The Socialist Plan

[danielpalos]

Were the County Poor Houses socialism?

If they were funded with tax money, yes they were.

You and those who agree with you are nothing if not ignorant. Define socialism.

Socialism is not definable on these boards, socialism is anything a poster wants it to be. If the old poor houses were socialistic, America has had socialism since the Constitution. If helping the poor survive is socialism, is helping business survive, socialism? If so we have had that socialism since the Constitution also.
The greatest boon to the Republican party was when Marx added another form of socialism to the list of the various types of socialism, Scientific Socialism. Then Republicans could take up the chant "socialism leads to communism."

they already do; but are just cognitively dissonant; when they claim to believe in the Socialism of religion.

 

[bripat9643]

BS



How to Build a Railroad

Most business historians have assumed that the transcontinental railroads would never have been built without government subsidies. The free market would have failed to provide the adequate capital, or so the theory asserts. The evidence for this theory is that the Union Pacific and Central Pacific railroads, which were completed in the years after the War Between the States, received per-mile subsidies from the federal government in the form of low-interest loans as well as massive land grants. But there need not be cause and effect here: the subsidies were not needed to cause the transcontinental railroads to be built. We know this because, just as many roads and canals were privately financed in the early nineteenth century, a market entrepreneur built his own transcontinental railroad. James J. Hill built the Great Northern Railroad "without any government aid, even the right of way, through hundreds of miles of public lands, being paid for in cash," as Hill himself stated.[2]

The project simply required too much capital before any profit could be realized, so the rich folks of the day turned to the tool of government to make it happen.

In other words, there weren't going to be enough paying customers. That's another way to say it was a boondoggle.

Dude... that's kind of the point.

If enough paying customers were willing to buy tickets 5 to 7 years in advance, the private interests would have started the cash-flow flowing on their own.

Government is a necessary tool when the profit margin must be thin for efficiency, such as for roads and sewer systems and for fledgling industry which requires a LOT of investment up front.

It's a good thing that this country was built by men and women with vision instead of the TEA party, eh?

Y9u mean like AMTRAK? When is that going to turn a profit? How about all the mass transit systems in the country? Do any of them cover their costs? If a capital investment had a reasonable chance of making money, companies would be lining up to sink their money into it. The transcontinentals had no hope of making money.

You are aware of the fact that all the government subsidized transcontinentals went broke, aren't you?

Of course. But not before they were used to line the pockets of a few industrialists with enough spare change for some serious lobbying.

Do you really thinks that things were somehow different back then, and the investment class was altruistic in their goals?

That's funny.

So why do you want more of these boondoggles? I oppose them for the reasons outlined and also for moral reasons. The poor and middle class should not be taxed to make billionaires richer

 

[Freiheit]

Were the County Poor Houses socialism?

If they were funded with tax money, yes they were.

You and those who agree with you are nothing if not ignorant. Define socialism.

Socialism is not definable on these boards, socialism is anything a poster wants it to be. If the old poor houses were socialistic, America has had socialism since the Constitution. If helping the poor survive is socialism, is helping business survive, socialism? If so we have had that socialism since the Constitution also.
The greatest boon to the Republican party was when Marx added another form of socialism to the list of the various types of socialism, Scientific Socialism. Then Republicans could take up the chant "socialism leads to communism."

According to the above Dictionaries, text books, all reference sources are wrong. Then gnarfle schnark doddttlle raffletle nattllesete xenscyzt. Looky here looky here I just won every argument anyone could conceive of close the forum and everyone go home.

 

[regent]

Are we defining a single program or an nation's entire economy? Most industrial nations on this earth today, have a mixed economic system, some socialism and some capitalism. Does the United States have mixed economy and how long have we had it?

 

[Conservative65]

What you call Sanders' 'socialist' agenda, point by point, is more popular with the American people than the average rightwing anti-socialist agenda.

It's popular with those who think all those things he supports is owed to them and that someone else should be forced to provide them. In other words, it's popular with the leeches of society.

 

[Conservative65]

Are we defining a single program or an nation's entire economy? Most industrial nations on this earth today, have a mixed economic system, some socialism and some capitalism. Does the United States have mixed economy and how long have we had it?

We do have a mixed economy. The problem is as time goes on, more and more socialism is creeping in because more and more people are have the entitlement mentality that it's the government's job to provide for them what they should be providing for themselves.

 

[Conservative65]

What you call Sanders' 'socialist' agenda, point by point, is more popular with the American people than the average rightwing anti-socialist agenda.

That IS Sanders platform RETARD. NOT what I am calling it what HE is calling it idiot. Do you DENY Sanders is a socialist? HE says He is.

He's a democratic socialist. The best position anyone can have in the 21st century.

A socialist, no matter how they get to power, is the worst thing that can exist.

A socialist democracy is nothing more than those not paying for what they get having a vote that forces others to do it for them. Why wouldn't they like it. They get what they should be providing themselves and are allowed to make the determination that someone else has to provide it to them.

 

[regent]

Should there be enough jobs at a living wage available for the able bodied to work?

 

[Freiheit]

Are we defining a single program or an nation's entire economy? Most industrial nations on this earth today, have a mixed economic system, some socialism and some capitalism. Does the United States have mixed economy and how long have we had it?

Socialism is defined as government or collective ownership of the means of production and distribution. Welfare benefits are not defined as socialism. Welfare benefits are just that extorted charity.

 

[The Rabbi]

Are we defining a single program or an nation's entire economy? Most industrial nations on this earth today, have a mixed economic system, some socialism and some capitalism. Does the United States have mixed economy and how long have we had it?

Socialism is defined as government or collective ownership of the means of production and distribution. Welfare benefits are not defined as socialism. Welfare benefits are just that extorted charity.

You're confusing communism with socialism. Communism calls for state ownership of means of production. Socialism calls for state control. Two different things.

 

[Freiheit]

Are we defining a single program or an nation's entire economy? Most industrial nations on this earth today, have a mixed economic system, some socialism and some capitalism. Does the United States have mixed economy and how long have we had it?

Socialism is defined as government or collective ownership of the means of production and distribution. Welfare benefits are not defined as socialism. Welfare benefits are just that extorted charity.

You're confusing communism with socialism. Communism calls for state ownership of means of production. Socialism calls for state control. Two different things.

Interestingly enough Marx used Communism and Socialism interchangeably in fact socialism is a phase on the path to communism.
Satisfy yourself and look up the definition of Socialism Merriam Webster says:

Full Definition of SOCIALISM
1
: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2
a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property

b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3
: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done
If you paid for a college degree that gave you the definition you used you were cheated and should look at everything you learned with a grain of salt.

 

[BluesLegend]

Should there be enough jobs at a living wage available for the able bodied to work?

Not possible, the establishment has chosen ideology, regulations, and high taxes over jobs.

 

[The Rabbi]

Are we defining a single program or an nation's entire economy? Most industrial nations on this earth today, have a mixed economic system, some socialism and some capitalism. Does the United States have mixed economy and how long have we had it?

Socialism is defined as government or collective ownership of the means of production and distribution. Welfare benefits are not defined as socialism. Welfare benefits are just that extorted charity.

You're confusing communism with socialism. Communism calls for state ownership of means of production. Socialism calls for state control. Two different things.

Interestingly enough Marx used Communism and Socialism interchangeably in fact socialism is a phase on the path to communism.
Satisfy yourself and look up the definition of Socialism Merriam Webster says:

Full Definition of SOCIALISM
1
: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2
a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property

b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3
: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done
If you paid for a college degree that gave you the definition you used you were cheated and should look at everything you learned with a grain of salt.

If you rely on Marx then both Cuba and Denmark share the same system. I'd say you were cheated out of a brain. Sue.

 

[Meathead]

America under Sanders, and quite possibly Hillary 2.0, would look like far more Zimbabwe than Denmark. Even worse, Detroit.

 

[Freiheit]

Are we defining a single program or an nation's entire economy? Most industrial nations on this earth today, have a mixed economic system, some socialism and some capitalism. Does the United States have mixed economy and how long have we had it?

Socialism is defined as government or collective ownership of the means of production and distribution. Welfare benefits are not defined as socialism. Welfare benefits are just that extorted charity.

You're confusing communism with socialism. Communism calls for state ownership of means of production. Socialism calls for state control. Two different things.

Interestingly enough Marx used Communism and Socialism interchangeably in fact socialism is a phase on the path to communism.
Satisfy yourself and look up the definition of Socialism Merriam Webster says:

Full Definition of SOCIALISM
1
: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2
a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property

b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3
: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done
If you paid for a college degree that gave you the definition you used you were cheated and should look at everything you learned with a grain of salt.

If you rely on Marx then both Cuba and Denmark share the same system. I'd say you were cheated out of a brain. Sue.

If reading the source material means I have no brain I agree. It seems to me that reading the source material indicates enough interest to know what I am talking about as for you "“If silence be good for the wise, how much better for fools”.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Are we defining a single program or an nation's entire economy? Most industrial nations on this earth today, have a mixed economic system, some socialism and some capitalism. Does the United States have mixed economy and how long have we had it?

Socialism is defined as government or collective ownership of the means of production and distribution. Welfare benefits are not defined as socialism. Welfare benefits are just that extorted charity.

You're confusing communism with socialism. Communism calls for state ownership of means of production. Socialism calls for state control. Two different things.

Interestingly enough Marx used Communism and Socialism interchangeably in fact socialism is a phase on the path to communism.
Satisfy yourself and look up the definition of Socialism Merriam Webster says:

Full Definition of SOCIALISM
1
: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2
a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property

b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3
: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done
If you paid for a college degree that gave you the definition you used you were cheated and should look at everything you learned with a grain of salt.

Capitalism, then Socialism, the Communism, if you make it that far. Good work, boys...

 

[PaintMyHouse]

America under Sanders, and quite possibly Hillary 2.0, would look like far more Zimbabwe than Denmark. Even worse, Detroit.

There's not a reason in the world why that would be true. We have soft informal socialism here, a mixed economy but not a very good one. That can be fixed.

 

[FJO]

What you call Sanders' 'socialist' agenda, point by point, is more popular with the American people than the average rightwing anti-socialist agenda.

That IS Sanders platform RETARD. NOT what I am calling it what HE is calling it idiot. Do you DENY Sanders is a socialist? HE says He is.

He's a democratic socialist. The best position anyone can have in the 21st century.

Except those who has to pay for socialist generosity. Which is never the generous socialist, generous with someone else's money. Which - eventually - runs out.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Should there be enough jobs at a living wage available for the able bodied to work?

Not possible, the establishment has chosen ideology, regulations, and high taxes over jobs.

Capitalism, by definition, is not about everyone having a job. When unemployment is too low that is a bad thing for capitalists, it causes Wage Inflation.

 

[The Rabbi]

Are we defining a single program or an nation's entire economy? Most industrial nations on this earth today, have a mixed economic system, some socialism and some capitalism. Does the United States have mixed economy and how long have we had it?

Socialism is defined as government or collective ownership of the means of production and distribution. Welfare benefits are not defined as socialism. Welfare benefits are just that extorted charity.

You're confusing communism with socialism. Communism calls for state ownership of means of production. Socialism calls for state control. Two different things.

Interestingly enough Marx used Communism and Socialism interchangeably in fact socialism is a phase on the path to communism.
Satisfy yourself and look up the definition of Socialism Merriam Webster says:

Full Definition of SOCIALISM
1
: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2
a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property

b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3
: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done
If you paid for a college degree that gave you the definition you used you were cheated and should look at everything you learned with a grain of salt.

If you rely on Marx then both Cuba and Denmark share the same system. I'd say you were cheated out of a brain. Sue.

If reading the source material means I have no brain I agree. It seems to me that reading the source material indicates enough interest to know what I am talking about as for you "“If silence be good for the wise, how much better for fools”.

"Source material." <snicker>
You dont know what the term means. You dont know what you're talking about.
The adage: A little knowledge is an absurd thing" comes to mind here.