What is it about Socialism that makes you want it here in the United States?

[dblack]

... socialists ..... want to force their collectivism on everyone else.

Who told you that?

Socialists. Did someone try to convince you otherwise?

Are you out of your mind? I am from Sweden. During the Cold War I have been to the Soviet Union. I have been to Poland. I have been to East Germany. I have been to Hungary. I have been to Romania. I have been to Czechoslovakia. I have been to the Ukraine. I have been to Belarus. I have been to Yugoslavia. I have been to Albania. I have been to Latvia. I have been to Lithuania, I have been to Estonia. My wife is from Czechoslovakia. I guess your "Dick & Jane Easy Reader" didn't tell you that Socialism in this country, and that country, and the other country, and in the minds of the people who you've met, and in the minds of the people who I've met ........ are not the same. Why am I even trying to tell you anything? This is a waste of time.

Are you trying to make a point here?

 

[GLASNOST]

... socialists ..... want to force their collectivism on everyone else.

Who told you that?

Socialists. Did someone try to convince you otherwise?

Are you out of your mind? I am from Sweden. During the Cold War I have been to the Soviet Union. I have been to Poland. I have been to East Germany. I have been to Hungary. I have been to Romania. I have been to Czechoslovakia. I have been to the Ukraine. I have been to Belarus. I have been to Yugoslavia. I have been to Albania. I have been to Latvia. I have been to Lithuania, I have been to Estonia. My wife is from Czechoslovakia. I guess your "Dick & Jane Easy Reader" didn't tell you that Socialism in this country, and that country, and the other country, and in the minds of the people who you've met, and in the minds of the people who I've met ........ are not the same. Why am I even trying to tell you anything? This is a waste of time.

Are you trying to make a point here?

I was, yes. But I've changed my mind. I am clicking the "ignore button" instead.

 

[dblack]

... socialists ..... want to force their collectivism on everyone else.

Who told you that?

Socialists. Did someone try to convince you otherwise?

Are you out of your mind? I am from Sweden. During the Cold War I have been to the Soviet Union. I have been to Poland. I have been to East Germany. I have been to Hungary. I have been to Romania. I have been to Czechoslovakia. I have been to the Ukraine. I have been to Belarus. I have been to Yugoslavia. I have been to Albania. I have been to Latvia. I have been to Lithuania, I have been to Estonia. My wife is from Czechoslovakia. I guess your "Dick & Jane Easy Reader" didn't tell you that Socialism in this country, and that country, and the other country, and in the minds of the people who you've met, and in the minds of the people who I've met ........ are not the same. Why am I even trying to tell you anything? This is a waste of time.

Are you trying to make a point here?

I was, yes. But I've changed my mind. I am clicking the "ignore button" instead.

Good for you. Whenever your core beliefs are challenged, it's best not to risk it. Turtle up!

 

[Andylusion]

Bullshit. You're going to quibble about 'control' vs 'regulate', but it's the same thing.

Did you even bother to look up what it is?

Yeah, it's just socialism.

Look... there is no "you control it, but I control it, but you do."

Either the government controls something, or the government does not control something. This idea that you can have a non-government control, government control, is just the left-wing playing word games.

When you say "market socialism", if the outcome of "market socialism" is different from what the outcome would have been under just the "market"... then it isn't market. It's just socialism.

The outcome would be the same.

If the outcome would be the exact same.... then there is no socialism. Free Market Capitalism, is just that.... free market capitalism. There is no socialism involved.

You can't have it both ways. It either is operating like a market, or it is not. It can't be both.

Don't you understand the basics of political economy? Factors of production are treated as independent of the market. Market socialism simply means that factors of production are organized socially as opposed to free market capitalism where the factors of production are owned and organized privately. Regardless of the way in which you organize the factors of production, the products can still be sold in the market.

But that simply isn't true. You are acting like the factors of production, are separate from the market.

If you control how "way in which you organize the factors of production" then that isn't how the market would have them. That's socialism, and doesn't work.

That has a huge effect on production.

Let me give you a simple example:

I looked up the cost of building and starting up a restaurant, like any fast food place. The startup costs were between $2 Million to $3.5 Million dollars.

Let us say for the sake of argument, that the cost to build and open a new store is $3 Million.

Now according to your own words, you said "factors of production are organized socially as opposed to free market capitalism where the factors of production are owned and organized privately".

Under your system, why would I invest $3 Million into a store, that in the end, I don't own? Well I would not. Honestly, I could invest that $3 Million dollars in the stock market, and get a 10% return, for $300,000 a year in income, and that's doing nothing at all. Don't have to deal with employees, or bills, or angry customers. So I'll invest that money into stocks, before I build a store, that you take ownership of it away from me.

Now that does not mean that I don't build the store. I will still build the store, just not in that country. I'll find another country to invest my money into building a store.

What this is called in economic terms is "Capital flight"

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/world/americas/article1954791.html

This is a perfect example:

Not only has money failed to come in, but Barclays Capital, an international investment bank, estimates companies have taken some $150 billion out of the country since currency exchange controls were instituted a decade ago. In part, they were supposed to prevent capital flight. An average of $20 billion a year has been sent abroad over the past five years.

In recent years Venezuelan companies have invested $920 million in the Dominican Republic, according to the Dominican Republic Export and Investment Center.

Although the Cisneros Group still has substantial holdings in Venezuela, it moved its operational headquarters to Coral Gables (Florida) in 2000.

A 2009 diplomatic cable released by WikiLeaks, stated the principal owners of the company, the Cohen family, were “ready to negotiate, to give the government what it wants … but no one will talk to them,’” a lawyer who represents the family said, according to the cable.

The diplomat who wrote the cable added, “The Cohens were losing money because of the delay … and planned to concentrate new investment outside Venezuela.”
​

Now no doubt in the ultra short term, having "factors of production are organized socially" will reap results. In the short term the cost of food went down in Venezuela. In the short term, housing became affordable in Venezuela. In the short term, things will improve.

But in the long term, controlling the 'factors of production' to be organized 'socially', will destroy the reason for investment. The result is capital flight.

Multinational companies are dumping their Venezuela operations in fire-sale deals

Companies will sell off their operations, and reopen their operations in other countries. The result will be massive job loss, production loss, and poverty and decline.

So to recap everything in the simplest terms.... 'market socialism' is just socialism. And it does not work.

 

[KissMy]

Socialism cheaper than Wallstreet

 

[Tehon]

Did you even bother to look up what it is?

Yeah, it's just socialism.

Look... there is no "you control it, but I control it, but you do."

Either the government controls something, or the government does not control something. This idea that you can have a non-government control, government control, is just the left-wing playing word games.

When you say "market socialism", if the outcome of "market socialism" is different from what the outcome would have been under just the "market"... then it isn't market. It's just socialism.

The outcome would be the same.

If the outcome would be the exact same.... then there is no socialism. Free Market Capitalism, is just that.... free market capitalism. There is no socialism involved.

You can't have it both ways. It either is operating like a market, or it is not. It can't be both.

Don't you understand the basics of political economy? Factors of production are treated as independent of the market. Market socialism simply means that factors of production are organized socially as opposed to free market capitalism where the factors of production are owned and organized privately. Regardless of the way in which you organize the factors of production, the products can still be sold in the market.

But that simply isn't true. You are acting like the factors of production, are separate from the market.

If you control how "way in which you organize the factors of production" then that isn't how the market would have them. That's socialism, and doesn't work.

That has a huge effect on production.

Let me give you a simple example:

I looked up the cost of building and starting up a restaurant, like any fast food place. The startup costs were between $2 Million to $3.5 Million dollars.

Let us say for the sake of argument, that the cost to build and open a new store is $3 Million.

Now according to your own words, you said "factors of production are organized socially as opposed to free market capitalism where the factors of production are owned and organized privately".

Under your system, why would I invest $3 Million into a store, that in the end, I don't own? Well I would not. Honestly, I could invest that $3 Million dollars in the stock market, and get a 10% return, for $300,000 a year in income, and that's doing nothing at all. Don't have to deal with employees, or bills, or angry customers. So I'll invest that money into stocks, before I build a store, that you take ownership of it away from me.

Now that does not mean that I don't build the store. I will still build the store, just not in that country. I'll find another country to invest my money into building a store.

What this is called in economic terms is "Capital flight"

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/world/americas/article1954791.html

This is a perfect example:

Not only has money failed to come in, but Barclays Capital, an international investment bank, estimates companies have taken some $150 billion out of the country since currency exchange controls were instituted a decade ago. In part, they were supposed to prevent capital flight. An average of $20 billion a year has been sent abroad over the past five years.

In recent years Venezuelan companies have invested $920 million in the Dominican Republic, according to the Dominican Republic Export and Investment Center.

Although the Cisneros Group still has substantial holdings in Venezuela, it moved its operational headquarters to Coral Gables (Florida) in 2000.

A 2009 diplomatic cable released by WikiLeaks, stated the principal owners of the company, the Cohen family, were “ready to negotiate, to give the government what it wants … but no one will talk to them,’” a lawyer who represents the family said, according to the cable.

The diplomat who wrote the cable added, “The Cohens were losing money because of the delay … and planned to concentrate new investment outside Venezuela.”
​

Now no doubt in the ultra short term, having "factors of production are organized socially" will reap results. In the short term the cost of food went down in Venezuela. In the short term, housing became affordable in Venezuela. In the short term, things will improve.

But in the long term, controlling the 'factors of production' to be organized 'socially', will destroy the reason for investment. The result is capital flight.

Multinational companies are dumping their Venezuela operations in fire-sale deals

Companies will sell off their operations, and reopen their operations in other countries. The result will be massive job loss, production loss, and poverty and decline.

So to recap everything in the simplest terms.... 'market socialism' is just socialism. And it does not work.

You are acting like the factors of production, are separate from the market.

Yea, because they are.

The factors of production are land, labor and capital. Those inputs are organized to create an output which is then allocated via the market.

 

[Andylusion]

Yeah, it's just socialism.

Look... there is no "you control it, but I control it, but you do."

Either the government controls something, or the government does not control something. This idea that you can have a non-government control, government control, is just the left-wing playing word games.

When you say "market socialism", if the outcome of "market socialism" is different from what the outcome would have been under just the "market"... then it isn't market. It's just socialism.

The outcome would be the same.

If the outcome would be the exact same.... then there is no socialism. Free Market Capitalism, is just that.... free market capitalism. There is no socialism involved.

You can't have it both ways. It either is operating like a market, or it is not. It can't be both.

Don't you understand the basics of political economy? Factors of production are treated as independent of the market. Market socialism simply means that factors of production are organized socially as opposed to free market capitalism where the factors of production are owned and organized privately. Regardless of the way in which you organize the factors of production, the products can still be sold in the market.

But that simply isn't true. You are acting like the factors of production, are separate from the market.

If you control how "way in which you organize the factors of production" then that isn't how the market would have them. That's socialism, and doesn't work.

That has a huge effect on production.

Let me give you a simple example:

I looked up the cost of building and starting up a restaurant, like any fast food place. The startup costs were between $2 Million to $3.5 Million dollars.

Let us say for the sake of argument, that the cost to build and open a new store is $3 Million.

Now according to your own words, you said "factors of production are organized socially as opposed to free market capitalism where the factors of production are owned and organized privately".

Under your system, why would I invest $3 Million into a store, that in the end, I don't own? Well I would not. Honestly, I could invest that $3 Million dollars in the stock market, and get a 10% return, for $300,000 a year in income, and that's doing nothing at all. Don't have to deal with employees, or bills, or angry customers. So I'll invest that money into stocks, before I build a store, that you take ownership of it away from me.

Now that does not mean that I don't build the store. I will still build the store, just not in that country. I'll find another country to invest my money into building a store.

What this is called in economic terms is "Capital flight"

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/world/americas/article1954791.html

This is a perfect example:

Not only has money failed to come in, but Barclays Capital, an international investment bank, estimates companies have taken some $150 billion out of the country since currency exchange controls were instituted a decade ago. In part, they were supposed to prevent capital flight. An average of $20 billion a year has been sent abroad over the past five years.

In recent years Venezuelan companies have invested $920 million in the Dominican Republic, according to the Dominican Republic Export and Investment Center.

Although the Cisneros Group still has substantial holdings in Venezuela, it moved its operational headquarters to Coral Gables (Florida) in 2000.

A 2009 diplomatic cable released by WikiLeaks, stated the principal owners of the company, the Cohen family, were “ready to negotiate, to give the government what it wants … but no one will talk to them,’” a lawyer who represents the family said, according to the cable.

The diplomat who wrote the cable added, “The Cohens were losing money because of the delay … and planned to concentrate new investment outside Venezuela.”
​

Now no doubt in the ultra short term, having "factors of production are organized socially" will reap results. In the short term the cost of food went down in Venezuela. In the short term, housing became affordable in Venezuela. In the short term, things will improve.

But in the long term, controlling the 'factors of production' to be organized 'socially', will destroy the reason for investment. The result is capital flight.

Multinational companies are dumping their Venezuela operations in fire-sale deals

Companies will sell off their operations, and reopen their operations in other countries. The result will be massive job loss, production loss, and poverty and decline.

So to recap everything in the simplest terms.... 'market socialism' is just socialism. And it does not work.

You are acting like the factors of production, are separate from the market.

Yea, because they are.

The factors of production are land, labor and capital. Those inputs are organized to create an output which is then allocated via the market.

Can you actually prove that, or respond to the real world example being played out in Venezuela? OR no but you intend to keep saying your unsupportable statements?

 

[Tehon]

The outcome would be the same.

If the outcome would be the exact same.... then there is no socialism. Free Market Capitalism, is just that.... free market capitalism. There is no socialism involved.

You can't have it both ways. It either is operating like a market, or it is not. It can't be both.

Don't you understand the basics of political economy? Factors of production are treated as independent of the market. Market socialism simply means that factors of production are organized socially as opposed to free market capitalism where the factors of production are owned and organized privately. Regardless of the way in which you organize the factors of production, the products can still be sold in the market.

But that simply isn't true. You are acting like the factors of production, are separate from the market.

If you control how "way in which you organize the factors of production" then that isn't how the market would have them. That's socialism, and doesn't work.

That has a huge effect on production.

Let me give you a simple example:

I looked up the cost of building and starting up a restaurant, like any fast food place. The startup costs were between $2 Million to $3.5 Million dollars.

Let us say for the sake of argument, that the cost to build and open a new store is $3 Million.

Now according to your own words, you said "factors of production are organized socially as opposed to free market capitalism where the factors of production are owned and organized privately".

Under your system, why would I invest $3 Million into a store, that in the end, I don't own? Well I would not. Honestly, I could invest that $3 Million dollars in the stock market, and get a 10% return, for $300,000 a year in income, and that's doing nothing at all. Don't have to deal with employees, or bills, or angry customers. So I'll invest that money into stocks, before I build a store, that you take ownership of it away from me.

Now that does not mean that I don't build the store. I will still build the store, just not in that country. I'll find another country to invest my money into building a store.

What this is called in economic terms is "Capital flight"

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/world/americas/article1954791.html

This is a perfect example:

Not only has money failed to come in, but Barclays Capital, an international investment bank, estimates companies have taken some $150 billion out of the country since currency exchange controls were instituted a decade ago. In part, they were supposed to prevent capital flight. An average of $20 billion a year has been sent abroad over the past five years.

In recent years Venezuelan companies have invested $920 million in the Dominican Republic, according to the Dominican Republic Export and Investment Center.

Although the Cisneros Group still has substantial holdings in Venezuela, it moved its operational headquarters to Coral Gables (Florida) in 2000.

A 2009 diplomatic cable released by WikiLeaks, stated the principal owners of the company, the Cohen family, were “ready to negotiate, to give the government what it wants … but no one will talk to them,’” a lawyer who represents the family said, according to the cable.

The diplomat who wrote the cable added, “The Cohens were losing money because of the delay … and planned to concentrate new investment outside Venezuela.”
​

Now no doubt in the ultra short term, having "factors of production are organized socially" will reap results. In the short term the cost of food went down in Venezuela. In the short term, housing became affordable in Venezuela. In the short term, things will improve.

But in the long term, controlling the 'factors of production' to be organized 'socially', will destroy the reason for investment. The result is capital flight.

Multinational companies are dumping their Venezuela operations in fire-sale deals

Companies will sell off their operations, and reopen their operations in other countries. The result will be massive job loss, production loss, and poverty and decline.

So to recap everything in the simplest terms.... 'market socialism' is just socialism. And it does not work.

You are acting like the factors of production, are separate from the market.

Yea, because they are.

The factors of production are land, labor and capital. Those inputs are organized to create an output which is then allocated via the market.

Can you actually prove that, or respond to the real world example being played out in Venezuela? OR no but you intend to keep saying your unsupportable statements?

Definition of FACTOR
b: a good or service (such as land, labor, or capital) used in the process of production

Factors of Production | Economic Lowdown Podcasts | Education | St. Louis Fed
Factors of production are the resources people use to produce goods and services; they are the building blocks of the economy. Economists divide the factors of production into four categories: land, labor, capital, and entrepreneurship.


The market is not a factor in production. Its role is to inform the producers.
Land, labor and capital can be organized any number of ways, including socially. Co-ops exist, you know.


Venezuela is not a real world example of market socialism. So it deserves no response.

 

[regent]

America has always had socialism. There must be so many types that some may not even be aware they belong to a socialist organization,

 

[Andylusion]

If the outcome would be the exact same.... then there is no socialism. Free Market Capitalism, is just that.... free market capitalism. There is no socialism involved.

You can't have it both ways. It either is operating like a market, or it is not. It can't be both.

Don't you understand the basics of political economy? Factors of production are treated as independent of the market. Market socialism simply means that factors of production are organized socially as opposed to free market capitalism where the factors of production are owned and organized privately. Regardless of the way in which you organize the factors of production, the products can still be sold in the market.

But that simply isn't true. You are acting like the factors of production, are separate from the market.

If you control how "way in which you organize the factors of production" then that isn't how the market would have them. That's socialism, and doesn't work.

That has a huge effect on production.

Let me give you a simple example:

I looked up the cost of building and starting up a restaurant, like any fast food place. The startup costs were between $2 Million to $3.5 Million dollars.

Let us say for the sake of argument, that the cost to build and open a new store is $3 Million.

Now according to your own words, you said "factors of production are organized socially as opposed to free market capitalism where the factors of production are owned and organized privately".

Under your system, why would I invest $3 Million into a store, that in the end, I don't own? Well I would not. Honestly, I could invest that $3 Million dollars in the stock market, and get a 10% return, for $300,000 a year in income, and that's doing nothing at all. Don't have to deal with employees, or bills, or angry customers. So I'll invest that money into stocks, before I build a store, that you take ownership of it away from me.

Now that does not mean that I don't build the store. I will still build the store, just not in that country. I'll find another country to invest my money into building a store.

What this is called in economic terms is "Capital flight"

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/world/americas/article1954791.html

This is a perfect example:

Not only has money failed to come in, but Barclays Capital, an international investment bank, estimates companies have taken some $150 billion out of the country since currency exchange controls were instituted a decade ago. In part, they were supposed to prevent capital flight. An average of $20 billion a year has been sent abroad over the past five years.

In recent years Venezuelan companies have invested $920 million in the Dominican Republic, according to the Dominican Republic Export and Investment Center.

Although the Cisneros Group still has substantial holdings in Venezuela, it moved its operational headquarters to Coral Gables (Florida) in 2000.

A 2009 diplomatic cable released by WikiLeaks, stated the principal owners of the company, the Cohen family, were “ready to negotiate, to give the government what it wants … but no one will talk to them,’” a lawyer who represents the family said, according to the cable.

The diplomat who wrote the cable added, “The Cohens were losing money because of the delay … and planned to concentrate new investment outside Venezuela.”
​

Now no doubt in the ultra short term, having "factors of production are organized socially" will reap results. In the short term the cost of food went down in Venezuela. In the short term, housing became affordable in Venezuela. In the short term, things will improve.

But in the long term, controlling the 'factors of production' to be organized 'socially', will destroy the reason for investment. The result is capital flight.

Multinational companies are dumping their Venezuela operations in fire-sale deals

Companies will sell off their operations, and reopen their operations in other countries. The result will be massive job loss, production loss, and poverty and decline.

So to recap everything in the simplest terms.... 'market socialism' is just socialism. And it does not work.

You are acting like the factors of production, are separate from the market.

Yea, because they are.

The factors of production are land, labor and capital. Those inputs are organized to create an output which is then allocated via the market.

Can you actually prove that, or respond to the real world example being played out in Venezuela? OR no but you intend to keep saying your unsupportable statements?

Definition of FACTOR
b: a good or service (such as land, labor, or capital) used in the process of production

Factors of Production | Economic Lowdown Podcasts | Education | St. Louis Fed
Factors of production are the resources people use to produce goods and services; they are the building blocks of the economy. Economists divide the factors of production into four categories: land, labor, capital, and entrepreneurship.


The market is not a factor in production. Its role is to inform the producers.
Land, labor and capital can be organized any number of ways, including socially. Co-ops exist, you know.


Venezuela is not a real world example of market socialism. So it deserves no response.

It's amazing how every self-proclaimed example of socialism, is magically not.... and how every self-proclaimed example of capitalism, is magically socialism.

Ok. Do tell... where do you have an example of market socialism?

Yes, co-ops exist, and generally either are insignificant in the economy, or they cease to exist, or they are only co-op in name, and otherwise are just traditional capitalist based companies, with a mask on them to keep left-wingers from screaming about them.

 

[San Souci]

Socialism what is so attractive about it, that you would give up your Constitutional Rights to have in implemented?

You forgot the all of above button..

We've always had socialism light, but due to what has happened over the long years leading back to the 60's and the Vietnam war, it has created years of generation's who are totally rebellious young folks that are easily courted by the powers to be, that want to be, and have been over the years.

Breaking the cycle is a very tough thing as we are seeing in the Trump presidency that has taken the task head on.

Anyone who is focused on fixing the problems of this nation, will be met with some serious backlash. Just ask Trump these days.

Also a crooked ,bought and paid for Media.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Socialism is like that 28% interest credit card you took out. Come on, you never intended to PAY for it...

 

[regent]

I think the arguments put forth against socialism were better in 1935 when conservatives were fighting Social Security. At that time it led directly to Communism and all sorts of evils. America has always had socialist programs, but the people made the decision not Wall Street.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Socialism what is so attractive about it, that you would give up your Constitutional Rights to have in implemented?

FREESTUFF !!!! The reversal of science or evolution so that the least fit survive just like the most fit do thus dooming humanity.

 

[justinacolmena]

I think the arguments put forth against socialism were better in 1935 when conservatives were fighting Social Security. At that time it led directly to Communism and all sorts of evils. America has always had socialist programs, but the people made the decision not Wall Street.

The Social Security Number and its use for a whole array of auxiliary government intelligence, surveillance and population control purposes "not originally intended" is a big part of the problem.

Add to that the way the Social Security Administration digs into each and every paycheck of every worker, even more intrusively than the IRS.

Then they put people away or institutionalize them at law for alleged "mental health" reasons, put them out on disability, make an horrifically anti-Constitutional gun grab.

Try to go work anywhere on benefits, the employer does an extended background check, finds out you're fucking mental and shit, and fires you before the end of your probationary period at your new job, because they can't hire anybody mental for a position of responsibility due to government regulations, business licensure, bonding, and corporate liability.

Meanwhile the SSA kicks you off the benefits, because they maintain that you can work, but you were fired due to your misconduct rather than because of your alleged mental health history, (which they illegally looked up at the corporate level along with your other medical records,) was deemed to be a corporate risk management problem, and the boss was ordered to find an excuse to dump you before the end of your probationary period of employment as a new hire, and you're supposed to consider yourself lucky it wasn't a sexual harassment lawsuit or some similar claim of that general nature.

 

[San Souci]

Socialism what is so attractive about it, that you would give up your Constitutional Rights to have in implemented?

FREESTUFF !!!! The reversal of science or evolution so that the least fit survive just like the most fit do thus dooming humanity.

Good point. If one can vote themselves free stuff ,freeloaders will always take advantage. That is why there is a Democrat Party.

 

[justinacolmena]

Good point. If one can vote themselves free stuff

Nothing is free at the ballot box in the registered sex offender district.

freeloaders will always take advantage.

Well if you're in any kind of business or commerce, you have to sell at a higher price that what you're paying for the goods. Money doesn't grow on trees, but apples do.

That is why there is a Democrat Party.

The Democratic Party is nothing but an atheist haircut at work on the job and a religious haircut on the church pew on Sunday.

The Democratic sermon doesn't cut it.

 

[Flopper]

Socialism what is so attractive about it, that you would give up your Constitutional Rights to have in implemented?

Right now Covid 19 might well be the answer for a lot of people who are sitting at home and wondering how they're going feed the family next week

 

[justinacolmena]

A lot of shooting going on, I think it's target practice at the Air Force Base next door.

COVID-19?

I'm wondering it it's some advanced auxiliary supervisory video system for the latest generation of military aircraft.

Sort of like the chi-mo black box videos on the school buses, or the city cops' bodycams, to audit official misconduct, but this would be so highly classified, only Commissioned Officers would have clearance to access, and then you need to have other people commissioned from some other government agency in charge of the disciplinary proceedings.

 

[San Souci]

Good point. If one can vote themselves free stuff

Nothing is free at the ballot box in the registered sex offender district.

freeloaders will always take advantage.

Well if you're in any kind of business or commerce, you have to sell at a higher price that what you're paying for the goods. Money doesn't grow on trees, but apples do.

That is why there is a Democrat Party.

The Democratic Party is nothing but an atheist haircut at work on the job and a religious haircut on the church pew on Sunday.

The Democratic sermon doesn't cut it.

Yes. Apples grow on trees. But freeloading Welfare moms would want working folks to pick 'em and deliver 'em. It is called Free Lunch Program.