What is bad about socialism?

[Soupnazi630]

Nope.

It's really not that complicated.

Taxation isn't stealing. Killing in warfare isn't murder.


Nope, not at all.

The state will take whatever it needs to, and you can't do a thing about it.

Yes it is

Stealing predates the law and is very clear

taxation is theft.
Permission is necessary or it is theft

yes the state can forcibly takes as it pleases but without permission it is theft

 

[Soupnazi630]

"Parasitism" is just another word which means whatever individuals want it to mean. The reality is that everyone in developed countries is dependent on public establishments to some extent or another, and there's nothing wrong with that.

Yes and that is not socialism which is evil and always fails

 

[Midnight FM]

Yes it is

Stealing predates the law and is very clear

Not at all, it's defined under the law.

We can use an early example of law, such as the 10 Commandments. And under the law of ancient Israel, taxation was very clearly distinguished from theft.

taxation is theft.
Permission is necessary or it is theft

Nope, not according to the law.

yes the state can forcibly takes as it pleases but without permission it is theft

Not at all, and you have no legal recourse whatsoever. It belongs to the state, not to you. Calling it that over and over again won't change reality.

 

[Soupnazi630]

Not at all, it's defined under the law.


Nope, not according to the law.


Not at all, and you have no legal recourse whatsoever. Calling it that over and over again won't change reality.

It is NOT strictly or exclusively defined under the law it was defined and understood long before any law was written

According to reality it is theft the government simply excuses itself

All intelligent people know this but you are a fool

I never said you had a recourse. Yes they can steal with impunity but it is still theft and that is proven fact

Denying fact and truth over and oer again does not make you look intelligent which is what you are trying and failing to do

 

[Midnight FM]

It is NOT strictly or exclusively defined under the law it was defined and understood long before any law was written

Likely arbitrarily and mis-defined, such as by people like yourself.

According to reality it is theft the government simply excuses itself

All intelligent people know this but you are a fool

Nope, the state taking what's rightfully there's isn't theft at all.

Maybe you should just give it to them voluntarily, and you won't have to worry about it being "taken" then, now will you?

I never said you had a recourse. Yes they can steal with impunity but it is still theft and that is proven fact

Denying fact and truth over and oer again does not make you look intelligent which is what you are trying and failing to do

Nope, it isn't. We've explained it to you, and offered up examples of law, ancient and modern, which define what it is and what it isn't.

 

[Soupnazi630]

Likely arbitrarily and mis-defined, such as by people like yourself.


Nope, the state taking what's rightfully there's isn't theft at all.

Maybe you should just give it to them voluntarily, and you won't have to worry about it being "taken" then, now will you?


Nope, it isn't. We've explained it to you, and offered up examples of law, ancient and modern, which define what it is and what it isn't.

Nope logically and accurately defined.

It is not rightfully the states they are taking it from the rightful owners


Maybe they should apply the laws of theft to themselves and stop stealing from people

Yes it is.
You have not exaplined it you have made bad arguements which FAILED

 

[Midnight FM]

Nope logically and accurately defined.

It is not rightfully the states they are taking it from the rightful owners

Nope, it's rightfully the states. They're just taking back what is theres.

Maybe they should apply the laws of theft to themselves and stop stealing from people

Nope, they shouldn't.

Yes it is.
You have not exaplined it you have made bad arguements which FAILED

It's been explained already. It's defined under the law, not at the whim of anonymous individuals who can apply it to anything they want to.

 

[Soupnazi630]

Nope, it's rightfully the states. They're just taking back what is theres.


Nope, they shouldn't.


It's been explained already. It's defined under the law, not at the whim of anonymous individuals who can apply it to anything they want to.

No it is not rightfully the states they simply have the power to steal with impunity

Yes they should theft is immoral

It has not been explained

It was defined before any law was written It is the government applying it at the whim of anything they want

this proves how contradictory and therefore failed and stupid your premise is

 

[Midnight FM]

No it is not rightfully the states they simply have the power to steal with impunity

They have the right to take back what is rightfully theirs.

Yes they should theft is immoral

It has not been explained

Nothing immoral about it whatsoever.

It was defined before any law was written It is the government applying it at the whim of anything they want

this proves how contradictory and therefore failed and stupid your premise is

Anyone can define anything to be anything one wants it do, but those definitions have little validity.

So, if, instead, we refer back to legal sources which have been around since ancient times, we can easily see that taxation is distinct from theft, and that they are not one and the same.

 

[Thinker101]

You say that like there's something wrong with it. There isn't.


Your ability to earn an income is contingent on the public goods, laws, and services that you use to earn an income, such as public roadways.

So one could argue that "you" don't really earn that income. Your ability to do so is provided to you, at least in part, by the state, and the rights and freedoms that it provides.

Who do you think paid for those public roadways, idiot.
Your fricken panhandling sure didn't.

 

[Midnight FM]

Who do you think paid for those public roadways, idiot.
Your fricken panhandling sure didn't.

People who are wealthy paid for them considerably more than you do.

And, naturally, you're ability to do whatever "work" you pretend to do is contingent on the existence of public goods, services, laws, and rights that enable you to do it.

You could always decide to go live in the woods and fend completely for yourself, but, of course, you're not going to.

 

[Thinker101]

People who are wealthy paid for them considerably more than you do.

And, naturally, you're ability to do whatever "work" you pretend to do is contingent on the existence of public goods, services, laws, and rights that enable you to do it.

You could always decide to go live in the woods and fend completely for yourself, but, of course, you're not going to.

What a shock, you conveniently left out public roads. Go be stupid on your own time.

 

[Midnight FM]

What a shock, you conveniently left out public roads. Go be stupid on your own time.

Right, the "work" you do is dependent on having services such as public roads available to you. So, of course, "you" aren't doing it all by yourself, as much as you want to pretend that you are.

If you want to do that, you'll need to go live on a deserted Island and fend completely for yourself like Robinson Crusoe.

 

[Thinker101]

Right, the "work" you do is dependent on having services such as public roads available to you. So, of course, "you" aren't doing it all by yourself, as much as you want to pretend that you are.

If you want to do that, you'll need to go live on a deserted Island and fend completely for yourself like Robinson Crusoe.

Yep, public roads that I helped pay for....idiot.

 

[Soupnazi630]

They have the right to take back what is rightfully theirs.


Nothing immoral about it whatsoever.


Anyone can define anything to be anything one wants it do, but those definitions have little validity.

So, if, instead, we refer back to legal sources which have been around since ancient times, we can easily see that taxation is distinct from theft, and that they are not one and the same.

It is not rightfully their's and was not taken from them in the first place. they are stealing it not taking it BACK

Yes it is immoral theft is always an immoral act

theft is not ANYONE's definition it was logically and clearly defined before the law as was rape and murder.

Therefore taxation is theft as it fits the universal accepted definition of theft and that is absolute fact

 

[g5000]

Since the term "socialism" gets thrown around a lot by people who don't know the meaning of it, here's a definition:

Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy.

Now we can discuss what is bad about it.

Well, taking tax money and distributing it to the poor is one kind of socialism. A very, very bad socialism.

Taking tax money and giving subsidies to large corporations and using tax money to bail out failed businesses who broke our laws is another kind of socialism. The very bestest kind!

Creating tax expenditures in our tax code to redistribute trillions upon trillons up the food chain is the most expensive socialism in the history of the Universe, and it goes completely unnoticed by the dumb people at the middle and bottom of the food chain.

They can feel themselves being robbed, but the victors tell them its the damned commies doing it to them.

It's all about perspective.

 

[Contumacious]

"Parasitism" is just another word which means whatever individuals want it to mean. The reality is that everyone in developed countries is dependent on public establishments to some extent or another, and there's nothing wrong with that.

Taxpayers object and they are ignored. ONLY A SOCIALIST BELIEVES THAT ENSLAVING FOLKS IS COPACETIC

 

[Deplorable Yankee]

I wanna join the democratic socialist of america.... Cause I want to get on the killing of the useful idiots when it kicks off .... Should I convert to jooodism first ........

derp

 

[Captain Caveman]

Since the term "socialism" gets thrown around a lot by people who don't know the meaning of it, here's a definition:

Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy.

Now we can discuss what is bad about it.

Socialism can be described in one sentence -

On paper, it is the best political system to have, in practice, it doesn't and has never worked.

So if you say socialism is good and brilliant, I agree with you. If you want to implement it, I disagree with you.

 

[Votto]