Obama, the King of Corporate Welfare

[beenthere]

Privatization.

Private property ownership under socialism is protected, but is heavily taxed in return. So is it not true that the government is picking the winners?

Communism solves the problem of inequality by abolishing private property ownership in favor of state control and Socialism according to Marx was the developmental stage toward Communism.

 

[abandonconflict]

Private property ownership under socialism is protected, but is heavily taxed in return.

Actually, the one thing that every definition for socialism has in common, is that whole "no private property" thing, especially when it comes to resources.

 

[beenthere]

Actually, the one thing that every definition for socialism has in common, is that whole "no private property" thing, especially when it comes to resources.

Define private property, does this include personal property?

 

[tokeprep]

Mexico's markets are far more free than US markets. Pena Nieto also just privatized a big chunk of Pemex. Well there goes your argument.

How are you measuring the freedom of markets?

 

[abandonconflict]

Define private property, does this include personal property?

While I commend you for finally reaching the edge of the argument between the sides, I'm disappointed that you only see it as a chance reach an impasse. The reason I say this is because very few and only anarchists (Spooner, Proudhon) have bothered to seek an answer for that question. I do make a distinction but it is my opinion. The problem is that the only vernacular available for us to form these arguments comes from Marx and Rand (neither of whom were anarchists) and it is insufficient vernacular.

 

[abandonconflict]

How are you measuring the freedom of markets?

There were no police or politicians involved at any point in the creation of any of my meals today.

 

[tokeprep]

There were no police or politicians involved at any point in the creation of any of my meals today.

That's as true for you as it is for me. If you're denying that Mexico has an agricultural policy that interferes in markets, it means you just don't know what you're talking about.

 

[ChesusRice]

After 15 pages i am still confused
Is Obama the king of corporate welfare
Or is he a Socialist bent on destroying the free market?

 

[abandonconflict]

That's as true for you as it is for me. If you're denying that Mexico has an agricultural policy that interferes in markets, it means you just don't know what you're talking about.

I'm saying that suppliers are much less hindered in reaching their consumers (often North American suppliers) in Mexico than in the US. In my opinion they should get rid of NAFTA and stop getting undercut on most aisles of the stores. There is no where near the amount of bureaucracy down here as there is up there. There is a similar amount of corruption though.

 

[beenthere]

While I commend you for finally reaching the edge of the argument between the sides, I'm disappointed that you only see it as a chance reach an impasse. The reason I say this is because very few and only anarchists (Spooner, Proudhon) have bothered to seek an answer for that question. I do make a distinction but it is my opinion. The problem is that the only vernacular available for us to form these arguments comes from Marx and Rand (neither of whom were anarchists) and it is insufficient vernacular.

I'm not trying to change your opinion about Socialism, just curious as to what you find so fascinating with the former Soviet Union, Cuba or N Korea.

 

[abandonconflict]

 

[tokeprep]

I'm saying that suppliers are much less hindered in reaching their consumers (often North American suppliers) in Mexico than in the US. In my opinion they should get rid of NAFTA and stop getting undercut on most aisles of the stores.

Are you saying that American companies have been more successful selling in Mexico than Mexican companies have been in the United States? Mexican agriculture was relatively inefficient and couldn't compete on cost. The freedom of markets in both countries--the lack of artificial tariff barriers--is what caused Mexican agriculture to decline. Does the United States subsidize farmers? Yeah, but so does Mexico.

There is no where near the amount of bureaucracy down here as there is up there. There is a similar amount of corruption though.

Your first point is related to your second point. There's no bureaucracy because corruption is rampant: you pay to play rather than having to deal with rules. The Corruption Perceptions Index ranked the United States 19th in corruption and Mexico 105th.

 

[cannabineer]

Meowist. ...

 

[Dr Kynes]

I explicated your argument correctly Kynes. You are insisting that fascism is both Marxist and socialist and not capitalist and you are wrong. Fascism is a form of capitalism (hence the privatization) and is therefore neither Marxist or socialist. The tiny thread your argument hangs on is that Mussolini went around telling everyone he was a socialist.

Sometimes politicians lie bro.

typically Chompskyite.

dont like what the words mean? re-define them to suit your narrative!

Fascism, just like all forms of Socialism relies on government (and a single dominant ruling party's ideology) to take from some, and give to others all in the name of "fairness"

Fascism, just like every other form of socialism, assumes that those with land, money or investments only got it by exploiting the proletariat, and only Marxists are wise enough to equitably distribute these things among the people

Fascism, like all forms of Marxism is predicated on the eventual "evolution" into a Communist Utopia, after the proles become wise enough in the ways of "Scientific Marxism" to finally manage their own lives within the bounds of Marxist thought.

Democratic Socialism is also, Fascism just with less nationalism, less chauvinism, and less aggressive implementation of the Nationalization and Redistribution programs, but the result is the same, only slower.

Fascism is the Marxist Socialist Revolution re-tooled and re-branded to sell to people who just arent buying Ye Olde Tyme Marxism, in the form of violent revolution led by the Intellectual Vanguard, just as Maoism is Marxism for sale to the Agrarian Vanguard.

Fascism is designed to appeal to the Industrial Worker's Vanguard, and the Urban Dweller, where Marxism Classic is terribly unpopular with the proles.

Democratic Socialism operates the same way, but on a longer time scale.

Democratic Socialism, and Fascism have become the New Hotness in Marxist circles due to the utter failure of every Marxist revolution, while slow creeping Socialism has proven popular in several countries.

By the time the proles figure out they are being led into socialist dictatorship, it's too late, and they are already trapped. thats the plan.

Sometimes politicians lie, but Chompskyites and Marxists ALWAYS LIE

 

[Wavels]

typically Chompskyite.

dont like what the words mean? re-define them to suit your narrative!
Sometimes politicians lie, but Chompskyites and Marxists ALWAYS LIE

Noam is merely a linguist, all he really knows how to do with any proficiency is fool gullible individuals.
His MO is to change definitions of words.
Without this technique he would not even have a page on Wikipedia.

 

[abandonconflict]

typically Chompskyite.

dont like what the words mean? re-define them to suit your narrative!

Fascism, just like all forms of Socialism relies on government (and a single dominant ruling party's ideology) to take from some, and give to others all in the name of "fairness"

Fascism, just like every other form of socialism, assumes that those with land, money or investments only got it by exploiting the proletariat, and only Marxists are wise enough to equitably distribute these things among the people

Fascism, like all forms of Marxism is predicated on the eventual "evolution" into a Communist Utopia, after the proles become wise enough in the ways of "Scientific Marxism" to finally manage their own lives within the bounds of Marxist thought.

Democratic Socialism is also, Fascism just with less nationalism, less chauvinism, and less aggressive implementation of the Nationalization and Redistribution programs, but the result is the same, only slower.

Fascism is the Marxist Socialist Revolution re-tooled and re-branded to sell to people who just arent buying Ye Olde Tyme Marxism, in the form of violent revolution led by the Intellectual Vanguard, just as Maoism is Marxism for sale to the Agrarian Vanguard.

Fascism is designed to appeal to the Industrial Worker's Vanguard, and the Urban Dweller, where Marxism Classic is terribly unpopular with the proles.

Democratic Socialism operates the same way, but on a longer time scale.

Democratic Socialism, and Fascism have become the New Hotness in Marxist circles due to the utter failure of every Marxist revolution, while slow creeping Socialism has proven popular in several countries.

By the time the proles figure out they are being led into socialist dictatorship, it's too late, and they are already trapped. thats the plan.

Sometimes politicians lie, but Chompskyites and Marxists ALWAYS LIE

Do you know why you get TL;DR'd so much bro?

It is because it requires such long emotional bullshit diatribes in order to plea your case. You aren't stating an argument, you're pleading a case. I'm in and out because I'm just reminding you what a word means, since your head is full of shit. You're the one trying to redefine words bro. You're the one who ALWAYS LIES. That is your MO, distort arguments, lie, and then to take words into the corner and mouthfuck them and that is why you can't concisely make your point with brevity and devoid of a whiny tone.

Words have meanings and arguments should be logical, but all you can do is to spew hateful and whiny walls of text about how Marx and Chomsky worshiped Satan.

 

[abandonconflict]

Noam is merely a linguist, all he really knows how to do with any proficiency is fool gullible individuals.
His MO is to change definitions of words.
Without this technique he would not even have a page on Wikipedia.

MIT students are gullible individuals eh? Chomsky is a genius by the way.

 

[abandonconflict]

Are you saying that American companies have been more successful selling in Mexico than Mexican companies have been in the United States?

I saw the loaded question and TL;DR'd you.

I'm saying that American companies have been more successful than Mexican companies have been in Mexico. This is sufficient to grind your previous argument into dust, because it shows how free the markets are down here, even to the detriment of the people down here.

You have a tendancy to use long winded arguments that drift far from charted waters which is cool since this is a place for stoners to shoot the shit, but I have KKKynes trying to troll me too.

 

[Dr Kynes]

Do you know why you get TL;DR'd so much bro?

It is because it requires such long emotional bullshit diatribes in order to plea your case. You aren't stating an argument, you're pleading a case. I'm in and out because I'm just reminding you what a word means, since your head is full of shit. You're the one trying to redefine words bro. You're the one who ALWAYS LIES. That is your MO, distort arguments, lie, and then to take words into the corner and mouthfuck them and that is why you can't concisely make your point with brevity and devoid of a whiny tone.

Words have meanings and arguments should be logical, but all you can do is to spew hateful and whiny walls of text about how Marx and Chomsky worshiped Satan.

well then you should explain your position, but it must be in 40 chracters or less of course, otherwise i'll TLDR it.

cant refute rational arguments?

pretend it was too complex for your tiny mind to comprehend and cry in the corner.

chomp chomp hasnt told you how to refute the facts, so you whine and cry and accuse others of being emotional, just before you join bucky in calling people racist.

Fascism is a form of Marxism

is that short enough for you?

and yes it is opposite your Chompsky meme, but my assertion has the benefit of being the truth.

 

[abandonconflict]

well then you should explain your position, but it must be in 40 chracters or less of course, otherwise i'll TLDR it.
Fascism is a form of Marxism
is that short enough for you?

See post #140 bro.