King Trump's s**t doesn't stink
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
26-12-2015, 12:42 PM
RE: King Trump's s**t doesn't stink
(26-12-2015 11:24 AM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  I don't think we need full on socialism to fix our problems. Just tax everyone fairly. Cut out all tax breaks. Everyone pays their own share depending on your income. No more tax returns. Get rid of the minimum wage and let workers negotiate their pay based on the type of job and their value to the company.

I hope that you'll enjoy your reassignment as a beat cop working 14 hour days, 10 minutes for lunch, on call every "off" day, no benefits, 65ยข an hour. Gotta get rid of FOP. It's too full-on socialism. They're costing the country too much money. It's for the good of America, you see. Making it greaterer again.

Don't let those gnomes and their illusions get you down. They're just gnomes and illusions.

--Jake the Dog, Adventure Time

Alouette, je te plumerai.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-12-2015, 01:03 PM
RE: King Trump's s**t doesn't stink
(26-12-2015 11:35 AM)DerFish Wrote:  Yes, you know what you are talking about. I was getting worried that maybe nobody sane was around. 37 per cent and such is what Norwegians pay and Swedes. No I am not there, but have a close friend who is. He spends half his year in Norway, the wrong half, only when it is cold and returns to the Dominican Republic for the summer!

That's about what I pay in federal and state and local income taxes, Medicare/Medicaid taxes, and SS taxes. Add my medical insurance premiums and medical costs and I'm over 37%. I think I'm missing your point.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-12-2015, 03:16 PM
RE: King Trump's s**t doesn't stink
(26-12-2015 09:20 AM)BnW Wrote:  Speaking of people who don't look things up......

First, Sanders claims he's a "Democratic Socialist" and second, your definition is of communism, not socialism. Socialism does not advocate the state ownership of the means of production. Communism does that. Socialism deals with the state provision of social services like education, healthcare, etc. while allowing private ownership of the means of production (although generally subject to regulations that limit the enterprises ability to create economic havoc - which can have its own drawbacks, obviously).

Democratic Socialism is theory put into practice. He's not asking for an authoritarian control over these services. He's still advocating a vote and people having input into what the government controls.

ROFL. What did you use to "look this up"? Clearly not a dictionary, or an encyclopedia, or anything of the sort. How on earth can you advocate a policy when you don't even take 60 seconds to google what that policy is?

Just type "socialism" in google. What does it say? "Definition of socialism. : a social system or theory in which the government owns and controls the means of production (as factories) and distribution of goods." Every dictionary, every encyclopedia, every internet page, wikipedia page, etc., ALL define socialism as the state owned means of production. Communism is different from socialism because it means ALL property (not just factories and means of production) belongs to the state. Duh. This is basic socialism 101, and here, like the moron Sanders, are advocating a political system without even looking up what it is.

And google "Democratic socialism". It too bans private ownership of the means of production (ie all companies, factories, etc. are state owned), it just prefers a democratic process to administer it and not an authoritarian regime.

Socialism (be it democratic socialism or regular socialism) means a very specific thing which can be precisely and scientifically measured; the % of the economy that is state owned. Socialism = 100%. Measure the change to see if a country is moving towards or away from socialism. All Scandinavian countries are RUNNING from socialism. It's so comical that an anti-intellectual nut job like Sanders praises Denmark's system, and Denmark's own PM has to tweet that Sanders is so fucking clueless because Denmark is successful precisely because it's running away from the system which Sanders advocates.

The only socialist state now is N. Korea, since even Cuba admitted it failed and is privatizing some industry. And Venezuela and Argentina are the only ones moving towards democratic socialism. And it's been as big of a disaster as every other country that tried it, with people desperate to leave and the economy in shambles.

So, now that you know what socialism and democratic socialism is and how to measure it, let's see if you'll even dare to try to answer a basic question:

1. I can name tons of countries that have tried socialism and failed miserably. Can you name ONE country (just one) that adopted socialism/democratic socialism that was not such a HUGE failure that they had to close the borders because the people were so desperate to leave? Name one socialist country that didn't have to trap it's people in as slaves because it was so bad? (Hint, there actually was one, and only one, but I bet you don't even know what it is. Heck you don't even know what socialism is).

2. Name one country that moved towards socialism (increasing the % of state owned enterprise) that had positive results during that experiment?

I'm anxious to see how you'll respond. It should be good. No doubt you'll try to school me on socialism/democratic socialism even though we just demonstrated that until this moment you had no clue what it even was.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-12-2015, 03:31 PM
RE: King Trump's s**t doesn't stink
(26-12-2015 09:34 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  What world do you live on? As it's evidently not the same one the rest of us are on... Facepalm

You know you've made an airtight case when your opponent doesn't even dare address the points you made and reverts to insults. However, I do understand why you think we libertarians are from another plant. See, on planet earth, for millions of years, every organism is born with the primal instinct to use force to achieve its goals. The lion doesn't negotiate a win-win deal with the gazelle. Knuckle dragging neanderthals carried their clubs. After thousands of years of human progress, this carnal instinct was never challenged: if someone has something you want, use force to take it. if someone is doing something you don't like, use force to make them stop. All society and government tried to do was organize the use of force.

Then in the 17th century, enlightenment philosophers suggested humans could evolve past that, and actually use logic and reason to trump that primitive instinct, and negotiate peaceful solutions to our problems without resorting to force. Yes, only a tiny percent of the population has evolved to that state, and to everyone else, they do appear alien.

But what convinces me that we aliens are on the right track and that non-libertarians, even self-proclaimed intellectuals, don't even know what they believe and what separates us. When I said that the only difference between libertarians and them is that we reject using force/violence to accomplish our goals, cjlr, who says he's a physicist, claimed to not be able to understand what force is. Chas insisted I was wrong, and when I challenged him to name one policy difference between us that didn't boil down to him wanting to use force and me not, he couldn't name even one. Even though I rattled off a bunch of policies where I knew that was the difference. Finally, cjlr stopped pretending to be confused about what force is and said that violence is necessary because without it people die. But then when I asked to tell me who these people are who die without violence, and what society collapsed for not having enough violence, he of course scampered off.

Then we have nutjobs who keep saying they advocate democratic socialism and apparently don't even have computers to google what that means (I still can't figure out how you guys are even posting to this forum since you obviously don't have access to the internet).

And then in this thread post #49, I asked you a couple basic questions about your belief that are just one word answers. A libertarian would NEVER run from such a challenge. But, predictably, you will never even answer those basic questions because you don't even know what you believe and have never thought it through. You just know that if something is going on you don't like, step 1 is to get a gun. After that, you diverge from the right wing over who gets to hold the gun, but you both succumb to the club-wielding neanderthal primal instinct to use force to solve every problem you see.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes frankksj's post
26-12-2015, 03:49 PM
King Trump's s**t doesn't stink
(26-12-2015 09:20 AM)BnW Wrote:  Speaking of people who don't look things up......

Socialism does not advocate the state ownership of the means of production.
[Image: c161613bc5d080a2e1f3ad3cc9acd642.jpg]

You need to work on your Google-fu.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-12-2015, 04:39 PM
RE: King Trump's s**t doesn't stink
@Bnw, @EvolutionKills,

BTW, while most self-proclaimed socialist numskulls like yourselves don't even know what socialism is or that it has a 100% perfect record of dismal failure, there ARE real, life actual intellectuals who believe in socialism, like Noam Chomsky.

It may be hard for you to believe, but he actually learned what socialism is before advocating it. And he acknowledged it has been a failure every time it's been tried, but proposes that changes could be made (ie decentralized control) to make it viable.

And, btw, why do you guys advocate Denmark so much. Have you been there? I remember my first time I was shocked to arrive at Copenhagen train station and see so many homeless people lining the pothole-filled streets, and the windows broken out of the metro station. Just go a bit south to Switzerland to find a country that ranks just as high in terms of quality of life, provides an even stronger social safety net, has excellent infrastructure, and the taxes are a fraction of the price. Yes, Denmark is a nice place. But why are you so keen to pay more and get less, since Switzerland has proven you can get a system as good as Denmark's for less than what the US already charges in taxes? And besides, you have no hope of getting Americans to adopt the Danish system and pay their tax rates, but it is feasible that the US could adopt the Swiss system and get Danish-grade government while actually paying less taxes. Besides, the Swiss system is easy since they just copied the US constitution, and the only difference being they stick to it and didn't throw it in the trash. Yes, the Swiss blueprint for success was written by the US's founding fathers. All the US would have to do to have the same results is simply follow the constitution.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes frankksj's post
26-12-2015, 05:03 PM
RE: King Trump's s**t doesn't stink
(26-12-2015 03:16 PM)frankksj Wrote:  
(26-12-2015 09:20 AM)BnW Wrote:  Speaking of people who don't look things up......

First, Sanders claims he's a "Democratic Socialist" and second, your definition is of communism, not socialism. Socialism does not advocate the state ownership of the means of production. Communism does that. Socialism deals with the state provision of social services like education, healthcare, etc. while allowing private ownership of the means of production (although generally subject to regulations that limit the enterprises ability to create economic havoc - which can have its own drawbacks, obviously).

Democratic Socialism is theory put into practice. He's not asking for an authoritarian control over these services. He's still advocating a vote and people having input into what the government controls.

ROFL. What did you use to "look this up"? Clearly not a dictionary, or an encyclopedia, or anything of the sort. How on earth can you advocate a policy when you don't even take 60 seconds to google what that policy is?

Just type "socialism" in google. What does it say? "Definition of socialism. : a social system or theory in which the government owns and controls the means of production (as factories) and distribution of goods." Every dictionary, every encyclopedia, every internet page, wikipedia page, etc., ALL define socialism as the state owned means of production. Communism is different from socialism because it means ALL property (not just factories and means of production) belongs to the state. Duh. This is basic socialism 101, and here, like the moron Sanders, are advocating a political system without even looking up what it is.

And google "Democratic socialism". It too bans private ownership of the means of production (ie all companies, factories, etc. are state owned), it just prefers a democratic process to administer it and not an authoritarian regime.

Socialism (be it democratic socialism or regular socialism) means a very specific thing which can be precisely and scientifically measured; the % of the economy that is state owned. Socialism = 100%. Measure the change to see if a country is moving towards or away from socialism. All Scandinavian countries are RUNNING from socialism. It's so comical that an anti-intellectual nut job like Sanders praises Denmark's system, and Denmark's own PM has to tweet that Sanders is so fucking clueless because Denmark is successful precisely because it's running away from the system which Sanders advocates.

The only socialist state now is N. Korea, since even Cuba admitted it failed and is privatizing some industry. And Venezuela and Argentina are the only ones moving towards democratic socialism. And it's been as big of a disaster as every other country that tried it, with people desperate to leave and the economy in shambles.

So, now that you know what socialism and democratic socialism is and how to measure it, let's see if you'll even dare to try to answer a basic question:

1. I can name tons of countries that have tried socialism and failed miserably. Can you name ONE country (just one) that adopted socialism/democratic socialism that was not such a HUGE failure that they had to close the borders because the people were so desperate to leave? Name one socialist country that didn't have to trap it's people in as slaves because it was so bad? (Hint, there actually was one, and only one, but I bet you don't even know what it is. Heck you don't even know what socialism is).

2. Name one country that moved towards socialism (increasing the % of state owned enterprise) that had positive results during that experiment?

I'm anxious to see how you'll respond. It should be good. No doubt you'll try to school me on socialism/democratic socialism even though we just demonstrated that until this moment you had no clue what it even was.
Many countries of the world have a Democrat Socialist political party. Most of Europe is proud of their socialist policies. Canada has socialized Medicine and they are all happy with it. Norway is proud of their socialistic success. Are you aware that the USA is the only civilized country that does not provide health care as a right to their citizens? The Dominican Republic where the median income is somewhere around $100 USD a week per household has free medical care. But the richest country on earth cannot afford it? Criminal
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes DerFish's post
26-12-2015, 07:22 PM
RE: King Trump's s**t doesn't stink
(26-12-2015 05:03 PM)DerFish Wrote:  
(26-12-2015 03:16 PM)frankksj Wrote:  ROFL. What did you use to "look this up"? Clearly not a dictionary, or an encyclopedia, or anything of the sort. How on earth can you advocate a policy when you don't even take 60 seconds to google what that policy is?

Just type "socialism" in google. What does it say? "Definition of socialism. : a social system or theory in which the government owns and controls the means of production (as factories) and distribution of goods." Every dictionary, every encyclopedia, every internet page, wikipedia page, etc., ALL define socialism as the state owned means of production. Communism is different from socialism because it means ALL property (not just factories and means of production) belongs to the state. Duh. This is basic socialism 101, and here, like the moron Sanders, are advocating a political system without even looking up what it is.

And google "Democratic socialism". It too bans private ownership of the means of production (ie all companies, factories, etc. are state owned), it just prefers a democratic process to administer it and not an authoritarian regime.

Socialism (be it democratic socialism or regular socialism) means a very specific thing which can be precisely and scientifically measured; the % of the economy that is state owned. Socialism = 100%. Measure the change to see if a country is moving towards or away from socialism. All Scandinavian countries are RUNNING from socialism. It's so comical that an anti-intellectual nut job like Sanders praises Denmark's system, and Denmark's own PM has to tweet that Sanders is so fucking clueless because Denmark is successful precisely because it's running away from the system which Sanders advocates.

The only socialist state now is N. Korea, since even Cuba admitted it failed and is privatizing some industry. And Venezuela and Argentina are the only ones moving towards democratic socialism. And it's been as big of a disaster as every other country that tried it, with people desperate to leave and the economy in shambles.

So, now that you know what socialism and democratic socialism is and how to measure it, let's see if you'll even dare to try to answer a basic question:

1. I can name tons of countries that have tried socialism and failed miserably. Can you name ONE country (just one) that adopted socialism/democratic socialism that was not such a HUGE failure that they had to close the borders because the people were so desperate to leave? Name one socialist country that didn't have to trap it's people in as slaves because it was so bad? (Hint, there actually was one, and only one, but I bet you don't even know what it is. Heck you don't even know what socialism is).

2. Name one country that moved towards socialism (increasing the % of state owned enterprise) that had positive results during that experiment?

I'm anxious to see how you'll respond. It should be good. No doubt you'll try to school me on socialism/democratic socialism even though we just demonstrated that until this moment you had no clue what it even was.
Many countries of the world have a Democrat Socialist political party. Most of Europe is proud of their socialist policies. Canada has socialized Medicine and they are all happy with it. Norway is proud of their socialistic success. Are you aware that the USA is the only civilized country that does not provide health care as a right to their citizens? The Dominican Republic where the median income is somewhere around $100 USD a week per household has free medical care. But the richest country on earth cannot afford it? Criminal

I disagree. Everyone in the U.S. has a right to healthcare. We just have to pay for it ourselves (well most of us have to, the lazy moochers can get it for free).

"Evil will always triumph over good, because good is dumb." - Lord Dark Helmet
[Image: 25397spaceballs.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-12-2015, 07:26 PM (This post was last modified: 26-12-2015 07:29 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: King Trump's s**t doesn't stink
(26-12-2015 07:22 PM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  
(26-12-2015 05:03 PM)DerFish Wrote:  Many countries of the world have a Democrat Socialist political party. Most of Europe is proud of their socialist policies. Canada has socialized Medicine and they are all happy with it. Norway is proud of their socialistic success. Are you aware that the USA is the only civilized country that does not provide health care as a right to their citizens? The Dominican Republic where the median income is somewhere around $100 USD a week per household has free medical care. But the richest country on earth cannot afford it? Criminal

I disagree. Everyone in the U.S. has a right to healthcare. We just have to pay for it ourselves (well most of us have to, the lazy moochers can get it for free).

Where do I sign up to be a lazy moocher? I want to get health care for free. I'd be an idiot not to. Why you got this stick up your ass to provide your own health care?

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-12-2015, 07:45 PM
RE: King Trump's s**t doesn't stink
(26-12-2015 07:26 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(26-12-2015 07:22 PM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  I disagree. Everyone in the U.S. has a right to healthcare. We just have to pay for it ourselves (well most of us have to, the lazy moochers can get it for free).

Where do I sign up to be a lazy moocher? I want to get health care for free. I'd be an idiot not to. Why you got this stick up your ass to provide your own health care?

It shouldn't be free for anyone unless they're disabled or elderly. IMO poor people shouldn't get free healthcare. Shit I feel poor but have to buy my own. I had to pick up a part time second job to cover it since its mandatory now. If I have to work two jobs for the rest of my life then that's just what I have to do.

"Evil will always triumph over good, because good is dumb." - Lord Dark Helmet
[Image: 25397spaceballs.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: