So you want better paying jobs?

[Correll]

Is the right finally recognizing that socialism Requires a work ethic while capitalism must rely on voluntary, freedom of association and Contract in Any at-will employment State.

I can't be bothered to try to interpret your words.

you should block him rather than enable him. he lacks the writing ability to be here and thus degrades USMB and us all with his inane gibberish.

I am considering it.

The problem is he is not really any worse than the average liberal.

If I just want to talk to fellow conservatives, I could have went searching for a conservative forum.

 

[danielpalos]

Is the right finally recognizing that socialism Requires a work ethic while capitalism must rely on voluntary, freedom of association and Contract in Any at-will employment State.

gibberish from liberal illiterate

Just incompetence from the clueless and the Causeless.

 

[danielpalos]

Is the right finally recognizing that socialism Requires a work ethic while capitalism must rely on voluntary, freedom of association and Contract in Any at-will employment State.

I can't be bothered to try to interpret your words.

Only shills without a clue or a Cause, say that.

You really need to consider that I might be offering you constructive criticism.

With nothing but fallacy?

 

[Correll]

Is the right finally recognizing that socialism Requires a work ethic while capitalism must rely on voluntary, freedom of association and Contract in Any at-will employment State.

I can't be bothered to try to interpret your words.

Only shills without a clue or a Cause, say that.

You really need to consider that I might be offering you constructive criticism.

With nothing but fallacy?

THat was a lie.

It is time to question your assumptions.

 

[danielpalos]

Is the right finally recognizing that socialism Requires a work ethic while capitalism must rely on voluntary, freedom of association and Contract in Any at-will employment State.

I can't be bothered to try to interpret your words.

Only shills without a clue or a Cause, say that.

You really need to consider that I might be offering you constructive criticism.

With nothing but fallacy?

THat was a lie.

It is time to question your assumptions.

dear, Government is socialism. It is a self-evident truth, except to the right.

 

[Correll]

I can't be bothered to try to interpret your words.

Only shills without a clue or a Cause, say that.

You really need to consider that I might be offering you constructive criticism.

With nothing but fallacy?

THat was a lie.

It is time to question your assumptions.

dear, Government is socialism. It is a self-evident truth, except to the right.

NOpe.

"Socialism is a social and economic system characterised by social ownership and/or social control of the means of production and co-operative management of the economy, as well as a political theory and movement that aims at the establishment of such a system."


BUilding a road is not socialism. Funding a police force is not socialism. Maintaining a military is not socialism.

BTW, thank you for stating your position clearly, concisely and coherently.

 

[Boss]

Just incompetence from the clueless and the Causeless.

Well, I think I've been very clear that my "Cause" is free market capitalism. Reason being, free market capitalism is responsible for creating more millionaires and billionaires than anything ever devised by man. With free market capitalism and a free enterprise system, the individual is empowered to achieve whatever level of wealth they desire through their own initiatives, talents and skills.

Meanwhile, you have not articulated from where Socialism magically obtains it resources. What you present is a circular reasoning that is both "clueless and causeless." ...It is like thinking you can nutritionally sustain your life indefinitely by consuming your own feces.

 

[Correll]

Just incompetence from the clueless and the Causeless.

Well, I think I've been very clear that my "Cause" is free market capitalism. Reason being, free market capitalism is responsible for creating more millionaires and billionaires than anything ever devised by man. With free market capitalism and a free enterprise system, the individual is empowered to achieve whatever level of wealth they desire through their own initiatives, talents and skills.

Meanwhile, you have not articulated from where Socialism magically obtains it resources. What you present is a circular reasoning that is both "clueless and causeless." ...It is like thinking you can nutritionally sustain your life indefinitely by consuming your own feces.

Personally I think a stronger argument for capitalism is the very large middle class it created.

 

[Boss]

Personally I think a stronger argument for capitalism is the very large middle class it created.

I don't subscribe to the Socialist's "class" language. We often say "the middle class" and think nothing of it, I am guilty of using the term myself, but there is really NOT a "middle class" because no one is confined to their class. In our system, people are free to leave the class they are in and be part of another class, and this happens constantly. Few people in our system remain the same class their entire life. Yet all the Socialist's arguments are couched in "class perspective" where we assume people can't ever escape their class... this is how it was across Asia and Europe where Socialism cut it's teeth.

When we become intellectually trapped in this way of thinking by the Socialists, they will appeal with statistics to show you how "the middle class" has declined since 1967. ...Oh no... fewer and fewer in the middle class? This is a serious and alarming "problem" we need to address! But what they fail to tell you is where they are going. The people who were in their "middle class" group have moved up! They've used the free market capitalist system and free enterprise to improve their lot in life... (unlike what you can do in a socialist system or a caste [class] system.) Also, there are new people constantly coming in to "the middle class" from poverty... they've become motivated to improve their lot in life. So these fictitious "groups" the Socialists like to pretend we have, are not real groups at all. The members of the group are constantly and ever-changing.

When I am confronted with the Socialist's "but statistics show middle class wages are stagnant!" My response is, "Great! It needs to be that way!" This is how "motivation" works... people are not satisfied with what they make so they aspire for more. Our free market, free enterprise, capitalist system allows you, the individual, to attain as much wealth as you please. But... Nothing is ever accomplished without motivation.... quite literally. Nothing.

 

[danielpalos]

Only shills without a clue or a Cause, say that.

You really need to consider that I might be offering you constructive criticism.

With nothing but fallacy?

THat was a lie.

It is time to question your assumptions.

dear, Government is socialism. It is a self-evident truth, except to the right.

NOpe.

"Socialism is a social and economic system characterised by social ownership and/or social control of the means of production and co-operative management of the economy, as well as a political theory and movement that aims at the establishment of such a system."


BUilding a road is not socialism. Funding a police force is not socialism. Maintaining a military is not socialism.

BTW, thank you for stating your position clearly, concisely and coherently.

Dear, even if we go by the special pleading of that political-science jargon, then I can also use political-science jargon and claim, government of the People and for the People qualifies, as does Hoover Dam as a public sector means of production.

 

[Correll]

Personally I think a stronger argument for capitalism is the very large middle class it created.

I don't subscribe to the Socialist's "class" language. We often say "the middle class" and think nothing of it, I am guilty of using the term myself, but there is really NOT a "middle class" because no one is confined to their class. In our system, people are free to leave the class they are in and be part of another class, and this happens constantly. Few people in our system remain the same class their entire life. Yet all the Socialist's arguments are couched in "class perspective" where we assume people can't ever escape their class... this is how it was across Asia and Europe where Socialism cut it's teeth.

When we become intellectually trapped in this way of thinking by the Socialists, they will appeal with statistics to show you how "the middle class" has declined since 1967. ...Oh no... fewer and fewer in the middle class? This is a serious and alarming "problem" we need to address! But what they fail to tell you is where they are going. The people who were in their "middle class" group have moved up! They've used the free market capitalist system and free enterprise to improve their lot in life... (unlike what you can do in a socialist system or a caste [class] system.) Also, there are new people constantly coming in to "the middle class" from poverty... they've become motivated to improve their lot in life. So these fictitious "groups" the Socialists like to pretend we have, are not real groups at all. The members of the group are constantly and ever-changing.

When I am confronted with the Socialist's "but statistics show middle class wages are stagnant!" My response is, "Great! It needs to be that way!" This is how "motivation" works... people are not satisfied with what they make so they aspire for more. Our free market, free enterprise, capitalist system allows you, the individual, to attain as much wealth as you please. But... Nothing is ever accomplished without motivation.... quite literally. Nothing.

The goal of American policy should be to serve the interests of all, or at least the majority of Americans.

The majority of people, at any one time, are in that range, ie the "middle".

Which is good, we do not have a pyramid shaped economy.


Having those wages stagnate is a valid issue.


Given current technology I don't see US moving to an INVERTED PYRAMID shaped economy either.


ONe of the best men I know "stagnated" in the Middle Class for his whole life.

He had a good job as a Machinist. By the time I knew him he was comfortably in the Middle Class and he was focused on his family and his volunteer work.

He had 7 children of his own, when there was some issue with a relative and he ended up adopted an EIGHT child.

He was not focused on moving up any further economically, his energies were focused otherwise.

IMO, only a fool would think his life stagnate or failed.

 

[Correll]

You really need to consider that I might be offering you constructive criticism.

With nothing but fallacy?

THat was a lie.

It is time to question your assumptions.

dear, Government is socialism. It is a self-evident truth, except to the right.

NOpe.

"Socialism is a social and economic system characterised by social ownership and/or social control of the means of production and co-operative management of the economy, as well as a political theory and movement that aims at the establishment of such a system."


BUilding a road is not socialism. Funding a police force is not socialism. Maintaining a military is not socialism.

BTW, thank you for stating your position clearly, concisely and coherently.

Dear, even if we go by the special pleading of that political-science jargon, then I can also use political-science jargon and claim, government of the People and for the People qualifies, as does Hoover Dam as a public sector means of production.

You made a blanket statement that "government is socialism".

I pointed out some examples of that NOT being true.

The Hoover Dam was a socialistic program, as it is a "means of production".

We are certainly a mixed economy.

The Hoover Dam is a fine argument that such "socialistic" programs have a positive role to play.

But when you try to spin "government of the People and for the People" as qualifying as socialism you are being dishonest or wrong.

Road: not socialism. Police: not socialism. Military: not socialism.

 

[danielpalos]

Just incompetence from the clueless and the Causeless.

Well, I think I've been very clear that my "Cause" is free market capitalism. Reason being, free market capitalism is responsible for creating more millionaires and billionaires than anything ever devised by man. With free market capitalism and a free enterprise system, the individual is empowered to achieve whatever level of wealth they desire through their own initiatives, talents and skills.

Meanwhile, you have not articulated from where Socialism magically obtains it resources. What you present is a circular reasoning that is both "clueless and causeless." ...It is like thinking you can nutritionally sustain your life indefinitely by consuming your own feces.

Define free market capitalism. From my understanding, AnCaps don't exist any longer than male lions in a pride in the wild, without the Nurture of Socialism.

And,

Your straw man arguments are just, a lack of competence for your Cause. Just shillery?

 

[Correll]

Just incompetence from the clueless and the Causeless.

Well, I think I've been very clear that my "Cause" is free market capitalism. Reason being, free market capitalism is responsible for creating more millionaires and billionaires than anything ever devised by man. With free market capitalism and a free enterprise system, the individual is empowered to achieve whatever level of wealth they desire through their own initiatives, talents and skills.

Meanwhile, you have not articulated from where Socialism magically obtains it resources. What you present is a circular reasoning that is both "clueless and causeless." ...It is like thinking you can nutritionally sustain your life indefinitely by consuming your own feces.

Define free market capitalism. From my understanding, AnCaps don't exist any longer than male lions in a pride in the wild, without the Nurture of Socialism.

And,

Your straw man arguments are just, a lack of competence for your Cause. Just shillery?

REally? You don't know what he means by Free Market Capitalism? That's hardly credible.

 

[danielpalos]

With nothing but fallacy?

THat was a lie.

It is time to question your assumptions.

dear, Government is socialism. It is a self-evident truth, except to the right.

NOpe.

"Socialism is a social and economic system characterised by social ownership and/or social control of the means of production and co-operative management of the economy, as well as a political theory and movement that aims at the establishment of such a system."


BUilding a road is not socialism. Funding a police force is not socialism. Maintaining a military is not socialism.

BTW, thank you for stating your position clearly, concisely and coherently.

Dear, even if we go by the special pleading of that political-science jargon, then I can also use political-science jargon and claim, government of the People and for the People qualifies, as does Hoover Dam as a public sector means of production.

You made a blanket statement that "government is socialism".

I pointed out some examples of that NOT being true.

The Hoover Dam was a socialistic program, as it is a "means of production".

We are certainly a mixed economy.

The Hoover Dam is a fine argument that such "socialistic" programs have a positive role to play.

But when you try to spin "government of the People and for the People" as qualifying as socialism you are being dishonest or wrong.

Road: not socialism. Police: not socialism. Military: not socialism.

it implies ownership, dear.

 

[Correll]

THat was a lie.

It is time to question your assumptions.

dear, Government is socialism. It is a self-evident truth, except to the right.

NOpe.

"Socialism is a social and economic system characterised by social ownership and/or social control of the means of production and co-operative management of the economy, as well as a political theory and movement that aims at the establishment of such a system."


BUilding a road is not socialism. Funding a police force is not socialism. Maintaining a military is not socialism.

BTW, thank you for stating your position clearly, concisely and coherently.

Dear, even if we go by the special pleading of that political-science jargon, then I can also use political-science jargon and claim, government of the People and for the People qualifies, as does Hoover Dam as a public sector means of production.

You made a blanket statement that "government is socialism".

I pointed out some examples of that NOT being true.

The Hoover Dam was a socialistic program, as it is a "means of production".

We are certainly a mixed economy.

The Hoover Dam is a fine argument that such "socialistic" programs have a positive role to play.

But when you try to spin "government of the People and for the People" as qualifying as socialism you are being dishonest or wrong.

Road: not socialism. Police: not socialism. Military: not socialism.

it implies ownership, dear.

SOcialism?

Yes, the standard assumption would be a government owned and operated "means of production".

But a government controlled production would also count.

Hence the Hoover Dam is a fine example of Socialism.

The Police? NO. They are not a "means of production". They fill a government function ie, keeping the peace.

A road? THe government owns the road, but the road is not a means of production.

A toll road is, but few roads are toll roads.

MOst roads are used by normal citizens going about their business, some productive uses, others simple personal uses.

When I drive down the road to go see a movie, that is not socialism.

It is utterly ridiculous to claim that it is.

 

[danielpalos]

Just incompetence from the clueless and the Causeless.

Well, I think I've been very clear that my "Cause" is free market capitalism. Reason being, free market capitalism is responsible for creating more millionaires and billionaires than anything ever devised by man. With free market capitalism and a free enterprise system, the individual is empowered to achieve whatever level of wealth they desire through their own initiatives, talents and skills.

Meanwhile, you have not articulated from where Socialism magically obtains it resources. What you present is a circular reasoning that is both "clueless and causeless." ...It is like thinking you can nutritionally sustain your life indefinitely by consuming your own feces.

Define free market capitalism. From my understanding, AnCaps don't exist any longer than male lions in a pride in the wild, without the Nurture of Socialism.

And,

Your straw man arguments are just, a lack of competence for your Cause. Just shillery?

REally? You don't know what he means by Free Market Capitalism? That's hardly credible.

Just incompetence from the clueless and the Causeless.

Well, I think I've been very clear that my "Cause" is free market capitalism. Reason being, free market capitalism is responsible for creating more millionaires and billionaires than anything ever devised by man. With free market capitalism and a free enterprise system, the individual is empowered to achieve whatever level of wealth they desire through their own initiatives, talents and skills.

Meanwhile, you have not articulated from where Socialism magically obtains it resources. What you present is a circular reasoning that is both "clueless and causeless." ...It is like thinking you can nutritionally sustain your life indefinitely by consuming your own feces.

Define free market capitalism. From my understanding, AnCaps don't exist any longer than male lions in a pride in the wild, without the Nurture of Socialism.

And,

Your straw man arguments are just, a lack of competence for your Cause. Just shillery?

REally? You don't know what he means by Free Market Capitalism? That's hardly credible.

dears, what will Always be literally incredible in this discussion, is any penchant for diversion instead of clarification of concepts.

What do those of the opposing view mean by free market capitalism, and how is it different from an AnCap?

 

[Correll]

Just incompetence from the clueless and the Causeless.

Well, I think I've been very clear that my "Cause" is free market capitalism. Reason being, free market capitalism is responsible for creating more millionaires and billionaires than anything ever devised by man. With free market capitalism and a free enterprise system, the individual is empowered to achieve whatever level of wealth they desire through their own initiatives, talents and skills.

Meanwhile, you have not articulated from where Socialism magically obtains it resources. What you present is a circular reasoning that is both "clueless and causeless." ...It is like thinking you can nutritionally sustain your life indefinitely by consuming your own feces.

Define free market capitalism. From my understanding, AnCaps don't exist any longer than male lions in a pride in the wild, without the Nurture of Socialism.

And,

Your straw man arguments are just, a lack of competence for your Cause. Just shillery?

REally? You don't know what he means by Free Market Capitalism? That's hardly credible.

Just incompetence from the clueless and the Causeless.

Well, I think I've been very clear that my "Cause" is free market capitalism. Reason being, free market capitalism is responsible for creating more millionaires and billionaires than anything ever devised by man. With free market capitalism and a free enterprise system, the individual is empowered to achieve whatever level of wealth they desire through their own initiatives, talents and skills.

Meanwhile, you have not articulated from where Socialism magically obtains it resources. What you present is a circular reasoning that is both "clueless and causeless." ...It is like thinking you can nutritionally sustain your life indefinitely by consuming your own feces.

Define free market capitalism. From my understanding, AnCaps don't exist any longer than male lions in a pride in the wild, without the Nurture of Socialism.

And,

Your straw man arguments are just, a lack of competence for your Cause. Just shillery?

REally? You don't know what he means by Free Market Capitalism? That's hardly credible.

dears, what will Always be literally incredible in this discussion, is any penchant for diversion instead of clarification of concepts.

What do those of the opposing view mean by free market capitalism, and how is it different from an AnCap?

Easy, small and/or limited government vs no government.

Why do you ask?

 

[Boss]

What do those of the opposing view mean by free market capitalism, and how is it different from an AnCap?

Anarco-capitalism produces a host of negative outcomes, which, by any objective measure, significantly exceed any positive outcomes. Distorts market parameters, breeds corruption, institutionalizes monopoly, and generates pollution through the collectivization of property as well as promoting tribalism through collectivization of identity.

A Free Market is a system where the prices for goods and services are set freely by consent between vendors and consumers. In which the laws and forces of supply and demands are free from any intervention by a government.

The difference lies in "peaceful, voluntary exchange" and a collusive partnership between business and government that uses coercion to subvert the free market.

 

[danielpalos]

Just incompetence from the clueless and the Causeless.

Well, I think I've been very clear that my "Cause" is free market capitalism. Reason being, free market capitalism is responsible for creating more millionaires and billionaires than anything ever devised by man. With free market capitalism and a free enterprise system, the individual is empowered to achieve whatever level of wealth they desire through their own initiatives, talents and skills.

Meanwhile, you have not articulated from where Socialism magically obtains it resources. What you present is a circular reasoning that is both "clueless and causeless." ...It is like thinking you can nutritionally sustain your life indefinitely by consuming your own feces.

Define free market capitalism. From my understanding, AnCaps don't exist any longer than male lions in a pride in the wild, without the Nurture of Socialism.

And,

Your straw man arguments are just, a lack of competence for your Cause. Just shillery?

REally? You don't know what he means by Free Market Capitalism? That's hardly credible.

Just incompetence from the clueless and the Causeless.

Well, I think I've been very clear that my "Cause" is free market capitalism. Reason being, free market capitalism is responsible for creating more millionaires and billionaires than anything ever devised by man. With free market capitalism and a free enterprise system, the individual is empowered to achieve whatever level of wealth they desire through their own initiatives, talents and skills.

Meanwhile, you have not articulated from where Socialism magically obtains it resources. What you present is a circular reasoning that is both "clueless and causeless." ...It is like thinking you can nutritionally sustain your life indefinitely by consuming your own feces.

Define free market capitalism. From my understanding, AnCaps don't exist any longer than male lions in a pride in the wild, without the Nurture of Socialism.

And,

Your straw man arguments are just, a lack of competence for your Cause. Just shillery?

REally? You don't know what he means by Free Market Capitalism? That's hardly credible.

dears, what will Always be literally incredible in this discussion, is any penchant for diversion instead of clarification of concepts.

What do those of the opposing view mean by free market capitalism, and how is it different from an AnCap?

Easy, small and/or limited government vs no government.

Why do you ask?

Simply because only no Government contains no socialism.

Thus, it is about Good management.