What are you depending on government to do for you?

[Robert W]

Well first of all, as an American citizen we have obligations and responsibilities to our country and communities. So let's begin there, it's not about waiting to be convinced by the government to serve. If you're a properly raised and educated human being and American, you already know you have certain obligations and responsibilities towards your fellow-man, especially your fellow Americans. The economy is a vital element of our national infrastructure, without it we don't have a nation, and capitalists are the primary job creators in a market economy, not the government (as in Marxism).

There are incentives for capitalists in a National Socialist-run US government and country. Your business is considered a service to the country and community, providing goods and services, jobs..etc. So tax incentives, grants, contracts. Take care of your workers, make sure they're well paid and working in a safe environment, and the government will reward you. The community that your business serves will also reward you with a customer base able to afford your goods and services. The working class will have affordable housing, education, healthcare..etc. They'll live in a country with a robust, modern infrastructure, able to provide them with services, like public transit, utilities..etc.

The private sector will work in tandem with the public sector, serving the nation (the volk, the people). That is a healthy capitalism, that enriches everyone, not just the capitalist class. Working class people will also benefit from that form of capitalism. The government can also assist workers who want to organize worker-owned companies, running them as cooperatives, increasing democracy in the workplace. That's also doable in a national socialist-run economy. Laws can be passed that ensure workers own a certain % of privately owned companies. Especially large corporations, perhaps not so much smaller, mom-pop Pizzerias, but the big companies. Workers will have a seat in the boardroom.

Essentially, capitalism must be patriotic, prioritizing the needs of the people, or public good, rather than private profits.

Can you name a person or a party that has delivered all of that to the public? It would have been great had you real life experience as a capitalist.

 

[Robert W]

We gave up running our country, When deciding too turn over our voice & our vote to Party Politics.
Maters not what party you chose.

That claim is not accurate. However a case you can make is that is what Biden did and why his party lost.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Including Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, the VA, GI BILL, Unemployment Insurance, utilities..etc. BUST ALL THE LABOR UNIONS! Just cut it all, and hand it to the billionaires, they'll do a better job serving the public good, when everything is primarily for private profits. Heck, we should even get rid of government fire departments, make them private, and if you don't pay for fire insurance, too bad for you, your house burns down, and perhaps the whole neighborhood too. Yeah! Laissez-faire capitalism, everything amounts to profits for the rich, yeah! MIGA- MAKE ISRAEL GREAT AGAIN!

Adam Smith the father of capitalism, called capitalists "masters":

"What are the common wages of labor, depends everywhere upon the contract usually made between those two parties, whose interests are by no means the same. The workmen desire to get as much, the masters to give as little as possible. The former are disposed to combine (To form labor unions) in order to raise, the latter in order to lower the wages of labor.

It is not, however, difficult to foresee which of the two parties must, upon all ordinary occasions, have the advantage in the dispute, and force the other into a compliance with their terms. The masters, being fewer in number, can combine (In the form of chambers of commerce, industry-specific associations, and guilds, super-PACs, non-profit front organizations/NGOs, armies of lobbyists bribing politicians in the halls of government, think tanks staffed by Ivy league analysts and scholars who write the papers and legislation that they hand to the lobbyists, to give to their cronies in the US Congress) much more easily; and the law, besides, authorises, or at least does not prohibit their combinations, while it prohibits those of the workmen.

We have no acts of parliament against combining to lower the price of work; but many against combining to raise it. In all such disputes the masters can hold out much longer. A landlord, a farmer, a master manufacturer, or merchant, though they did not employ a single workman, could generally live a year or two upon the stocks which they have already acquired. Many workmen could not subsist a week, few could subsist a month, and scarce any a year without employment. In the long-run the workman may be as necessary to his master as his master is to him, but the necessity is not so immediate.

We rarely hear, it has been said, of the combinations of masters, though frequently of those of workmen. But whoever imagines, upon this account, that masters rarely combine, is as ignorant of the world as of the subject. Masters are always and every where in a sort of tacit, but constant and uniform combination, not to raise the wages of labour above their actual rate. To violate this combination is every where a most unpopular action, and a sort of reproach to a master among his neighbours and equals." (Wealth Of Nations - Book I, Chapter VIII)

Yeah! Give everything to the masters, they'll take care of it!

YEAH!

View attachment 1042898

View attachment 1042901

View attachment 1042899
View attachment 1042900

View attachment 1042902

View attachment 1042903

View attachment 1042904

View attachment 1042905​

 

[TruthNotBS]

View attachment 1043059

Give everything to the billionaires or you get a famine? Durrrrr.

 

[froggy]

View attachment 1042897

You are here ================== ^^^

The Bible speaks of times getting this way in the last days.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Give everything to the billionaires or you get a famine? Durrrrr.

Thank goodness Cuba, Venezuela and North Korea got rid of all their billionaires.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

 

[BlackSand]

That's great for a country the size of one of our states. America is way too big and diverse for national socialism to work.

.

What that nutcase has been talking about is government enforced Critical Theory and Class Warfare ...

.​

 

[ThisIsMe]

The federal government will have to fund it, along with public, and local resources. Federal, state, and local governments will participate in the effort to eliminate homelessness and substance abuse, street crime, and illegal immigration. etc. ICE can't deport illegals without local and state assistance.

Why does the federal government have to have any role? Just leave it to the states and the locals. Immigration is the only activity in that list where the federal government has any constitutional authority.

 

[TruthNotBS]

Thank goodness Cuba, Venezuela and North Korea got rid of all their billionaires.

Are you aware that famines have occurred and continue to occur in nations with capitalist-run market economies? Many countries in the world have market economies and populations suffering from malnutrition and extreme poverty. These capitalist-run countries aren't even being sanctioned or embargoed by the Judeo-American empire. That 800-pound Zionist gorilla that controls the world's reserve currency, and banks, spending almost a trillion yearly in its "defense", with 700+ military bases around the world.

Your beloved billionaire gods are committing economic terrorism against the countries you mentioned, yet you delude yourself into thinking you have the ideological grounds to criticize their economies. Amazing your confusion and lack of fairness.

Following your line of reasoning the modern industrialized world is full of Marxist socialist countries, because those policies that you automatically, disingenuously identify with Marxist-Leninism, are taken for granted in Western Europe and China..etc. China is a heavily centrally planned economy, led by commies. Many Western European countries are by your silly standard, commie.

I'm a national socialist and third-way fascist, I'm not a Marxist or liberal. Socialism comes in different forms, just like capitalism does. You're quite dishonest when you pretend there's only one form of socialism or capitalism. Socialism can co-exist with market economics, as it does today throughout Europe, and as it did in the Third Reich, there was no famine in 1930s Germany until WW2. Socialism now is everywhere, in the modern, industrialized world, because most of these countries don't agree with your take on capitalism. Several of them have fully nationalized energy sectors and other socialist policies and ideals that you dishonestly identify as Marxist-Leninist or communist. Just because I don't agree with your laissez-faire, Milton Friedman, "Atlas Shrugged", Jew-capitalism doesn't make me a communist.

​

Food Production in the Third Reich (No Famines).​

1. Autarky and Agricultural Policies:
   
   • The German national socialist government pursued autarky (economic self-sufficiency) as part of its broader economic strategy. The Reich Food Estate (Reichsnährstand) centralized control over agricultural production and pricing.
   • Incentives were provided to farmers, including subsidies and fixed prices for agricultural goods, which improved production efficiency compared to the Weimar Republic era (i.e. unbridled capitalism - serving capitalists at the expense of the working class).
2. Modernization and Mechanization:
   
   • National socialist agricultural policies encouraged mechanization and the use of chemical fertilizers.
3. Production Statistics:
   
   • By 1939, Germany produced approximately 24 million tons of grain annually, which, when adjusted for population size, offered better per capita availability than the Soviet Union and produced more food than under the Jew capitalist-run Weimar Republic. It was even more self-sufficient in food production than the UK in 1939, with the latter being more dependent upon foreign food imports.

All socialism isn't the same Todd. I'm not a Marxist. I used to be, a council-communist, Marxist, but not anymore. Socialism and markets can co-exist, and Jewish religion (Abrahamic religion) and culture are anti-human (shit). Desert savage religions, that lead to the destruction of White Europeans, and all of humanity. The sooner we rid ourselves of Jewish religion and culture, the better.

​

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

​

Jew still banging your ex?

 

[TruthNotBS]

Jew still banging your ex?

Only in your perverted Jewish fantasies. I don't even have an ex, I've been married to the same woman for thirty-two years.

 

[TruthNotBS]

Why does the federal government have to have any role? Just leave it to the states and the locals. Immigration is the only activity in that list where the federal government has any constitutional authority.

Just immigration? Really? Not even issuing the currency or maintaining our country's defense and courts of law? Justice system? How about international diplomacy? Why even have a union, of 50 half-ass states, that aren't truly sovereign? Relying on Washington for funding and other resources?

You cite the Constitution as if it's the inerrant Word of Almighty God. Are you aware that the Constitution can be amended? Changed, to serve our needs as they arise? The situation today isn't what it was 250 years ago. Perhaps we need some new amendments, or to eliminate others. Maybe we need a complete overhaul of our economic system and government.

 

[ThisIsMe]

Just immigration? Really? Not even issuing the currency or maintaining our country's defense and courts of law? Justice system? How about international diplomacy? Why even have a union, of 50 half-ass states, that aren't truly sovereign? Relying on Washington for funding and other resources?

You cite the Constitution as if it's the inerrant Word of Almighty God. Are you aware that the Constitution can be amended? Changed, to serve our needs as they arise? The situation today isn't what it was 250 years ago. Perhaps we need some new amendments, or to eliminate others. Maybe we need a complete overhaul of our economic system and government.

were talking about immigration.

You cite the Constitution as if it's the inerrant Word of Almighty God.

No, I cite it as the law of the land that our country was founded on.

Yes, it can be amended, but until such time as it is, we operate on the rules currently in place.

The situation today isn't what it was 250 years ago.

Yes, I know. The funny thing is, the cotus was written to be future proof, because, as written, it was a check on the power of the federal government. It wasn't until we started expanding the power of the federal government that things started to go awry. Take all this federal bureaucracy and return it to the states and the cotus goes back to working as intended.

 

[TruthNotBS]

were talking about immigration.




No, I cite it as the law of the land that our country was founded on.

Yes, it can be amended, but until such time as it is, we operate on the rules currently in place.




Yes, I know. The funny thing is, the cotus was written to be future proof, because, as written, it was a check on the power of the federal government. It wasn't until we started expanding the power of the federal government that things started to go awry. Take all this federal bureaucracy and return it to the states and the cotus goes back to working as intended.

The necessary role or function of the federal government might be more important today than it was 250 years ago. It's not all set in stone, there's no immutable principle in the Constitution suggesting the federal government's role shouldn't be expanded or enhanced. Your claim that the federal government is the source of our problems is nonsense. Jim Crow laws in the South might have been OK for White people like you, but not for its Black victims, at the receiving end of such discrimination. They were constantly denigrated, dehumanized, and even lynched after they were freed from slavery.

Just a few years before I was born, Blacks finally got their civil rights, and I'm in my early 50s. Black people were legally freed from slavery 160 years ago, and Black people had to wait 100 years after that to finally get their civil rights recognized. The federal government intervened on their behalf. Left to the Southern States, Blacks would still be sitting at the back of the bus. Crap like this would still be happening:

​

 

[ThisIsMe]

The necessary role or function of the federal government might be more important today than it was 250 years ago. It's not all set in stone, there's no immutable principle in the Constitution suggesting the federal government's role shouldn't be expanded or enhanced. Your claim that the federal government is the source of our problems is nonsense. Jim Crow laws in the South might have been OK for White people like you, but not for its Black victims, at the receiving end of such discrimination. They were constantly denigrated, dehumanized, and even lynched after they were freed from slavery.

Just a few years before I was born, Blacks finally got their civil rights, and I'm in my early 50s. Black people were legally freed from slavery 160 years ago, and Black people had to wait 100 years after that to finally get their civil rights recognized. The federal government intervened on their behalf. Left to the Southern States, Blacks would still be sitting at the back of the bus. Crap like this would still be happening:

​

White people like you

Wait, is this an IM2 alternate account? I'll ask you the same question. What makes you think I'm white? It must be because I say "white thing" huh?

there's no immutable principle in the Constitution suggesting the federal government's role shouldn't be expanded or enhanced

Yes, there is, it's called the enumerated powers, and the 10th ammendment.

Your claim that the federal government is the source of our problems is nonsense

No, I said the expansion of powers in the federal government is the source of the problems. Government, in its original and intended form, is fine and even necessary. It wasn't until we started allowing the government to take on all these additional roles, where it all started to go down hill.

Nobody can agree on what powers the government should have, what programs they should do and with every expansion of government comes the need for foreign taxation., and the federal government is the most inefficient body when it comes to handling money.