The difference between capitalism and socialism in a nutshell

[Kosh]

Thus we need to debate issues, evaluate policies and determine which works best - an unregulated system allowed to police itself, or a system wherein the government decides - the answer is a pragmatic approach,. The balance is the issue, and one which cannot be intelligently debated by those stuck in an ideological box.

Coming from you, that's a hoot. Since NOBODY is advocating eliminating all business regulations you're just kicking around a lame strawman.

Can you read without bias? I don't believe you can, stuck as you are in that little box of ideology, any criticism of that ideology usually results in a claim that the author who challenges that ideology is being illogical and many times includes a personal attack.

"The answer is a pragmatic approach" ! It is not a one or the other theory of governance, it is one which seeks the best solution to the issue at hand. Your bias seems to lead you into a dishonest effort to rebut my comments, that being the hyperbolic example [ "Since NOBODY is advocating eliminating all business regulations you're just kicking around a lame strawman"].

To deny that the Crazy Right Wing isn't opposed to government, and the Libertarian movement wants less regulation and less interference into the lives of our citizens and business is patently dishonest. It is a theme presented everyday on this message board.

I don't advocate an authoritarian government; I'd never consider an invasive medical procedure, medically unnecessary, for a pregnant women who sought and abortion legally authorized by the Supreme Court. Nor do I want a laissez faire government approach to industry whose work product produces pollution of our air,
water or soil.

Sometimes a government needs to exercise its authority and other times to take a hands off approach. Using Art. I, Sec 8 and the 10th Amendment to circumvent long established and necessary governance is insane; some believe allowing a problem to fester when a medial treatment will remedy the situation is insane - and some of those are the ideologues who always hide behind the wording of the Second Amendment..

The irony impaired far left drones and their comments!

hyperbolical.

Yes, hyperbolical (see here): Also, see related terms too.

Hyperbolical Define Hyperbolical at Dictionary.com




Thanks for sharing, your posts are always enlightening (sarcasm alert).

This form the far left drone that continues to prost far left propaganda..

 

[Wry Catcher]

You failed to rebut my post (my argument) and instead called me a "fucking Idiot".

Actually, if you had been paying attention you'd see that I did refute your post, and called you a fucking idiot after.

This is not a refutation, "Are you seriously trying to argue that any form of taxation, and any form of basic government service, is socialism?"

It is a question asked in the form of a Straw Man. Never did I suggest Socialism is not an economic system. If the dichotomy is between Private Sector and Public Sector, which is implied in most of this thread, a police dept is a public sector example of Socialism in America.

A. Police Depts are employed by the public, and paid by the public and administrated by publicly elected employees hire by and paid by the public;

B. There is no competition with a police dept;

C. There is no profit motive assumed with a police dept.

D. Police Depts. do not pay taxes.

E. Police Depts. Water Depts, Gas and Electric Depts are public utilities, thus:

In other words a socialist economic system places utilities under public rather than private control and government officials manage the utilities to achieve policy goals rather than to build profit.

So they ain't a private sector entity, but a public untility; a public utility is more socialistic than the PPACA, which still involve private insurance companies.

Comments w/o ad hominems

 

[Wry Catcher]

Thus we need to debate issues, evaluate policies and determine which works best - an unregulated system allowed to police itself, or a system wherein the government decides - the answer is a pragmatic approach,. The balance is the issue, and one which cannot be intelligently debated by those stuck in an ideological box.

Coming from you, that's a hoot. Since NOBODY is advocating eliminating all business regulations you're just kicking around a lame strawman.

Can you read without bias? I don't believe you can, stuck as you are in that little box of ideology, any criticism of that ideology usually results in a claim that the author who challenges that ideology is being illogical and many times includes a personal attack.

"The answer is a pragmatic approach" ! It is not a one or the other theory of governance, it is one which seeks the best solution to the issue at hand. Your bias seems to lead you into a dishonest effort to rebut my comments, that being the hyperbolic example [ "Since NOBODY is advocating eliminating all business regulations you're just kicking around a lame strawman"].

To deny that the Crazy Right Wing isn't opposed to government, and the Libertarian movement wants less regulation and less interference into the lives of our citizens and business is patently dishonest. It is a theme presented everyday on this message board.

I don't advocate an authoritarian government; I'd never consider an invasive medical procedure, medically unnecessary, for a pregnant women who sought and abortion legally authorized by the Supreme Court. Nor do I want a laissez faire government approach to industry whose work product produces pollution of our air,
water or soil.

Sometimes a government needs to exercise its authority and other times to take a hands off approach. Using Art. I, Sec 8 and the 10th Amendment to circumvent long established and necessary governance is insane; some believe allowing a problem to fester when a medial treatment will remedy the situation is insane - and some of those are the ideologues who always hide behind the wording of the Second Amendment..

The irony impaired far left drones and their comments!

hyperbolical.

Yes, hyperbolical (see here): Also, see related terms too.

Hyperbolical Define Hyperbolical at Dictionary.com




Thanks for sharing, your posts are always enlightening (sarcasm alert).

This form the far left drone that continues to prost far left propaganda..

Are you drunk or do you regularly post a message without reviewing it for typos and stupidity?

 

[SwimExpert]

Coming from you, that's a hoot. Since NOBODY is advocating eliminating all business regulations you're just kicking around a lame strawman.

Can you read without bias? I don't believe you can, stuck as you are in that little box of ideology, any criticism of that ideology usually results in a claim that the author who challenges that ideology is being illogical and many times includes a personal attack.

"The answer is a pragmatic approach" ! It is not a one or the other theory of governance, it is one which seeks the best solution to the issue at hand. Your bias seems to lead you into a dishonest effort to rebut my comments, that being the hyperbolic example [ "Since NOBODY is advocating eliminating all business regulations you're just kicking around a lame strawman"].

To deny that the Crazy Right Wing isn't opposed to government, and the Libertarian movement wants less regulation and less interference into the lives of our citizens and business is patently dishonest. It is a theme presented everyday on this message board.

I don't advocate an authoritarian government; I'd never consider an invasive medical procedure, medically unnecessary, for a pregnant women who sought and abortion legally authorized by the Supreme Court. Nor do I want a laissez faire government approach to industry whose work product produces pollution of our air,
water or soil.

Sometimes a government needs to exercise its authority and other times to take a hands off approach. Using Art. I, Sec 8 and the 10th Amendment to circumvent long established and necessary governance is insane; some believe allowing a problem to fester when a medial treatment will remedy the situation is insane - and some of those are the ideologues who always hide behind the wording of the Second Amendment..

The irony impaired far left drones and their comments!

hyperbolical.

Yes, hyperbolical (see here): Also, see related terms too.

Hyperbolical Define Hyperbolical at Dictionary.com




Thanks for sharing, your posts are always enlightening (sarcasm alert).

This form the far left drone that continues to prost far left propaganda..

Are you drunk or do you regularly post a message without reviewing it for typos and stupidity?

*GASP!*

No rebuttal there, what are you thinking posting like that?

 

[Kosh]

You failed to rebut my post (my argument) and instead called me a "fucking Idiot".

Actually, if you had been paying attention you'd see that I did refute your post, and called you a fucking idiot after.

This is not a refutation, "Are you seriously trying to argue that any form of taxation, and any form of basic government service, is socialism?"

It is a question asked in the form of a Straw Man. Never did I suggest Socialism is not an economic system. If the dichotomy is between Private Sector and Public Sector, which is implied in most of this thread, a police dept is a public sector example of Socialism in America.

A. Police Depts are employed by the public, and paid by the public and administrated by publicly elected employees hire by and paid by the public;

B. There is no competition with a police dept;

C. There is no profit motive assumed with a police dept.

D. Police Depts. do not pay taxes.

E. Police Depts. Water Depts, Gas and Electric Depts are public utilities, thus:

In other words a socialist economic system places utilities under public rather than private control and government officials manage the utilities to achieve policy goals rather than to build profit.

So they ain't a private sector entity, but a public untility; a public utility is more socialistic than the PPACA, which still involve privage insurance companies.

Coming from you, that's a hoot. Since NOBODY is advocating eliminating all business regulations you're just kicking around a lame strawman.

Can you read without bias? I don't believe you can, stuck as you are in that little box of ideology, any criticism of that ideology usually results in a claim that the author who challenges that ideology is being illogical and many times includes a personal attack.

"The answer is a pragmatic approach" ! It is not a one or the other theory of governance, it is one which seeks the best solution to the issue at hand. Your bias seems to lead you into a dishonest effort to rebut my comments, that being the hyperbolic example [ "Since NOBODY is advocating eliminating all business regulations you're just kicking around a lame strawman"].

To deny that the Crazy Right Wing isn't opposed to government, and the Libertarian movement wants less regulation and less interference into the lives of our citizens and business is patently dishonest. It is a theme presented everyday on this message board.

I don't advocate an authoritarian government; I'd never consider an invasive medical procedure, medically unnecessary, for a pregnant women who sought and abortion legally authorized by the Supreme Court. Nor do I want a laissez faire government approach to industry whose work product produces pollution of our air,
water or soil.

Sometimes a government needs to exercise its authority and other times to take a hands off approach. Using Art. I, Sec 8 and the 10th Amendment to circumvent long established and necessary governance is insane; some believe allowing a problem to fester when a medial treatment will remedy the situation is insane - and some of those are the ideologues who always hide behind the wording of the Second Amendment..

The irony impaired far left drones and their comments!

hyperbolical.

Yes, hyperbolical (see here): Also, see related terms too.

Hyperbolical Define Hyperbolical at Dictionary.com




Thanks for sharing, your posts are always enlightening (sarcasm alert).

This form the far left drone that continues to prost far left propaganda..

Are you drunk or do you regularly post a message without reviewing it for typos and stupidity?

This is from a far left drone..

 

[Kosh]

Can you read without bias? I don't believe you can, stuck as you are in that little box of ideology, any criticism of that ideology usually results in a claim that the author who challenges that ideology is being illogical and many times includes a personal attack.

"The answer is a pragmatic approach" ! It is not a one or the other theory of governance, it is one which seeks the best solution to the issue at hand. Your bias seems to lead you into a dishonest effort to rebut my comments, that being the hyperbolic example [ "Since NOBODY is advocating eliminating all business regulations you're just kicking around a lame strawman"].

To deny that the Crazy Right Wing isn't opposed to government, and the Libertarian movement wants less regulation and less interference into the lives of our citizens and business is patently dishonest. It is a theme presented everyday on this message board.

I don't advocate an authoritarian government; I'd never consider an invasive medical procedure, medically unnecessary, for a pregnant women who sought and abortion legally authorized by the Supreme Court. Nor do I want a laissez faire government approach to industry whose work product produces pollution of our air,
water or soil.

Sometimes a government needs to exercise its authority and other times to take a hands off approach. Using Art. I, Sec 8 and the 10th Amendment to circumvent long established and necessary governance is insane; some believe allowing a problem to fester when a medial treatment will remedy the situation is insane - and some of those are the ideologues who always hide behind the wording of the Second Amendment..

The irony impaired far left drones and their comments!

hyperbolical.

Yes, hyperbolical (see here): Also, see related terms too.

Hyperbolical Define Hyperbolical at Dictionary.com




Thanks for sharing, your posts are always enlightening (sarcasm alert).

This form the far left drone that continues to prost far left propaganda..

Are you drunk or do you regularly post a message without reviewing it for typos and stupidity?

*GASP!*

No rebuttal there, what are you thinking posting like that?

It is a part of the far left drone programing to post propaganda not connected to reality, but hey if you think it is connected to reality that does not help your case..

 

[kaz]

But guess who is paying the "income taxes" - not the rich , the middle class is. Because Americans have been conditioned to confuse patriotism with stupidity..

Since the top 1% earn 20% of income and pay 40% of income taxes and the top 5% pay 60% and the top 20% pay 94% of all income taxes, that would seem to be unsupported by the facts.

Really? That's a fact?


Romney Avoids Taxes via Loophole Cutting Mormon Donations

.

Those are IRS statistics. We have higher rates and more tax shelters, showing an example of a tax shelter doesn't refute what I said. But overall, it's income verus taxes, and I gave you the end result.

You are forgetting that the costs of doing business will be pass on to the consumers.

So "income" taxes are paid by the poor and middle class.

The Sixteenth "amendment" and the Revenue Act of 1944 ought to be repealed.

.

No, I'm not forgetting that, but that is a recast of your argument, not a clarification of it. All taxes are in the end regressive because taxes are passed on to consumers. And the poorer you are, the higher percentage of your income you spend. The problem with all the shifting in taxes to try to change that which cannot be changed is they cause economic inefficiency which drags down the economy. That is why taxes should be direct and flat, it is the best tax structure for everyone, including the "poor." That is true, and we both know it's true, and we both know that isn't what you meant when you said the middle class pay most income taxes.

 

[Edgetho]

If dimocraps don't like the past, they simply change it...

College plaque in Land of Lincoln labels Abe a Democrat Fox News

Abraham Lincoln, a Democrat?

So says a plaque at a public university in Lincoln’s home state of Illinois, where, since 1905, students at Northeastern Illinois University in Chicago have seen the nation’s 16th president — and quite possibly its most influential — honored as a democrat.

 

[Uncensored2008]

That is all you need to know. In a fascist country individuals have no rights. They can only exercise whatever "privileges" the bureaucrats allow them to exercise.

That's all YOU know because you've never bothered to study what fascism actually is. You're quite literally arguing your own ignorance, insisting that because that one sentence is all you know of fascism, that's all anyone else needs to know.

And you're obviously wrong. Fascism is far, far more than you comprehend. Encompassing dictatorship, belligerent nationalism, state sanctioned racism, violent oppression of the press, free speech and opposition, and stringent socio-economic controls.

None of which are regulated capitalism.

You simply don't know what you're talking about. And worse, don't want to know.

Yet here YOU are arguing from ignorance as well. "Il Fascisti" says not a word about "state sanctioned racism" and advocates for a press which is managed, yet "free." Remember, Mussolini rose from the radical press. He advocated for "fact checkers" in government to ensure "accuracy," much as the fascist democrats today demand. The democrats will also claim such a system is "freedom of the press."

The Doctrine of Fascism by Benito Mussolini Reviews Discussion Bookclubs Lists

 

[Uncensored2008]

[

Are you drunk or do you regularly post a message without reviewing it for typos and stupidity?

It's good to see you post comments w/o ad homs......

 

[Skylar]

That is all you need to know. In a fascist country individuals have no rights. They can only exercise whatever "privileges" the bureaucrats allow them to exercise.

That's all YOU know because you've never bothered to study what fascism actually is. You're quite literally arguing your own ignorance, insisting that because that one sentence is all you know of fascism, that's all anyone else needs to know.

And you're obviously wrong. Fascism is far, far more than you comprehend. Encompassing dictatorship, belligerent nationalism, state sanctioned racism, violent oppression of the press, free speech and opposition, and stringent socio-economic controls.

None of which are regulated capitalism.

You simply don't know what you're talking about. And worse, don't want to know.

Yet here YOU are arguing from ignorance as well. "Il Fascisti" says not a word about "state sanctioned racism" and advocates for a press which is managed, yet "free." Remember, Mussolini rose from the radical press. He advocated for "fact checkers" in government to ensure "accuracy," much as the fascist democrats today demand. The democrats will also claim such a system is "freedom of the press."

The Doctrine of Fascism by Benito Mussolini Reviews Discussion Bookclubs Lists

Il Fascisti may not. But the manifesto of the racist scientists most certainly does:

MANIFESTO OF THE RACIST SCIENTISTS

6. There exists by now a pure "Italian race". This premise is not based on the confusion of the biological concept of race as the historical-linguistic concept of a people and of a nation, but on the purist kinship of blood which unites the Italians of today to the generations which have populated Italy for millennia. This ancient purity of blood is the greatest title of nobility of the Italian Nation.

7. It is time that the Italians proclaim themselves frankly racist. All the work that the regime in Italy has done until now is founded in racism. Reference to racial concepts has always been very frequent in the speeches of the Leader. The question of racism in Italy ought to be treated from a purely biological point of view, without philosophic or religious intentions. The conception of racism in Italy ought to be essentially Italian and its direction Aryan-Nordic. This does not mean, however, to introduce into Italy the theories of German racism as they are or to claim that the Italians and the Scandinavians are the same. But it intends only to point out to the Italians a physical and especially psychological model of the human race which in its purely European characteristics is completely separated from all of the non-European races, this means to elevate the Italian to an ideal of superior self-consciousness and of greater responsibility.

RacistScientists

Written in the Italian ministry of Popular Culture on the explicit instructions of Mussolini himself. With racial purity laws passed shortly afterward.

 

[Skylar]

\
Remember, Mussolini rose from the radical press. He advocated for "fact checkers" in government to ensure "accuracy," much as the fascist democrats today demand. The democrats will also claim such a system is "freedom of the press."

'Much as' the democrats today demand, huh? Under Fascist Italy, any newspaper could be confiscated by the government for containing 'inaccurate information' or that might lead to contempt of the government.

There's nothing like that in our country.

Books from ideologies not favored by the Fascist government were banned. Nothing from Marx, nothing about Jews nothing about freemasonry, etc could be distributed. It could be held on only in 'special sections' of library that you had to get a permit to enter.

There's nothing like that in our country.

Letters were routinely opened and checked by State censors. Phone calls were routinely interrrupted by censors if the topic of the conversation was opposed by the Ministry of Popular Culture.

There's nothing like that in our country.

 

[defcon4]

Letters were routinely opened and checked by State censors. Phone calls were routinely interrrupted by censors if the topic of the conversation was opposed by the Ministry of Popular Culture.

There's nothing like that in our country.

NSA

 

[Skylar]

Letters were routinely opened and checked by State censors. Phone calls were routinely interrrupted by censors if the topic of the conversation was opposed by the Ministry of Popular Culture.

There's nothing like that in our country.

NSA

The NSA doesn't open letters or interrupt phone calls. Nor do they censor anything.

 

[defcon4]

Letters were routinely opened and checked by State censors. Phone calls were routinely interrrupted by censors if the topic of the conversation was opposed by the Ministry of Popular Culture.

There's nothing like that in our country.

NSA

The NSA doesn't open letters or interrupt phone calls. Nor do they censor anything.

Where do you live my dear? Clue >>> You are on an electronic device using the internet. The same internet you use for emails. You probably use mobile phone. Oh.. I see, applying the same evesdropping and monitoring activity to electronic devices is too much of a stretch for you to understand.

 

[Skylar]

Letters were routinely opened and checked by State censors. Phone calls were routinely interrrupted by censors if the topic of the conversation was opposed by the Ministry of Popular Culture.

There's nothing like that in our country.

NSA

The NSA doesn't open letters or interrupt phone calls. Nor do they censor anything.

Where do you live my dear? Clue >>> You are on an electronic device using the internet. The same internet you use for emails. You probably use mobile phone. Oh.. I see, applying the same evesdropping and monitoring activity to electronic devices is too much of a stretch for you to understand.

And where do you live, hun? Because our conversation isn't being censored by the NSA. Nor are your phone conversations being interrupted by censors when they don't like the topic of your conversation.

 

[defcon4]

Letters were routinely opened and checked by State censors. Phone calls were routinely interrrupted by censors if the topic of the conversation was opposed by the Ministry of Popular Culture.

There's nothing like that in our country.

NSA

The NSA doesn't open letters or interrupt phone calls. Nor do they censor anything.

Where do you live my dear? Clue >>> You are on an electronic device using the internet. The same internet you use for emails. You probably use mobile phone. Oh.. I see, applying the same evesdropping and monitoring activity to electronic devices is too much of a stretch for you to understand.

And where do you live, hun? Because our conversation isn't being censored by the NSA. Nor are your phone conversations being interrupted by censors when they don't like the topic of your conversation.

 

[Skylar]

Letters were routinely opened and checked by State censors. Phone calls were routinely interrrupted by censors if the topic of the conversation was opposed by the Ministry of Popular Culture.

There's nothing like that in our country.

NSA

The NSA doesn't open letters or interrupt phone calls. Nor do they censor anything.

Where do you live my dear? Clue >>> You are on an electronic device using the internet. The same internet you use for emails. You probably use mobile phone. Oh.. I see, applying the same evesdropping and monitoring activity to electronic devices is too much of a stretch for you to understand.

And where do you live, hun? Because our conversation isn't being censored by the NSA. Nor are your phone conversations being interrupted by censors when they don't like the topic of your conversation.

And yet the NSA left that completely alone. Either you've completely confounded their vast censorship network with an emoticon.....or they don't censor anything.

 

[Contumacious]

\
Remember, Mussolini rose from the radical press. He advocated for "fact checkers" in government to ensure "accuracy," much as the fascist democrats today demand. The democrats will also claim such a system is "freedom of the press."

'Much as' the democrats today demand, huh? Under Fascist Italy, any newspaper could be confiscated by the government for containing 'inaccurate information' or that might lead to contempt of the government.

There's nothing like that in our country.

Books from ideologies not favored by the Fascist government were banned. Nothing from Marx, nothing about Jews nothing about freemasonry, etc could be distributed. It could be held on only in 'special sections' of library that you had to get a permit to enter.

There's nothing like that in our country.

Letters were routinely opened and checked by State censors. Phone calls were routinely interrrupted by censors if the topic of the conversation was opposed by the Ministry of Popular Culture.

There's nothing like that in our country.

As previously indicated in a fascist country , the bureaucrats micromanage the country.

The bureaucrats know that they can intervene in economic and social issues at anytime when THEY THEY THEY determine that is proper.

It is up to them to decide what degree of social and economic PRIVILEGES will be allowed.

That they have allowed us to certain certain PRIVILEGES is pure luck.


.


.


.

 

[Skylar]

\
Remember, Mussolini rose from the radical press. He advocated for "fact checkers" in government to ensure "accuracy," much as the fascist democrats today demand. The democrats will also claim such a system is "freedom of the press."

'Much as' the democrats today demand, huh? Under Fascist Italy, any newspaper could be confiscated by the government for containing 'inaccurate information' or that might lead to contempt of the government.

There's nothing like that in our country.

Books from ideologies not favored by the Fascist government were banned. Nothing from Marx, nothing about Jews nothing about freemasonry, etc could be distributed. It could be held on only in 'special sections' of library that you had to get a permit to enter.

There's nothing like that in our country.

Letters were routinely opened and checked by State censors. Phone calls were routinely interrrupted by censors if the topic of the conversation was opposed by the Ministry of Popular Culture.

There's nothing like that in our country.

As previously indicated in a fascist country , the bureaucrats micromanage the country.

The bureaucrats know that they can intervene in economic and social issues at anytime when THEY THEY THEY determine that is proper.

It is up to them to decide what degree of social and economic PRIVILEGES will be allowed.

That they have allowed us to certain certain PRIVILEGES is pure luck.


.


.


.

Wow. A larger font. And yet you still couldn't come even remotely close to the meaning of fascism. Fascism involves dictatorship...which we don't have. Belligerent nationalism...which we don't have. Violent suppression of the press and political opposition....which we don't have. State sanctioned racism....which we don't have. And stringent socioeconomic controls....which we don't have.

But other than failing to meet virtually every defining characteristic of fascism, yeah.....we're a spot on match.