you have a paycheck and a couple cars and a home. What if your employer decides your job should go to an h1-b immigrant for half the money and you’re fired?? No paycheck??? Tough times? Bet u file for unemployment. That’s anti-conservative. Maybe the guys in your church or gunclub will help you out.

Or maybe you’re a business owner. Alot of conservatives are business owners. What will you do when you are put out of business by a US competitor who paid NO taxes??

Just some stuff to think about.

Homework: Read the lyrics to “Like a Rolling Stone” by Dylan (damn pinko commie)

[/quote]
Wanting to keep what I earn is greed? Not wanting to pay for someone who’s too lazy to work to sit home and have babies is immoral? Expecting people to take personal responsibility for the consequences of their own decisions is anti-social?
No I’m not rich, but have been a good steward of my money. If I lost my job I have enough set aside to get by. I’ve diversified my income so I can continue to provide for my family. If you don’t like the situation of the bottom 98%, get off you ass ond don’t be one of them.

Homework: Get your economics education from somewhere besides a fucking song dude…
[/quote]

My point is, YOU are part of the bottom 98%!!! Average duration of unemployment in this recession is at an all-time high of 37.1 weeks. You’re not going to file for unemployment after that amount of time??? Come on.

Oh, I got my economic education at the Smeal School at Penn State, where I got my PhD.
Where did you get your’s?[/quote]

You might want to ask for a refund…

85

[quote]Bambi wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Bambi wrote:

Although the headlines says tax breaks they are described as ‘subsidies’ within the argument itself.

Really Zeb the academic liberal professor stereotype? There was a poll in the UK a while back found just as many ‘right-wing’ professors as ‘left wing’.[/quote]

Bullshit kid. Produce the evidence at hand and for every “survey” you show me I’ll show you three that clearly demonstrate that professors are by and large LIBERAL. And when they’re done with little ones like you your mind is in full tilt. It will take a good 5-10 years before you wake up, if ever. But certainly I wish you well in getting a really good job. In fact, the more money that you make the more you will resent the government stealing it. And I wish you a great wife and a house full of kids. You’ll then get a really good taste of how little you know right now.

Don’t you? I guess time will tell in what you do with your life and how much big brother has to help you to get there.

[/quote]

Actually my job now I get taxed 20% on all I earn right now, so 250 pounds every month straight off the bat, before NI. I do resent that some of the money goes to people on welfare, who frankly, don’t need it. But the majority of people don’t seek unemployment as a career, at least the ones I know, and so I’m happy for the taxes I pay to support them on what is a very basic living allowance, especially with the cost of fuel, and a healthcare system that isn’t perfect but is free on demand, and if you don’t like it you can go private. And the government is really cutting down on benefit fraud anyway.

No, I don’t believe the government owes me anything I’ve been working in various jobs earning qualifications since I was 15 and now have saved enough money to study for a masters, which partly will be sponsored by the company I’m going to work for and partly by my savings from the aforementioned 20% taxed job.

But back to the issue - I’d like the OP to explain to me how this is an example of socialism. It does seem to be capitalism in action

[/quote]
THe company got tired of all the socialist BS in the UK, so they took their money elsewhere.

86

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
And here is where your lack of experience comes in. When I ran my companies HR dept we’d have people refuse a lower paid entry level job because it was not enough over what they’d make on unemployment.

What do you say about that?

This may sound crazy but I think there is hope for you.
[/quote]

In the course of your life you have come into contact with people who refused a job that they thought was too low-paying. What does this prove? What generalization are you (fallaciously) trying to make?

Since anecdotal evidence seems to be acceptable in this discussion: my childhood friend’s parents became addicted to painkillers while we were in high school. He worked his ass off through and after school, trying to support them, never having time or money for a college degree. Now he is 24, uneducated, and barely scraping by.

I, on the other hand, am the son of a professor. I had been to every continent save for Antarctica by the time I was 12. I lived half of my childhood in New York and half in Europe, where I became fluent in multiple languages. I am about to attend one of the best schools in the country…and I had connections there and at most of the others.

His lot in life was not his own doing, and neither has mine been. I SHOULD surrender part of my income in the future so that men and women like him, vulnerable as they are, can see to the health of their families. Because every kid on this planet deserves to be healthy. Or do you disagree? Be careful, Jesus is listening.[/quote]

You are free to surrender as much of your income to him as you like. The problem starts when you (and those like you) convince the gov’t to FORCE me to surrender part of my income at the point of a gun.

87

[quote]reddog6376 wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
And here is where your lack of experience comes in. When I ran my companies HR dept we’d have people refuse a lower paid entry level job because it was not enough over what they’d make on unemployment.

What do you say about that?

This may sound crazy but I think there is hope for you.
[/quote]

In the course of your life you have come into contact with people who refused a job that they thought was too low-paying. What does this prove? What generalization are you (fallaciously) trying to make?

Since anecdotal evidence seems to be acceptable in this discussion: my childhood friend’s parents became addicted to painkillers while we were in high school. He worked his ass off through and after school, trying to support them, never having time or money for a college degree. Now he is 24, uneducated, and barely scraping by.

I, on the other hand, am the son of a professor. I had been to every continent save for Antarctica by the time I was 12. I lived half of my childhood in New York and half in Europe, where I became fluent in multiple languages. I am about to attend one of the best schools in the country…and I had connections there and at most of the others.

His lot in life was not his own doing, and neither has mine been. I SHOULD surrender part of my income in the future so that men and women like him, vulnerable as they are, can see to the health of their families. Because every kid on this planet deserves to be healthy. Or do you disagree? Be careful, Jesus is listening.[/quote]

You are free to surrender as much of your income to him as you like. The problem starts when you (and those like you) convince the gov’t to FORCE me to surrender part of my income at the point of a gun.
[/quote]

If you are an anarcho-captialist you are consistent, but if you are a conservative or a libertarian who believes there should be a state and some form of a tax, then you are highly inconsistent.

Aslong as we are discussing this in a context of a democratic state, then what the tax rate should be and what the state should use the tax revenue on is up to the people to decide. In this context your statement doesnt make sense at all, but if you bring anarchism into this as an alternative, then your emotional statement about taxes makes more sense.

88

[quote]florelius wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
And here is where your lack of experience comes in. When I ran my companies HR dept we’d have people refuse a lower paid entry level job because it was not enough over what they’d make on unemployment.

What do you say about that?

This may sound crazy but I think there is hope for you.
[/quote]

In the course of your life you have come into contact with people who refused a job that they thought was too low-paying. What does this prove? What generalization are you (fallaciously) trying to make?

Since anecdotal evidence seems to be acceptable in this discussion: my childhood friend’s parents became addicted to painkillers while we were in high school. He worked his ass off through and after school, trying to support them, never having time or money for a college degree. Now he is 24, uneducated, and barely scraping by.

I, on the other hand, am the son of a professor. I had been to every continent save for Antarctica by the time I was 12. I lived half of my childhood in New York and half in Europe, where I became fluent in multiple languages. I am about to attend one of the best schools in the country…and I had connections there and at most of the others.

His lot in life was not his own doing, and neither has mine been. I SHOULD surrender part of my income in the future so that men and women like him, vulnerable as they are, can see to the health of their families. Because every kid on this planet deserves to be healthy. Or do you disagree? Be careful, Jesus is listening.[/quote]

One of the best posts I have read in this forum, Kudos smh23.
[/quote]

Many thanks, good sir. It’s good to have an ally on here every once in a while.

89

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]reddog6376 wrote:

[quote]Rohnyn wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Garcia is actually what’s wrong with this country. He and the others who feel empowered to spew this nonsesnse help graduate hundreds of thousands of kids each year from University’s with the wrong attitude. The come out feeling that the government owes them something. This character has helped create the enititlement mentality that questioinable politicians like Obama feed on to get elected.

Give this some thought, if you and your kind were to live without the support of people like me how long do you think it would take your ivory tower to crumble?[/quote]
Garcia has a legit job. Actually, if the corporations didn’t vampire money out of the electorate in 09 then the American Financial Sector wouldn’t even exist anymore. The Bankers and other Jewbags would have had to get real jobs.

Screwing people out of their value, taking it for yourself, getting taken from taxes and redistributed again is a catch 22 dumb system…but don’t for a second tell me that the majority of the plutocracy in this country are innovative movers and shakers who made the cents they have. Truth is many if not most of the richies in this country are getting in their positions via networks of nepotism and getting cash from inheritance. They keep themselves in fortunate positions by having their money managed by banksters who invest every manner of usury you can think of that keeps many hardworking common men in perpetual wage slavery.

I’d say in the upper middle class and lowest bracket of the upper class, you’ll find the people who actually made their cash.[/quote]

80% of millionaires in the US are first generation affluent (they did NOT inherit their wealth) A little research goes a long way Rohnyn. You’re a perfect case of class envy.[/quote]

You’ve hit the nail on the head my friend.[/quote]

What you said about millionaires does not negate my statement at all. “I’d say in the upper middle class and lowest bracket of the upper class, you’ll find the people who actually made their cash.” If the upper middle class and lower upper class is 100k to 300k a year, and your millionaires are (I’m guessing mostly older and retired people) then that would be consistent with my statement. As the upper middle class and lower upper class do become millionaires within their lifetime should they save.

Also, simply earning several million within your lifetime does not mean were not the product of privilege. I wonder how many of these people got into more fortunate positions of privilege by way of nepotism?

Anyways, to go back to what I said about social justice. I should coin the term, ‘social integrity’ alongside it. I don’t believe the cure for the poor man, are the alms of the rich man, nor do I believe however, that man is allowed to be wolf to man.

Social justice is the idea that every man by his will, merit, work ethic and intelligence should be able to achieve in his lifetime what is his due share.

Social integrity is the idea that no man will profit from any other man’s misery, and all men will be judged by their merit and not favored by their privilege.

Yes, the two above are ‘ideals’ not found in practice universally nowadays, but so were many things that have now become a part of Western culture.

In the current system, if a rich man does any foolish or weak thing, he can be most entirely excused medically; a poor man is responsibile for his actions.

I am for the repeal of financial usury, and the opening of the free market.
The government is not the answer, but it is undeniable that the plutocracy is in control of this country. What is needed is a cultural revolution to instate social justice and integrity so America can be strong again.

I could go on, but I come to listen in this instance, as this isn’t an ego trip for me. I only come to PWI to listen, and learn. Find the truth through dialectic discussion.

90

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]florelius wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
And here is where your lack of experience comes in. When I ran my companies HR dept we’d have people refuse a lower paid entry level job because it was not enough over what they’d make on unemployment.

What do you say about that?

This may sound crazy but I think there is hope for you.
[/quote]

In the course of your life you have come into contact with people who refused a job that they thought was too low-paying. What does this prove? What generalization are you (fallaciously) trying to make?

Since anecdotal evidence seems to be acceptable in this discussion: my childhood friend’s parents became addicted to painkillers while we were in high school. He worked his ass off through and after school, trying to support them, never having time or money for a college degree. Now he is 24, uneducated, and barely scraping by.

I, on the other hand, am the son of a professor. I had been to every continent save for Antarctica by the time I was 12. I lived half of my childhood in New York and half in Europe, where I became fluent in multiple languages. I am about to attend one of the best schools in the country…and I had connections there and at most of the others.

His lot in life was not his own doing, and neither has mine been. I SHOULD surrender part of my income in the future so that men and women like him, vulnerable as they are, can see to the health of their families. Because every kid on this planet deserves to be healthy. Or do you disagree? Be careful, Jesus is listening.[/quote]

One of the best posts I have read in this forum, Kudos smh23.
[/quote]

Many thanks, good sir. It’s good to have an ally on here every once in a while.[/quote]

Yhea it helps to get some support some times. I think we who are to the left of the GOP paradigm suck at backing eachother up LOL, I know I am guilty of sometimes observing others getting ripped a new by the rightwing hordes.

91

[quote]reddog6376 wrote:

[quote]Bambi wrote:

Although the headlines says tax breaks they are described as ‘subsidies’ within the argument itself.

[/quote]

Thank you for highlighting you ignorance for me. In your feeble mind letting someone keep more of what they earn is the same as giving them money. I may understand that coming from a dumb kid, but from your friend the professor, who claims to have a PhD in business, it’s a sad reflection on his skills as a professor.[/quote]

Did you read the article? The oil companies were given tax breaks that they ADMITTED they didn’t need when oil was $60 a barrel. Here (Brent crude) it’s now $110. This isn’t about taxing them more, it’s about taxing them at all. Or do you think companies should pay no tax?
And if you think the UK is socialist, where were AIG’s dodgy deadlings conducted? London. What banks because of their toxic loans had to be rescued by the British taxpayer? HBOS and RBS. The eye of the storm in the financial meltdown was the UK thanks to deregulation and what regulation was left was improperly managed.

@Zeb: Believe it or not I agree with you that benefits should be less than the minimum wage. Unfortunately that’s not the case in the UK, because the last Labour government abolished the entry 10% tax rate. I believe that if you pay minimum wage you should pay no tax - that’d get a lot of people here looking for a job. I have also seen what you mention but the plural of anecdote is not data. Obviously we have radically different ideas on how the problem should be solved.

92

[quote]smh23 wrote:

His lot in life was not his own doing, and neither has mine been. I SHOULD surrender part of my income in the future so that men and women like him, vulnerable as they are, can see to the health of their families. Because every kid on this planet deserves to be healthy. Or do you disagree? Be careful, Jesus is listening.[/quote]

Then please do so.

Just sont ease you guilty conscience at the expense of other peoples income.

93

[quote]TheTick42 wrote:
The left-leaning guys who are posting have more patience than I do. Or less sense…

Do you really think you are going to get an American-style Conservative to see reason? To bend or compromise even a little? I read a few of these comments, not many, and it’s just the same old crap. No thought, no depth. Most conservatives couldn’t find the correct definition of “Socialism” if you put it on the screen, much less understand why it isn’t the same as Communism, or Nazism.

Bottom-line: Socialism might not be the best option but when you compare it to the war-obsessed Neo-con agenda it look amazing. Currently the US values the death of an Iraqi civilian higher than the life of an American child. If that doesn’t make you think the USA is nuts…nothing will.[/quote]

  1. There is no ‘correct definition’ of Socialism.

  2. What on earth has the Iraq war and your absurd allegations against ‘the US’ have to do with the subject of this thread?

94

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]TheTick42 wrote:
The left-leaning guys who are posting have more patience than I do. Or less sense…

Do you really think you are going to get an American-style Conservative to see reason? To bend or compromise even a little? I read a few of these comments, not many, and it’s just the same old crap. No thought, no depth. Most conservatives couldn’t find the correct definition of “Socialism” if you put it on the screen, much less understand why it isn’t the same as Communism, or Nazism.

Bottom-line: Socialism might not be the best option but when you compare it to the war-obsessed Neo-con agenda it look amazing. Currently the US values the death of an Iraqi civilian higher than the life of an American child. If that doesn’t make you think the USA is nuts…nothing will.[/quote]

  1. There is no ‘correct definition’ of Socialism.

  2. What on earth has the Iraq war and your absurd allegations against ‘the US’ have to do with the subject of this thread?[/quote]

Maybe if he ahs the choice between crony capitalism that involves constant warfare and “socialism” he chooses the latter?

95

[quote]smh23 wrote:
ZEB wrote:
In the course of your life you have come into contact with people who refused a job that they thought was too low-paying. What does this prove? What generalization are you (fallaciously) trying to make?[/quote]

It proves that many (it was not just a few) people would rather stay home and collect free money from the government (who takes it from people like me who earn it) than go to work and make more. Is this concept too hard for you to grasp? Let me explain human nature to you kid. If someone pays you $400 a week to NOT work, do you take a job making say $450 a week? Even with your very limited life experience you should get this one right. Of course it will be your far left leanings that will cause you to give me the wrong answer.

Extended unemployment is a bad idea as it encourages people to not work and collect free money. Simple.

Ah, well thank you for sharing this piece of information. That explains why you have your head up your ass. I was wondering how you could get so screwed up at such a tender age - But that explains it. Thanks.

Sniff, sniff, I can barely contain myself. Man you really touched me with that one. You are right man. Everyone deserves everything. Why stop at health care? Don’t you think that they deserve a nice place to live? It’s no ones falut that they live in poverty, no one did that, it just happened POOF. Now I think we should raise taxes to make sure that every man, woman, child and house pet have a nice place to live. It’s only fair right? And that’s what you “know nothing moronic liberals” are after right? Just a little fairness. And listen we can’t stop there how about transportation? Do you think it’s fair that they have to (gulp) take a bus? That can be humiliating to someone and damage their self-esteem. Yep…a car should be given to all families. Tell me what makes health care more important than any of the above? Do you have an answer other than that you were programmed by the far left to say "everyone deserves health care. Why can’t that line work for something else, anything else. Everyone deserves_____________Just fill in the blank and say it enough times and it becomes true.

By the way junior the Bible is pretty clear “if a man does not work he shall not eat”

I guess that’s one more topic you know nothing about - They’re adding up quickly. You better post more so that we can all be impressed.

96

[quote]TheTick42 wrote:
SMH23 -

Nice.[/quote]

Hey there smh you’ve got a fan club of one here. A CANADIAN no less. They’re already under the tyranny of socialism and want the US to follow.

N I C E ---- OOOOOOO Ahhhhhh

Ha ha

97

[quote]florelius wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
And here is where your lack of experience comes in. When I ran my companies HR dept we’d have people refuse a lower paid entry level job because it was not enough over what they’d make on unemployment.

What do you say about that?

This may sound crazy but I think there is hope for you.
[/quote]

In the course of your life you have come into contact with people who refused a job that they thought was too low-paying. What does this prove? What generalization are you (fallaciously) trying to make?

Since anecdotal evidence seems to be acceptable in this discussion: my childhood friend’s parents became addicted to painkillers while we were in high school. He worked his ass off through and after school, trying to support them, never having time or money for a college degree. Now he is 24, uneducated, and barely scraping by.

I, on the other hand, am the son of a professor. I had been to every continent save for Antarctica by the time I was 12. I lived half of my childhood in New York and half in Europe, where I became fluent in multiple languages. I am about to attend one of the best schools in the country…and I had connections there and at most of the others.

His lot in life was not his own doing, and neither has mine been. I SHOULD surrender part of my income in the future so that men and women like him, vulnerable as they are, can see to the health of their families. Because every kid on this planet deserves to be healthy. Or do you disagree? Be careful, Jesus is listening.[/quote]

One of the best posts I have read in this forum, Kudos smh23.
[/quote]

Then why don’t you tell me why those same people don’t deserve a safe car to drive, a place to live in and food to eat? Do you value the occasional visit to the doctor over these things?

Please feel free to ramble on as I’d like to hear your thoughts on why one thing is more important than another.

Note: Canada and Norway agree with smh—(eye roll)

98

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]TheTick42 wrote:
SMH23 -

Nice.[/quote]

Hey there smh you’ve got a fan club of one here. A CANADIAN no less. They’re already under the tyranny of socialism and want the US to follow.

N I C E ---- OOOOOOO Ahhhhhh

Ha ha[/quote]

He is Canadian, therefore he is wrong.

Flawless logic.

99

I would like to take this opportunity to encourage my suggestions to make the
world a fairer and better place to be in;

-try and avoid cooperations. Try not to work for them and dont do business with them. I know
this will be difficult, but try and do what you can.

-purchase your food from markets, and pay cash.

-use the bartering method if you can to swap exchange goods and services

-try to avoid purchasing mass produced goods. Even if you have to spend an extra dollar, purchase
something that has been made locally by locals.

-use less oil. Ride a bike.

tweet tweet

100

[quote]Bambi wrote:
Did you read the article? The oil companies were given tax breaks that they ADMITTED they didn’t need when oil was $60 a barrel. Here (Brent crude) it’s now $110. This isn’t about taxing them more, it’s about taxing them at all.
[/quote]

And you still don’t get it. A tax break is not a subsidy. A subsidy is giving them money. A tax break is letting them keep what they EARNED. Whether they need it or not is irrelevant, it belongs to them, it is their property. Your insinuation that the gov’t has a right to take it disgusts me.

[quote] Or do you think companies should pay no tax?[/quote] They don’t pay the tax now. They just increase the price of their product to cover that additional cost. You and I pay the tax for them. Which, in part, explains why crude is $110. But you refuse to understand this because you want to punish those with more than you.

I’d argue that giving money to banks that haven’t earned it is much closer to socialism than it is to capitalism. As a captitalist I am against the gov’t giving any money to any entity, whether it’s banks, GM, dairy farmers or airlines, or the homeless single mother down the street. That’s not the place of our Fed Gov’t.

Shouldn’t everyone pay their fair share? Or does that only apply to those who make more than you? Class envy.