How Can You Be A Socialist….

[PoliticalChic]

I'm against socialism for a fairly simple reason: I prefer low taxes and a minimum of government bureaucracy in my life. Believe it or not, I'm a big boy who doesn't need any government to babysit me.

I'm glad that you use words like "low" and "minimum".

That reflects the fact that this entire issue lies on a continuum, and that there will not be any such condition as "socialist" or "not socialist".

The task, then, is to find the most workable point of equilibrium, and not in screaming platitudes.
.

Just for a minute there I thought you were actually going to take a position....

But....I have your theme song...

 

[Mac1958]

I'm against socialism for a fairly simple reason: I prefer low taxes and a minimum of government bureaucracy in my life. Believe it or not, I'm a big boy who doesn't need any government to babysit me.

I'm glad that you use words like "low" and "minimum".

That reflects the fact that this entire issue lies on a continuum, and that there will not be any such condition as "socialist" or "not socialist".

The task, then, is to find the most workable point of equilibrium, and not in screaming platitudes.
.

Just for a minute there I thought you were actually going to take a position....

But....I have your theme song...

And as always, the ideologically obedient PoliticalChic responds to challenges to her shallow, binary worldview with catty personal attacks.

Thank you, as always.
.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I'm against socialism for a fairly simple reason: I prefer low taxes and a minimum of government bureaucracy in my life. Believe it or not, I'm a big boy who doesn't need any government to babysit me.

I'm glad that you use words like "low" and "minimum".

That reflects the fact that this entire issue lies on a continuum, and that there will not be any such condition as "socialist" or "not socialist".

The task, then, is to find the most workable point of equilibrium, and not in screaming platitudes.
.

Just for a minute there I thought you were actually going to take a position....

But....I have your theme song...

And as always, the ideologically obedient PoliticalChic responds to challenges to her shallow, binary worldview with catty personal attacks.

Thank you, as always.
.

Don't be so touchy, FenceSitter....not everyone can be
a. brave enough to stake out a position and defend it
b. informed enough to actually understand both sides of the argument....and choose one.


There'll always be room for really dull folks like you.

 

[Mac1958]

I'm against socialism for a fairly simple reason: I prefer low taxes and a minimum of government bureaucracy in my life. Believe it or not, I'm a big boy who doesn't need any government to babysit me.

I'm glad that you use words like "low" and "minimum".

That reflects the fact that this entire issue lies on a continuum, and that there will not be any such condition as "socialist" or "not socialist".

The task, then, is to find the most workable point of equilibrium, and not in screaming platitudes.
.

Just for a minute there I thought you were actually going to take a position....

But....I have your theme song...

And as always, the ideologically obedient PoliticalChic responds to challenges to her shallow, binary worldview with catty personal attacks.

Thank you, as always.
.

Don't be so touchy, FenceSitter....not everyone can be
a. brave enough to stake out a position and defend it
b. informed enough to actually understand both sides of the argument....and choose one.


There'll always be room for really dull folks like you.

One of the fascinating things about people like PC is that they have somehow convinced themselves that being an incurious and obedient ideologue is a virtue, and that thinking for yourself against both ends is a demonstration of some kind of weakness, of a flaw.

And they really do believe this, this is not an act. So she is being serious.

Take a good look, folks. Is this what you want to be, or is it a cautionary tale?
.

 

[NYcarbineer]

[


Hegel, Marx, Hitler....or Democrats.....the Germanic thought that gave birth to Progressivism, all stemmed from this:

"The German state is the Volksgemeinschaft, or “Peoples Community,” where the individual has no rights, only duties."
Hayek on the Socialist Roots of Nazism | Byron Chiado

lol, American liberals don't believe in any individual rights?

Goddam!

 

[NYcarbineer]

[


Don't be so touchy, FenceSitter....not everyone can be
a. brave enough to stake out a position and defend it
b. informed enough to actually understand both sides of the argument....and choose one.


There'll always be room for really dull folks like you.

The ability to stake out a comically stupid position is nothing to brag about.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I'm against socialism for a fairly simple reason: I prefer low taxes and a minimum of government bureaucracy in my life. Believe it or not, I'm a big boy who doesn't need any government to babysit me.

I'm glad that you use words like "low" and "minimum".

That reflects the fact that this entire issue lies on a continuum, and that there will not be any such condition as "socialist" or "not socialist".

The task, then, is to find the most workable point of equilibrium, and not in screaming platitudes.
.

Just for a minute there I thought you were actually going to take a position....

But....I have your theme song...

And as always, the ideologically obedient PoliticalChic responds to challenges to her shallow, binary worldview with catty personal attacks.

Thank you, as always.
.

Don't be so touchy, FenceSitter....not everyone can be
a. brave enough to stake out a position and defend it
b. informed enough to actually understand both sides of the argument....and choose one.


There'll always be room for really dull folks like you.

One of the fascinating things about people like PC is that they have somehow convinced themselves that being an incurious and obedient ideologue is a virtue, and that thinking for yourself against both ends is a demonstration of some kind of weakness, of a flaw.

And they really do believe this, this is not an act. So she is being serious.

Take a good look, folks. Is this what you want to be, or is it a cautionary tale?
.

Wow.....I really hit a nerve this morn, huh?

 

[Mac1958]

I'm glad that you use words like "low" and "minimum".

That reflects the fact that this entire issue lies on a continuum, and that there will not be any such condition as "socialist" or "not socialist".

The task, then, is to find the most workable point of equilibrium, and not in screaming platitudes.
.

Just for a minute there I thought you were actually going to take a position....

But....I have your theme song...

And as always, the ideologically obedient PoliticalChic responds to challenges to her shallow, binary worldview with catty personal attacks.

Thank you, as always.
.

Don't be so touchy, FenceSitter....not everyone can be
a. brave enough to stake out a position and defend it
b. informed enough to actually understand both sides of the argument....and choose one.


There'll always be room for really dull folks like you.

One of the fascinating things about people like PC is that they have somehow convinced themselves that being an incurious and obedient ideologue is a virtue, and that thinking for yourself against both ends is a demonstration of some kind of weakness, of a flaw.

And they really do believe this, this is not an act. So she is being serious.

Take a good look, folks. Is this what you want to be, or is it a cautionary tale?
.

Wow.....I really hit a nerve this morn, huh?

Yes, I have some time, and people like you are always a fascinating study.
.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Just for a minute there I thought you were actually going to take a position....

But....I have your theme song...

And as always, the ideologically obedient PoliticalChic responds to challenges to her shallow, binary worldview with catty personal attacks.

Thank you, as always.
.

Don't be so touchy, FenceSitter....not everyone can be
a. brave enough to stake out a position and defend it
b. informed enough to actually understand both sides of the argument....and choose one.


There'll always be room for really dull folks like you.

One of the fascinating things about people like PC is that they have somehow convinced themselves that being an incurious and obedient ideologue is a virtue, and that thinking for yourself against both ends is a demonstration of some kind of weakness, of a flaw.

And they really do believe this, this is not an act. So she is being serious.

Take a good look, folks. Is this what you want to be, or is it a cautionary tale?
.

Wow.....I really hit a nerve this morn, huh?

Yes, I have some time, and people like you are always a fascinating study.
.

Well....whenever you grow a pair...er, feel capable of debating a point with me.....

...write back.

 

[Mac1958]

And as always, the ideologically obedient PoliticalChic responds to challenges to her shallow, binary worldview with catty personal attacks.

Thank you, as always.
.

Don't be so touchy, FenceSitter....not everyone can be
a. brave enough to stake out a position and defend it
b. informed enough to actually understand both sides of the argument....and choose one.


There'll always be room for really dull folks like you.

One of the fascinating things about people like PC is that they have somehow convinced themselves that being an incurious and obedient ideologue is a virtue, and that thinking for yourself against both ends is a demonstration of some kind of weakness, of a flaw.

And they really do believe this, this is not an act. So she is being serious.

Take a good look, folks. Is this what you want to be, or is it a cautionary tale?
.

Wow.....I really hit a nerve this morn, huh?

Yes, I have some time, and people like you are always a fascinating study.
.

Well....whenever you grow a pair...er, feel capable of debating a point with me.....

...write back.

I made a specific point and you deflected and went on the attack. As you always do.

You could have just addressed the point like an adult. You still can, I'm patient with people like you.

So, go ahead. Does all this exist on a continuum, or does it not?
.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Don't be so touchy, FenceSitter....not everyone can be
a. brave enough to stake out a position and defend it
b. informed enough to actually understand both sides of the argument....and choose one.


There'll always be room for really dull folks like you.

One of the fascinating things about people like PC is that they have somehow convinced themselves that being an incurious and obedient ideologue is a virtue, and that thinking for yourself against both ends is a demonstration of some kind of weakness, of a flaw.

And they really do believe this, this is not an act. So she is being serious.

Take a good look, folks. Is this what you want to be, or is it a cautionary tale?
.

Wow.....I really hit a nerve this morn, huh?

Yes, I have some time, and people like you are always a fascinating study.
.

Well....whenever you grow a pair...er, feel capable of debating a point with me.....

...write back.

I made a specific point and you deflected and went on the attack. As you always do.

You could have just addressed the point like an adult. You still can, I'm patient with people like you.

Go ahead. Does all this lie on a continuum, or does it not?
.

Here is the defining characteristic: freedom for the individual.

It's an 'either-or.'

Which of these is based on liberty, freedom for the individual?

Nazism

Communism

Socialism

Fascism

Progressivism

Liberalism


The correct response is 'none if 'em,' they all demand the bending of the knee and the neck to the collective.


Hence......the title of the thread.



Get it now?????

 

[Mac1958]

One of the fascinating things about people like PC is that they have somehow convinced themselves that being an incurious and obedient ideologue is a virtue, and that thinking for yourself against both ends is a demonstration of some kind of weakness, of a flaw.

And they really do believe this, this is not an act. So she is being serious.

Take a good look, folks. Is this what you want to be, or is it a cautionary tale?
.

Wow.....I really hit a nerve this morn, huh?

Yes, I have some time, and people like you are always a fascinating study.
.

Well....whenever you grow a pair...er, feel capable of debating a point with me.....

...write back.

I made a specific point and you deflected and went on the attack. As you always do.

You could have just addressed the point like an adult. You still can, I'm patient with people like you.

Go ahead. Does all this lie on a continuum, or does it not?
.

Here is the defining characteristic: freedom for the individual.

It's an 'either-or.'

Which of these is based on liberty, freedom for the individual?

Nazism

Communism

Socialism

Fascism

Progressivism

Liberalism


The correct response is 'none if 'em,' they all demand the bending of the knee and the neck to the collective.


Hence......the title of the thread.



Get it now?????

That's a delightful dodge of my question, and I know you're doing the best you can.

I'll ask again: Does the role, scope and cost of government exist on a continuum, or does it not?

You like "either/or" models, so please provide a clear answer this time.
.

 

[bripat9643]

I never heard of a contract that I consented to before I was born.

I can't see any posts from danielpalos, because he is an idiot, so I ignored him. But, this is a funny discussion.

When a child is born with an obligation to work for the benefit of other people, we call that child a slave. The Marxists try to sugar coat it and make it sound like a noble responsibility, but the result is the same.

The proponents of communism and its resulting socialist state (yes, it works just the opposite of the way Marx described it) misuse and bastardize the "social contract" theory. Social contract is simply the agreement of individuals (implicitly) to surrender some of their natural freedoms to a government in exchange for that government's protection of their remaining freedoms. That's it.

The Marxists claim that we have surrendered our all of our rights to property to their State, in exchange for (I presume) protection from economic failure. Assuming (but never conceding) that is true, a serious question remains. In the minds of Marxists (or Socialists) have we surrendered our right to revoke our consent?

The so-called "social contract" is bullshit. It's how statists justify their desire to plunder and enslave you.

Right wingers don't know what they are talking about.

Our social contract is our federal Constitution for the Union.

I just proved that the Constitution is not a contract.

With what? I just "proved it is."

You did no such thing. You merely insisted it is. A contract requires consent from all parties to it. I never consented to it.

 

[Skull Pilot]

[


Hegel, Marx, Hitler....or Democrats.....the Germanic thought that gave birth to Progressivism, all stemmed from this:

"The German state is the Volksgemeinschaft, or “Peoples Community,” where the individual has no rights, only duties."
Hayek on the Socialist Roots of Nazism | Byron Chiado

lol, American liberals don't believe in any individual rights?

Goddam!

They believe less in individual rights than they used to.

 

[PoliticalChic]

14. As per the title….How can you be a socialist, Democrat…..and still claim to believe in liberty????

"The underlying foundation of capitalism is human freedom. As Adam Smith recognized, when individuals are permitted to pursue their self-interest through markets, they are amazingly good at finding ways of bettering not only themselves but society as well.

Equally important, as economist Joseph Schumpeter explained, out of this freedom arises a continuous process of improvement – what he called “creative destruction.” It is this constant innovation – discovering and bringing to market new products and services, finding ways of improving existing products and services, and finding more efficient ways to create these products and services – that truly drives economic growth and increases standards of living.

The fact is, while the accumulation of capital is a feature of a market economy, it’s certainly not exclusive to it. It is individual freedom and the innovation that arises from it that drives the engine of capitalism." 4 Common Capitalism Myths Debunked | James Davenport





15. And the result of capitalism, and individual liberty….is the innovation on display in this example:

" In 1949, someone who worked minimum wage over the summer would have enough money to buy the following items from that year’s Sears’ catalogue: A Smith-Corona typewriter, Argus 21 35mm camera, Silvertone AM-FM table radio, and Silvertone 3-speed phonograph.

In 2009, the same person, working the same number of hours at minimum wage, would now be able to purchase: A Dell laptop computer, HP color ink printer, scanner, copier, Canon 8 megapixel digital camera, GPS system, 32” LCD HDTV television, 8GB iPod Nano, GE microwave, Haier refrigerator/freezer, Toshiba DVD/VCR combo, RCA home theater system, Uniden cordless phone, RCA AM/FM radio, Camcorder, Sony PlayStation 2, as well as several other things."
Mark J. Perry, “Young Americans: Luckiest Generation in History,” CARPE DIEM: Young Americans: Luckiest Generation in History




Freedom, liberty, results in prosperity.

Don't believe it? Compare the Obama economy with the Trump economy.

Or…..take a gander at Venezuela.

 

[NYcarbineer]

[


Hegel, Marx, Hitler....or Democrats.....the Germanic thought that gave birth to Progressivism, all stemmed from this:

"The German state is the Volksgemeinschaft, or “Peoples Community,” where the individual has no rights, only duties."
Hayek on the Socialist Roots of Nazism | Byron Chiado

lol, American liberals don't believe in any individual rights?

Goddam!

They believe less in individual rights than they used to.

So what individual rights do you want back?

 

[NYcarbineer]

One of the fascinating things about people like PC is that they have somehow convinced themselves that being an incurious and obedient ideologue is a virtue, and that thinking for yourself against both ends is a demonstration of some kind of weakness, of a flaw.

And they really do believe this, this is not an act. So she is being serious.

Take a good look, folks. Is this what you want to be, or is it a cautionary tale?
.

Wow.....I really hit a nerve this morn, huh?

Yes, I have some time, and people like you are always a fascinating study.
.

Well....whenever you grow a pair...er, feel capable of debating a point with me.....

...write back.

I made a specific point and you deflected and went on the attack. As you always do.

You could have just addressed the point like an adult. You still can, I'm patient with people like you.

Go ahead. Does all this lie on a continuum, or does it not?
.

Here is the defining characteristic: freedom for the individual.

It's an 'either-or.'

Which of these is based on liberty, freedom for the individual?

Nazism

Communism

Socialism

Fascism

Progressivism

Liberalism


The correct response is 'none if 'em,' they all demand the bending of the knee and the neck to the collective.


Hence......the title of the thread.



Get it now?????

The GOVERNMENT secures and protects your rights. That's why even conservatives run to the courts when they believe their rights have been violated.

 

[Skull Pilot]

[


Hegel, Marx, Hitler....or Democrats.....the Germanic thought that gave birth to Progressivism, all stemmed from this:

"The German state is the Volksgemeinschaft, or “Peoples Community,” where the individual has no rights, only duties."
Hayek on the Socialist Roots of Nazism | Byron Chiado

lol, American liberals don't believe in any individual rights?

Goddam!

They believe less in individual rights than they used to.

So what individual rights do you want back?

Where did I say there were any taken away? I said people believe less in individual rights that they used to.

Obammycare is a prime example. I don't know any other time in history where the American people were compelled by law to buy a commercial product do you?

Our 4th amendment rights are being eroded every day
Out 6th amendment rights are being eroded via the use of secret no fly lists


For the most part these violations of our rights are just fine with the people and the government certainly is OK with them

SO as I said the people believe less in individual rights than we used to

 

[Skull Pilot]

Wow.....I really hit a nerve this morn, huh?

Yes, I have some time, and people like you are always a fascinating study.
.

Well....whenever you grow a pair...er, feel capable of debating a point with me.....

...write back.

I made a specific point and you deflected and went on the attack. As you always do.

You could have just addressed the point like an adult. You still can, I'm patient with people like you.

Go ahead. Does all this lie on a continuum, or does it not?
.

Here is the defining characteristic: freedom for the individual.

It's an 'either-or.'

Which of these is based on liberty, freedom for the individual?

Nazism

Communism

Socialism

Fascism

Progressivism

Liberalism


The correct response is 'none if 'em,' they all demand the bending of the knee and the neck to the collective.


Hence......the title of the thread.



Get it now?????

The GOVERNMENT secures and protects your rights. That's why even conservatives run to the courts when they believe their rights have been violated.

No it doesn't.
You think the Patriot Act secured your rights?

 

[danielpalos]

I'm against socialism for a fairly simple reason: I prefer low taxes and a minimum of government bureaucracy in my life. Believe it or not, I'm a big boy who doesn't need any government to babysit me.

I'm glad that you use words like "low" and "minimum".

That reflects the fact that this entire issue lies on a continuum, and that there will not be any such condition as "socialist" or "not socialist".

The task, then, is to find the most workable point of equilibrium, and not in screaming platitudes.
.

Just for a minute there I thought you were actually going to take a position....

But....I have your theme song...

And as always, the ideologically obedient PoliticalChic responds to challenges to her shallow, binary worldview with catty personal attacks.

Thank you, as always.
.

she just needs a full body massage.