When Lefties pitch Socialism do they realize what decent people hear?

[Hutch Starskey]

You offer nothing but tired, retarded narratives.

Lol
Says the guy that says socialism will work “this time”…

I never said that, dope.

Actually you say it all the time, do you want to force people into the collective…?

Nope.

Socialism is all about forcing people into the collective/village

You're not forced into anything. No one is forcing you to use any program.

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

if only the Constitution wasn't so socialist

 

[Norman]

Lol
Says the guy that says socialism will work “this time”…

I never said that, dope.

Actually you say it all the time, do you want to force people into the collective…?

Nope.

Socialism is all about forcing people into the collective/village

You're not forced into anything. No one is forcing you to use any program.

I am not forced to pay?

Taxes are not voluntary despite what you may think.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

No matter how it’s cleverly spun or packaged ALL decent people hear it the same way.
“Provide me with shit that other people pay for...I’m entitled to free shit because I stand on U.S. soil.”
Do they realize NOBODY good and decent is shameless enough to make these types of requests?
I’m hoping the pitchmasters such as Mac1958 will weigh in here.

It's not a matter of being good,and decent. In fact, to imply as much casts the opposite on those who espouse democratic,socialism.

It's not their alleged goodness and decency that prevents them from doing jderstanding democratic socialism. In fact, plenty of good,and decent people would fight to hold on to the democratic socialism they enjoy, namely Social Security and Medicare.

What keeps them from understanding democratic socialism is their ignorance about what it actually means. Couple that ignorance with a steady diet of propaganda, and their understanding is even more entrenched.

If only reputable pundits were honest with these people,,we wouldn't be arguing points but honestly discussing them.

I am quite sure that, if asked in an unbiased manner, many people would agree that the kind of healthcare system enjoyed in every other industrialized nation would show real benefits here. Canada has universal healthcare, but the Canadian example is never proffered by biased pundits. Instead, they rant about Cuba, Venezuela and China. Are the Canadians as oppressed as the Venezuelans? Are the British as poor as the Cubans? Is there the same degree of freedom in Japan as there is in China?

Many would agree, if asked in an unbiased way, that community college or trade schools should be free of tuition so some may transfer those credits to other colleges or universities or begin a career in a trade. The cost of education is prohibitive now. But we all know that an educated population, a skilled population is vastly more competitive than populations with fewer educated and skilled citizens to fill a work force.

Just blaring the evils of socialism,without explaining the long term benefits hamstrings the discussion at best, and robs America of the potential,of its citizens at worst.

That’s your spin huh...you sticking with that?
I think we all know most don’t have a problem taking care of our elderly whom have paid their dues.
Why don’t you go ahead and try again.

That is sort of the model that Social Security and Medicare has been based on since it started -- and even when it started, the same fear-mongering took place -- it didn't stop these 2 programs from being the 2 most successful and popular programs in history -- it doesn't stop so-called conservatives from holding up signs saying "Keep your government hands off my Medicare!!"

When republicans can offer better alternatives that garner a majority of public support, they wont have to try so hard to demonize the program that is working.

Social security, medicare... successful? When?

Last time I checked they pay far less than equivalent investment to stock market and are over 100 trillions in debt.

are over 100 trillions in debt.

Yikes!

 

[Mac1958]

Is that your response?
.

You really believe that people who are too dumb to secure steady source of food in a nation where obesity is the biggest health problem, are capable of revolution? I am very afraid of their super soakers...

Usually it's the strong that do revolutions, the ones who are tired of their money feeding a bunch of dead weight. The ones with closets filled with AR-15s. Why should those people be happy to throw 40% of their income away again? Let them keep their money and we won't have a revolution.

People just love to put words in other's mouths here.

No, I'm saying the metaphor is excellent: We purchase insurance to mitigate risk. In this particular case, electoral risk, not war.

Some people like to self-insure. The question is whether they have the resources to do so.
.

So when should the tax cuts for the AR owners going to go on effect? How are we going to give money to the poor if there are almost no taxes to prevent the revolution by the AR owners?

Furthermore what makes you sure that this money is not used to conduct, not prevent the revolution? How does giving people money prevent it?

I don't know what you mean by AR.

As I said, we can choose to pay a little for insurance now, or we can self-insure. Obviously your preference is the latter.
.

AR-15 owners.

It seems like my point went over your head. I was saying that we should insure against the AR-15 owners who pay massive amounts of taxes and get no return. Obviously, this is not a good deal for them, kicking some revolutionary ass would be a far better deal. So to prevent revolution we need to lower taxes and as such there won't be money to pay your insurance money. Good thing they got ARs and can protect themselves.

When I pay for long term care insurance, I realize that I may never get the benefits of the policy. I pay them anyway, because the risk mitigation is worth it to me.

Ignore the point, that's fine with me. I'm not trying to convince you of anything.
.

 

[Rustic]

No matter how it’s cleverly spun or packaged ALL decent people hear it the same way.
“Provide me with shit that other people pay for...I’m entitled to free shit because I stand on U.S. soil.”
Do they realize NOBODY good and decent is shameless enough to make these types of requests?
I’m hoping the pitchmasters such as Mac1958 will weigh in here.

It's not a matter of being good,and decent. In fact, to imply as much casts the opposite on those who espouse democratic,socialism.

It's not their alleged goodness and decency that prevents them from doing jderstanding democratic socialism. In fact, plenty of good,and decent people would fight to hold on to the democratic socialism they enjoy, namely Social Security and Medicare.

What keeps them from understanding democratic socialism is their ignorance about what it actually means. Couple that ignorance with a steady diet of propaganda, and their understanding is even more entrenched.

If only reputable pundits were honest with these people,,we wouldn't be arguing points but honestly discussing them.

I am quite sure that, if asked in an unbiased manner, many people would agree that the kind of healthcare system enjoyed in every other industrialized nation would show real benefits here. Canada has universal healthcare, but the Canadian example is never proffered by biased pundits. Instead, they rant about Cuba, Venezuela and China. Are the Canadians as oppressed as the Venezuelans? Are the British as poor as the Cubans? Is there the same degree of freedom in Japan as there is in China?

Many would agree, if asked in an unbiased way, that community college or trade schools should be free of tuition so some may transfer those credits to other colleges or universities or begin a career in a trade. The cost of education is prohibitive now. But we all know that an educated population, a skilled population is vastly more competitive than populations with fewer educated and skilled citizens to fill a work force.

Just blaring the evils of socialism,without explaining the long term benefits hamstrings the discussion at best, and robs America of the potential,of its citizens at worst.

That’s your spin huh...you sticking with that?
I think we all know most don’t have a problem taking care of our elderly whom have paid their dues.
Why don’t you go ahead and try again.

That is sort of the model that Social Security and Medicare has been based on since it started -- and even when it started, the same fear-mongering took place -- it didn't stop these 2 programs from being the 2 most successful and popular programs in history -- it doesn't stop so-called conservatives from holding up signs saying "Keep your government hands off my Medicare!!"

When republicans can offer better alternatives that garner a majority of public support, they wont have to try so hard to demonize the program that is working.

Social security, medicare... successful? When?

Last time I checked they pay far less than equivalent investment to stock market and are over 100 trillions in debt.

Like I said -- when folks continue to have to lie -- instead of produce their own policies and win public support -- that means their policies suck...its just that simple

Yep, that is why things like socialism, global warming and political correctness always has to be renamed because it Is a lie and a fraud to the core.

If they cannot stand on their own they are not worth pursuing, that is why Socialism has failed every time it’s been tried long-term. I think a famous guy once said trying something over and over again and expecting different results is insanity? Who would that be?

 

[Norman]

You really believe that people who are too dumb to secure steady source of food in a nation where obesity is the biggest health problem, are capable of revolution? I am very afraid of their super soakers...

Usually it's the strong that do revolutions, the ones who are tired of their money feeding a bunch of dead weight. The ones with closets filled with AR-15s. Why should those people be happy to throw 40% of their income away again? Let them keep their money and we won't have a revolution.

People just love to put words in other's mouths here.

No, I'm saying the metaphor is excellent: We purchase insurance to mitigate risk. In this particular case, electoral risk, not war.

Some people like to self-insure. The question is whether they have the resources to do so.
.

So when should the tax cuts for the AR owners going to go on effect? How are we going to give money to the poor if there are almost no taxes to prevent the revolution by the AR owners?

Furthermore what makes you sure that this money is not used to conduct, not prevent the revolution? How does giving people money prevent it?

I don't know what you mean by AR.

As I said, we can choose to pay a little for insurance now, or we can self-insure. Obviously your preference is the latter.
.

AR-15 owners.

It seems like my point went over your head. I was saying that we should insure against the AR-15 owners who pay massive amounts of taxes and get no return. Obviously, this is not a good deal for them, kicking some revolutionary ass would be a far better deal. So to prevent revolution we need to lower taxes and as such there won't be money to pay your insurance money. Good thing they got ARs and can protect themselves.

When I pay for long term care insurance, I realize that I may never get the benefits of the policy. I pay them anyway, because the risk mitigation is worth it to me.

Ignore the point, that's fine with me. I'm not trying to convince you of anything.
.

Mac it seems you are still not understanding my point. My point is, why are you afraid of a revolution by guys living in the bedroom of their parents, when there are bunch of guy's in the country who are highly armed and have a far higher interest to revolt?

Not only that, your "insurance money" that they would have to pay, is a reason for the revolt.

 

[Rustic]

No matter how it’s cleverly spun or packaged ALL decent people hear it the same way.
“Provide me with shit that other people pay for...I’m entitled to free shit because I stand on U.S. soil.”
Do they realize NOBODY good and decent is shameless enough to make these types of requests?
I’m hoping the pitchmasters such as Mac1958 will weigh in here.

Marx is decent people.


Quite apart from the analysis so far given, it was in general a mistake to make a fuss about so-called distribution and put the principal stress on it.

Any distribution whatever of the means of consumption is only a consequence of the distribution of the conditions of production themselves. The latter distribution, however, is a feature of the mode of production itself. The capitalist mode of production, for example, rests on the fact that the material conditions of production are in the hands of nonworkers in the form of property in capital and land, while the masses are only owners of the personal condition of production, of labor power. If the elements of production are so distributed, then the present-day distribution of the means of consumption results automatically. If the material conditions of production are the co-operative property of the workers themselves, then there likewise results a distribution of the means of consumption different from the present one. Vulgar socialism (and from it in turn a section of the democrats) has taken over from the bourgeois economists the consideration and treatment of distribution as independent of the mode of production and hence the presentation of socialism as turning principally on distribution. After the real relation has long been made clear, why retrogress again?
Critique of the Gotha Programme-- I

There really wouldn’t be any problem with socialism if it did not force everybody into the shit... But that is not how Socialism works if forces everybody whether they want to be part of it or not into the collective. So fuck your village

Our socioeconomic reality is in reality a social decision.

I'm forced to participate in a capitalist system.

And you live in a collective society, in spite of your irrational hatred of it.

The only problem is I run into from day today are formed by the collective…

And since the collective is a fraud... there you have it.

 

[BrokeLoser]

No matter how it’s cleverly spun or packaged ALL decent people hear it the same way.
“Provide me with shit that other people pay for...I’m entitled to free shit because I stand on U.S. soil.”
Do they realize NOBODY good and decent is shameless enough to make these types of requests?
I’m hoping the pitchmasters such as Mac1958 will weigh in here.

Do Righties realize how it sounds when they bitch about "welfare moms" but have no problem with corporate bailouts?

Do they realize how it looks when they stand by private businesses who discriminate against gays, but they whine to the government when Facebook discriminates against them?

The unfortunate fact is that the ideological differences between the two major parties are few. They both favor big government control over society. They just have different targets in mind.

What corporate bailouts are you referring to?
Didn’t the Kenyan Zulu appropriate that funding?
Is he a “Righty”?

There is nothing discriminatory about a person of faith refusing to partake in the devils work. Think once.

 

[Mac1958]

People just love to put words in other's mouths here.

No, I'm saying the metaphor is excellent: We purchase insurance to mitigate risk. In this particular case, electoral risk, not war.

Some people like to self-insure. The question is whether they have the resources to do so.
.

So when should the tax cuts for the AR owners going to go on effect? How are we going to give money to the poor if there are almost no taxes to prevent the revolution by the AR owners?

Furthermore what makes you sure that this money is not used to conduct, not prevent the revolution? How does giving people money prevent it?

I don't know what you mean by AR.

As I said, we can choose to pay a little for insurance now, or we can self-insure. Obviously your preference is the latter.
.

AR-15 owners.

It seems like my point went over your head. I was saying that we should insure against the AR-15 owners who pay massive amounts of taxes and get no return. Obviously, this is not a good deal for them, kicking some revolutionary ass would be a far better deal. So to prevent revolution we need to lower taxes and as such there won't be money to pay your insurance money. Good thing they got ARs and can protect themselves.

When I pay for long term care insurance, I realize that I may never get the benefits of the policy. I pay them anyway, because the risk mitigation is worth it to me.

Ignore the point, that's fine with me. I'm not trying to convince you of anything.
.

Mac it seems you are still not understanding my point. My point is, why are you afraid of a revolution by guys living in the bedroom of their parents, when there are bunch of guy's in the country who are highly armed and have a far higher interest to revolt?

Not only that, your "insurance money" that they have to pay, is a reason for the revolt.

I don't know what that has to do with the point. I've already said this kind of revolution would be electoral, not violent. Guns have zero (0) to do with this.

When Americans have had enough, they revolt. At the ballot box.

Is that more clear?
.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

It's not a matter of being good,and decent. In fact, to imply as much casts the opposite on those who espouse democratic,socialism.

It's not their alleged goodness and decency that prevents them from doing jderstanding democratic socialism. In fact, plenty of good,and decent people would fight to hold on to the democratic socialism they enjoy, namely Social Security and Medicare.

What keeps them from understanding democratic socialism is their ignorance about what it actually means. Couple that ignorance with a steady diet of propaganda, and their understanding is even more entrenched.

If only reputable pundits were honest with these people,,we wouldn't be arguing points but honestly discussing them.

I am quite sure that, if asked in an unbiased manner, many people would agree that the kind of healthcare system enjoyed in every other industrialized nation would show real benefits here. Canada has universal healthcare, but the Canadian example is never proffered by biased pundits. Instead, they rant about Cuba, Venezuela and China. Are the Canadians as oppressed as the Venezuelans? Are the British as poor as the Cubans? Is there the same degree of freedom in Japan as there is in China?

Many would agree, if asked in an unbiased way, that community college or trade schools should be free of tuition so some may transfer those credits to other colleges or universities or begin a career in a trade. The cost of education is prohibitive now. But we all know that an educated population, a skilled population is vastly more competitive than populations with fewer educated and skilled citizens to fill a work force.

Just blaring the evils of socialism,without explaining the long term benefits hamstrings the discussion at best, and robs America of the potential,of its citizens at worst.

That’s your spin huh...you sticking with that?
I think we all know most don’t have a problem taking care of our elderly whom have paid their dues.
Why don’t you go ahead and try again.

That is sort of the model that Social Security and Medicare has been based on since it started -- and even when it started, the same fear-mongering took place -- it didn't stop these 2 programs from being the 2 most successful and popular programs in history -- it doesn't stop so-called conservatives from holding up signs saying "Keep your government hands off my Medicare!!"

When republicans can offer better alternatives that garner a majority of public support, they wont have to try so hard to demonize the program that is working.

Social Security and Medicare are socialist entitlement programs...
And currently far more people are taking far more out... far less people are putting far less in... every year.
That is socialism in a nut shell...

You can’t make something out of nothing… That being socialism

Social Security and Medicare are socialist entitlement programs...

Really?


You should start with the actual definition of socialism and work from there.

All socialism is the same… And leads to failure

No, it's not.

That's why I said you should start with the definition.

 

[Rustic]

Lol
It’s pretty sad one has to depend on the collective to be happy…

I’m glad I don’t live in that village

 

[dblack]

Lol
Says the guy that says socialism will work “this time”…

I never said that, dope.

Actually you say it all the time, do you want to force people into the collective…?

Nope.

Socialism is all about forcing people into the collective/village

You're not forced into anything. No one is forcing you to use any program.

LOL... correct. You're just forced to pay for them. Good point!

 

[Rustic]

So when should the tax cuts for the AR owners going to go on effect? How are we going to give money to the poor if there are almost no taxes to prevent the revolution by the AR owners?

Furthermore what makes you sure that this money is not used to conduct, not prevent the revolution? How does giving people money prevent it?

I don't know what you mean by AR.

As I said, we can choose to pay a little for insurance now, or we can self-insure. Obviously your preference is the latter.
.

AR-15 owners.

It seems like my point went over your head. I was saying that we should insure against the AR-15 owners who pay massive amounts of taxes and get no return. Obviously, this is not a good deal for them, kicking some revolutionary ass would be a far better deal. So to prevent revolution we need to lower taxes and as such there won't be money to pay your insurance money. Good thing they got ARs and can protect themselves.

When I pay for long term care insurance, I realize that I may never get the benefits of the policy. I pay them anyway, because the risk mitigation is worth it to me.

Ignore the point, that's fine with me. I'm not trying to convince you of anything.
.

Mac it seems you are still not understanding my point. My point is, why are you afraid of a revolution by guys living in the bedroom of their parents, when there are bunch of guy's in the country who are highly armed and have a far higher interest to revolt?

Not only that, your "insurance money" that they have to pay, is a reason for the revolt.

I don't know what that has to do with the point. I've already said this kind of revolution would be electoral, not violent. Guns have zero (0) to do with this.

When Americans have had enough, they revolt. At the ballot box.

Is that more clear?
.

There would be no trump if there was no Obama, Karma is a bitch… Is that enough of a revolt for you?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

I never said that, dope.

Actually you say it all the time, do you want to force people into the collective…?

Nope.

Socialism is all about forcing people into the collective/village

You're not forced into anything. No one is forcing you to use any program.

I am not forced to pay?

Taxes are not voluntary despite what you may think.

Derp. No one is forcing you to be dependent on SS or Medicare, dope.

 

[Mac1958]

I don't know what you mean by AR.

As I said, we can choose to pay a little for insurance now, or we can self-insure. Obviously your preference is the latter.
.

AR-15 owners.

It seems like my point went over your head. I was saying that we should insure against the AR-15 owners who pay massive amounts of taxes and get no return. Obviously, this is not a good deal for them, kicking some revolutionary ass would be a far better deal. So to prevent revolution we need to lower taxes and as such there won't be money to pay your insurance money. Good thing they got ARs and can protect themselves.

When I pay for long term care insurance, I realize that I may never get the benefits of the policy. I pay them anyway, because the risk mitigation is worth it to me.

Ignore the point, that's fine with me. I'm not trying to convince you of anything.
.

Mac it seems you are still not understanding my point. My point is, why are you afraid of a revolution by guys living in the bedroom of their parents, when there are bunch of guy's in the country who are highly armed and have a far higher interest to revolt?

Not only that, your "insurance money" that they have to pay, is a reason for the revolt.

I don't know what that has to do with the point. I've already said this kind of revolution would be electoral, not violent. Guns have zero (0) to do with this.

When Americans have had enough, they revolt. At the ballot box.

Is that more clear?
.

There would be no trump if there was no Obama, Karma is a bitch… Is that enough of a revolt for you?

Okie doke.
.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Lol
It’s pretty sad one has to depend on the collective to be happy…

I’m glad I don’t live in that village

Fuck the village!

 

[Rustic]

That’s your spin huh...you sticking with that?
I think we all know most don’t have a problem taking care of our elderly whom have paid their dues.
Why don’t you go ahead and try again.

That is sort of the model that Social Security and Medicare has been based on since it started -- and even when it started, the same fear-mongering took place -- it didn't stop these 2 programs from being the 2 most successful and popular programs in history -- it doesn't stop so-called conservatives from holding up signs saying "Keep your government hands off my Medicare!!"

When republicans can offer better alternatives that garner a majority of public support, they wont have to try so hard to demonize the program that is working.

Social Security and Medicare are socialist entitlement programs...
And currently far more people are taking far more out... far less people are putting far less in... every year.
That is socialism in a nut shell...

You can’t make something out of nothing… That being socialism

Social Security and Medicare are socialist entitlement programs...

Really?


You should start with the actual definition of socialism and work from there.

All socialism is the same… And leads to failure

No, it's not.

That's why I said you should start with the definition.

Actually it is, show us where Socialism has not failed long-term?

 

[Rustic]

I never said that, dope.

Actually you say it all the time, do you want to force people into the collective…?

Nope.

Socialism is all about forcing people into the collective/village

You're not forced into anything. No one is forcing you to use any program.

LOL... correct. You're just forced to pay for them. Good point!

Yep, The collective knows Best according to the control freaks.

There is a reason why every socialist entitlement program is failing miserably...
Fraud has no foundation

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Actually you say it all the time, do you want to force people into the collective…?

Nope.

Socialism is all about forcing people into the collective/village

You're not forced into anything. No one is forcing you to use any program.

I am not forced to pay?

Taxes are not voluntary despite what you may think.

Derp. No one is forcing you to be dependent on SS or Medicare, dope.

Dumbfuck. We are forced to PAY for it. We can’t opt out of your bankrupt communist billshit.