The liberal march towards EXTREME fascism

[Rigby5]

where is the evidence that the "ruling class" told Hitler to kill Roehm?

Your post hoc, ergo propter hoc logic doesn't prove a thing.

Relax.
Read it again.
I wrote, "So maybe I am wrong."

 

[P@triot]

For example, Social Security is not federal spending at all, but is just our money we are putting away for later.

Your ignorance literally knows no bounds.

1. There is no “we”. The government takes it against your will. It is not a choice.
2. You do not receive only what you put in. If you live long enough, you will receive considerably more than you put in
3. Welfare is a part of Social Security. People who have never paid a dime into Social Security draw from welfare

Hush now child and go play. The adults are trying to have a conversation and you just keep embarassing yourself.

 

[P@triot]

For example, Social Security is not federal spending at all, but is just our money we are putting away for later.

Imagine being so damn dumb that you think government takes your money for Social Security, holds into it, and then gives you that exact amount back later.

 

[P@triot]

Beside, the DNC has not been left wing for over 30 years now.

More trolling by Rigby5. At this point, one has to assume she is either a Russian or Chinese disinformation account because not even she believes this bullshit.

The DNC has gotten more and more extreme left-wing every year. In the 1960’s, nobody could have run openly as a “socialist”. Nobody (hell, JFK ran on lowering taxes and sacrificing for your nation - two concepts that get you tagged as a “Tea Bagger” by today’s extremist Dumbocrat Party).

Bernie finished second as their nominee for President and that’s only because the DNC rigged it for Hitlery.

 

[DrLove]

fascism
noun

1. an authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization.

Yep, most dictionaries define Naziism with many of those same words.

 

[P@triot]

Like public health care reduces the cost and size of health care, while increasing quality.

Is that why Cuba and the former Soviet Union had the world’s most elite healthcare? Oh wait, that’s right, their healthcare was literally equivalent to what the U.S. had in the 1800’s

Not even you believe the bullshit you’re posting. You’re either a Chinese or Russian disinformation account, or you’re just a sad/bored teenager looking for attention.

 

[P@triot]

Yep, most dictionaries define Naziism with many of those same words.

Actually none did until the last decade or so when you fascists desperately attempted to rewrite history to cover your own crimes.

 

[P@triot]

Privatizing social security would not reduce the size of the bureaucracy…

Rigby5 “logic”: eliminating Social Security would not eliminate the Social Security Administration

 

[P@triot]

If you think privatization shrinks anything, you would have to be a fool.

If the government doesn’t run it…the government doesn’t fund it. If the together doesn’t fund it, the government doesn’t have a department dedicated to the administration of it.

Your troll game is getting weaker and weaker with each post.

 

[P@triot]

Wrong.
Socialism is left wing, and all socialism requires is for the means of production to be REGULATED, not owned, by government.

Uh…regulate is just a synonym for “owned” in this content, troll. If you have the power to tell me how to run my company, then you control my company. If you control my company, you literally own my company. You’re just allowing me to keep “ownership” in title only.

Once again, I expose you’re trolling.

 

[P@triot]

You only have to read the ratbag statements has made to realise how ignorant he is. He s just another brain dead Republican.

If that were even remotely true, I wouldn’t have owned you every time you’ve posted. Your post right there is a vintage example of the low-IQ left. Once they’ve been defeated by logic and reason, they lash-out in a fit of emotional frustration over the realization that they are wrong and were duped.

 

[P@triot]

Relax. Read it again. I wrote, "So maybe I am wrong."

Spoiler alert: you are wrong. And have been on every post you’ve made.

 

[bripat9643]

Yep, most dictionaries define Naziism with many of those same words.

Dictionaries are written by liberal arts majors, dumbass.

 

[bripat9643]

Uh…regulate is just a synonym for “owned” in this content, troll. If you have the power to tell me how to run my company, then you control my company. If you control my company, you literally own my company. You’re just allowing me to keep “ownership” in title only.

Once again, I expose you’re trolling.

I've explained this 10,000 times. Now prepare to receive the standard response: "nuh uhn!"

 

[bripat9643]

If the government doesn’t run it…the government doesn’t fund it. If the together doesn’t fund it, the government doesn’t have a department dedicated to the administration of it.

Your troll game is getting weaker and weaker with each post.

I marvel at the idiocy of the leftwing theory that private ownership causes bureaucracy.

 

[Rigby5]

Your ignorance literally knows no bounds.

1. There is no “we”. The government takes it against your will. It is not a choice.
2. You do not receive only what you put in. If you live long enough, you will receive considerably more than you put in
3. Welfare is a part of Social Security. People who have never paid a dime into Social Security draw from welfare

Hush now child and go play. The adults are trying to have a conversation and you just keep embarassing yourself.

View attachment 538221

VERY wrong.
Social Security does pay you more than you put in, but only about 3% or so, which is very minor interest over the length of time you let the government borrow and use your money.
Social Security does pay a minimum even to those who neve paid in, but that does NOT come from taxes, but from the Social Security surplus. And the amount paid out to those never employed or disabled still has to be paid by someone. We can't let elderly poor just beg on the street. And it is so minor that it is of little significance.

So since Social Security is totally self funding, it is NEVER supposed to be considered part of the federal spending budget. Anyone who does include Social Security as part of the cost of government is deliberately lying, because not only does social security not come from out our income taxes, but since there is a huge Social Security surplus that the general fund borrows from, Social Security actually saves us a huge amount of money that the national debt would otherwise have to pay in commercial interest repayments. So anyone putting Social Security on a graph is federal spending, is just deliberately lying. The only thing that prevents Social Security from being just a private retirement investment is the fact you can't will it to someone if you die.

Here is a much more accurate graph of federal spending.

That is because all the interest on the national debt that we have to pay is actually Defense spending. For example, we are still paying off Desert Storm and the invasion of Iraq. The section labeled Medical in your chart actually is almost all VA, which is actually military spending as well.
There is almost no social services in our federal budget at all.

 

[Rigby5]

Imagine being so damn dumb that you think government takes your money for Social Security, holds into it, and then gives you that exact amount back later.

View attachment 538223

With about a 3% increase for interest, that is exactly what Social Security does do.
Social Security is a pay as you go system. What gets paid out only come from what current workers are paying in.
Government can borrow from any surplus, but the government has to pay back anything it borrows, and the government is not diverting any of it.
It is our own money we put in that we get back later, (with a small interest).

 

[Rigby5]

More trolling by Rigby5. At this point, one has to assume she is either a Russian or Chinese disinformation account because not even she believes this bullshit.

The DNC has gotten more and more extreme left-wing every year. In the 1960’s, nobody could have run openly as a “socialist”. Nobody (hell, JFK ran on lowering taxes and sacrificing for your nation - two concepts that get you tagged as a “Tea Bagger” by today’s extremist Dumbocrat Party).

Bernie finished second as their nominee for President and that’s only because the DNC rigged it for Hitlery.

That is silly.
Bernie does well as a candidate because he is the most fiscally conservative candidate out there.
He is about the only one consistently trying to cut government spending, which is almost all military spending.
That is about the only significant thing the government spends money on at all.
And when Bernie does make social system proposals, like public health care, it is to save us money.
Public health care could cut current health care spending by more than half.

No, the DNC has become identical to the RNC over just about everything, such as supporting illegal foreign wars that only harm us, to mandating private health insurance.

 

[Rigby5]

Uh…regulate is just a synonym for “owned” in this content, troll. If you have the power to tell me how to run my company, then you control my company. If you control my company, you literally own my company. You’re just allowing me to keep “ownership” in title only.

Once again, I expose you’re trolling.

Wrong.
We regulate jobs so there is no child labor, unpaid forced over time, unsafe work conditions, etc.
Regulation has never resulted in anything like taking over ownership.
When roads are regulated to prevent accidents by setting speed limits, does that prevent you from owning your car or using the roads for reasonable purposes?

 

[Rigby5]

Dictionaries are written by liberal arts majors, dumbass.

There is no one who has ever written anything about the Weimar Republic who did not totally identify the Nazis as extremely right wing.
Hitler had just been released from prison for his part in the Beerhall Putsch, so was broke and unconnected.
Clearly it was the wealthy elite who financed his tours to become such as successful candidate.
It must have cost millions to make Hitler famous.
And not once did Hitler ever do anything against the wishes of the wealthy elite.
He never nationalized a single industry or reduced their profiteering in any way.

That is also obvious when you look at Hitler's allies, the monarchies in Italy and Japan.