Even When Times Are Tough Keep Socialism as Your North Star, Though Building fully socialist society takes long time, we should never lose sight of it

[The Sage of Main Street]

I'd like to see that list too. I would be fully supportive of any politician who suggested eliminating huge government programs such as these. Especially one who has the cojones to publicly state it.

Plutes Never Practice the Virtues They Preach to Peons

Eliminate trust funds first. That's even worse, because the spoiled and sheltered moochers didn't even contribute to it.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Actually, he may be mentally ill. We should be kind to him. His writing style is so poor that I doubt very much that he's a graduate even of our crappy schools. A shame.

Cram for the Exam, Then Completely Forget the Material Within Weeks

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

I believe you just answered your own question ... taxing all the profits out of businesses and investments (which is required to shower the peasants with "free" health care and cheap college, etc.) just kills any incentive to create business or make investments, and the economy suffers for it.

If you're not making a living wage, is that the fault of the business who hired you or your fault for having worthless skills? Does a person who screws up your order a McDonalds deserve $40 an hour? Are you willing to pay $35 for a dried out Quarter Pounder and a Coke so the person who screws up your order can have a "living wage"?

Minimum Wage Produces Minimum Work

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

the individual

themselves

Something the bro is too stupid to understand.

Using a Plural With a Singular Antecedent Puts You in a Collectivist Mindset

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

You know nothing but garbage GOP propaganda, you can't help yourself. Just because you haven't heard this before doesn't mean it's incoherent, it means your brain is stuck on garbage.
The Demise of the American Middle Class In Numbers.

Over the past 40 years the American dream has gradually disappeared. The process was slow, so most people didn’t notice. They just worked a few more hours, borrowed a little more and cut back on non-essentials. But looking at the numbers and comparing them over long time periods, it is obvious that things have changed drastically. Here are the details:

1. WORKERS PRODUCE MORE BUT THE GAINS GO TO BUSINESS.

Over the past 43 years worker productivity has grown by 2.0% per year.

But after 1980, workers received a smaller share every year. Labor’s share of income (1992 = 100%):

1950 = 101%
1960 = 105%
1970 = 105%
1980 = 105% – Reagan
1990 = 100%
2000 = 96%
2007 = 92%

A 13% drop since 1980

2. THE TOP 10% GET A LARGER SHARE.

Share of National Income going to Top 10%:

1950 = 35%
1960 = 34%
1970 = 34%
1980 = 34% – Reagan
1990 = 40%
2000 = 47%
2007 = 50%

An increase of 16% since Reagan.

3. WORKERS COMPENSATED FOR THE LOSS OF INCOME BY SPENDING THEIR SAVINGS.

The savings Rose up to Reagan and fell during and after.

1950 = 6.0%
1960 = 7.0%
1970 = 8.5%
1980 = 10.0% – Reagan
1982 = 11.2% – Peak
1990 = 7.0%
2000 = 2.0%
2006 = -1.1% (Negative = withdrawing from savings)

A 12.3% drop after Reagan.

4. WORKERS ALSO BORROWED TO MAKE UP FOR THE LOSS.

Household Debt as percentage of GDP:

1965 = 46%
1970 = 45%
1980 = 50% – Reagan
1990 = 61%
2000 = 69%
2007 = 95%

A 45% increase after 1980.

5. SO THE GAP BETWEEN THE RICHEST AND THE POOREST HAS GROWN.

Gap Between the Share of Capital Income earned by the top 1%
and the bottom 80%:

1980 = 10%
2003 = 56%

A 5.6 times increase.

6. AND THE AMERICAN DREAM IS GONE.

The Probably of Moving Up from the Bottom 40% to the Top 40%:

1945 = 12%
1958 = 6%
1990 = 3%
2000 = 2%

A 10% Decrease.

1 = ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/pf/totalf1.txt
1 = https://www.clevelandfed.org/Research/PolicyDis/No7Nov04.pdf
1 = Clipboard01.jpg (image)
2 – http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/blog/09/04/27/CongratulationstoEmmanuelSaez/
3 = http://www.demos.org/inequality/images/charts/uspersonalsaving_thumb.gif
3 = http://www.bea.gov/national/nipaweb...able=58&Freq=Qtr&FirstYear=2008&LastYear=2010
4 = Prudent Bear Fund
4 = The Fed - Financial Accounts of the United States - Z.1 - Current Release
5/6 = 15 Mind-Blowing Facts About Wealth And Inequality In America

Overview = http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2010062415/reagan-revolution-home-roost-charts

Two Wings of the Same Born-High Vulture

True, but far more important is what can be done about it. Since all proposed change comes from the same tiny power-grabbing clique, all their answers will lead to things getting even worse. For example, the middle class is being crushed by both the Scrooges at the top and the useless moochers at the bottom. "First helping those who need it most" is a code-phrase for throwing money away on those who are at the bottom because they're unfit to be anywhere else.

One wing of the HeirHead nation-destroyers says, "We got ours, and we're not going to let you get yours."

The Preppy Progressive wing flutters, "We got ours, and we're going to give yours away."

 

[fncceo]

Plutes Never Practice the Virtues They Preach to Peons

Eliminate trust funds first. That's even worse, because the spoiled and sheltered moochers didn't even contribute to it.

You don't seem to understand the difference between a government program that distributes taxpayer money to people and a trust fund that is completely private.

I don't care what people do with their own money, and neither should anyone else.

I do however care about my own money that I am forced to contribute in the form of taxes and how it is spent.

 

[francoHFW]

Two Wings of the Same Born-High Vulture

True, but far more important is what can be done about it. Since all proposed change comes from the same tiny power-grabbing clique, all their answers will lead to things getting even worse. For example, the middle class is being crushed by both the Scrooges at the top and the useless moochers at the bottom. "First helping those who need it most" is a code-phrase for throwing money away on those who are at the bottom because they're unfit to be anywhere else.

One wing of the HeirHead nation-destroyers says, "We got ours, and we're not going to let you get yours."

The Preppy Progressive wing flutters, "We got ours, and we're going to give yours away."

Two Wings of the Same Born-High Vulture

True, but far more important is what can be done about it. Since all proposed change comes from the same tiny power-grabbing clique, all their answers will lead to things getting even worse. For example, the middle class is being crushed by both the Scrooges at the top and the useless moochers at the bottom. "First helping those who need it most" is a code-phrase for throwing money away on those who are at the bottom because they're unfit to be anywhere else.

One wing of the HeirHead nation-destroyers says, "We got ours, and we're not going to let you get yours."

The Preppy Progressive wing flutters, "We got ours, and we're going to give yours away."

and they are all Republicans. Too bad their voters don't pay attention to reality.

 

[francoHFW]

You don't seem to understand the difference between a government program that distributes taxpayer money to people and a trust fund that is completely private.

I don't care what people do with their own money, and neither should anyone else.

I do however care about my own money that I am forced to contribute in the form of taxes and how it is spent.

Not as long as they pay their fair share, which the rich are not doing the last 40 years thanks to Republicans.

 

[dblack]

I don't care what people do with their own money, and neither should anyone else.

But they do. Socialists want more (and more, and more) state control of our economic decisions. I don't quite understand why. I think it's based on a naive assumption that the democracy will always result in the best decision. I've seen too many elections to fall for that.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

You don't seem to understand the difference between a government program that distributes taxpayer money to people and a trust fund that is completely private.

I don't care what people do with their own money, and neither should anyone else.

I do however care about my own money that I am forced to contribute in the form of taxes and how it is spent.

Make Every Dynasty Die Nasty


Birth privileges tilt the playing field, which is a public concern. It's no different from bribery, which is also done with private funds. The HeirDads set their brats up halfway to the finish line, eliminating the natural winners. Break the entitled richkids' legs and make them crawl the rest of the way.

With this extra expense, the plutocrats have to take it out of your paycheck. Second, confiscating all inheritances over $100,000 will eliminate any rational need for you to have to pay income taxes.

It $3 trillion a year from the 1% alone, so heiristocracy is a crime against America. But that unAmerican class also controls education and the media, so it never gets blamed for its elitist destruction.

 

[dblack]

Make Every Dynasty Die Nasty

Birth privileges tilt the playing field, which is a public concern. It's no different from bribery, which is also done with private funds.

???

 

[fncceo]

???

I think what he's saying is ... if anyone is successful, we tax them until they die and then, when they die, make sure you strip the carcass to the bone and spread it around to inner city transgender kids to give them a "leg up".

Eating the rich has two significant flaws. First, there's never enough rich people around to satisfy the appetite of those who want to eat them and second, if you start eating the rich, you eliminate any incentive to actually be rich.

Either way, an economic theory that relies on eating the rich will lead, very quickly, to mass starvation.

 

[westwall]

I think what he's saying is ... if anyone is successful, we tax them until they die and then, when they die, make sure you strip the carcass to the bone and spread it around to inner city transgender kids to give them a "leg up".

Eating the rich has two significant flaws. First, there's never enough rich people around to satisfy the appetite of those who want to eat them and second, if you start eating the rich, you eliminate any incentive to actually be rich.

Either way, an economic theory that relies on eating the rich will lead, very quickly, to mass starvation.

And civil war. Never forget that part too.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

I think what he's saying is ... if anyone is successful, we tax them until they die and then, when they die, make sure you strip the carcass to the bone and spread it around to inner city transgender kids to give them a "leg up".

Eating the rich has two significant flaws. First, there's never enough rich people around to satisfy the appetite of those who want to eat them and second, if you start eating the rich, you eliminate any incentive to actually be rich.

Slavish, Self-Hating Serfs

Typical dishonesty by a gutless preppy-lover. The dead aren't taxed, only the moochers off Daddy's Money are. Second, no one but these HeirHead parasites will be taxed, so "double-taxation" is a lie.

Third, the strawman making up the worst thing the hereditary ruling-class's government will do with the money. Leftists are richkids, with that typical "Born to Rule" attitude. Take away their special privileges and they'll never get into a position where they can take the government away from the majority.

"Incentive to be rich" is more nonsense. This applies only to the nation-destroying incentive to be born rich. Those who hate their Daddies for not getting rich and spoiling them are the wannabe Preppies, and that is the very essence of Anti-Americanism.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

And civil war. Never forget that part too.

Those Who Are Proud to Die Taking a Richkids Place Will Also Be Easy to Defeat

Against sissyboys who had their rich Daddies bribe the government to get them out of having to fight in the other wars? We can crush them like grapes. Time to quit "whining" and start making wine.

 

[Stryder50]

If human beings were selfless angels, capitalism would be vastly less objectionable

But we’re not angels. So we need to be socialists instead

Even When Times Are Tough, Keep Socialism as Your North Star

Achieving a fully socialist society is going to take a long time, and there’s no guarantee of victory. But we should never lose sight of the goal, because every step we take in that direction makes life better for working-class people and deepens democracy.

jacobin.com

EXCERTS;
Animal Farm is a beast fable,[1] in the form of a satirical allegorical novella, by George Orwell, first published in England on 17 August 1945.[2][3] It tells the story of a group of farm animals who rebel against their human farmer, hoping to create a society where the animals can be equal, free, and happy. Ultimately, the rebellion is betrayed, and under the dictatorship of a pig named Napoleon, the farm ends up in a state as bad as it was before.
...
"All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others".
...

Animal Farm - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[dblack]

"All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others".

Animal Farm - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

This quote is more than just ironic. It's a key transition that needs to take place to establish a socialist society - namely the rejection of equal rights in favor of state assigned privilege. That's why Dems are pushing for all the identity politics nonsense..

 

[Doug1943]

This quote is more than just ironic. It's a key transition that needs to take place to establish a socialist society - namely the rejection of equal rights in favor of state assigned privilege. That's why Dems are pushing for all the identity politics nonsense..

What's really interesting is that genuine socialism, of the sort they had in the Soviet Union, can't even make bureaucratic privilege satisfactory for the bureaucrats.

The income differential between top and bottom in the USSR was, by one estimate I read, about 5 to 1. Substantial, but not enormous. If I'm at the bottom and making $50 000 a year and you're at the top making $250 000, you're not really comparable to an American multi-millionaire and his janitor.

What's worse, you might be the manager of the biggest steel works in the USSR, but you're still just a government employee. You can't sell it. You can't leave it to your children. You can't fly to Paris for a vacation. If you fail to show up for work two days in a row, the KGB starts hunting for you.

No wonder the system collapsed.

I don't know if I mentioned this earlier, but there is a brilliant novel, Red Plenty, by Francis Spufford, that catches the problems with a planned economy perfectly. The author doesn't even speak Russian, but he has caught the essence of life in the USSR under Brezhnev beautifully. It should be required reading for all socialists.

 

[dblack]

I don't know if I mentioned this earlier, but there is a brilliant novel, Red Plenty, by Francis Spufford, that catches the problems with a planned economy perfectly. The author doesn't even speak Russian, but he has caught the essence of life in the USSR under Brezhnev beautifully. It should be required reading for all socialists.

The challenges of a command economy are well understood. No managed system can match the efficiency or, frankly, the justice of a free market. But that's not why I reject socialism. Even if you could devise a state-run system that perfectly measured and balanced the needs of all participants in the economy, I still believe that that kind of control is an abuse of state power. It's not necessary for the state to dictate our economic decisions and doing so is utterly incompatible with individual liberty. Which is why leftists now openly despise individual liberty.

 

[Burgermeister]

Cultural Marxism has been and continues to be incredibly effective in America.