What's wrong with socialism?

[ttystikk]

What about the people that want free health care? Isnt that greedy?

I know. It's sooooooooo selfish to want to be well enough to work for a living.

Do you even think about the shit you say, or are you really that much of an asshole?

 

[Fogdog]

I am certain you have been fed a line of propaganda that makes you envious and jealous.

Wealth is not money. An example is Wal-Mart. The Waltons are billionaires over and over again. But their wealth is tied into a mass chain of supermarkets that employ millions upon millions of people.

Their wealth is money that has been lent to them by their shareholders to make more money. It is in property and buildings and inventory that is used to generate income for millions upon millions of people. Those millions of people are paid salaries and generate a huge amount of economic income.

If you take the stores away from the Waltons the business fails because of the corporate agreements that are made that allow it to buy in such bulk it can give awesome discounts.


Take those 62 people and figure out how much they pay out in payroll every week and then get on your knees and thank them for feeding the planet.

LOL

As I predicted. He didn't understand @MisterBouncyBounce 's post. Too funny that.

 

[twostrokenut]

First, you're wrong; those countries are social democratic nations. I don't expect you to have the first clue about what that means, considering you treat right wing propaganda as Received Truth.

The truth is those countries embraced free markets, or opened markets much more than we have. They have more economic freedom. Embracing this has allowed their social spending so seem balanced to you, because they aren't at war.

Are you proposing increasing economic freedoms and ending wars before "reforming" healthcare in the US?

 

[ttystikk]

LOL

As I predicted. He didn't understand Bouncey's post. Too funny that.

And of course yet another post riddled with lies and stupidity, making me wonder if he's actually making a salary defending all the oligarch cock he's sucking.

 

[ttystikk]

The truth is those countries embraced free markets, or opened markets much more than we have. They have more economic freedom. Embracing this has allowed their social spending so seem balanced to you, because they aren't at war.

Are you proposing increasing economic freedoms and ending wars before "reforming" healthcare in the US?

I'm done commenting on your drivel because you can't keep a coherent line of thought from one post to the next.

 

[twostrokenut]

I'm done commenting on your drivel because you can't keep a coherent line of thought from one post to the next.

Your comparison is even more like apples and oranges considering the size of these Scandinavian countries. Comparing them to States is more accurate.

Now lets get to Canada...You have two sustainable options there, Vancouver and Toronto. The rest of the country is like Halifax, very dependent.

I expected you to run away, no worries.

 

[Fogdog]

I'm done commenting on your drivel because you can't keep a coherent line of thought from one post to the next.

He's infected with the faux economic theory referred to as libertarian. Typical of pseudo logic, he picks his truthy conclusions first then finds facts to back them up. As opposed to roy, he tries to make sense, so I'll give him that.

 

[ttystikk]

He's infected with the faux economic theory referred to as libertarian. Typical of pseudo logic, he picks his truthy conclusions first then finds facts to back them up. As opposed to roy, he tries to make sense, so I'll give him that.

If that's his idea of trying to make sense I'd hate see winging it.

 

[twostrokenut]

He's infected with the faux economic theory referred to as libertarian. .

This on a cannabis forum. Too funny.

 

[Fogdog]

This on a cannabis forum. Too funny.

I was stuck in a crowded van on a long road trip with a libertarian. At the time I had no idea what that meant other than a few words I'd heard here and there, so I talked with him about it. He thought that the gubmint had no concern with the rights of people, that they should do whatever they want to, economically or socially. Basically what he wanted was the freedom to demand blow jobs and regular sex from women employees. "They are free to quit if they don't like it."

Libertarians are just extreme right wingers who have lost touch with reality.

 

[ttystikk]

I was stuck in a crowded van on a long road trip with a libertarian. At the time I had no idea what that meant other than a few words I'd heard here and there, so I talked with him about it. He thought that the gubmint had no concern with the rights of people, that they should do whatever they want to, economically or socially. Basically what he wanted was the freedom to demand blow jobs and regular sex from women employees. "They are free to quit if they don't like it."

Libertarians are just extreme right wingers who have lost touch with reality.

And worse, they've all crawled into bed with fascists.

 

[ismann]

First, you're wrong; those countries are social democratic nations. I don't expect you to have the first clue about what that means, considering you treat right wing propaganda as Received Truth.

No, I'm not wrong. You don't know what "Socialism" means if you think those are socialist nations. And obviously you think so since you used them as examples. One socialized program does not equate their entire economy to socialism. Go back to 8th grade civics.

That's nonsense. People are unhealthy here because there is a financial barrier where health care is concerned. If there were no out of pocket expenses to get a routine physical, people would go. If there were no financial barrier for a woman to go get a lump in her breast checked out early, she would go. To suggest otherwise is to say that Americans value their lives less than people from other countries do.

More bullshit. I grew up poor and went through most of my 20s poor. I still took care of myself just fine because I'm not a lazy piece of shit. Not only did I take care of myself, I worked my ass off just to compete in bodybuilding and did it all on $50/month in food. If you're unhealthy, it is your own damn fault... no one elses. If you have a full time job, you can afford a co-pay unless you live above your means which most do. So glad the libtardism is dying away.

 

[Fogdog]

And worse, they've all crawled into bed with fascists.

Libertarians are to fascists like anarchists are to communists

Isn't it interesting how the right manages to foster these two extreme philosophies and keep them current, even main stream? The left clusters more toward the middle, not communist and not anarchist. And still the left fights with each other. IMO this is because the left is interested in breaking the hold of the wealthy elite on society. They want real change, not a nudge here and there in banking laws.

The right is all about maintaining the status quo of powerful elite. It doesn't matter if the philosophy is libertarian or fascist, its all about enabling the wealthy elite to continue with their ways. They get what they want no matter.

 

[st0wandgrow]

No, I'm not wrong. You don't know what "Socialism" means if you think those are socialist nations. And obviously you think so since you used them as examples. One socialized program does not equate their entire economy to socialism. Go back to 8th grade civics.

Go to google and type in "socialist countries", and then come back and report your findings. Joseph Stalin is dead, so unless you're referring to the USSR circa 1925 the list I provided are the most relevant examples.

More bullshit. I grew up poor and went through most of my 20s poor. I still took care of myself just fine because I'm not a lazy piece of shit. Not only did I take care of myself, I worked my ass off just to compete in bodybuilding and did it all on $50/month in food. If you're unhealthy, it is your own damn fault... no one elses. If you have a full time job, you can afford a co-pay unless you live above your means which most do. So glad the libtardism is dying away.

 

[Fogdog]

No, I'm not wrong. You don't know what "Socialism" means if you think those are socialist nations. And obviously you think so since you used them as examples. One socialized program does not equate their entire economy to socialism. Go back to 8th grade civics.


More bullshit. I grew up poor and went through most of my 20s poor. I still took care of myself just fine because I'm not a lazy piece of shit. Not only did I take care of myself, I worked my ass off just to compete in bodybuilding and did it all on $50/month in food. If you're unhealthy, it is your own damn fault... no one elses. If you have a full time job, you can afford a co-pay unless you live above your means which most do. So glad the libtardism is dying away.

Interesting how you accuse others of exactly what you are doing. You are making up your own definition of the word "socialism" to mean what is now thought of as communism. On second thought, not interesting. Pretty boring actually.

Usage Discussion of socialism
In the many years since socialism entered English around 1830, it has acquired several different meanings. It refers to a system of social organization in which private property and the distribution of income are subject to social control, but the conception of that control has varied, and the term has been interpreted in widely diverging ways, ranging from statist to libertarian, from Marxist to liberal. In the modern era, “pure” socialism has been seen only rarely and usually briefly in a few Communist regimes. Far more common are systems of social democracy, now often referred to as “democratic socialism,” in which extensive state regulation, with limited state ownership, has been employed by democratically elected governments (as in Sweden and Denmark) in the belief that it produces a fair distribution of income without impairing economic growth.

As far as your health is concerned, so what? You wake up each morning as a stupid asshole and go to bed that way too. You are smug about being able to make your co-pay? LOL.

 

[ttystikk]

No, I'm not wrong. You don't know what "Socialism" means if you think those are socialist nations. And obviously you think so since you used them as examples. One socialized program does not equate their entire economy to socialism. Go back to 8th grade civics.


More bullshit. I grew up poor and went through most of my 20s poor. I still took care of myself just fine because I'm not a lazy piece of shit. Not only did I take care of myself, I worked my ass off just to compete in bodybuilding and did it all on $50/month in food. If you're unhealthy, it is your own damn fault... no one elses. If you have a full time job, you can afford a co-pay unless you live above your means which most do. So glad the libtardism is dying away.

Yup. I have TWO family members who are career State Department officials, so of course I don't know anything about politics or basic definitions.

Check yourself before calling me out.

 

[Freddie Millergogo]

Libertarians are to fascists like anarchists are to communists

Isn't it interesting how the right manages to foster these two extreme philosophies and keep them current, even main stream? The left clusters more toward the middle, not communist and not anarchist. And still the left fights with each other. IMO this is because the left is interested in breaking the hold of the wealthy elite on society. They want real change, not a nudge here and there in banking laws.

The right is all about maintaining the status quo of powerful elite. It doesn't matter if the philosophy is libertarian or fascist, its all about enabling the wealthy elite to continue with their ways. They get what they want no matter.

Well you got that part right and in all and every system the Powerful Elite are ALWAYS in control. So you can say socialism or capitalism but the elite are ALWAYS in control.

So you can debate all you want but those Elite will pit us against each other. Keep falling for the stupid Red team versus Blue Team argument.

The Bolsheviks were backed by and controlled by western bankers as was Hitler. Wars are created by the bankers and elites.

And Obama, Bushes and Clintons are all NeoCon stooges for the elites/bankers who have been pushing endless war for 28 years just like LBJ was, FDR, Woodrow Wilson, Abe Lincoln, etc. 500 years of European wars too.

 

[ttystikk]

Well you got that part right and in all and every system the Powerful Elite are ALWAYS in control. So you can say socialism or capitalism but the elite are ALWAYS in control.

So you can debate all you want but those Elite will pit us against each other. Keep falling for the stupid Red team versus Blue Team argument.

The Bolsheviks were backed by and controlled by western bankers as was Hitler. Wars are created by the bankers and elites.

And Obama, Bushes and Clintons are all NeoCon stooges for the elites/bankers who have been pushing endless war for 28 years just like LBJ was, FDR, Woodrow Wilson, Abe Lincoln, etc. 500 years of European wars too.

So you accept the rule of your plutocratic overlords?

I don't. I'm also expecting a big swing of the pendulum against them in the next few years.

Quack the Chump will certainly help see to that.

 

[Fogdog]

Well you got that part right and in all and every system the Powerful Elite are ALWAYS in control. So you can say socialism or capitalism but the elite are ALWAYS in control.

So you can debate all you want but those Elite will pit us against each other. Keep falling for the stupid Red team versus Blue Team argument.

The Bolsheviks were backed by and controlled by western bankers as was Hitler. Wars are created by the bankers and elites.

You use the word socialism incorrectly. You mean communism when you say socialism. Please re-read the discussion on the use of this word in an earlier post. To make it easy for you, I'll re-post it here:

Usage Discussion of socialism
In the many years since socialism entered English around 1830, it has acquired several different meanings. It refers to a system of social organization in which private property and the distribution of income are subject to social control, but the conception of that control has varied, and the term has been interpreted in widely diverging ways, ranging from statist to libertarian, from Marxist to liberal. In the modern era, “pure” socialism has been seen only rarely and usually briefly in a few Communist regimes. Far more common are systems of social democracy, now often referred to as “democratic socialism,” in which extensive state regulation, with limited state ownership, has been employed by democratically elected governments (as in Sweden and Denmark) in the belief that it produces a fair distribution of income without impairing economic growth.

And Obama, Bushes and Clintons are all NeoCon stooges for the elites/bankers who have been pushing endless war for 28 years just like LBJ was, FDR, Woodrow Wilson, Abe Lincoln, etc. 500 years of European wars too.

What war did Bill Clinton lead us into? As far as what Obama dealt with, if Bush Jr hadn't rushed into an unnecessary war with Iraq, none of the shit going down now would have happened.

 

[Fogdog]

So you accept the rule of your plutocratic overlords?

I don't. I'm also expecting a big swing of the pendulum against them in the next few years.

Quack the Chump will certainly help see to that.

Yeah, I noticed his blind acceptance of the power of the wealthy elites and thought of skewering him. You said it better though.