Does the USA need more socialism or less socialism?

[the watcher]

Less corruption and foreign influence in government and a lot more comprehension and engagement by the peons.

 

[Failzero]

Register Socialists not Firearms

 

[Robert W]

Less corruption and foreign influence in government and a lot more comprehension and engagement by the peons.

Here is a major problem, so long as our form of government is called a democracy, it creates the illusion we voters vote on issues the congress takes up. Which of course we never do. We select the men and women yet after that we either ignore them or gripe about them or praise them. Which accomplishes nothing at all.

 

[JonKoch]

Socialism is where the Government controls the means of production

Show where that is happening

Dementia Donnie IS trying

 

[Robert W]

Dementia Donnie IS trying

He has no idea to spin off your terms.

 

[JonKoch]

Sure, that's the ticket. No more employer-provided health, dental and life insurance. No more employer-provided social security payments, no more sick leave, no more paid time-off, no more FMLA, no more paid vacations. Naw, that terrible corporate socialism has to go. LOL, moron.

U.S. corporations evolved from limited, public-purpose entities in the 1790s to dominant global economic forces. Initially requiring special state charters for infrastructure, they gained "free incorporation" by the 1850s. The 1886 Santa Clara case granted them personhood, accelerating corporate power, which shifted from stakeholder focus to shareholder wealth maximization in the modern era

Our Hidden History of Corporations in the U.S.​

Our Hidden History of Corporations in the U.S. ⋆ Reclaim Democracy!

When colonists declared independence, they also gained freedom from corporations. Since then, corporations have regained control over commerce and the law.

reclaimdemocracy.org

 

[JonKoch]

He has no idea to spin off your terms.

During his second term, President Trump has shifted U.S. industrial policy by acquiring direct equity stakes in private companies through the federal government.


To date,specifically over $10 billion in targeted taxpayer funds to secure ownership in at least 11 companies

 

[JonKoch]

Here is a major problem, so long as our form of government is called a democracy, it creates the illusion we voters vote on issues the congress takes up. Which of course we never do. We select the men and women yet after that we either ignore them or gripe about them or praise them. Which accomplishes nothing at all.

We are a Democracy. A Republic where we directly elect representatives


The United States is a federal constitutional representative democracy (or democratic republic) where power is derived from the people, who elect officials to represent them. It is designed to be a government "of, for, and by the people," aiming for an inclusive, multiracial system that protects rights and freedoms.

 

[JonKoch]

You are either incredibly stupid or seriously dishonest, or both...

Inquiry Confirms Top Medicare Official Threatened Actuary Over Cost of Drug Benefits (Published 2004)

Health and Human Services Department internal investigation confirms that then-Admr Thomas A Scully threatened to fire Medicare chief actuary Richard S Foster if he told Congress that drug benefit legislation would likely cost up to $600 billion over ten years, far more than White House figure...

www.nytimes.com

With Tom DeLay passing out $10k Pfizer checks on the House floor, the GOP House Senate and WH socialized senior drugs in 2004. But that's not all. The W White House had an actuary estimate the cost of socializing senior drugs. The W White House told him to "shut up or else."

And that's how ZIONIST FASCISM operates, currently as the ONLY ISRAEL MATTERS "Republican Party."

Don't forget, they took the Medicare "Advantage" and REALLY hosed US in the 2003 Dubya pushed bill.


Between Medicare Part D (Drugs) and Advantage, the US will spend $230+ billion this F/Y to corporations, of course without a single penny of funding in the 2003 bill!

 

[JonKoch]

Here is a major problem, so long as our form of government is called a democracy, it creates the illusion we voters vote on issues the congress takes up. Which of course we never do. We select the men and women yet after that we either ignore them or gripe about them or praise them. Which accomplishes nothing at all.

Nah, THAT'S BECAUSE OF MONEY IN POLITICS. How many lobbyist do you have in DC?

 

[JonKoch]

You did not describe corporate socialism because it does not exist.

Socialism is a function of Government,

"Socialism for the rich and capitalism for the poor" is a classical political-economic argument asserting that, in advanced capitalist societies, state policies assure that more resources flow to the rich than to the poor, for example in the form of a bailout.


The US bailed out the banksters after the S&L heist (that Ronnie ignored warnings on), we bailed out the banksters in the Latin America and Asia debt crisis under Clinton then vailed out the banksters after Dubya cheered them on with the subprime ponzi scheme.

 

[JonKoch]

The communists never thought of that

Harrington disagrees with the state’s interpretation of a 1925 state law granting the commission broad water rights to the Big Butte Creek Basin. He believes he’s been singled out amid other pond owners.


In 2002, Harrington pleaded guilty to similar charges applied for permits for his reservoirs, They were denied. At issue is the interpretation of the 1925 state law that gave the water commission exclusive rights to all the water in Big Butte Creek, its tributaries and Big Butte Springs. That’s core of the city’s municipal water supply.


Harrington has argued in court documents that he’s not diverting water from the creek system, but capturing rainwater and snowmelt from his 172-acre property along Crowfoot Road. He maintained that the runoff does not fall under the state’s jurisdiction and does not violate the 1925 act. Water managers have said the runoff is a tributary of nearby Crowfoot Creek and thus subject to the law.

Oregon man disputes convictions of illegal water use - HeraldNet.com

 

[DGS49]

The Constitution forbids Congress from spending money on any individual, whether it be for food, housing, education, clothing, healthcare, or hormone treatments. It an't in Article I, and accordingly, the Tenth Amendment precludes this type of spending.

But Lefties have stomped all over the Tenth Amendment for so long that the GenPop has forgotten this simple lesson from HS Civics class.

If they were serious about this, they (the Lefties) would sponsor a Constitutional Amendment granting Congress the "power" to promote the general welfare by whatever means they deem appropriate, and we, the people, can decide how much socialism we want. Right now, it's just a matter of Lefties wanting to spend OPM on goodies for their favored constituencies.

 

[JonKoch]

The Constitution forbids Congress from spending money on any individual, whether it be for food, housing, education, clothing, healthcare, or hormone treatments. It an't in Article I, and accordingly, the Tenth Amendment precludes this type of spending.

But Lefties have stomped all over the Tenth Amendment for so long that the GenPop has forgotten this simple lesson from HS Civics class.

If they were serious about this, they (the Lefties) would sponsor a Constitutional Amendment granting Congress the "power" to promote the general welfare by whatever means they deem appropriate, and we, the people, can decide how much socialism we want. Right now, it's just a matter of Lefties wanting to spend OPM on goodies for their favored constituencies.

LMAOROG. Crazy MFukers

Hint DOZENS of court cases say go away

 

[JonKoch]

The Constitution forbids Congress from spending money on any individual, whether it be for food, housing, education, clothing, healthcare, or hormone treatments. It an't in Article I, and accordingly, the Tenth Amendment precludes this type of spending.

But Lefties have stomped all over the Tenth Amendment for so long that the GenPop has forgotten this simple lesson from HS Civics class.

If they were serious about this, they (the Lefties) would sponsor a Constitutional Amendment granting Congress the "power" to promote the general welfare by whatever means they deem appropriate, and we, the people, can decide how much socialism we want. Right now, it's just a matter of Lefties wanting to spend OPM on goodies for their favored constituencies.

Article I, Section 8 authorizes Congress to spend for the "general welfare". While early leaders like James Madison debated this, modern interpretation grants Congress broad discretion to direct funds, including to individuals through authorized legislation, subject to appropriations.

• The Spending Clause (Art. I, §8, Cl. 1): Grants Congress broad power to lay taxes and spend for the "common Defence and general Welfare".

• The "General Welfare" Debate: Historically, some (like Madison) argued for limited spending, while others (like Hamilton) favored a broader interpretation, as detailed in this Power of the Purse article from the US House of Representatives.

Modern Interpretation: For roughly the past 70 years, the Supreme Court has allowed wide discretion, permitting federal funds to be spent on specific individuals (e.g., Social Security, disaster relief) under the umbrella of "general welfare".

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Here is a major problem, so long as our form of government is called a democracy, it creates the illusion we voters vote on issues the congress takes up. Which of course we never do. We select the men and women yet after that we either ignore them or gripe about them or praise them. Which accomplishes nothing at all.

All Republics Go Bananas

The Founding Fodder gave us representation without participation.

 

[Concerned American]

U.S. corporations evolved from limited, public-purpose entities in the 1790s to dominant global economic forces. Initially requiring special state charters for infrastructure, they gained "free incorporation" by the 1850s. The 1886 Santa Clara case granted them personhood, accelerating corporate power, which shifted from stakeholder focus to shareholder wealth maximization in the modern era

Our Hidden History of Corporations in the U.S.​

Our Hidden History of Corporations in the U.S. ⋆ Reclaim Democracy!

When colonists declared independence, they also gained freedom from corporations. Since then, corporations have regained control over commerce and the law.

reclaimdemocracy.org

And what was the result of those policies. The US became the corporate leaders of the world affording Americans the highest standard of living in the world evidenced by the fact that the world is beating down our doors wanting a piece of that action while decrying the very policies that made them possible. STFU, you're ignorant.

 

[JonKoch]

And what was the result of those policies. The US became the corporate leaders of the world affording Americans the highest standard of living in the world evidenced by the fact that the world is beating down our doors wanting a piece of that action while decrying the very policies that made them possible. STFU, you're ignorant.

LMAOROG. Sure all thanks to that. NOT to the Monroe Doctrine where the US invaded dozens of nations on behalf of Corp's, hell Hawaii became a state BECAUSE the nation of Hawaii wanted to tax sugar, so the US invaded

 

[EMH]

Don't forget, they took the Medicare "Advantage" and REALLY hosed US in the 2003 Dubya pushed bill.


Between Medicare Part D (Drugs) and Advantage, the US will spend $230+ billion this F/Y to corporations, of course without a single penny of funding in the 2003 bill!

Nothing W did was actually conservative, just the opposite, and that's why the LBJ supporters, the self proclaimed sub humans, loved all of it, because they aren't conservative either, and most who self ID with the word conservative have NO CLUE what the word means, one of two types of "American" that dumb, the other being ANTIFA.

 

[JonKoch]

Nothing W did was actually conservative, just the opposite, and that's why the LBJ supporters, the self proclaimed sub humans, loved all of it, because they aren't conservative either, and most who self ID with the word conservative have NO CLUE what the word means, one of two types of "American" that dumb, the other being ANTIFA.

LMAOROG. A John Bircher huh?