Isn't it funny how liberals defend socialism?

[Brain357]

Difference Between Socialism and Communism

Keep in mind Bernie likes the Nordic economic model which is really not communism at all.

That says what I did, communism is a form of socialism. So you're posting that you agree with me, interesting.

Here's what you're not posting, any examples of how the President you examined for seven years isn't one. Can't come up with any examples, not a single one. Yet you insist he's not and it's clear as the light of day

Yes I have seen no evidence Obama is a communist. So far you haven't offered any.

So which of these things is not true?

1) You know Obama's policies
2) You know what a communist is
3) Obama is not a communist

Because if all three of those are true, you could stuff me right now by rattling off a bunch of things. Since you've continued to claim all three are true and you're hiding and evading the question, the conclusion is you're full of shit

I'd rather wait for you to show me your proof he is. You are the one with the claim. Prove it.

Of course you would prefer that, you can't show he isn't. Which would be simple ... if he wasn't ...

And the proof he is would be the Communist manifesto, I keep telling you that. That learning disability must be a bitch.

Last post of the day, I'm done working and I'm caught up on posts now

If he was it would be quite easy for you to prove. So far you prefer to repeat yourself rather than show any proof. Very telling.

 

[Brain357]

It is what I have heard Bernie promote. So what is wrong with it?

All socialism is harmful to society. It reduces the material welfare of the population and it reduces their freedom.

Yet it seems to be working fine for many countries. The countries with the happiest people...

It's not working. They have chronic unemployment above 10% and their economic growth is anemic. The only part of their economies that work is the part that remains capitalist.

As for their "happiness," that's pure bullshit. You can't measure happiness. Anyone who claims they can is lying.

Really?
United States vs. Denmark, in 17 Charts

There's no source listed for any of the charts, so they are most likely bullshit.

The Heritage Index of Economic Freedom lists Denmark as as #12 and the United States as #11. So Denmark is only slightly more socialist than the U.S.

I note the chart for percentage of GDP going to taxes is 33%. That's much lower than the actual value. I doubt it includes all state and local taxes.

You will find all sources give similar numbers. Only slightly more socialist than us? Well then I guess Bernie is only slightly socialist because that is what he says we should move toward.

 

[bripat9643]

All socialism is harmful to society. It reduces the material welfare of the population and it reduces their freedom.

Yet it seems to be working fine for many countries. The countries with the happiest people...

It's not working. They have chronic unemployment above 10% and their economic growth is anemic. The only part of their economies that work is the part that remains capitalist.

As for their "happiness," that's pure bullshit. You can't measure happiness. Anyone who claims they can is lying.

Really?
United States vs. Denmark, in 17 Charts

There's no source listed for any of the charts, so they are most likely bullshit.

The Heritage Index of Economic Freedom lists Denmark as as #12 and the United States as #11. So Denmark is only slightly more socialist than the U.S.

I note the chart for percentage of GDP going to taxes is 33%. That's much lower than the actual value. I doubt it includes all state and local taxes.

You will find all sources give similar numbers. Only slightly more socialist than us? Well then I guess Bernie is only slightly socialist because that is what he says we should move toward.

No, he isn't. For one thing he wants to impose a tax on financial transactions. That's the last thing the Danes would do. They tax individuals. Business and corporate taxes are quite low.

However, your claims about the data are dubious, to say the least. Provide the source or we can assume they are garbage.

 

[Brain357]

Yet it seems to be working fine for many countries. The countries with the happiest people...

It's not working. They have chronic unemployment above 10% and their economic growth is anemic. The only part of their economies that work is the part that remains capitalist.

As for their "happiness," that's pure bullshit. You can't measure happiness. Anyone who claims they can is lying.

Really?
United States vs. Denmark, in 17 Charts

There's no source listed for any of the charts, so they are most likely bullshit.

The Heritage Index of Economic Freedom lists Denmark as as #12 and the United States as #11. So Denmark is only slightly more socialist than the U.S.

I note the chart for percentage of GDP going to taxes is 33%. That's much lower than the actual value. I doubt it includes all state and local taxes.

You will find all sources give similar numbers. Only slightly more socialist than us? Well then I guess Bernie is only slightly socialist because that is what he says we should move toward.

No, he isn't. For one thing he wants to impose a tax on financial transactions. That's the last thing the Danes would do. They tax individuals. Business and corporate taxes are quite low.

However, your claims about the data are dubious, to say the least. Provide the source or we can assume they are garbage.

Good point about corporate taxes. But does Bernie want to raise corp taxes or just get rid of some of the loopholes that let corps pay 0?

 

[Rustic]

All socialism is harmful to society. It reduces the material welfare of the population and it reduces their freedom.

Yet it seems to be working fine for many countries. The countries with the happiest people...

It's not working. They have chronic unemployment above 10% and their economic growth is anemic. The only part of their economies that work is the part that remains capitalist.

As for their "happiness," that's pure bullshit. You can't measure happiness. Anyone who claims they can is lying.

Really?
United States vs. Denmark, in 17 Charts

There's no source listed for any of the charts, so they are most likely bullshit.

The Heritage Index of Economic Freedom lists Denmark as as #12 and the United States as #11. So Denmark is only slightly more socialist than the U.S.

I note the chart for percentage of GDP going to taxes is 33%. That's much lower than the actual value. I doubt it includes all state and local taxes.

You will find all sources give similar numbers. Only slightly more socialist than us? Well then I guess Bernie is only slightly socialist because that is what he says we should move toward.

 

[Brain357]

Yet it seems to be working fine for many countries. The countries with the happiest people...

It's not working. They have chronic unemployment above 10% and their economic growth is anemic. The only part of their economies that work is the part that remains capitalist.

As for their "happiness," that's pure bullshit. You can't measure happiness. Anyone who claims they can is lying.

Really?
United States vs. Denmark, in 17 Charts

There's no source listed for any of the charts, so they are most likely bullshit.

The Heritage Index of Economic Freedom lists Denmark as as #12 and the United States as #11. So Denmark is only slightly more socialist than the U.S.

I note the chart for percentage of GDP going to taxes is 33%. That's much lower than the actual value. I doubt it includes all state and local taxes.

You will find all sources give similar numbers. Only slightly more socialist than us? Well then I guess Bernie is only slightly socialist because that is what he says we should move toward.

You should probably stop wasting space on the forum with your pictures. Try to make intelligent points. I assume you will just go away.

 

[Rustic]

It's not working. They have chronic unemployment above 10% and their economic growth is anemic. The only part of their economies that work is the part that remains capitalist.

As for their "happiness," that's pure bullshit. You can't measure happiness. Anyone who claims they can is lying.

Really?
United States vs. Denmark, in 17 Charts

There's no source listed for any of the charts, so they are most likely bullshit.

The Heritage Index of Economic Freedom lists Denmark as as #12 and the United States as #11. So Denmark is only slightly more socialist than the U.S.

I note the chart for percentage of GDP going to taxes is 33%. That's much lower than the actual value. I doubt it includes all state and local taxes.

You will find all sources give similar numbers. Only slightly more socialist than us? Well then I guess Bernie is only slightly socialist because that is what he says we should move toward.

You should probably stop wasting space on the forum with your pictures. Try to make intelligent points. I assume you will just go away.

Says the socialist...

 

[bripat9643]

It's not working. They have chronic unemployment above 10% and their economic growth is anemic. The only part of their economies that work is the part that remains capitalist.

As for their "happiness," that's pure bullshit. You can't measure happiness. Anyone who claims they can is lying.

Really?
United States vs. Denmark, in 17 Charts

There's no source listed for any of the charts, so they are most likely bullshit.

The Heritage Index of Economic Freedom lists Denmark as as #12 and the United States as #11. So Denmark is only slightly more socialist than the U.S.

I note the chart for percentage of GDP going to taxes is 33%. That's much lower than the actual value. I doubt it includes all state and local taxes.

You will find all sources give similar numbers. Only slightly more socialist than us? Well then I guess Bernie is only slightly socialist because that is what he says we should move toward.

No, he isn't. For one thing he wants to impose a tax on financial transactions. That's the last thing the Danes would do. They tax individuals. Business and corporate taxes are quite low.

However, your claims about the data are dubious, to say the least. Provide the source or we can assume they are garbage.

Good point about corporate taxes. But does Bernie want to raise corp taxes or just get rid of some of the loopholes that let corps pay 0?

He wants to impose a tax on financial transactions. That mean anytime someone sells a share of stock, they have to pay a tax. That means death for the financial markets.

 

[Rustic]

Really?
United States vs. Denmark, in 17 Charts

There's no source listed for any of the charts, so they are most likely bullshit.

The Heritage Index of Economic Freedom lists Denmark as as #12 and the United States as #11. So Denmark is only slightly more socialist than the U.S.

I note the chart for percentage of GDP going to taxes is 33%. That's much lower than the actual value. I doubt it includes all state and local taxes.

You will find all sources give similar numbers. Only slightly more socialist than us? Well then I guess Bernie is only slightly socialist because that is what he says we should move toward.

No, he isn't. For one thing he wants to impose a tax on financial transactions. That's the last thing the Danes would do. They tax individuals. Business and corporate taxes are quite low.

However, your claims about the data are dubious, to say the least. Provide the source or we can assume they are garbage.

Good point about corporate taxes. But does Bernie want to raise corp taxes or just get rid of some of the loopholes that let corps pay 0?

He wants to impose a tax on financial transactions. That mean anytime someone sells a share of stock, they have to pay a tax. That means death for the financial markets.

Worse yet, small business cannot exist any European style socialism...

 

[Brain357]

Really?
United States vs. Denmark, in 17 Charts

There's no source listed for any of the charts, so they are most likely bullshit.

The Heritage Index of Economic Freedom lists Denmark as as #12 and the United States as #11. So Denmark is only slightly more socialist than the U.S.

I note the chart for percentage of GDP going to taxes is 33%. That's much lower than the actual value. I doubt it includes all state and local taxes.

You will find all sources give similar numbers. Only slightly more socialist than us? Well then I guess Bernie is only slightly socialist because that is what he says we should move toward.

No, he isn't. For one thing he wants to impose a tax on financial transactions. That's the last thing the Danes would do. They tax individuals. Business and corporate taxes are quite low.

However, your claims about the data are dubious, to say the least. Provide the source or we can assume they are garbage.

Good point about corporate taxes. But does Bernie want to raise corp taxes or just get rid of some of the loopholes that let corps pay 0?

He wants to impose a tax on financial transactions. That mean anytime someone sells a share of stock, they have to pay a tax. That means death for the financial markets.

To be clear, is this what you are referencing?
How Bernie Sanders' Wall Street Tax Would Work

I can't see that causing the death of financial markets...

 

[georgephillip]

"Capitalism has always been brutal in its methods. But it developed technology and a worldwide system of production which laid the material basis or groundwork for overcoming scarcity and creating abundance for all. People could have everything they need to live well. But it’s impossible to achieve under the capitalist system, which is driven to pursue profits rather than human needs. Therefore, as Karl Marx pointed out, only a workers’ or proletarian socialist revolution could bring about a society of abundance for all."
Capitalism is the Problem: Workers' Socialist Revolution is the Solution
Marx understood production for profit would create the material surplus necessary for production for need to take place. Abundance for all is impossible as long as the surplus condenses into fewer and fewer hands with each passing generation.

Here's what the socialist revolution gets you:

What's your point, Andy?

 

[bripat9643]

"Capitalism has always been brutal in its methods. But it developed technology and a worldwide system of production which laid the material basis or groundwork for overcoming scarcity and creating abundance for all. People could have everything they need to live well. But it’s impossible to achieve under the capitalist system, which is driven to pursue profits rather than human needs. Therefore, as Karl Marx pointed out, only a workers’ or proletarian socialist revolution could bring about a society of abundance for all."
Capitalism is the Problem: Workers' Socialist Revolution is the Solution
Marx understood production for profit would create the material surplus necessary for production for need to take place. Abundance for all is impossible as long as the surplus condenses into fewer and fewer hands with each passing generation.

Here's what the socialist revolution gets you:

What's your point, Andy?

Yeah, because the British Empire never killed any indigenous people's before capitalism, right?

 

[Billo_Really]

What you said and what you quoted in the constitution both had the word "welfare" in them, that's why you think they are the same? And BTW, general welfare and welfare are not the same thing. General welfare means things like police and national parks for the general public. It doesn't mean giving you someone else's money. That's your welfare, not the general welfare. So you had one word the same which meant something different. LOL, and "health" is nowhere in the constitution at all. And again, certainly not the health of individuals.

General welfare is just that. If the economy is going in the tank and the private sector won't start hiring, then government must step in and get people to work via infrastructure projects. Government needs to work for the people, not dish out corporate welfare to the rich.

No, your money was spent as it was taken in. On SSI you're getting someone else's money. You're taking your kids money. Or the government is. And government is giving it to you. The word for that is welfare. And not general welfare

Bullshit! Any money I get out, was money I put in. If they weren't taking it out of every paycheck, then you'd be right. But since they are, that's my money I get back.

 

[kaz]

Isn't it funny how those who identify themselves as "conservatives" defend fascism.

fas·cism
[ˈfaSHˌizəm]
authoritarianism · totalitarianism · dictatorship ·
despotism · autocracy · Nazism · rightism · nationalism · xenophobia · racism · anti-Semitism · jingoism · isolationism · neofascism · neo-Nazism

NOUN

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

• (in general use) extreme right-wing, authoritarian, or intolerant views or practice.

No one did that. Why don't you sleep this one off and then come back

 

[kaz]

That says what I did, communism is a form of socialism. So you're posting that you agree with me, interesting.

Here's what you're not posting, any examples of how the President you examined for seven years isn't one. Can't come up with any examples, not a single one. Yet you insist he's not and it's clear as the light of day

Yes I have seen no evidence Obama is a communist. So far you haven't offered any.

So which of these things is not true?

1) You know Obama's policies
2) You know what a communist is
3) Obama is not a communist

Because if all three of those are true, you could stuff me right now by rattling off a bunch of things. Since you've continued to claim all three are true and you're hiding and evading the question, the conclusion is you're full of shit

I'd rather wait for you to show me your proof he is. You are the one with the claim. Prove it.

Of course you would prefer that, you can't show he isn't. Which would be simple ... if he wasn't ...

And the proof he is would be the Communist manifesto, I keep telling you that. That learning disability must be a bitch.

Last post of the day, I'm done working and I'm caught up on posts now

If he was it would be quite easy for you to prove. So far you prefer to repeat yourself rather than show any proof. Very telling.

I can go through all his positions and write a 10 page summary proving he's a Marxist, or you could just show a couple examples where he's not.

I'm satisfied, you've supported and studied him for seven years and can't come up with a single plank of the Manifesto he opposes.

QED. You lose. Don't go away mad, just go away

 

[kaz]

What you said and what you quoted in the constitution both had the word "welfare" in them, that's why you think they are the same? And BTW, general welfare and welfare are not the same thing. General welfare means things like police and national parks for the general public. It doesn't mean giving you someone else's money. That's your welfare, not the general welfare. So you had one word the same which meant something different. LOL, and "health" is nowhere in the constitution at all. And again, certainly not the health of individuals.

General welfare is just that. If the economy is going in the tank and the private sector won't start hiring, then government must step in and get people to work via infrastructure projects. Government needs to work for the people, not dish out corporate welfare to the rich.

No, your money was spent as it was taken in. On SSI you're getting someone else's money. You're taking your kids money. Or the government is. And government is giving it to you. The word for that is welfare. And not general welfare

Bullshit! Any money I get out, was money I put in. If they weren't taking it out of every paycheck, then you'd be right. But since they are, that's my money I get back.

Um...learn to read, Holmes. I didn't say you didn't pay "SSI." I said none of the money was "saved." Just like the income taxes you paid and government spent, government spent the SSI taxes you paid.

They were just taxes like other taxes. Government just lied they were saving money because they thought the more gullible among us would buy the lie there were savings. It worked.

If there are savings, why are 100% of your social security welfare checks funded by your children?

 

[Brain357]

Yes I have seen no evidence Obama is a communist. So far you haven't offered any.

So which of these things is not true?

1) You know Obama's policies
2) You know what a communist is
3) Obama is not a communist

Because if all three of those are true, you could stuff me right now by rattling off a bunch of things. Since you've continued to claim all three are true and you're hiding and evading the question, the conclusion is you're full of shit

I'd rather wait for you to show me your proof he is. You are the one with the claim. Prove it.

Of course you would prefer that, you can't show he isn't. Which would be simple ... if he wasn't ...

And the proof he is would be the Communist manifesto, I keep telling you that. That learning disability must be a bitch.

Last post of the day, I'm done working and I'm caught up on posts now

If he was it would be quite easy for you to prove. So far you prefer to repeat yourself rather than show any proof. Very telling.

I can go through all his positions and write a 10 page summary proving he's a Marxist, or you could just show a couple examples where he's not.

I'm satisfied, you've supported and studied him for seven years and can't come up with a single plank of the Manifesto he opposes.

QED. You lose. Don't go away mad, just go away

You can just give two examples, that is fine.

 

[kaz]

So which of these things is not true?

1) You know Obama's policies
2) You know what a communist is
3) Obama is not a communist

Because if all three of those are true, you could stuff me right now by rattling off a bunch of things. Since you've continued to claim all three are true and you're hiding and evading the question, the conclusion is you're full of shit

I'd rather wait for you to show me your proof he is. You are the one with the claim. Prove it.

Of course you would prefer that, you can't show he isn't. Which would be simple ... if he wasn't ...

And the proof he is would be the Communist manifesto, I keep telling you that. That learning disability must be a bitch.

Last post of the day, I'm done working and I'm caught up on posts now

If he was it would be quite easy for you to prove. So far you prefer to repeat yourself rather than show any proof. Very telling.

I can go through all his positions and write a 10 page summary proving he's a Marxist, or you could just show a couple examples where he's not.

I'm satisfied, you've supported and studied him for seven years and can't come up with a single plank of the Manifesto he opposes.

QED. You lose. Don't go away mad, just go away

You can just give two examples, that is fine.

Why should I? You already conceded that you lost, seven years and you can't think of anything he's done that contradicts being a Marxist

 

[georgephillip]

"Capitalism has always been brutal in its methods. But it developed technology and a worldwide system of production which laid the material basis or groundwork for overcoming scarcity and creating abundance for all. People could have everything they need to live well. But it’s impossible to achieve under the capitalist system, which is driven to pursue profits rather than human needs. Therefore, as Karl Marx pointed out, only a workers’ or proletarian socialist revolution could bring about a society of abundance for all."
Capitalism is the Problem: Workers' Socialist Revolution is the Solution
Marx understood production for profit would create the material surplus necessary for production for need to take place. Abundance for all is impossible as long as the surplus condenses into fewer and fewer hands with each passing generation.

Here's what the socialist revolution gets you:

What's your point, Andy?

Yeah, because the British Empire never killed any indigenous people's before capitalism, right?

We need to agree on a starting point for capitalism, right?
History of capitalism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"Over the course of the past five hundred years,capital has been accumulated by a variety of different methods, in a variety of scales, and associated with a great deal of variation in the concentration of economic power and wealth.[3] Much of the history of the past five hundred years is concerned with the development of capitalism in its various forms."

 

[Brain357]

I'd rather wait for you to show me your proof he is. You are the one with the claim. Prove it.

Of course you would prefer that, you can't show he isn't. Which would be simple ... if he wasn't ...

And the proof he is would be the Communist manifesto, I keep telling you that. That learning disability must be a bitch.

Last post of the day, I'm done working and I'm caught up on posts now

If he was it would be quite easy for you to prove. So far you prefer to repeat yourself rather than show any proof. Very telling.

I can go through all his positions and write a 10 page summary proving he's a Marxist, or you could just show a couple examples where he's not.

I'm satisfied, you've supported and studied him for seven years and can't come up with a single plank of the Manifesto he opposes.

QED. You lose. Don't go away mad, just go away

You can just give two examples, that is fine.

Why should I? You already conceded that you lost, seven years and you can't think of anything he's done that contradicts being a Marxist

You are making a claim that you can't back up. You have lost. Thanks for playing.