To Remove Lead Water Pipes, First You Must Find Them

[Rigby5]

It could be a ruse to enable Biden to throw a lot of money at a non-existing problem, and then

Depends.
Some investments have a greater pay off than cost, so are worth it.
Example are Hoover dam, the St. Lawrence Seaway, TVA, etc.
I would love rural broadband myself.
When government does pump priming borrowing and spending, it can enrich consumers and boost the whole economy, making the initial borrowing small in comparison, due to inflation.
So it depends on if well researched and executed.

If you're attempting to address any of my comments, you should know that I left this discussion because it's a portrayal of the same sort of ignorance that is being displayed by Americans on the Covid vaccine.

As a catch-all reply though, I consider your comments to be nuanced enough to serve for further discussion. The reason being, the US is too far behind already for thinking of piecemeal fixes. My opinion is that it's going to take huge spending and the inherent risks attached.

Americans are angry and the attack against government is at least a symbolic effort to bring down bad government. There is risk of it growing into something that is more than just a symbolic joke.

Biden must succeed this time in breaking the country away from the 'American way', which is inequality and the hold the very wealthy has on the ordinary people.

Don't forget, the Jan.6th. riot was against government, not just one side of governemnt.

If Biden doesn't succeed then Trump is going to be back offering his solution to the problems in America. That will be a fascist bid for power.

And then no solution to the problem, because that would be contrary to a fascist agenda.

Have Americans matured enough yet to just leave the Trump experience in the dust, as a horrible experience? I think there are several indications now that would be true!

First I should provide the context that I am extreme left wing, liberal, progressive, socialist, etc.
But I did not mind the congress occupation because I do think our government is way corrupt, even though I do not think the election was rigged more than the usual poor choice of candidates.
What I don't like about our government are illegal legislation like Prohibition, the War on Drugs, federal gun laws, federal health laws, 3 Strikes, asset forfeiture, illegal wars, etc.

But I do like the idea of investing in mass transit, transportation in general, and stimulus.

other than mass transit thats not a left wing liberal,, more like right wing libertarian,

and the best stimulus happens the same way,, local,, the feds always take a big cut and use it as a political slush fund

as for mas transit,, like everything the government gets involved in it cost more and the waste is usually off the charts,,

best to let that happen on a local level where the needs came be evaluated first hand and waste left to a minimum,,

Leftwing, progressive, liberal, socialists are always for local over federal.
Federal it too far away, costs too much to contact or try to influence, and are always corrupt by corporate interests.
We need large government to counter large corruption, but it always provides its own corruption as well.
Leftwing, progressive, liberals are about individual liberties and rights.
Do words like cooperative, communal, or collective imply centralization?
Not at all.

not progressives or socialist,, they are for a single powerful government

collective is the very definition of centralization,,, it says all are controlled together with one power and is the polar opposite of individual liberty,,

Wrong.
You just have no idea what a progressive or socialist is.
Look up "Sewer Socialists", progressives like Phillip and Robert La Follette, in the state of WI, for the last century.
Then look up socialist mayors of Milwaukee, WI.

• Emil Seidel, Mayor of Milwaukee, 1910-1912
• Daniel Webster Hoan, Mayor of Milwaukee, 1916-1940
• Frank Zeidler, Mayor of Milwaukee, 1948-1960

It is always amusing when conservatives try to tell socialists what socialism really is?

I'm not a conservative and have done much research on progressives and their origins that go back to the fabian socialist,,,
and I know their ideology was so rejected they had to change their name to liberals,,,

could you explain how individual rights work in a collective society???

I always thought things should be decided for the collective and rejection of the individual,,

Easy.
If lots of people need something collective, they pool resources and do it together.
A common example would be a bond issue for the financing of public schools, library, police, fire department, etc.
In a rural setting, you would expect collective grain elevators, farmer's markets, etc.
It only starts to get more tricky when it is something that could generate more of a profit.
For example, if people need solar power, and no one can afford the over head alone, then why not collectively pool some revenue in order to finance the factory to build the solar panels, inverters, etc.?
The problem with that is a capitalist society considers that illegal.
A public company does not have to make a profit, so private companies consider it cheating.
But it does allow for better service, savings, and more user input.
For example, in Milwaukee, WI, the city buses, school buses, garbage trucks, and snow plows are all collective.
Which means they can shift drivers around as needed.
When it snows, they put plows on the garbage trucks, and it is quickly dealt with.
They already have plenty of drivers and don't have to have any extra overhead.
With a private company, people claim you can choose another brand instead, but the reality is that often is not possible.
Things like insurance, cars, gasoline, health care, etc., pretty much price fix, so you are really facing more of a monopoly.
You get no input at all.
While if you have public companies, then you can go to public meeting and complain, vote, or organize opposition.
You have much more influence.
With private, you have nothing.
The only people who like private over public, are the ones who want to make abusive profits.

thats not a collective,, thats a society working together for a specific goal,,,


theres no such thing as a public company they are owned by individuals and the public has no business telling them how to run their company,, thats authoritarian and against individual rights you say you are for,,

my guess is you lied when you said you were for individual rights cause everything youve said since goes against that,,,

Wrong.
Society working together for a specific goal IS collective.
That is exactly what the word means.

{...
collective
[kəˈlektiv]

ADJECTIVE

1. done by people acting as a group.
   "a collective protest"

NOUN

1. a cooperative enterprise.
   synonyms:
   cooperative · co-op · community · communal settlement · kibbutz · fellowship

...}

Authoritarian is when you have a private person or company dictate to you.
There are lots of public companies, for example most utilities are public.
Anytime you don't want a private dictator creating a high priced monopoly that your community has no influence over price or quality, you create a public company.
We should have far more public companies, but the reason we don't is that the private capitalists who want that profit, consider public companies that could make a profit, illegal.

Government grants utility monopolies, moron.

Governments have many options, ranging from just letting private utilities compete, granting a utility monopoly, or producing the utility itself. And example of the government doing it would be the TVA, Hoover dam, etc.

 

[bripat9643]

It could be a ruse to enable Biden to throw a lot of money at a non-existing problem, and then

Depends.
Some investments have a greater pay off than cost, so are worth it.
Example are Hoover dam, the St. Lawrence Seaway, TVA, etc.
I would love rural broadband myself.
When government does pump priming borrowing and spending, it can enrich consumers and boost the whole economy, making the initial borrowing small in comparison, due to inflation.
So it depends on if well researched and executed.

If you're attempting to address any of my comments, you should know that I left this discussion because it's a portrayal of the same sort of ignorance that is being displayed by Americans on the Covid vaccine.

As a catch-all reply though, I consider your comments to be nuanced enough to serve for further discussion. The reason being, the US is too far behind already for thinking of piecemeal fixes. My opinion is that it's going to take huge spending and the inherent risks attached.

Americans are angry and the attack against government is at least a symbolic effort to bring down bad government. There is risk of it growing into something that is more than just a symbolic joke.

Biden must succeed this time in breaking the country away from the 'American way', which is inequality and the hold the very wealthy has on the ordinary people.

Don't forget, the Jan.6th. riot was against government, not just one side of governemnt.

If Biden doesn't succeed then Trump is going to be back offering his solution to the problems in America. That will be a fascist bid for power.

And then no solution to the problem, because that would be contrary to a fascist agenda.

Have Americans matured enough yet to just leave the Trump experience in the dust, as a horrible experience? I think there are several indications now that would be true!

First I should provide the context that I am extreme left wing, liberal, progressive, socialist, etc.
But I did not mind the congress occupation because I do think our government is way corrupt, even though I do not think the election was rigged more than the usual poor choice of candidates.
What I don't like about our government are illegal legislation like Prohibition, the War on Drugs, federal gun laws, federal health laws, 3 Strikes, asset forfeiture, illegal wars, etc.

But I do like the idea of investing in mass transit, transportation in general, and stimulus.

other than mass transit thats not a left wing liberal,, more like right wing libertarian,

and the best stimulus happens the same way,, local,, the feds always take a big cut and use it as a political slush fund

as for mas transit,, like everything the government gets involved in it cost more and the waste is usually off the charts,,

best to let that happen on a local level where the needs came be evaluated first hand and waste left to a minimum,,

Leftwing, progressive, liberal, socialists are always for local over federal.
Federal it too far away, costs too much to contact or try to influence, and are always corrupt by corporate interests.
We need large government to counter large corruption, but it always provides its own corruption as well.
Leftwing, progressive, liberals are about individual liberties and rights.
Do words like cooperative, communal, or collective imply centralization?
Not at all.

not progressives or socialist,, they are for a single powerful government

collective is the very definition of centralization,,, it says all are controlled together with one power and is the polar opposite of individual liberty,,

Wrong.
You just have no idea what a progressive or socialist is.
Look up "Sewer Socialists", progressives like Phillip and Robert La Follette, in the state of WI, for the last century.
Then look up socialist mayors of Milwaukee, WI.

• Emil Seidel, Mayor of Milwaukee, 1910-1912
• Daniel Webster Hoan, Mayor of Milwaukee, 1916-1940
• Frank Zeidler, Mayor of Milwaukee, 1948-1960

It is always amusing when conservatives try to tell socialists what socialism really is?

I'm not a conservative and have done much research on progressives and their origins that go back to the fabian socialist,,,
and I know their ideology was so rejected they had to change their name to liberals,,,

could you explain how individual rights work in a collective society???

I always thought things should be decided for the collective and rejection of the individual,,

Easy.
If lots of people need something collective, they pool resources and do it together.
A common example would be a bond issue for the financing of public schools, library, police, fire department, etc.
In a rural setting, you would expect collective grain elevators, farmer's markets, etc.
It only starts to get more tricky when it is something that could generate more of a profit.
For example, if people need solar power, and no one can afford the over head alone, then why not collectively pool some revenue in order to finance the factory to build the solar panels, inverters, etc.?
The problem with that is a capitalist society considers that illegal.
A public company does not have to make a profit, so private companies consider it cheating.
But it does allow for better service, savings, and more user input.
For example, in Milwaukee, WI, the city buses, school buses, garbage trucks, and snow plows are all collective.
Which means they can shift drivers around as needed.
When it snows, they put plows on the garbage trucks, and it is quickly dealt with.
They already have plenty of drivers and don't have to have any extra overhead.
With a private company, people claim you can choose another brand instead, but the reality is that often is not possible.
Things like insurance, cars, gasoline, health care, etc., pretty much price fix, so you are really facing more of a monopoly.
You get no input at all.
While if you have public companies, then you can go to public meeting and complain, vote, or organize opposition.
You have much more influence.
With private, you have nothing.
The only people who like private over public, are the ones who want to make abusive profits.

thats not a collective,, thats a society working together for a specific goal,,,


theres no such thing as a public company they are owned by individuals and the public has no business telling them how to run their company,, thats authoritarian and against individual rights you say you are for,,

my guess is you lied when you said you were for individual rights cause everything youve said since goes against that,,,

Wrong.
Society working together for a specific goal IS collective.
That is exactly what the word means.

{...
collective
[kəˈlektiv]

ADJECTIVE

1. done by people acting as a group.
   "a collective protest"

NOUN

1. a cooperative enterprise.
   synonyms:
   cooperative · co-op · community · communal settlement · kibbutz · fellowship

...}

Authoritarian is when you have a private person or company dictate to you.
There are lots of public companies, for example most utilities are public.
Anytime you don't want a private dictator creating a high priced monopoly that your community has no influence over price or quality, you create a public company.
We should have far more public companies, but the reason we don't is that the private capitalists who want that profit, consider public companies that could make a profit, illegal.

Government grants utility monopolies, moron.

Governments have many options, ranging from just letting private utilities compete, granting a utility monopoly, or producing the utility itself. And example of the government doing it would be the TVA, Hoover dam, etc.

So?

 

[Rigby5]

It could be a ruse to enable Biden to throw a lot of money at a non-existing problem, and then

Depends.
Some investments have a greater pay off than cost, so are worth it.
Example are Hoover dam, the St. Lawrence Seaway, TVA, etc.
I would love rural broadband myself.
When government does pump priming borrowing and spending, it can enrich consumers and boost the whole economy, making the initial borrowing small in comparison, due to inflation.
So it depends on if well researched and executed.

If you're attempting to address any of my comments, you should know that I left this discussion because it's a portrayal of the same sort of ignorance that is being displayed by Americans on the Covid vaccine.

As a catch-all reply though, I consider your comments to be nuanced enough to serve for further discussion. The reason being, the US is too far behind already for thinking of piecemeal fixes. My opinion is that it's going to take huge spending and the inherent risks attached.

Americans are angry and the attack against government is at least a symbolic effort to bring down bad government. There is risk of it growing into something that is more than just a symbolic joke.

Biden must succeed this time in breaking the country away from the 'American way', which is inequality and the hold the very wealthy has on the ordinary people.

Don't forget, the Jan.6th. riot was against government, not just one side of governemnt.

If Biden doesn't succeed then Trump is going to be back offering his solution to the problems in America. That will be a fascist bid for power.

And then no solution to the problem, because that would be contrary to a fascist agenda.

Have Americans matured enough yet to just leave the Trump experience in the dust, as a horrible experience? I think there are several indications now that would be true!

First I should provide the context that I am extreme left wing, liberal, progressive, socialist, etc.
But I did not mind the congress occupation because I do think our government is way corrupt, even though I do not think the election was rigged more than the usual poor choice of candidates.
What I don't like about our government are illegal legislation like Prohibition, the War on Drugs, federal gun laws, federal health laws, 3 Strikes, asset forfeiture, illegal wars, etc.

But I do like the idea of investing in mass transit, transportation in general, and stimulus.

other than mass transit thats not a left wing liberal,, more like right wing libertarian,

and the best stimulus happens the same way,, local,, the feds always take a big cut and use it as a political slush fund

as for mas transit,, like everything the government gets involved in it cost more and the waste is usually off the charts,,

best to let that happen on a local level where the needs came be evaluated first hand and waste left to a minimum,,

Leftwing, progressive, liberal, socialists are always for local over federal.
Federal it too far away, costs too much to contact or try to influence, and are always corrupt by corporate interests.
We need large government to counter large corruption, but it always provides its own corruption as well.
Leftwing, progressive, liberals are about individual liberties and rights.
Do words like cooperative, communal, or collective imply centralization?
Not at all.

not progressives or socialist,, they are for a single powerful government

collective is the very definition of centralization,,, it says all are controlled together with one power and is the polar opposite of individual liberty,,

Wrong.
You just have no idea what a progressive or socialist is.
Look up "Sewer Socialists", progressives like Phillip and Robert La Follette, in the state of WI, for the last century.
Then look up socialist mayors of Milwaukee, WI.

• Emil Seidel, Mayor of Milwaukee, 1910-1912
• Daniel Webster Hoan, Mayor of Milwaukee, 1916-1940
• Frank Zeidler, Mayor of Milwaukee, 1948-1960

It is always amusing when conservatives try to tell socialists what socialism really is?

Someone has to do it because they always lie about it.

I notice the image of Hitler.
And do you realize Hitler was an anti-socialist?
Under Hitler, the capitalist corporations made the most profits ever.
Hitler was appointed by Hindenberg, the representative of the oligarchs, the aristocracy, military, and corporations.
Hitler had all the socialists murdered.
The Night of the Long Knives.

Socialism does not imply centralization.
It is capitalist corporations that are the greatest danger, because they are even more centralized than federal. They are multi national.

No, Hitler was not a socialist. He said many times that he was a socialist.

When Hitler was young, poor, and unknown, then he had to pretend to be a populist.
He hung with the SA of Rohem.
But in the Night of the Long Knives, (1934), he had all the SA killed, including Rohem.
So then how can he be a socialist if he had all the socialists killed?

 

[Rigby5]

It could be a ruse to enable Biden to throw a lot of money at a non-existing problem, and then

Depends.
Some investments have a greater pay off than cost, so are worth it.
Example are Hoover dam, the St. Lawrence Seaway, TVA, etc.
I would love rural broadband myself.
When government does pump priming borrowing and spending, it can enrich consumers and boost the whole economy, making the initial borrowing small in comparison, due to inflation.
So it depends on if well researched and executed.

If you're attempting to address any of my comments, you should know that I left this discussion because it's a portrayal of the same sort of ignorance that is being displayed by Americans on the Covid vaccine.

As a catch-all reply though, I consider your comments to be nuanced enough to serve for further discussion. The reason being, the US is too far behind already for thinking of piecemeal fixes. My opinion is that it's going to take huge spending and the inherent risks attached.

Americans are angry and the attack against government is at least a symbolic effort to bring down bad government. There is risk of it growing into something that is more than just a symbolic joke.

Biden must succeed this time in breaking the country away from the 'American way', which is inequality and the hold the very wealthy has on the ordinary people.

Don't forget, the Jan.6th. riot was against government, not just one side of governemnt.

If Biden doesn't succeed then Trump is going to be back offering his solution to the problems in America. That will be a fascist bid for power.

And then no solution to the problem, because that would be contrary to a fascist agenda.

Have Americans matured enough yet to just leave the Trump experience in the dust, as a horrible experience? I think there are several indications now that would be true!

First I should provide the context that I am extreme left wing, liberal, progressive, socialist, etc.
But I did not mind the congress occupation because I do think our government is way corrupt, even though I do not think the election was rigged more than the usual poor choice of candidates.
What I don't like about our government are illegal legislation like Prohibition, the War on Drugs, federal gun laws, federal health laws, 3 Strikes, asset forfeiture, illegal wars, etc.

But I do like the idea of investing in mass transit, transportation in general, and stimulus.

other than mass transit thats not a left wing liberal,, more like right wing libertarian,

and the best stimulus happens the same way,, local,, the feds always take a big cut and use it as a political slush fund

as for mas transit,, like everything the government gets involved in it cost more and the waste is usually off the charts,,

best to let that happen on a local level where the needs came be evaluated first hand and waste left to a minimum,,

Leftwing, progressive, liberal, socialists are always for local over federal.
Federal it too far away, costs too much to contact or try to influence, and are always corrupt by corporate interests.
We need large government to counter large corruption, but it always provides its own corruption as well.
Leftwing, progressive, liberals are about individual liberties and rights.
Do words like cooperative, communal, or collective imply centralization?
Not at all.

not progressives or socialist,, they are for a single powerful government

collective is the very definition of centralization,,, it says all are controlled together with one power and is the polar opposite of individual liberty,,

Wrong.
You just have no idea what a progressive or socialist is.
Look up "Sewer Socialists", progressives like Phillip and Robert La Follette, in the state of WI, for the last century.
Then look up socialist mayors of Milwaukee, WI.

• Emil Seidel, Mayor of Milwaukee, 1910-1912
• Daniel Webster Hoan, Mayor of Milwaukee, 1916-1940
• Frank Zeidler, Mayor of Milwaukee, 1948-1960

It is always amusing when conservatives try to tell socialists what socialism really is?

I'm not a conservative and have done much research on progressives and their origins that go back to the fabian socialist,,,
and I know their ideology was so rejected they had to change their name to liberals,,,

could you explain how individual rights work in a collective society???

I always thought things should be decided for the collective and rejection of the individual,,

Easy.
If lots of people need something collective, they pool resources and do it together.
A common example would be a bond issue for the financing of public schools, library, police, fire department, etc.
In a rural setting, you would expect collective grain elevators, farmer's markets, etc.
It only starts to get more tricky when it is something that could generate more of a profit.
For example, if people need solar power, and no one can afford the over head alone, then why not collectively pool some revenue in order to finance the factory to build the solar panels, inverters, etc.?
The problem with that is a capitalist society considers that illegal.
A public company does not have to make a profit, so private companies consider it cheating.
But it does allow for better service, savings, and more user input.
For example, in Milwaukee, WI, the city buses, school buses, garbage trucks, and snow plows are all collective.
Which means they can shift drivers around as needed.
When it snows, they put plows on the garbage trucks, and it is quickly dealt with.
They already have plenty of drivers and don't have to have any extra overhead.
With a private company, people claim you can choose another brand instead, but the reality is that often is not possible.
Things like insurance, cars, gasoline, health care, etc., pretty much price fix, so you are really facing more of a monopoly.
You get no input at all.
While if you have public companies, then you can go to public meeting and complain, vote, or organize opposition.
You have much more influence.
With private, you have nothing.
The only people who like private over public, are the ones who want to make abusive profits.

thats not a collective,, thats a society working together for a specific goal,,,


theres no such thing as a public company they are owned by individuals and the public has no business telling them how to run their company,, thats authoritarian and against individual rights you say you are for,,

my guess is you lied when you said you were for individual rights cause everything youve said since goes against that,,,

Wrong.
Society working together for a specific goal IS collective.
That is exactly what the word means.

{...
collective
[kəˈlektiv]

ADJECTIVE

1. done by people acting as a group.
   "a collective protest"

NOUN

1. a cooperative enterprise.
   synonyms:
   cooperative · co-op · community · communal settlement · kibbutz · fellowship

...}

Authoritarian is when you have a private person or company dictate to you.
There are lots of public companies, for example most utilities are public.
Anytime you don't want a private dictator creating a high priced monopoly that your community has no influence over price or quality, you create a public company.
We should have far more public companies, but the reason we don't is that the private capitalists who want that profit, consider public companies that could make a profit, illegal.

Government grants utility monopolies, moron.

Governments have many options, ranging from just letting private utilities compete, granting a utility monopoly, or producing the utility itself. And example of the government doing it would be the TVA, Hoover dam, etc.

So?

So then utilities can be private or public, but it should be pretty clear that public utilities work out the best.
With public, you don't have anyone siphoning off profits or shifting resources to more profitable ventures.
You also get to vote over public ventures, instead of getting no say at all in private ones.

 

[Markle]

It could be a ruse to enable Biden to throw a lot of money at a non-existing problem, and then

Depends.
Some investments have a greater pay off than cost, so are worth it.
Example are Hoover dam, the St. Lawrence Seaway, TVA, etc.
I would love rural broadband myself.
When government does pump priming borrowing and spending, it can enrich consumers and boost the whole economy, making the initial borrowing small in comparison, due to inflation.
So it depends on if well researched and executed.

If you're attempting to address any of my comments, you should know that I left this discussion because it's a portrayal of the same sort of ignorance that is being displayed by Americans on the Covid vaccine.

As a catch-all reply though, I consider your comments to be nuanced enough to serve for further discussion. The reason being, the US is too far behind already for thinking of piecemeal fixes. My opinion is that it's going to take huge spending and the inherent risks attached.

Americans are angry and the attack against government is at least a symbolic effort to bring down bad government. There is risk of it growing into something that is more than just a symbolic joke.

Biden must succeed this time in breaking the country away from the 'American way', which is inequality and the hold the very wealthy has on the ordinary people.

Don't forget, the Jan.6th. riot was against government, not just one side of governemnt.

If Biden doesn't succeed then Trump is going to be back offering his solution to the problems in America. That will be a fascist bid for power.

And then no solution to the problem, because that would be contrary to a fascist agenda.

Have Americans matured enough yet to just leave the Trump experience in the dust, as a horrible experience? I think there are several indications now that would be true!

First I should provide the context that I am extreme left wing, liberal, progressive, socialist, etc.
But I did not mind the congress occupation because I do think our government is way corrupt, even though I do not think the election was rigged more than the usual poor choice of candidates.
What I don't like about our government are illegal legislation like Prohibition, the War on Drugs, federal gun laws, federal health laws, 3 Strikes, asset forfeiture, illegal wars, etc.

But I do like the idea of investing in mass transit, transportation in general, and stimulus.

other than mass transit thats not a left wing liberal,, more like right wing libertarian,

and the best stimulus happens the same way,, local,, the feds always take a big cut and use it as a political slush fund

as for mas transit,, like everything the government gets involved in it cost more and the waste is usually off the charts,,

best to let that happen on a local level where the needs came be evaluated first hand and waste left to a minimum,,

Leftwing, progressive, liberal, socialists are always for local over federal.
Federal it too far away, costs too much to contact or try to influence, and are always corrupt by corporate interests.
We need large government to counter large corruption, but it always provides its own corruption as well.
Leftwing, progressive, liberals are about individual liberties and rights.
Do words like cooperative, communal, or collective imply centralization?
Not at all.

not progressives or socialist,, they are for a single powerful government

collective is the very definition of centralization,,, it says all are controlled together with one power and is the polar opposite of individual liberty,,

Wrong.
You just have no idea what a progressive or socialist is.
Look up "Sewer Socialists", progressives like Phillip and Robert La Follette, in the state of WI, for the last century.
Then look up socialist mayors of Milwaukee, WI.

• Emil Seidel, Mayor of Milwaukee, 1910-1912
• Daniel Webster Hoan, Mayor of Milwaukee, 1916-1940
• Frank Zeidler, Mayor of Milwaukee, 1948-1960

It is always amusing when conservatives try to tell socialists what socialism really is?

Someone has to do it because they always lie about it.

I notice the image of Hitler.
And do you realize Hitler was an anti-socialist?
Under Hitler, the capitalist corporations made the most profits ever.
Hitler was appointed by Hindenberg, the representative of the oligarchs, the aristocracy, military, and corporations.
Hitler had all the socialists murdered.
The Night of the Long Knives.

Socialism does not imply centralization.
It is capitalist corporations that are the greatest danger, because they are even more centralized than federal. They are multi national.

You need to do a bit more research before jumping in with Adolph Hitler.

Nazi
[ˈnätsē]
NOUN

1. historical
   a member of the National Socialist German Workers' Party.

You say capitalist corporations made the most profit under Hitler. In FACT, the factories were, in large part, manned by slaves brought in from the various concentration and death camps. That'll sure up the profit margin.

As you know too, Hitler had the COMMUNISTS murdered.

The Night of the Long Knives was used by Hitler to eliminate one of his major competitors.

After Adolf Hitler ordered the Night of the Long Knives (die Nacht der langen Messer) in 1934, he withdrew his support for the SA [Brownshirts]. The SA continued to exist but had lost almost all its influence, and was effectively superseded by the SS, which had carried out Hitler's orders in the purge, and thereafter was formally removed from the SA. The SA remained in existence until after Nazi Germany's final capitulation to the Allies in 1945, after which it was disbanded and outlawed by the Allied Control Council.

 

[Concerned American]

What I don't like about our government are illegal legislation like Prohibition, the War on Drugs, federal gun laws, federal health laws, 3 Strikes, asset forfeiture, illegal wars, etc.

I'm not a Constitutional expert so I probably missed it but where in our Constitution all the things you enumerate prohibited?

They aren't allowed by the Constitution, which means they are prohibited.

The constitution is written to allow ANYTHING not specifically prohibited by a constitutional law.

 

[progressive hunter]

What I don't like about our government are illegal legislation like Prohibition, the War on Drugs, federal gun laws, federal health laws, 3 Strikes, asset forfeiture, illegal wars, etc.

I'm not a Constitutional expert so I probably missed it but where in our Constitution all the things you enumerate prohibited?

They aren't allowed by the Constitution, which means they are prohibited.

The constitution is written to allow ANYTHING not specifically prohibited by a constitutional law.

not according to the 9th & 10th amendment,,

 

[bripat9643]

It could be a ruse to enable Biden to throw a lot of money at a non-existing problem, and then

Depends.
Some investments have a greater pay off than cost, so are worth it.
Example are Hoover dam, the St. Lawrence Seaway, TVA, etc.
I would love rural broadband myself.
When government does pump priming borrowing and spending, it can enrich consumers and boost the whole economy, making the initial borrowing small in comparison, due to inflation.
So it depends on if well researched and executed.

If you're attempting to address any of my comments, you should know that I left this discussion because it's a portrayal of the same sort of ignorance that is being displayed by Americans on the Covid vaccine.

As a catch-all reply though, I consider your comments to be nuanced enough to serve for further discussion. The reason being, the US is too far behind already for thinking of piecemeal fixes. My opinion is that it's going to take huge spending and the inherent risks attached.

Americans are angry and the attack against government is at least a symbolic effort to bring down bad government. There is risk of it growing into something that is more than just a symbolic joke.

Biden must succeed this time in breaking the country away from the 'American way', which is inequality and the hold the very wealthy has on the ordinary people.

Don't forget, the Jan.6th. riot was against government, not just one side of governemnt.

If Biden doesn't succeed then Trump is going to be back offering his solution to the problems in America. That will be a fascist bid for power.

And then no solution to the problem, because that would be contrary to a fascist agenda.

Have Americans matured enough yet to just leave the Trump experience in the dust, as a horrible experience? I think there are several indications now that would be true!

First I should provide the context that I am extreme left wing, liberal, progressive, socialist, etc.
But I did not mind the congress occupation because I do think our government is way corrupt, even though I do not think the election was rigged more than the usual poor choice of candidates.
What I don't like about our government are illegal legislation like Prohibition, the War on Drugs, federal gun laws, federal health laws, 3 Strikes, asset forfeiture, illegal wars, etc.

But I do like the idea of investing in mass transit, transportation in general, and stimulus.

other than mass transit thats not a left wing liberal,, more like right wing libertarian,

and the best stimulus happens the same way,, local,, the feds always take a big cut and use it as a political slush fund

as for mas transit,, like everything the government gets involved in it cost more and the waste is usually off the charts,,

best to let that happen on a local level where the needs came be evaluated first hand and waste left to a minimum,,

Leftwing, progressive, liberal, socialists are always for local over federal.
Federal it too far away, costs too much to contact or try to influence, and are always corrupt by corporate interests.
We need large government to counter large corruption, but it always provides its own corruption as well.
Leftwing, progressive, liberals are about individual liberties and rights.
Do words like cooperative, communal, or collective imply centralization?
Not at all.

not progressives or socialist,, they are for a single powerful government

collective is the very definition of centralization,,, it says all are controlled together with one power and is the polar opposite of individual liberty,,

Wrong.
You just have no idea what a progressive or socialist is.
Look up "Sewer Socialists", progressives like Phillip and Robert La Follette, in the state of WI, for the last century.
Then look up socialist mayors of Milwaukee, WI.

• Emil Seidel, Mayor of Milwaukee, 1910-1912
• Daniel Webster Hoan, Mayor of Milwaukee, 1916-1940
• Frank Zeidler, Mayor of Milwaukee, 1948-1960

It is always amusing when conservatives try to tell socialists what socialism really is?

Someone has to do it because they always lie about it.

I notice the image of Hitler.
And do you realize Hitler was an anti-socialist?
Under Hitler, the capitalist corporations made the most profits ever.
Hitler was appointed by Hindenberg, the representative of the oligarchs, the aristocracy, military, and corporations.
Hitler had all the socialists murdered.
The Night of the Long Knives.

Socialism does not imply centralization.
It is capitalist corporations that are the greatest danger, because they are even more centralized than federal. They are multi national.

No, Hitler was not a socialist. He said many times that he was a socialist.

When Hitler was young, poor, and unknown, then he had to pretend to be a populist.
He hung with the SA of Rohem.
But in the Night of the Long Knives, (1934), he had all the SA killed, including Rohem.
So then how can he be a socialist if he had all the socialists killed?

How did Stalin pretend to be a socialist when he had almost every communist and socialist in the USSR killed or sent to the Gulag?

 

[bripat9643]

What I don't like about our government are illegal legislation like Prohibition, the War on Drugs, federal gun laws, federal health laws, 3 Strikes, asset forfeiture, illegal wars, etc.

I'm not a Constitutional expert so I probably missed it but where in our Constitution all the things you enumerate prohibited?

They aren't allowed by the Constitution, which means they are prohibited.

The constitution is written to allow ANYTHING not specifically prohibited by a constitutional law.

95% of the laws on the books are not allowed by the Constitution.

 

[bripat9643]

It could be a ruse to enable Biden to throw a lot of money at a non-existing problem, and then

Depends.
Some investments have a greater pay off than cost, so are worth it.
Example are Hoover dam, the St. Lawrence Seaway, TVA, etc.
I would love rural broadband myself.
When government does pump priming borrowing and spending, it can enrich consumers and boost the whole economy, making the initial borrowing small in comparison, due to inflation.
So it depends on if well researched and executed.

If you're attempting to address any of my comments, you should know that I left this discussion because it's a portrayal of the same sort of ignorance that is being displayed by Americans on the Covid vaccine.

As a catch-all reply though, I consider your comments to be nuanced enough to serve for further discussion. The reason being, the US is too far behind already for thinking of piecemeal fixes. My opinion is that it's going to take huge spending and the inherent risks attached.

Americans are angry and the attack against government is at least a symbolic effort to bring down bad government. There is risk of it growing into something that is more than just a symbolic joke.

Biden must succeed this time in breaking the country away from the 'American way', which is inequality and the hold the very wealthy has on the ordinary people.

Don't forget, the Jan.6th. riot was against government, not just one side of governemnt.

If Biden doesn't succeed then Trump is going to be back offering his solution to the problems in America. That will be a fascist bid for power.

And then no solution to the problem, because that would be contrary to a fascist agenda.

Have Americans matured enough yet to just leave the Trump experience in the dust, as a horrible experience? I think there are several indications now that would be true!

First I should provide the context that I am extreme left wing, liberal, progressive, socialist, etc.
But I did not mind the congress occupation because I do think our government is way corrupt, even though I do not think the election was rigged more than the usual poor choice of candidates.
What I don't like about our government are illegal legislation like Prohibition, the War on Drugs, federal gun laws, federal health laws, 3 Strikes, asset forfeiture, illegal wars, etc.

But I do like the idea of investing in mass transit, transportation in general, and stimulus.

other than mass transit thats not a left wing liberal,, more like right wing libertarian,

and the best stimulus happens the same way,, local,, the feds always take a big cut and use it as a political slush fund

as for mas transit,, like everything the government gets involved in it cost more and the waste is usually off the charts,,

best to let that happen on a local level where the needs came be evaluated first hand and waste left to a minimum,,

Leftwing, progressive, liberal, socialists are always for local over federal.
Federal it too far away, costs too much to contact or try to influence, and are always corrupt by corporate interests.
We need large government to counter large corruption, but it always provides its own corruption as well.
Leftwing, progressive, liberals are about individual liberties and rights.
Do words like cooperative, communal, or collective imply centralization?
Not at all.

not progressives or socialist,, they are for a single powerful government

collective is the very definition of centralization,,, it says all are controlled together with one power and is the polar opposite of individual liberty,,

Wrong.
You just have no idea what a progressive or socialist is.
Look up "Sewer Socialists", progressives like Phillip and Robert La Follette, in the state of WI, for the last century.
Then look up socialist mayors of Milwaukee, WI.

• Emil Seidel, Mayor of Milwaukee, 1910-1912
• Daniel Webster Hoan, Mayor of Milwaukee, 1916-1940
• Frank Zeidler, Mayor of Milwaukee, 1948-1960

It is always amusing when conservatives try to tell socialists what socialism really is?

Someone has to do it because they always lie about it.

I notice the image of Hitler.
And do you realize Hitler was an anti-socialist?
Under Hitler, the capitalist corporations made the most profits ever.
Hitler was appointed by Hindenberg, the representative of the oligarchs, the aristocracy, military, and corporations.
Hitler had all the socialists murdered.
The Night of the Long Knives.

Socialism does not imply centralization.
It is capitalist corporations that are the greatest danger, because they are even more centralized than federal. They are multi national.

You need to do a bit more research before jumping in with Adolph Hitler.

Nazi
[ˈnätsē]
NOUN

1. historical
   a member of the National Socialist German Workers' Party.

You say capitalist corporations made the most profit under Hitler. In FACT, the factories were, in large part, manned by slaves brought in from the various concentration and death camps. That'll sure up the profit margin.

As you know too, Hitler had the COMMUNISTS murdered.

The Night of the Long Knives was used by Hitler to eliminate one of his major competitors.

After Adolf Hitler ordered the Night of the Long Knives (die Nacht der langen Messer) in 1934, he withdrew his support for the SA [Brownshirts]. The SA continued to exist but had lost almost all its influence, and was effectively superseded by the SS, which had carried out Hitler's orders in the purge, and thereafter was formally removed from the SA. The SA remained in existence until after Nazi Germany's final capitulation to the Allies in 1945, after which it was disbanded and outlawed by the Allied Control Council.

Rigby wants us to believe that Stalin wasn't a socialist.

 

[bripat9643]

It could be a ruse to enable Biden to throw a lot of money at a non-existing problem, and then

Depends.
Some investments have a greater pay off than cost, so are worth it.
Example are Hoover dam, the St. Lawrence Seaway, TVA, etc.
I would love rural broadband myself.
When government does pump priming borrowing and spending, it can enrich consumers and boost the whole economy, making the initial borrowing small in comparison, due to inflation.
So it depends on if well researched and executed.

If you're attempting to address any of my comments, you should know that I left this discussion because it's a portrayal of the same sort of ignorance that is being displayed by Americans on the Covid vaccine.

As a catch-all reply though, I consider your comments to be nuanced enough to serve for further discussion. The reason being, the US is too far behind already for thinking of piecemeal fixes. My opinion is that it's going to take huge spending and the inherent risks attached.

Americans are angry and the attack against government is at least a symbolic effort to bring down bad government. There is risk of it growing into something that is more than just a symbolic joke.

Biden must succeed this time in breaking the country away from the 'American way', which is inequality and the hold the very wealthy has on the ordinary people.

Don't forget, the Jan.6th. riot was against government, not just one side of governemnt.

If Biden doesn't succeed then Trump is going to be back offering his solution to the problems in America. That will be a fascist bid for power.

And then no solution to the problem, because that would be contrary to a fascist agenda.

Have Americans matured enough yet to just leave the Trump experience in the dust, as a horrible experience? I think there are several indications now that would be true!

First I should provide the context that I am extreme left wing, liberal, progressive, socialist, etc.
But I did not mind the congress occupation because I do think our government is way corrupt, even though I do not think the election was rigged more than the usual poor choice of candidates.
What I don't like about our government are illegal legislation like Prohibition, the War on Drugs, federal gun laws, federal health laws, 3 Strikes, asset forfeiture, illegal wars, etc.

But I do like the idea of investing in mass transit, transportation in general, and stimulus.

other than mass transit thats not a left wing liberal,, more like right wing libertarian,

and the best stimulus happens the same way,, local,, the feds always take a big cut and use it as a political slush fund

as for mas transit,, like everything the government gets involved in it cost more and the waste is usually off the charts,,

best to let that happen on a local level where the needs came be evaluated first hand and waste left to a minimum,,

Leftwing, progressive, liberal, socialists are always for local over federal.
Federal it too far away, costs too much to contact or try to influence, and are always corrupt by corporate interests.
We need large government to counter large corruption, but it always provides its own corruption as well.
Leftwing, progressive, liberals are about individual liberties and rights.
Do words like cooperative, communal, or collective imply centralization?
Not at all.

not progressives or socialist,, they are for a single powerful government

collective is the very definition of centralization,,, it says all are controlled together with one power and is the polar opposite of individual liberty,,

Wrong.
You just have no idea what a progressive or socialist is.
Look up "Sewer Socialists", progressives like Phillip and Robert La Follette, in the state of WI, for the last century.
Then look up socialist mayors of Milwaukee, WI.

• Emil Seidel, Mayor of Milwaukee, 1910-1912
• Daniel Webster Hoan, Mayor of Milwaukee, 1916-1940
• Frank Zeidler, Mayor of Milwaukee, 1948-1960

It is always amusing when conservatives try to tell socialists what socialism really is?

I'm not a conservative and have done much research on progressives and their origins that go back to the fabian socialist,,,
and I know their ideology was so rejected they had to change their name to liberals,,,

could you explain how individual rights work in a collective society???

I always thought things should be decided for the collective and rejection of the individual,,

Easy.
If lots of people need something collective, they pool resources and do it together.
A common example would be a bond issue for the financing of public schools, library, police, fire department, etc.
In a rural setting, you would expect collective grain elevators, farmer's markets, etc.
It only starts to get more tricky when it is something that could generate more of a profit.
For example, if people need solar power, and no one can afford the over head alone, then why not collectively pool some revenue in order to finance the factory to build the solar panels, inverters, etc.?
The problem with that is a capitalist society considers that illegal.
A public company does not have to make a profit, so private companies consider it cheating.
But it does allow for better service, savings, and more user input.
For example, in Milwaukee, WI, the city buses, school buses, garbage trucks, and snow plows are all collective.
Which means they can shift drivers around as needed.
When it snows, they put plows on the garbage trucks, and it is quickly dealt with.
They already have plenty of drivers and don't have to have any extra overhead.
With a private company, people claim you can choose another brand instead, but the reality is that often is not possible.
Things like insurance, cars, gasoline, health care, etc., pretty much price fix, so you are really facing more of a monopoly.
You get no input at all.
While if you have public companies, then you can go to public meeting and complain, vote, or organize opposition.
You have much more influence.
With private, you have nothing.
The only people who like private over public, are the ones who want to make abusive profits.

thats not a collective,, thats a society working together for a specific goal,,,


theres no such thing as a public company they are owned by individuals and the public has no business telling them how to run their company,, thats authoritarian and against individual rights you say you are for,,

my guess is you lied when you said you were for individual rights cause everything youve said since goes against that,,,

Wrong.
Society working together for a specific goal IS collective.
That is exactly what the word means.

{...
collective
[kəˈlektiv]

ADJECTIVE

1. done by people acting as a group.
   "a collective protest"

NOUN

1. a cooperative enterprise.
   synonyms:
   cooperative · co-op · community · communal settlement · kibbutz · fellowship

...}

Authoritarian is when you have a private person or company dictate to you.
There are lots of public companies, for example most utilities are public.
Anytime you don't want a private dictator creating a high priced monopoly that your community has no influence over price or quality, you create a public company.
We should have far more public companies, but the reason we don't is that the private capitalists who want that profit, consider public companies that could make a profit, illegal.

Government grants utility monopolies, moron.

Governments have many options, ranging from just letting private utilities compete, granting a utility monopoly, or producing the utility itself. And example of the government doing it would be the TVA, Hoover dam, etc.

So?

So then utilities can be private or public, but it should be pretty clear that public utilities work out the best.

That's not clear at all.

With public, you don't have anyone siphoning off profits or shifting resources to more profitable ventures.

What's good about that? Capital should go to its highest use, which means its most profitable use.

You also get to vote over public ventures, instead of getting no say at all in private ones.

Allowing the numskulls who can vote to make economic decisions is the ultimate in stupid.

 

[Concerned American]

What I don't like about our government are illegal legislation like Prohibition, the War on Drugs, federal gun laws, federal health laws, 3 Strikes, asset forfeiture, illegal wars, etc.

I'm not a Constitutional expert so I probably missed it but where in our Constitution all the things you enumerate prohibited?

They aren't allowed by the Constitution, which means they are prohibited.

The constitution is written to allow ANYTHING not specifically prohibited by a constitutional law.

95% of the laws on the books are not allowed by the Constitution.

And that is the sad part.

 

[Markle]

Depends on what you get back from those taxes paid.
In the US we get almost nothing back because almost all our taxes go to the military.
But in places like China, there are low cost or free public places to eat all over the place.

China currently has a drastic food shortage. How then do they have places giving away free food, "all over the place"?

 

[Lesh]

but as I said, I have done dozens of first time remodels on houses pre 1920 and a few pre 1900 and never seen lead pipes,,

Where the hell do you live? In the NY metro area anything older than 1960 had lead feeds (occasionally black pipe). Rarely copper before that

IF any of what you state was true, why was the problem resolved immediately upon Flint switching back to their original water supply?

Immediately?

Well switching back is a necessity (because the chems that break up the calcium are harmful in themselves) but once that calcium is broken up it takes a long time to build up again.

 

[progressive hunter]

but as I said, I have done dozens of first time remodels on houses pre 1920 and a few pre 1900 and never seen lead pipes,,

Where the hell do you live? In the NY metro area anything older than 1960 had lead feeds (occasionally black pipe). Rarely copper before that

IF any of what you state was true, why was the problem resolved immediately upon Flint switching back to their original water supply?

Immediately?

Well switching back is a necessity (because the chems that break up the calcium are harmful in themselves) but once that calcium is broken up it takes a long time to build up again.

KC MO

 

[Rigby5]

It could be a ruse to enable Biden to throw a lot of money at a non-existing problem, and then

Depends.
Some investments have a greater pay off than cost, so are worth it.
Example are Hoover dam, the St. Lawrence Seaway, TVA, etc.
I would love rural broadband myself.
When government does pump priming borrowing and spending, it can enrich consumers and boost the whole economy, making the initial borrowing small in comparison, due to inflation.
So it depends on if well researched and executed.

If you're attempting to address any of my comments, you should know that I left this discussion because it's a portrayal of the same sort of ignorance that is being displayed by Americans on the Covid vaccine.

As a catch-all reply though, I consider your comments to be nuanced enough to serve for further discussion. The reason being, the US is too far behind already for thinking of piecemeal fixes. My opinion is that it's going to take huge spending and the inherent risks attached.

Americans are angry and the attack against government is at least a symbolic effort to bring down bad government. There is risk of it growing into something that is more than just a symbolic joke.

Biden must succeed this time in breaking the country away from the 'American way', which is inequality and the hold the very wealthy has on the ordinary people.

Don't forget, the Jan.6th. riot was against government, not just one side of governemnt.

If Biden doesn't succeed then Trump is going to be back offering his solution to the problems in America. That will be a fascist bid for power.

And then no solution to the problem, because that would be contrary to a fascist agenda.

Have Americans matured enough yet to just leave the Trump experience in the dust, as a horrible experience? I think there are several indications now that would be true!

First I should provide the context that I am extreme left wing, liberal, progressive, socialist, etc.
But I did not mind the congress occupation because I do think our government is way corrupt, even though I do not think the election was rigged more than the usual poor choice of candidates.
What I don't like about our government are illegal legislation like Prohibition, the War on Drugs, federal gun laws, federal health laws, 3 Strikes, asset forfeiture, illegal wars, etc.

But I do like the idea of investing in mass transit, transportation in general, and stimulus.

other than mass transit thats not a left wing liberal,, more like right wing libertarian,

and the best stimulus happens the same way,, local,, the feds always take a big cut and use it as a political slush fund

as for mas transit,, like everything the government gets involved in it cost more and the waste is usually off the charts,,

best to let that happen on a local level where the needs came be evaluated first hand and waste left to a minimum,,

Leftwing, progressive, liberal, socialists are always for local over federal.
Federal it too far away, costs too much to contact or try to influence, and are always corrupt by corporate interests.
We need large government to counter large corruption, but it always provides its own corruption as well.
Leftwing, progressive, liberals are about individual liberties and rights.
Do words like cooperative, communal, or collective imply centralization?
Not at all.

not progressives or socialist,, they are for a single powerful government

collective is the very definition of centralization,,, it says all are controlled together with one power and is the polar opposite of individual liberty,,

Wrong.
You just have no idea what a progressive or socialist is.
Look up "Sewer Socialists", progressives like Phillip and Robert La Follette, in the state of WI, for the last century.
Then look up socialist mayors of Milwaukee, WI.

• Emil Seidel, Mayor of Milwaukee, 1910-1912
• Daniel Webster Hoan, Mayor of Milwaukee, 1916-1940
• Frank Zeidler, Mayor of Milwaukee, 1948-1960

It is always amusing when conservatives try to tell socialists what socialism really is?

Someone has to do it because they always lie about it.

I notice the image of Hitler.
And do you realize Hitler was an anti-socialist?
Under Hitler, the capitalist corporations made the most profits ever.
Hitler was appointed by Hindenberg, the representative of the oligarchs, the aristocracy, military, and corporations.
Hitler had all the socialists murdered.
The Night of the Long Knives.

Socialism does not imply centralization.
It is capitalist corporations that are the greatest danger, because they are even more centralized than federal. They are multi national.

You need to do a bit more research before jumping in with Adolph Hitler.

Nazi
[ˈnätsē]
NOUN

1. historical
   a member of the National Socialist German Workers' Party.

You say capitalist corporations made the most profit under Hitler. In FACT, the factories were, in large part, manned by slaves brought in from the various concentration and death camps. That'll sure up the profit margin.

As you know too, Hitler had the COMMUNISTS murdered.

The Night of the Long Knives was used by Hitler to eliminate one of his major competitors.

After Adolf Hitler ordered the Night of the Long Knives (die Nacht der langen Messer) in 1934, he withdrew his support for the SA [Brownshirts]. The SA continued to exist but had lost almost all its influence, and was effectively superseded by the SS, which had carried out Hitler's orders in the purge, and thereafter was formally removed from the SA. The SA remained in existence until after Nazi Germany's final capitulation to the Allies in 1945, after which it was disbanded and outlawed by the Allied Control Council.

The Hitler comments started from the signature line image that bripat9643 put up, and I wanted to just point out that Hitler was an anti-socialist, in case he thought Hitler was a socialist.
But yes, Hitler was picked by the aristocracy, military, and corporations in order to defeat all the threats to their profits, especially the communists.

 

[Rigby5]

What I don't like about our government are illegal legislation like Prohibition, the War on Drugs, federal gun laws, federal health laws, 3 Strikes, asset forfeiture, illegal wars, etc.

I'm not a Constitutional expert so I probably missed it but where in our Constitution all the things you enumerate prohibited?

They aren't allowed by the Constitution, which means they are prohibited.

The constitution is written to allow ANYTHING not specifically prohibited by a constitutional law.

I strongly disagree.
Here are the 9th and 10th amendments that clearly say the feds are prohibited anything not explicitly granted:
{...
Ninth Amendment

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.[95]

The Ninth Amendment declares that there are additional fundamental rights that exist outside the Constitution. The rights enumerated in the Constitution are not an explicit and exhaustive list of individual rights. It was rarely mentioned in Supreme Court decisions before the second half of the 20th century, when it was cited by several of the justices in Griswold v. Connecticut (1965). The Court in that case voided a statute prohibiting use of contraceptives as an infringement of the right of marital privacy.[118] This right was, in turn, the foundation upon which the Supreme Court built decisions in several landmark cases, including, Roe v. Wade (1973), which overturned a Texas law making it a crime to assist a woman to get an abortion, and Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992), which invalidated a Pennsylvania law that required spousal awareness prior to obtaining an abortion.

Tenth Amendment

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.[95]

The Tenth Amendment reinforces the principles of separation of powers and federalism by providing that powers not granted to the federal government by the Constitution, nor prohibited to the states, are reserved to the states or the people. The amendment provides no new powers or rights to the states, but rather preserves their authority in all matters not specifically granted to the federal government.[119]

...}

 

[Rigby5]

It could be a ruse to enable Biden to throw a lot of money at a non-existing problem, and then

Depends.
Some investments have a greater pay off than cost, so are worth it.
Example are Hoover dam, the St. Lawrence Seaway, TVA, etc.
I would love rural broadband myself.
When government does pump priming borrowing and spending, it can enrich consumers and boost the whole economy, making the initial borrowing small in comparison, due to inflation.
So it depends on if well researched and executed.

If you're attempting to address any of my comments, you should know that I left this discussion because it's a portrayal of the same sort of ignorance that is being displayed by Americans on the Covid vaccine.

As a catch-all reply though, I consider your comments to be nuanced enough to serve for further discussion. The reason being, the US is too far behind already for thinking of piecemeal fixes. My opinion is that it's going to take huge spending and the inherent risks attached.

Americans are angry and the attack against government is at least a symbolic effort to bring down bad government. There is risk of it growing into something that is more than just a symbolic joke.

Biden must succeed this time in breaking the country away from the 'American way', which is inequality and the hold the very wealthy has on the ordinary people.

Don't forget, the Jan.6th. riot was against government, not just one side of governemnt.

If Biden doesn't succeed then Trump is going to be back offering his solution to the problems in America. That will be a fascist bid for power.

And then no solution to the problem, because that would be contrary to a fascist agenda.

Have Americans matured enough yet to just leave the Trump experience in the dust, as a horrible experience? I think there are several indications now that would be true!

First I should provide the context that I am extreme left wing, liberal, progressive, socialist, etc.
But I did not mind the congress occupation because I do think our government is way corrupt, even though I do not think the election was rigged more than the usual poor choice of candidates.
What I don't like about our government are illegal legislation like Prohibition, the War on Drugs, federal gun laws, federal health laws, 3 Strikes, asset forfeiture, illegal wars, etc.

But I do like the idea of investing in mass transit, transportation in general, and stimulus.

other than mass transit thats not a left wing liberal,, more like right wing libertarian,

and the best stimulus happens the same way,, local,, the feds always take a big cut and use it as a political slush fund

as for mas transit,, like everything the government gets involved in it cost more and the waste is usually off the charts,,

best to let that happen on a local level where the needs came be evaluated first hand and waste left to a minimum,,

Leftwing, progressive, liberal, socialists are always for local over federal.
Federal it too far away, costs too much to contact or try to influence, and are always corrupt by corporate interests.
We need large government to counter large corruption, but it always provides its own corruption as well.
Leftwing, progressive, liberals are about individual liberties and rights.
Do words like cooperative, communal, or collective imply centralization?
Not at all.

not progressives or socialist,, they are for a single powerful government

collective is the very definition of centralization,,, it says all are controlled together with one power and is the polar opposite of individual liberty,,

Wrong.
You just have no idea what a progressive or socialist is.
Look up "Sewer Socialists", progressives like Phillip and Robert La Follette, in the state of WI, for the last century.
Then look up socialist mayors of Milwaukee, WI.

• Emil Seidel, Mayor of Milwaukee, 1910-1912
• Daniel Webster Hoan, Mayor of Milwaukee, 1916-1940
• Frank Zeidler, Mayor of Milwaukee, 1948-1960

It is always amusing when conservatives try to tell socialists what socialism really is?

Someone has to do it because they always lie about it.

I notice the image of Hitler.
And do you realize Hitler was an anti-socialist?
Under Hitler, the capitalist corporations made the most profits ever.
Hitler was appointed by Hindenberg, the representative of the oligarchs, the aristocracy, military, and corporations.
Hitler had all the socialists murdered.
The Night of the Long Knives.

Socialism does not imply centralization.
It is capitalist corporations that are the greatest danger, because they are even more centralized than federal. They are multi national.

No, Hitler was not a socialist. He said many times that he was a socialist.

When Hitler was young, poor, and unknown, then he had to pretend to be a populist.
He hung with the SA of Rohem.
But in the Night of the Long Knives, (1934), he had all the SA killed, including Rohem.
So then how can he be a socialist if he had all the socialists killed?

How did Stalin pretend to be a socialist when he had almost every communist and socialist in the USSR killed or sent to the Gulag?

Good point in that there are parallels between Hitler and Stalin first pretending to be one thing and then turning into the exact opposite.,
But you can see it has to be true, both for Hitler and Stalin, because a socialist or a communist has to want the people to make the choices and decisions, and for government to be working for the whole population.
And both Hitler and Stalin instead prevented the people from having any say at all, and instead was accumulating wealth for a small elite minority. That is capitalism. Both Hitler and Stalin were extreme capitalists. Any dictator pretty much has to be, otherwise what would their motivation to be a dictator unless it was profits?

 

[Rigby5]

What I don't like about our government are illegal legislation like Prohibition, the War on Drugs, federal gun laws, federal health laws, 3 Strikes, asset forfeiture, illegal wars, etc.

I'm not a Constitutional expert so I probably missed it but where in our Constitution all the things you enumerate prohibited?

They aren't allowed by the Constitution, which means they are prohibited.

The constitution is written to allow ANYTHING not specifically prohibited by a constitutional law.

95% of the laws on the books are not allowed by the Constitution.

Federal laws anyway.
It is less clear about state and local laws.
The federal government is not supposed to do anything the states could do, because the states do it better.
Originally that was even the way the military worked, and you see each state providing its own different uniforms in the Civil War for example.

 

[Rigby5]

It could be a ruse to enable Biden to throw a lot of money at a non-existing problem, and then

Depends.
Some investments have a greater pay off than cost, so are worth it.
Example are Hoover dam, the St. Lawrence Seaway, TVA, etc.
I would love rural broadband myself.
When government does pump priming borrowing and spending, it can enrich consumers and boost the whole economy, making the initial borrowing small in comparison, due to inflation.
So it depends on if well researched and executed.

If you're attempting to address any of my comments, you should know that I left this discussion because it's a portrayal of the same sort of ignorance that is being displayed by Americans on the Covid vaccine.

As a catch-all reply though, I consider your comments to be nuanced enough to serve for further discussion. The reason being, the US is too far behind already for thinking of piecemeal fixes. My opinion is that it's going to take huge spending and the inherent risks attached.

Americans are angry and the attack against government is at least a symbolic effort to bring down bad government. There is risk of it growing into something that is more than just a symbolic joke.

Biden must succeed this time in breaking the country away from the 'American way', which is inequality and the hold the very wealthy has on the ordinary people.

Don't forget, the Jan.6th. riot was against government, not just one side of governemnt.

If Biden doesn't succeed then Trump is going to be back offering his solution to the problems in America. That will be a fascist bid for power.

And then no solution to the problem, because that would be contrary to a fascist agenda.

Have Americans matured enough yet to just leave the Trump experience in the dust, as a horrible experience? I think there are several indications now that would be true!

First I should provide the context that I am extreme left wing, liberal, progressive, socialist, etc.
But I did not mind the congress occupation because I do think our government is way corrupt, even though I do not think the election was rigged more than the usual poor choice of candidates.
What I don't like about our government are illegal legislation like Prohibition, the War on Drugs, federal gun laws, federal health laws, 3 Strikes, asset forfeiture, illegal wars, etc.

But I do like the idea of investing in mass transit, transportation in general, and stimulus.

other than mass transit thats not a left wing liberal,, more like right wing libertarian,

and the best stimulus happens the same way,, local,, the feds always take a big cut and use it as a political slush fund

as for mas transit,, like everything the government gets involved in it cost more and the waste is usually off the charts,,

best to let that happen on a local level where the needs came be evaluated first hand and waste left to a minimum,,

Leftwing, progressive, liberal, socialists are always for local over federal.
Federal it too far away, costs too much to contact or try to influence, and are always corrupt by corporate interests.
We need large government to counter large corruption, but it always provides its own corruption as well.
Leftwing, progressive, liberals are about individual liberties and rights.
Do words like cooperative, communal, or collective imply centralization?
Not at all.

not progressives or socialist,, they are for a single powerful government

collective is the very definition of centralization,,, it says all are controlled together with one power and is the polar opposite of individual liberty,,

Wrong.
You just have no idea what a progressive or socialist is.
Look up "Sewer Socialists", progressives like Phillip and Robert La Follette, in the state of WI, for the last century.
Then look up socialist mayors of Milwaukee, WI.

• Emil Seidel, Mayor of Milwaukee, 1910-1912
• Daniel Webster Hoan, Mayor of Milwaukee, 1916-1940
• Frank Zeidler, Mayor of Milwaukee, 1948-1960

It is always amusing when conservatives try to tell socialists what socialism really is?

I'm not a conservative and have done much research on progressives and their origins that go back to the fabian socialist,,,
and I know their ideology was so rejected they had to change their name to liberals,,,

could you explain how individual rights work in a collective society???

I always thought things should be decided for the collective and rejection of the individual,,

Easy.
If lots of people need something collective, they pool resources and do it together.
A common example would be a bond issue for the financing of public schools, library, police, fire department, etc.
In a rural setting, you would expect collective grain elevators, farmer's markets, etc.
It only starts to get more tricky when it is something that could generate more of a profit.
For example, if people need solar power, and no one can afford the over head alone, then why not collectively pool some revenue in order to finance the factory to build the solar panels, inverters, etc.?
The problem with that is a capitalist society considers that illegal.
A public company does not have to make a profit, so private companies consider it cheating.
But it does allow for better service, savings, and more user input.
For example, in Milwaukee, WI, the city buses, school buses, garbage trucks, and snow plows are all collective.
Which means they can shift drivers around as needed.
When it snows, they put plows on the garbage trucks, and it is quickly dealt with.
They already have plenty of drivers and don't have to have any extra overhead.
With a private company, people claim you can choose another brand instead, but the reality is that often is not possible.
Things like insurance, cars, gasoline, health care, etc., pretty much price fix, so you are really facing more of a monopoly.
You get no input at all.
While if you have public companies, then you can go to public meeting and complain, vote, or organize opposition.
You have much more influence.
With private, you have nothing.
The only people who like private over public, are the ones who want to make abusive profits.

thats not a collective,, thats a society working together for a specific goal,,,


theres no such thing as a public company they are owned by individuals and the public has no business telling them how to run their company,, thats authoritarian and against individual rights you say you are for,,

my guess is you lied when you said you were for individual rights cause everything youve said since goes against that,,,

Wrong.
Society working together for a specific goal IS collective.
That is exactly what the word means.

{...
collective
[kəˈlektiv]

ADJECTIVE

1. done by people acting as a group.
   "a collective protest"

NOUN

1. a cooperative enterprise.
   synonyms:
   cooperative · co-op · community · communal settlement · kibbutz · fellowship

...}

Authoritarian is when you have a private person or company dictate to you.
There are lots of public companies, for example most utilities are public.
Anytime you don't want a private dictator creating a high priced monopoly that your community has no influence over price or quality, you create a public company.
We should have far more public companies, but the reason we don't is that the private capitalists who want that profit, consider public companies that could make a profit, illegal.

Government grants utility monopolies, moron.

Governments have many options, ranging from just letting private utilities compete, granting a utility monopoly, or producing the utility itself. And example of the government doing it would be the TVA, Hoover dam, etc.

So?

So then utilities can be private or public, but it should be pretty clear that public utilities work out the best.

That's not clear at all.

With public, you don't have anyone siphoning off profits or shifting resources to more profitable ventures.

What's good about that? Capital should go to its highest use, which means its most profitable use.

You also get to vote over public ventures, instead of getting no say at all in private ones.

Allowing the numskulls who can vote to make economic decisions is the ultimate in stupid.

Why should capital go to those who can make the most profit from it?
For example, with mass marketing techniques, it is not that hard to convince people that they want things like individual cars, when mass transit is about 30 times more efficient in terms of fuel use.
It would seem to me that conserving resources, producing food, education, health care, and lots of other less profitable services are the most important.
A society that is entirely profit motivated has to quickly devolve into slavery and injustice like Ancient Rome did.
For dictatorship is the ultimate in capitalism, where you just invest in a mercenary band that can take over by force, and then you make all the profits you want.

Although most of the voters may be numbskulls, they tend to cancel each other out, and you still get enough rational voting so that it is not as bad as an eccentric, wealthy, mogul.