The Triumph of Socialism

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
61

[quote]apbt55 wrote:
DixiesFinest wrote:
3IdSpetsnaz wrote:

This is article is so stupid, I want to take a gun and shoot the writer of this article in his fucking face, seriously.

^this is what I was referring to when I said violence and brutality.

too bad he is a tree huggin piece of garbarage who doesn’t believe in owning a gun or violence, or maybe he could follow through.

some things require violence and burtality, such as war. So we have not been at war, we have had a military mission, in war you conquer and destroy[/quote]

You are that blind to really think that I am a ‘tree huggin liberal’ because I have socialist leanings? You guys need to get out of the black and white politics and realize what’s up and what’s going on are just holistic unique systems, based on the individuals and cultures that in habit them. I have guns, and I’m not some leftist crybaby. Need I remind you Nazi Germany was Socialist? There is such a thing as right wing socialism.

62

[quote]3IdSpetsnaz wrote:
apbt55 wrote:
DixiesFinest wrote:
3IdSpetsnaz wrote:

This is article is so stupid, I want to take a gun and shoot the writer of this article in his fucking face, seriously.

^this is what I was referring to when I said violence and brutality.

too bad he is a tree huggin piece of garbarage who doesn’t believe in owning a gun or violence, or maybe he could follow through.

some things require violence and burtality, such as war. So we have not been at war, we have had a military mission, in war you conquer and destroy

You are that blind to really think that I am a ‘tree huggin liberal’ because I have socialist leanings? You guys need to get out of the black and white politics and realize what’s up and what’s going on are just holistic unique systems, based on the individuals and cultures that in habit them. I have guns, and I’m not some leftist crybaby. Need I remind you Nazi Germany was Socialist? There is such a thing as right wing socialism.[/quote]

nazi’s were socialist yes, good job.

they were not in the right side of the spectrum though.

yeah pretty much if you have any socialist leanings you are a crybaby who cannot stand on your own, that is what that means.

sorry so you don’t hug trees, you aren’t for the green movement, don’t believe in climate change or whatever they want to call that bullshit these days. cuz if you do, you are a tree hugger, it’s ok sorry you had to realize it here.

63

How not? Nazis were pretty damn right wing, by the American right/left split standard.

Wow what an astute analysis you’ve made. If believing in social justice and opposing perverse racial/ethnic standards for societal services, yet believing everyone should have equal access to social security nets, then I guess I’m a crybaby. Are you a ‘libertarian,’ by chance?

64

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Welcome back, Nomi!
[/quote]

Welcome.

65

[quote]orion wrote:
Did it ever occur to you that Russia needed to prevent people from fleeing socialist freedom by force whereas America has a hard time keeping potential “wage slaves” out?

Something does not compute.
[/quote]

This thread should’ve ended right about here.

66

[quote]Beowolf wrote:
orion wrote:
Did it ever occur to you that Russia needed to prevent people from fleeing socialist freedom by force whereas America has a hard time keeping potential “wage slaves” out?

Something does not compute.

This thread should’ve ended right about here.[/quote]

Yet Modern Moscow is full of immigrants from all over the world who emigrated during the Soviet era because of their high standard of living, educational opportunities as well as vocational ones…hmmmm, really makes you think.

67

[quote]3IdSpetsnaz wrote:
Beowolf wrote:
orion wrote:
Did it ever occur to you that Russia needed to prevent people from fleeing socialist freedom by force whereas America has a hard time keeping potential “wage slaves” out?

Something does not compute.

This thread should’ve ended right about here.

Yet Modern Moscow is full of immigrants from all over the world who emigrated during the Soviet era because of their high standard of living, educational opportunities as well as vocational ones…hmmmm, really makes you think.[/quote]

Missing the point. People in Soviet Russia fought to leave. People in the US fought to stay.

It matters not that some people immigrated to Russia. It was certainly better than some of the areas that were surrounding it. That misses the point that there were so many people trying to GTFO.

68

[quote]Beowolf wrote:
3IdSpetsnaz wrote:
Beowolf wrote:
orion wrote:
Did it ever occur to you that Russia needed to prevent people from fleeing socialist freedom by force whereas America has a hard time keeping potential “wage slaves” out?

Something does not compute.

This thread should’ve ended right about here.

Yet Modern Moscow is full of immigrants from all over the world who emigrated during the Soviet era because of their high standard of living, educational opportunities as well as vocational ones…hmmmm, really makes you think.

Missing the point. People in Soviet Russia fought to leave. People in the US fought to stay.

It matters not that some people immigrated to Russia. It was certainly better than some of the areas that were surrounding it. That misses the point that there were so many people trying to GTFO.[/quote]

Who tried to leave Soviet Russia? Noone has given me any proof there were Russians jumping on boats to Alaska or Japan, or illegally living in Canada, -none-. This is just cold war propaganda.

The immmigrants weren’t from ares surrounding it either man. Large populations of Latin Americans, Africans, South Asians, Middle Easterners and even some Western Europeans migrated to SU. While not highly substantial, prior to the Civil Rights movement, many African Americans moved to the Soviet Union, some even defect during the Korean War. Get your facts straight chorniiy.

69

this article is clearly biaised. It is crap

70

[quote]apbt55 wrote:
spyoptic wrote:
John S. wrote:
If we allowed the free market to do its job we would have job surpluses.

fail. capitalism runs on maximum efficiency. Low wages = more efficiency, all the jobs go overseas, jobs in U.S plummit. Capitalism does not care about the people, only profit - so people are at its whim and not the other way around.

In your own words fail.

Efficiency in a free market is the BEST product at the best price,[/quote] I agree but that is not what’s happening in today’s economy, as large companies have literally taken out all competition; therefore they decide the quality and price of the product

[quote]That does not equal jobs overseas, it means really efficient people who are an asset to the company get paid well. The ones their to dot he monkey work get paid less and the compan can eliminate the waste it currently carries thanks to equal opportunity and other governmental restrictions. [/quote] “really efficient” people do not get paid better, if that were true the factory worker busting his ass would make millions of dollars. The CEO makes in one year what it will take you to make in 50 years. High status jobs go to college students of predominently white private schools, which are sent their by parents who make the most money. There goes your “equal opportunity”
Governmental restrictions on large corporations? I’d like to hear specifics on that.

Yea blame your problems on those less fortunate instead of the ones higher up on the food-chain that are actually responsible for it.

71

[quote]spyoptic wrote:
apbt55 wrote:
spyoptic wrote:
John S. wrote:
If we allowed the free market to do its job we would have job surpluses.

fail. capitalism runs on maximum efficiency. Low wages = more efficiency, all the jobs go overseas, jobs in U.S plummit. Capitalism does not care about the people, only profit - so people are at its whim and not the other way around.

In your own words fail.

Efficiency in a free market is the BEST product at the best price, I agree but that is not what’s happening in today’s economy, as large companies have literally taken out all competition; therefore they decide the quality and price of the product

That does not equal jobs overseas, it means really efficient people who are an asset to the company get paid well. The ones their to dot he monkey work get paid less and the compan can eliminate the waste it currently carries thanks to equal opportunity and other governmental restrictions. “really efficient” people do not get paid better, if that were true the factory worker busting his ass would make millions of dollars.

The CEO makes in one year what it will take you to make in 50 years. High status jobs go to college students of predominently white private schools, which are sent their by parents who make the most money. There goes your “equal opportunity”
Governmental restrictions on large corporations? I’d like to hear specifics on that.

Talented people become a commidity, and people start to strive to be that more desireable commodity themselves.

Thiings become more affordable. So I am failing to see the downside here, less government, less taxes, less people trying mooch off my income, hell we may clean up the gene pool a little by not supporting these fat wateful obese people irresponsibly spending our money on their self imposed problems.

Yea blame your problems on those less fortunate instead of the ones higher up on the food-chain that are actually responsible for it.
[/quote]

You seem to get the point.

People say I’m some big bleeding leftist, but you seem to see.

It;s basically down to this. Our ‘Corporate Communisn’ versus an envisioned ‘Popular Socialism.’ You can have a social system that placatates worthless deadbeats and oligarchs while the working classes become indebted and do nothing, or you can develop a system where all people have the same access and opportunities to services provided by the government.

People who say some how that social welfare, free higher education (for the qualified) and universal healthcare will somehow result in people just sitting on their ass and vegging out all day, are fools. You are the person you are you are, providing people with basic needs does not stifle them from growing as individuals. If I were meant to be a creator and a doctor, I would become a creator and a doctor, it’s that simple. I decide, not my circumstance.

In the current system all these things are provided to people by perverse measures, while the government is tightly in the grips of wealth oligarchs, under the new system the people would be award services by merit, and the government would be ran by the people and not the oligarchs. Idealistic perhaps yes, but Impossible, no.

72

[quote]666Rich wrote:
SO everyone loves the idea that capitalis destroys wage standards. Might I remind you of Henry Ford? He was of course crazy for paying workers twice the average rate of pay per labor hour in related industries at the time. Other companies were baffled, yet he attracted the best and brightest workers and had his pick. Furthermore as a result of paying his workers TWICE the standard wage, he INCREASED PRODUCTIVITY and dominated the market.

It is no small secret many people take vacations at work if they are unsatisfied with their job. As a result, in spite of cutting corners and reducing costs, the company decreases output. A more contemporary example is Google and other tech startups. If you look at their employee relations it would be tought absurd that they would ever get any work done…oh wait Google is a market giant that treats their employees probably better than any company on earth.

Just goes to show you capitalism does not equal wage slavery, because if you pay that higher wage, your competitor loses his work force. Then if you follow certain aspects of Keynesian thought, wages are sticky due to contracts. Thus the above posters = fail.[/quote]

Not all companies treat their workers like shit, that’s good. But very few people are lucky enough to get to work for Google. I could give you tons of examples of the complete opposite. Such as companies using child labor and so on. To say that everybody else fails just because a handfull of companies are great to work for is laughable.

73

[quote]spyoptic wrote:
apbt55 wrote:
spyoptic wrote:
John S. wrote:
If we allowed the free market to do its job we would have job surpluses.

fail. capitalism runs on maximum efficiency. Low wages = more efficiency, all the jobs go overseas, jobs in U.S plummit. Capitalism does not care about the people, only profit - so people are at its whim and not the other way around.

In your own words fail.

Efficiency in a free market is the BEST product at the best price, I agree but that is not what’s happening in today’s economy, as large companies have literally taken out all competition; therefore they decide the quality and price of the product

That does not equal jobs overseas, it means really efficient people who are an asset to the company get paid well. The ones their to dot he monkey work get paid less and the compan can eliminate the waste it currently carries thanks to equal opportunity and other governmental restrictions. “really efficient” people do not get paid better, if that were true the factory worker busting his ass would make millions of dollars.

The CEO makes in one year what it will take you to make in 50 years. High status jobs go to college students of predominently white private schools, which are sent their by parents who make the most money. There goes your “equal opportunity”
Governmental restrictions on large corporations? I’d like to hear specifics on that.

Talented people become a commidity, and people start to strive to be that more desireable commodity themselves.

Thiings become more affordable. So I am failing to see the downside here, less government, less taxes, less people trying mooch off my income, hell we may clean up the gene pool a little by not supporting these fat wateful obese people irresponsibly spending our money on their self imposed problems.

Yea blame your problems on those less fortunate instead of the ones higher up on the food-chain that are actually responsible for it.
[/quote]

It does not matter how hard you work, that does not make you “efficient”.

A CEO control millions of dollars and makes decisions that can make or break a company. If he is good he creates much more wealth with much less effort because he has much more leverage and that is what makes him more efficient.

The market does not pay you for how hard you try and how hard you work but your actual output of goods and services that other people want enough to pay for it.

74

[quote]molnes wrote:
666Rich wrote:
SO everyone loves the idea that capitalis destroys wage standards. Might I remind you of Henry Ford?

He was of course crazy for paying workers twice the average rate of pay per labor hour in related industries at the time. Other companies were baffled, yet he attracted the best and brightest workers and had his pick. Furthermore as a result of paying his workers TWICE the standard wage, he INCREASED PRODUCTIVITY and dominated the market.

It is no small secret many people take vacations at work if they are unsatisfied with their job. As a result, in spite of cutting corners and reducing costs, the company decreases output.

A more contemporary example is Google and other tech startups. If you look at their employee relations it would be tought absurd that they would ever get any work done…oh wait Google is a market giant that treats their employees probably better than any company on earth.

Just goes to show you capitalism does not equal wage slavery, because if you pay that higher wage, your competitor loses his work force. Then if you follow certain aspects of Keynesian thought, wages are sticky due to contracts. Thus the above posters = fail.
Not all companies treat their workers like shit, that’s good.

But very few people are lucky enough to get to work for Google. I could give you tons of examples of the complete opposite. Such as companies using child labor and so on. To say that everybody else fails just because a handfull of companies are great to work for is laughable.

[/quote]

And one for you.

You are welcome.

75

[quote]spyoptic wrote:

Yea blame your problems on those less fortunate instead of the ones higher up on the food-chain that are actually responsible for it.
[/quote]

I can easily blame both.

76

Stossel, John is good Stossel.

77

[quote]3IdSpetsnaz wrote:
Beowolf wrote:
3IdSpetsnaz wrote:
Beowolf wrote:
orion wrote:
Did it ever occur to you that Russia needed to prevent people from fleeing socialist freedom by force whereas America has a hard time keeping potential “wage slaves” out?

Something does not compute.

This thread should’ve ended right about here.

Yet Modern Moscow is full of immigrants from all over the world who emigrated during the Soviet era because of their high standard of living, educational opportunities as well as vocational ones…hmmmm, really makes you think.

Missing the point. People in Soviet Russia fought to leave. People in the US fought to stay.

It matters not that some people immigrated to Russia. It was certainly better than some of the areas that were surrounding it. That misses the point that there were so many people trying to GTFO.

Who tried to leave Soviet Russia? Noone has given me any proof there were Russians jumping on boats to Alaska or Japan, or illegally living in Canada, -none-. This is just cold war propaganda.

The immmigrants weren’t from ares surrounding it either man. Large populations of Latin Americans, Africans, South Asians, Middle Easterners and even some Western Europeans migrated to SU. While not highly substantial, prior to the Civil Rights movement, many African Americans moved to the Soviet Union, some even defect during the Korean War. Get your facts straight chorniiy.[/quote]

Go read some of the eyewitness accounts of what the West Germans saw in Eat Germany after the wall fell. The USSR was a horrifying shithole compared to the capitalist West.

78

[quote]Beowolf wrote:
3IdSpetsnaz wrote:
Beowolf wrote:
3IdSpetsnaz wrote:
Beowolf wrote:
orion wrote:
Did it ever occur to you that Russia needed to prevent people from fleeing socialist freedom by force whereas America has a hard time keeping potential “wage slaves” out?

Something does not compute.

This thread should’ve ended right about here.

Yet Modern Moscow is full of immigrants from all over the world who emigrated during the Soviet era because of their high standard of living, educational opportunities as well as vocational ones…hmmmm, really makes you think.

Missing the point. People in Soviet Russia fought to leave. People in the US fought to stay.

It matters not that some people immigrated to Russia. It was certainly better than some of the areas that were surrounding it. That misses the point that there were so many people trying to GTFO.

Who tried to leave Soviet Russia? Noone has given me any proof there were Russians jumping on boats to Alaska or Japan, or illegally living in Canada, -none-. This is just cold war propaganda.

The immmigrants weren’t from ares surrounding it either man. Large populations of Latin Americans, Africans, South Asians, Middle Easterners and even some Western Europeans migrated to SU. While not highly substantial, prior to the Civil Rights movement, many African Americans moved to the Soviet Union, some even defect during the Korean War. Get your facts straight chorniiy.

Go read some of the eyewitness accounts of what the West Germans saw in Eat Germany after the wall fell. The USSR was a horrifying shithole compared to the capitalist West.[/quote]

They lie too.

The hilarious part is though that he accepts parts of Sowjet propaganda at face value, because they of all people were telling the truth.

79

[quote]jasmincar wrote:
this article is clearly biaised. It is crap[/quote]

Your comment is clearly biased…

80

I am suprised that video was ever aired. The problem is americans see the world through american eyes. They dont realize these people make a choice to migrate to the city in what would be considered appaling working conditions to AN AMERICAN. However these people are more than happy to as it makes their families better off. So one asks, “whats the big picture”.

Developing nations undergo a process from agrarian society, to having a green revolution (advanced farming methods) , then green revolution frees up labor and capital for fledgling industries that are more capital intensive and pay higher, though comparably bad by our standards. Then people move from the country to the city often in a short period of time.

This oversaturation leads to initially poor living conditions as they are not ready to handle this. However labor has been freed to advance industry. Then the capital grows and eventually financial intermediaries come into play, then a web of industries spring up and all become more proficient.

Every developed nation has followed this path, and those “wage slaves” are at one point in that path, you dont go directly from A to Z. They are happy to be there because they have a CHOICE.