The Republicans really wonder about capitalism.

[The Rabbi]

You didnt just write that, did you? That capitalism (which is defined by a free market) is destroyed by free markets? Nah, no one is that dumb.

Apparently you're have a reading problem. That's not what I wrote.

You didnt write that pure capitalism is destrucrtive to free markets?

 

[Flopper]

Apparently you're have a reading problem. That's not what I wrote.

You didnt write that pure capitalism is destrucrtive to free markets?

No, I didn't say " Capitalism is destroyed by the free market." I said "Pure (unregulated) capitalism operates without governmental constrains and is destructive to the free market."

 

[Brutus]

Pure (unregulated) capitalism operates without governmental constrains and is destructive to the free market. That's why unregulated capitalism does not exist and hopefully never will.

insane, capitalism requires regulation. You are pretending to yourself that there is some version of capitalism somewhere that existed without government. Most capitalists, including Friedman, have always wanted goverment money, courts, police and pollution laws at a minimum.

Stop clowning and try to state your most substantive objection to capitalism.

 

[Brutus]

I grew up in a socialist economy. There isn't a socialist economy in America, and Obama isn't a socialist let alone a communist. A social democrat maybe.

Obama had
1) 2 communist parents

if a Republican had 2 Nazi parents would it matter?? Do parents influence their children?

2) voted to the left of Bernie Sanders( an open socialist)

BO actually voted to the left of Bernie( an open socialist) so BO is more socialist than Bernie

3) BO is loved b the CPUSA

as if the USA Communist Party is too dumb to know a fellow traveler when they see one.

4) is openly for single payer

many developed economies have single payer, they average about 70% of our standard of living and that is after we invent 80% of the goods services and knowledge they use. Without us to copy they have about 40% of our standard of living.

 

[rdean]

I grew up in a socialist economy. There isn't a socialist economy in America, and Obama isn't a socialist let alone a communist. A social democrat maybe.

Obama had
1) 2 communist parents

if a Republican had 2 Nazi parents would it matter?? Do parents influence their children?

2) voted to the left of Bernie Sanders( an open socialist)

BO actually voted to the left of Bernie( an open socialist) so BO is more socialist than Bernie

3) BO is loved b the CPUSA

as if the USA Communist Party is too dumb to know a fellow traveler when they see one.

4) is openly for single payer

many developed economies have single payer, they average about 70% of our standard of living and that is after we invent 80% of the goods services and knowledge they use. Without us to copy they have about 40% of our standard of living.

I'm pretty sure a lot of Republicans had two Nazi parents. How else could you explain it?

Nazis would never join a political party that welcomes gays and blacks.

 

[Charles_Main]

Why doesn't everyone agree that anybody who refers to Obama as a socialist doesn't understand the term?

Government ownership of the means of production you mean? Who was it again that took over controlling ownership of GM? Who was it who bailed out the financial sector with a million strings attached? I think we understand the term.

When the Government is taking over half of the Money people earn. They have owner ship of the means of Production.

Call it what you want.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Why doesn't everyone agree that anybody who refers to Obama as a socialist doesn't understand the term?

Government ownership of the means of production you mean? Who was it again that took over controlling ownership of GM? Who was it who bailed out the financial sector with a million strings attached? I think we understand the term.

I don't think the socialists mean public ownership of the means of production of a handful of companies. I'm almost positive they mean every company. If Obama is anything it's a fascist or a corporatist, not a socialist. They're certainly related ideologies, but not the same thing.

So basically, if it's not all, it's nothing? You want to stand there, eyes squinched shut and fingers screwed tightly in your ears, denying and denying and denying creeping socialism as long as it's creeping, rather than taking over everything in one fell swoop?

That would make you naive and stupid, or evil and underhanded enough to believe the rest of us are naive and stupid.

 

[Charles_Main]

I grew up in a socialist economy. There isn't a socialist economy in America, and Obama isn't a socialist let alone a communist. A social democrat maybe.

Obama had
1) 2 communist parents

if a Republican had 2 Nazi parents would it matter?? Do parents influence their children?



BO actually voted to the left of Bernie( an open socialist) so BO is more socialist than Bernie



as if the USA Communist Party is too dumb to know a fellow traveler when they see one.

4) is openly for single payer

many developed economies have single payer, they average about 70% of our standard of living and that is after we invent 80% of the goods services and knowledge they use. Without us to copy they have about 40% of our standard of living.

I'm pretty sure a lot of Republicans had two Nazi parents. How else could you explain it?

Nazis would never join a political party that welcomes gays and blacks.

According to everyone that watched, the hands down winner of the First GOP Debate was a black man. You ******* idiot. A republican Black man.

More of the same from the most Misguided, ignorant, and angry Lefty on the board. Way to go Deano

 

[Brutus]

I'm pretty sure a lot of Republicans had two Nazi parents. How else could you explain it?

it went over your head, the liberal was arguing that parents don't matter as in the case of BO's 2 communist parents

 

[Charles_Main]

I don't think the socialists mean public ownership of the means of production of a handful of companies. I'm almost positive they mean every company. If Obama is anything it's a fascist or a corporatist, not a socialist. They're certainly related ideologies, but not the same thing.

Obama is a hybrid he is not a pure Socialist you are correct. However there is no denying his own Personal brand is heavily influenced by Marxist/Socialist Ideas. He is also a pragmatist and understands if you want to move the US towards a More Socialist type System. You are not going to succeed by trying to make the change over night. Baby steps is the way to do it, and he knows it.

It is pretty hard to get a real Clear Picture of Obama's Vision, but I think it is safe to assume it would be something resembling European Socialist Democracies, With their Fusion of Socialism and Capitalism, and there tendency toward Big Government, nanny state Policies.

Regardless of whether you think he is a socialist or not. One has to admit Obama is clearly of the mind set that you should turn to government and trust in Government most of the time. He certainly has no faith in the Private Sector and often displays open hostility toward it. IMO like many Lefty Democrats today He has never saw a problem he did not think throwing Federal Money at would fix.

So Socialist or not, if we continue down the Path Obama has us on. You better believe 10 Years from now we will look much more Socialist then we do now. We will be pushing close to half the work force employed by Government. just like in some European Country when you poll our College Grads and ask them what they want to do with their lives. The Number one answer will be work for the government. Not, Be a doctor, or Business person.

If that Vision is one you think is sustainable and good for us all. Then by all means keep supporting Obama and the Left wing Democrats running that party today. Me I rather vote for an asshole, Money Grubbing, Heartless Republican, than contribute to the US continuing down the Path Liberal Democrats want us on.

 

[Brutus]

So basically, if it's not all, it's nothing? You want to stand there, eyes squinched shut and fingers screwed tightly in your ears, denying and denying and denying creeping socialism as long as it's creeping, rather than taking over everything in one fell swoop?

That would make you naive and stupid, or evil and underhanded enough to believe the rest of us are naive and stupid.

Norman Thomas (first socialist presidential canditate) :

The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of 'liberalism' they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened.

 

[Brutus]

Why do right wingers go on and on about "capitalism" when they clearly don't know what "supply and demand" is and think "investing" is merely "throwing away money"? How can you have a "serious" conversation? It's not possible.

if you oppose capitalism why not present your most substantive reason and quit clowning because you lack the IQ to ever engage in a serious discussion.

 

[Brutus]

Socialism?

Here in American the brand of socialism we have is really CLASSISM.

The WEALTHY enjoy the benefits of socialism, the rest of us struggle with their version of CLASS DRIVEN, cronny-capitalism.

so then why be so liberal and afraid to give us your best example of socialism for the wealthy??? What does your fear tell you about liberalism?

John McCain's grandfather and great grandfather were admirals. They pulled strings and through "rich people with connections" Affirmative Action, McCain was jumped over thousands, where he graduated from the Naval Academy 5th from the Bottom out of 899. That means he was like the most stupid person in every single class he was ever in and Republicans tried to make him president. So when Right wingers, who don't even believe in "science", make these "judgement calls", it makes you wonder if anyone is actually at home. Socialist indeed.

why be so afraid to give us your best example of socialism for the wealthy?? What does your fear tell us about liberalism? Nepotism for Kennedy's or McCains is not socialism, sorry!

 

[Flopper]

Pure (unregulated) capitalism operates without governmental constrains and is destructive to the free market. That's why unregulated capitalism does not exist and hopefully never will.

insane, capitalism requires regulation. You are pretending to yourself that there is some version of capitalism somewhere that existed without government. Most capitalists, including Friedman, have always wanted goverment money, courts, police and pollution laws at a minimum.

Stop clowning and try to state your most substantive objection to capitalism.

I said unregulated capitalism is theoretical and exist nowhere and hopefully never will. I have no objection to regulated capitalism. It coexists with socialism in almost every country on the planet.

 

[rdean]

The problem with right wingers is they believe that Americans helping Americans is "socialism" and "Marxism". They have fallen so low.

 

[editec]

You want to see a pure unfettered (by government) form of capitalism in action?

Study organized crime.

Now I know some of you will protest because government is constantly interferring with their BLACK markets so this concept doesn't make any sense.

But think of that police interference as just part of their overall cost of doing business since they all face that problem.

Study the way their pure unfettered capitalistic operations actually work.

THAT is pure unfettered deregulated capitalism in action.

PURE capitalism is doing whatever it takes to make more capital.

I'm fiarly sure that none of you, however much you love capitalism and loath governments, really mean that you want NO regulations interferring with capitalism.

What you probably mean is that you want fair restrains put upon players in the market.

Where most of us disagree is what restraints we think are fair.

And those ought to be the debates we are having instead of these ad hominen driven bitchfests.

 

[Uncensored2008]

It depends what you mean. I would view Sweden as a social democracy.

Well, it isn't a democracy - they have no direct vote. It is a parliamentary republic, as most of Europe is.

About half the economy is government spending but you are right, it has an active capitalist segment where capital is surprisingly free and relatively lightly taxed.

Actually, it's about 20%

Economy of Sweden - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

However, income and consumption taxes are very high. The government has nationalized large swaths of the economy they believe is in better hands in the government - education, infrastructure, healthcare for instance.

Education and infrastructure are socialized in most countries, including the USA. Healthcare is socialized in most of Europe. Sweden is pretty standard in this regard.

They are also not hesitant to use government power when needed. Sweden had a similar financial crisis in the early 1990s after a housing bubble collapsed. Rather than bailing out the banks, they just nationalized them, wiping out the shareholders. They cleaned the banks up then sold them back to the public.

You understand that in this act, they also revoked the cradle to grave welfare model? Sweden went fully capitalist.

In America, we don't have socialism or communism. We have a mixed economy, like every single other rich country in the world. The only difference is degree.

There are a lot more differences. The U.S. economy is a mess. Regulation and government sponsored corruption are more oppressive than taxation.

I grew up in a socialist economy. There isn't a socialist economy in America, and Obama isn't a socialist let alone a communist. A social democrat maybe.

Obama is a fascist and promotes a fascist economy. Too many people are reactionary and don't comprehend what is meant by this. Obama promotes the merger of corporate and government power structures, blurring the lines between the private and public sectors. Obama didn't have government take over healthcare, instead he positioned well connected corporations to manage healthcare with the full enforcement of the government behind them. He did the same with General Motors and Chrysler. This is classical fascism - the very definition.

 

[Uncensored2008]

And what socialist policies are those?

The bailout of GM is a perfect example. It was conducted to ensure that the corrupt and criminal UAW was protected from the repercussions of their past acts.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Think about it, no antitrust laws, and no regulations on issuance of stocks and bonds, lending, advertising, deceptive business practices, price fixing, insider trading, etc...

Yawn..

Utter nonsense. Monopolies and trusts ONLY exist at the behest of and with the collusion of the government. In a market situation, they do not and can not exist. The only way to stop a competitor for undercutting price is through the threat or actuality of violence. Where there is violence, there is government involvement - 100% of the time. Every monopoly this nation has seen, from railroads to oil barons to soon-to-be health care, is based on government collusion and mandate.

Businesses with enough resources are free to use any means to destroy competition and monopolize markets.

Where do you get such stupid ideas?

Take an introductory economics class.

You are absurdly ignorant.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Why do right wingers go on and on about "capitalism" when they clearly don't know what "supply and demand" is and think "investing" is merely "throwing away money"? How can you have a "serious" conversation? It's not possible.

You are an uneducated boob, determined to demonstrate your abject ignorance.

Don't let me stop you....