Diuretic
Permanently confused
I like the pictures!
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
I don't know. My Canadian relatives can buy products from and travel to Cuba and I can't. Maybe they do enjoy more freedom than I.In another thread the statement was made that Socialism makes us less free. Canada, England, and Europe are all countries and regions much more socialized then we are yet all provide equal or greater quality of life, longer life, and equal or more civil liberties. So exactly how has socialization in those countries made them less free than ourselves?
And if you could I would like the explanation in the form of a logical argument-that is, your predicate should be supported by premises and conclusion congruent to all premises and predicate. "I'm a dumb fuck, go to Canada dick-wad, etc" are fallacies and only shows your ignorance. Many of you have already established that so now I am giving you the opportunity to show some intelligence. How exactly are we more free while others with comparable or better quality of lives and liberty aren't?
Perfect example:
In my area, all the resources to get schooling were privately funded. The rich funded them. However due to increased taxes to pay for, of all things, drug programs and shelters, those education programs were canceled. Very few still exist, and they are still privately funded. The government funded ones are only for specific groups, ones which most people who need them do not qualify, and most who do qualify are not interested. The money that the government took in taxes is basically wasted now and no one is being helped. All because the rich were taxed more.
Perfect example:
In my area, all the resources to get schooling were privately funded. The rich funded them. However due to increased taxes to pay for, of all things, drug programs and shelters, those education programs were canceled. Very few still exist, and they are still privately funded. The government funded ones are only for specific groups, ones which most people who need them do not qualify, and most who do qualify are not interested. The money that the government took in taxes is basically wasted now and no one is being helped. All because the rich were taxed more.
That is far too general for belief, Kitten. Give specifics that can be check. Critical Thinking Skills are imperative here because your bias is too well known.
Perfect example:
In my area, all the resources to get schooling were privately funded. The rich funded them. However due to increased taxes to pay for, of all things, drug programs and shelters, those education programs were canceled. Very few still exist, and they are still privately funded. The government funded ones are only for specific groups, ones which most people who need them do not qualify, and most who do qualify are not interested. The money that the government took in taxes is basically wasted now and no one is being helped. All because the rich were taxed more.
That is far too general for belief, Kitten. Give specifics that can be check. Critical Thinking Skills are imperative here because your bias is too well known.
How can you have more 'freedom' when a government can force you to do things with your own money you don't agree with?
The problem many people have with socialism is it never knows when to stop, while everyone agrees it would be good to help old and poor people, socialism tends to blur the lines of who needs help and where the money is to come from.
The main problem is, people don't have free will, they HAVE to go along or be arrested.
That is why the question was treated with derision, it should have been obvious.
True socialism infringes on the individual's right to private property, which is a right we in the US generally value (see the 5th Amendment).
True socialism infringes on the individual's right to private property, which is a right we in the US generally value (see the 5th Amendment).
But we are talking about socialism in Canada, England and Europe. All have the same access to private property as we do plus have greater personal savings and discretionary income to buy it. If 'property' is your argument then it is one you loose...
Is the US still locked into an 18th Century mindset because of a written constitution?
It created, in a historically short period of time, the most powerful and free nation on earth.
You saying there's something wrong with that?
I asked, "is the US still locked into an 18th Century mindset because of a written constitution?"
Is it?
I haven't made an argument yet I am simply trying to understand the arguments made. Benevolence is subjective and relevant to need. So why do we need it and how is this an infringement of liberty?Alright ... here's the simple answer that is so easy to see, it's almost glowing.
It takes away the freedom of the rich to decide how to spend their earned money and forces them to support people who either do not care, or are unwilling to try, instead of offering the help they do to those of us who simply can't but want to try.
So socialization reduces the ability of the wealthy elite to be benevolent and this represents a loss of freedom? But you are ignoring that socialization reduces the need for benevolence so if my ability to give what is not needed is the measure of loss of freedom how is losing what isn't needed a loss?
You sound like Karl Marx. It's okay to admit you're a Marxist.
When person A exists to involuntarily have earnings and possession taken from then for the benefit of person B, while person B does nothing to earn said benefit from person A, it does indeed equal less freedom
Ah, jeez, look up 'social compact', 'constitution,' 'declaration of rights', and 'conclusion to Civil War.'
Morons.
Ahh jeez.. look up individual freedoms, PERSONAL responsibility, and liberty... and while you are at it, the actual words and concepts within our constitution
Moron
True socialism infringes on the individual's right to private property, which is a right we in the US generally value (see the 5th Amendment).
But we are talking about socialism in Canada, England and Europe. All have the same access to private property as we do plus have greater personal savings and discretionary income to buy it. If 'property' is your argument then it is one you loose...
True socialism infringes on the individual's right to private property, which is a right we in the US generally value (see the 5th Amendment).
But we are talking about socialism in Canada, England and Europe. All have the same access to private property as we do plus have greater personal savings and discretionary income to buy it. If 'property' is your argument then it is one you loose...
Yet ... all of those countries are behind in every advance, they are even behind the US.
True socialism infringes on the individual's right to private property, which is a right we in the US generally value (see the 5th Amendment).
But we are talking about socialism in Canada, England and Europe. All have the same access to private property as we do plus have greater personal savings and discretionary income to buy it. If 'property' is your argument then it is one you loose...
But then you're not talking about true socialism.
It created, in a historically short period of time, the most powerful and free nation on earth.
You saying there's something wrong with that?
I asked, "is the US still locked into an 18th Century mindset because of a written constitution?"
Is it?
That's debatable, although I wish it was more than it is.
Now I asked, "is there something wrong with that?"
But we are talking about socialism in Canada, England and Europe. All have the same access to private property as we do plus have greater personal savings and discretionary income to buy it. If 'property' is your argument then it is one you loose...
Yet ... all of those countries are behind in every advance, they are even behind the US.
How so? Give a specific example.
But we are talking about socialism in Canada, England and Europe. All have the same access to private property as we do plus have greater personal savings and discretionary income to buy it. If 'property' is your argument then it is one you loose...
But then you're not talking about true socialism.
Then why the panic and demonizing of these counties and regions?