My mind is always blown at the concept of TEACHERS being the reason these kids are pro socialism. So these people, at their jobs, in the age of the smartphone, are openly pushing marxist talking points and somehow using their 4 hours a week with said kid to override what his family and surroundings teach him.
I feel like I’m always countering anecdotes with anecdotes, but it’s probably because I’ve never seen it, nor met anyone who’s seen it, nor encountered a product of it.
It does beg the question, how the hell are teachers SO GODDAMN BAD at things like negotiating pay and test scores, yet can use a miniscule amount of time to completely override someone’s life experiences.
Edit: it reminds me of safe spaces. Another favorite of the keyboard warrior talking point brochure
Lol. I’m certainly not suggesting that academia doesn’t have a ‘librul’ lean to it in some or even many places. It certainly does. But the idea that every single professor teaching in the School of Arts & Sciences at Pitt is a raging Marxist may be just a little bit exaggerated.
Anyone arguing for ‘socialism’ is advocating for that. All those idiot 18-29 year olds.
so·cial·ism
ˈsōSHəˌlizəm/ noun
a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.
So this policy is averting the impending doom of socialism by creating a new government agency and reorganizing businesses against their will?
I would hope they’d at least be looking to reduce regulation, taxation and legislation as a general rule. It’s the power of the government that enables all this detestable crony behaviour anyway.
No, they aren’t - there are different versions of socialism.
“Regulated” isn’t the same as “command and control”. Our economy has been regulated since the birth of the republic - and we haven’t been living in a socialist country since the 1770s.
Sure, could be if it worked, and there’s precedent - ever heard of the New Deal?
So because I favor more liberty than less I’m the absolutist? I want less government involvement than we currently have so I’m an anarchist?
I oppose Lizzy taking over corporate charters and stacking boards while modifying corporate behaviour through even more lawsuits in the courts and that’s the unreasonable position here?
Yes I do believe stealing ownership in a privately owned business with government falls squarely under socialism.
Taking 40% of a companies decision making power away from the owners isn’t regulation, it is the state taking ownership.
You mean the bundle of legislation that was ruled unconstitutional multiple times and was only allowed once the president threatened to add new justices to stack the court? Yeah. Heard of it.
Well the socialism all the kids seem to like is the nordic model. And the Nordic countries claim they aren’t socialist since they have market based economies.
Redistribution & safety net =/= socialism then. As you point out regulating commerce isn’t “socialism”. But taking property from people to further social goals is.
By your own logic? Absolutely. Unless we’re giving you different rules than all those stupid 18-29 yr olds that absolutely want the govt to control the means of production and are advocating for exactly that.
Of course not. But unless you’re special in some way, I don’t see why we’d lable your opposition that you only know exists in the abstract as absolutists but not you
Seems like a pretty easy stepping stone. Especially since we’ve come to the conclusion that there’s no middle ground between capitalism and socialism, and no blending of the 2 can possibly exist
Edit: not sure why the first one quoted as TB, that one was yours
“Socialism” is collective ownership/control of the means of production a la USSR and Venezuela. If that’s what the kids want then they’re moonbat crazy.
A mixed economy is what we have, that’s what the Nordic model is also. Mostly capitalism with high taxes and redistribution. The nordic people Bernie always points to have argued that isn’t socialism.
So when the kids say they favor socialism. They either:
A. Aren’t being accurate with their terms like Bernie
B. Or they want the state to seize entire industries and run them.
Well you seemed damn sure that’s what they all wanted lol. My point was more that you were fundamentally wrong about what type of socialism the VAST majority of people would prefer.
Or it means they want social aspects, ala public safety net and utility companies.
Because if those are the only options, you don’t want capitalism either
The state owns nothing - the state doesn’t vote, doesn’t collect dividends, and doesn’t sit in on board meetings. You constantly conflating a regulation with ownership is silly.
No, I mean the series of laws and policies that emerged out of the Great Depression to rescue capitalism from the capitalists. And the “switch in time that saved nine” you refer to was a fifth member of SCOTUS switching to confirm that yes, a state law minimum wage bill was constitutional. Tells you all you need to know about the court’s makeup during that time - it was dominates a bloc of justices that couldn’t restrain themselves from imposing their ideology on the democratic workings of states and the federal government. (Happy reading.)
Yeah, good call, so maybe it’s a good time to reconsider your (falsely) binary view of liberty or socialism.
