what so bad about socialism

[Freiheit]

Why not, definitions are both definite and clear. If you have a problem with the definition take it up with the editors of Merriam Webster.
If the definition doesn't fit your parameters sharpen your ability to both understand and speak English.

Because, it is special pleading if we have to quibble what socialism is. You have to use an encyclopedia if you are going to quibble, or you are merely full of fallacy.

How is referencing a widely accepted reference work a special pleading?

It is an inaccurate authority and doesn't explain what socislm is.

yes a dictionary will leave out that the more socialist a country is the more its people are likely to starve to death! Daniel spents 100% of his time on the meaning of his own language and never once gets to substance.

dear, put up an encyclopedic reference or cede the point and the argument, due to simple shillery of not having a clue or a Cause.

I cede nothing show me authoritative sources citing encyclopedias as superior to dictionaries in definition.

 

[danielpalos]

my assertions are self-evident truths,

it is self-evident that socialism killed 120 million and some are still deranged enough to want to try it again and then nazism next!

dear, only the clueless, the Causeless, and the right claim that; the rest of us know it was simple, bad management.

 

[danielpalos]

Because, it is special pleading if we have to quibble what socialism is. You have to use an encyclopedia if you are going to quibble, or you are merely full of fallacy.

How is referencing a widely accepted reference work a special pleading?

It is an inaccurate authority and doesn't explain what socislm is.

yes a dictionary will leave out that the more socialist a country is the more its people are likely to starve to death! Daniel spents 100% of his time on the meaning of his own language and never once gets to substance.

dear, put up an encyclopedic reference or cede the point and the argument, due to simple shillery of not having a clue or a Cause.

I cede nothing show me authoritative sources citing encyclopedias as superior to dictionaries in definition.

dear, special pleading is just that, a fallacy.

Socialism is a social and economic system characterised by social ownership and/or social control[1] of the means of production and co-operative management of the economy,[2][3] as well as a political theory and movement that aims at the establishment of such a system.[4][5] "Social ownership" may refer to cooperative enterprises, common ownership, state ownership (achieved by nationalization), citizen ownership of equity, or any combination of these.[6] There are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them.[7]--https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

my assertions are self-evident truths,

it is self-evident that socialism killed 120 million and some are still deranged enough to want to try it again and then nazism next!

dear, only the clueless, the Causeless, and the right claim that; the rest of us know it was simple, bad management.

120 million dead is more than bad management.

 

[danielpalos]

my assertions are self-evident truths,

it is self-evident that socialism killed 120 million and some are still deranged enough to want to try it again and then nazism next!

dear, only the clueless, the Causeless, and the right claim that; the rest of us know it was simple, bad management.

120 million dead is more than bad management.

how many dead natives, with even less regulation?

 

[danielpalos]

dears, simply using the (other) People's tax monies is socialism.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

my assertions are self-evident truths,

it is self-evident that socialism killed 120 million and some are still deranged enough to want to try it again and then nazism next!

dear, only the clueless, the Causeless, and the right claim that; the rest of us know it was simple, bad management.

120 million dead is more than bad management.

how many dead natives, with even less regulation?

You'll have to repost when you're no longer impaired.

 

[danielpalos]

my assertions are self-evident truths,

it is self-evident that socialism killed 120 million and some are still deranged enough to want to try it again and then nazism next!

dear, only the clueless, the Causeless, and the right claim that; the rest of us know it was simple, bad management.

120 million dead is more than bad management.

how many dead natives, with even less regulation?

You'll have to repost when you're no longer impaired.

run out of logic and reason, so soon?

 

[Freiheit]

How is referencing a widely accepted reference work a special pleading?

It is an inaccurate authority and doesn't explain what socislm is.

yes a dictionary will leave out that the more socialist a country is the more its people are likely to starve to death! Daniel spents 100% of his time on the meaning of his own language and never once gets to substance.

dear, put up an encyclopedic reference or cede the point and the argument, due to simple shillery of not having a clue or a Cause.

I cede nothing show me authoritative sources citing encyclopedias as superior to dictionaries in definition.

dear, special pleading is just that, a fallacy.

Socialism is a social and economic system characterised by social ownership and/or social control[1] of the means of production and co-operative management of the economy,[2][3] as well as a political theory and movement that aims at the establishment of such a system.[4][5] "Social ownership" may refer to cooperative enterprises, common ownership, state ownership (achieved by nationalization), citizen ownership of equity, or any combination of these.[6] There are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them.[7]--https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism

Ah I see you have no idea what an authority is.Wikipedia is not an accepted authority. The use of Wikipedia as reference material is sophomoric at best, ignorant at worst.
Since you bleat for an encyclopedic citation the following is from the Encyclopedia Britannica:
"A lexical definition simply reports the way in which a term is already used within a language community."
Lexical refers to lexicon. My use of the Merriam Webster definition is a lexical definition. Your allegation of it being a special pleading fails therefore.

 

[Freiheit]

dears, simply using the (other) People's tax monies is socialism.

No wonder your posts are so foolish you have no idea of what you are talking about.

 

[danielpalos]

It is an inaccurate authority and doesn't explain what socislm is.

yes a dictionary will leave out that the more socialist a country is the more its people are likely to starve to death! Daniel spents 100% of his time on the meaning of his own language and never once gets to substance.

dear, put up an encyclopedic reference or cede the point and the argument, due to simple shillery of not having a clue or a Cause.

I cede nothing show me authoritative sources citing encyclopedias as superior to dictionaries in definition.

dear, special pleading is just that, a fallacy.

Socialism is a social and economic system characterised by social ownership and/or social control[1] of the means of production and co-operative management of the economy,[2][3] as well as a political theory and movement that aims at the establishment of such a system.[4][5] "Social ownership" may refer to cooperative enterprises, common ownership, state ownership (achieved by nationalization), citizen ownership of equity, or any combination of these.[6] There are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them.[7]--https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism

Ah I see you have no idea what an authority is.Wikipedia is not an accepted authority. The use of Wikipedia as reference material is sophomoric at best, ignorant at worst.
Since you bleat for an encyclopedic citation the following is from the Encyclopedia Britannica:
"A lexical definition simply reports the way in which a term is already used within a language community."
Lexical refers to lexicon. My use of the Merriam Webster definition is a lexical definition. Your allegation of it being a special pleading fails therefore.

dear, any encyclopedia is more authoritative than political-science jargon invented for the clueless and the Causeless, during the Cold War. That war is over and so is the need for that special pleading.

Socialism starts with a social Contract like our Constitutions. It really is that simple, except to the right.

 

[sealybobo]

Sooner or later they all run out of OTHERS money, as we saw with Greece!

What about England and Germany? Arent they socialist?

 

[sealybobo]

dears, simply using the (other) People's tax monies is socialism.

Capitalism needs regulating and not everything should be run by capitalists.

 

[Andylusion]

dears, simply using the (other) People's tax monies is socialism.

Capitalism needs regulating and not everything should be run by capitalists.

I have never seen any system in which capitalists ran everything.

It certainly isn't our system. And most of the systems where people claim as much, it's actually socialists running the companies. Like all those "private capitalists" companies in Tunisia, that just happened to all be run by members of the presidents family. All by random market forces I'm sure.

As for regulation, I'd be hard pressed to discover an example that actually was a benefit to the public. There was a documentary air a few years back, where at one point a guy in the auto industry listed off all the safety innovations found in Formula 1 racing cars, that are prevented by regulations from being introduced in production retail cars, and he also mentioned alternative cars that could not be sold retail, because regulations made it impossible to sell them to the public.

In fact there is a 'car' that is supposed to come onto the market sometime next year, with 3 wheels. The whole reason they made the vehicle with 3 wheels, is to avoid the expensive burden of regulations. (regulations on cars is massive, but 'car' is defined as 4 wheeled vehicle. 3 wheels avoids the regulations).

So as much as people claim regulations are so great, in reality, it only harms the consumer, at the benefit of the rich.

 

[Freiheit]

yes a dictionary will leave out that the more socialist a country is the more its people are likely to starve to death! Daniel spents 100% of his time on the meaning of his own language and never once gets to substance.

dear, put up an encyclopedic reference or cede the point and the argument, due to simple shillery of not having a clue or a Cause.

I cede nothing show me authoritative sources citing encyclopedias as superior to dictionaries in definition.

dear, special pleading is just that, a fallacy.

Socialism is a social and economic system characterised by social ownership and/or social control[1] of the means of production and co-operative management of the economy,[2][3] as well as a political theory and movement that aims at the establishment of such a system.[4][5] "Social ownership" may refer to cooperative enterprises, common ownership, state ownership (achieved by nationalization), citizen ownership of equity, or any combination of these.[6] There are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them.[7]--https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism

Ah I see you have no idea what an authority is.Wikipedia is not an accepted authority. The use of Wikipedia as reference material is sophomoric at best, ignorant at worst.
Since you bleat for an encyclopedic citation the following is from the Encyclopedia Britannica:
"A lexical definition simply reports the way in which a term is already used within a language community."
Lexical refers to lexicon. My use of the Merriam Webster definition is a lexical definition. Your allegation of it being a special pleading fails therefore.

dear, any encyclopedia is more authoritative than political-science jargon invented for the clueless and the Causeless, during the Cold War. That war is over and so is the need for that special pleading.

Socialism starts with a social Contract like our Constitutions. It really is that simple, except to the right.

Sooner or later they all run out of OTHERS money, as we saw with Greece!

What about England and Germany? Arent they socialist?

Sooner or later they all run out of OTHERS money, as we saw with Greece!

What about England and Germany? Arent they socialist?

Go back to school then you can join the big boy/big girl discussions.

 

[sealybobo]

dears, simply using the (other) People's tax monies is socialism.

Capitalism needs regulating and not everything should be run by capitalists.

I have never seen any system in which capitalists ran everything.

It certainly isn't our system. And most of the systems where people claim as much, it's actually socialists running the companies. Like all those "private capitalists" companies in Tunisia, that just happened to all be run by members of the presidents family. All by random market forces I'm sure.

As for regulation, I'd be hard pressed to discover an example that actually was a benefit to the public. There was a documentary air a few years back, where at one point a guy in the auto industry listed off all the safety innovations found in Formula 1 racing cars, that are prevented by regulations from being introduced in production retail cars, and he also mentioned alternative cars that could not be sold retail, because regulations made it impossible to sell them to the public.

In fact there is a 'car' that is supposed to come onto the market sometime next year, with 3 wheels. The whole reason they made the vehicle with 3 wheels, is to avoid the expensive burden of regulations. (regulations on cars is massive, but 'car' is defined as 4 wheeled vehicle. 3 wheels avoids the regulations).

So as much as people claim regulations are so great, in reality, it only harms the consumer, at the benefit of the rich.

Republicans got you brainwashed and your post proves it. Republicans talk like all regulations are bad. They are not. There are good regulations and there are bad regulations. I'm not worried about the car regulations you mentioned. I'm worried about companies polluting and corporations gouging and when companies get too greedy I want OUR government to regulate them and STOP them.

Like snowflakes, no two regulations are exactly the same.

 

[Freiheit]

dears, simply using the (other) People's tax monies is socialism.

Capitalism needs regulating and not everything should be run by capitalists.

I have never seen any system in which capitalists ran everything.

It certainly isn't our system. And most of the systems where people claim as much, it's actually socialists running the companies. Like all those "private capitalists" companies in Tunisia, that just happened to all be run by members of the presidents family. All by random market forces I'm sure.

As for regulation, I'd be hard pressed to discover an example that actually was a benefit to the public. There was a documentary air a few years back, where at one point a guy in the auto industry listed off all the safety innovations found in Formula 1 racing cars, that are prevented by regulations from being introduced in production retail cars, and he also mentioned alternative cars that could not be sold retail, because regulations made it impossible to sell them to the public.

In fact there is a 'car' that is supposed to come onto the market sometime next year, with 3 wheels. The whole reason they made the vehicle with 3 wheels, is to avoid the expensive burden of regulations. (regulations on cars is massive, but 'car' is defined as 4 wheeled vehicle. 3 wheels avoids the regulations).

So as much as people claim regulations are so great, in reality, it only harms the consumer, at the benefit of the rich.

What ever you are referring to has nothing to do with the point being discussed. What is RCC I looked at the homepage and
found no "about us" I did find a request for donation.

 

[Freiheit]

dears, simply using the (other) People's tax monies is socialism.

Capitalism needs regulating and not everything should be run by capitalists.

Other than yours I could find no reference to Capitalism what are you talking about? Do you just post random words and thoughts to
message boards?

 

[Freiheit]

yes a dictionary will leave out that the more socialist a country is the more its people are likely to starve to death! Daniel spents 100% of his time on the meaning of his own language and never once gets to substance.

dear, put up an encyclopedic reference or cede the point and the argument, due to simple shillery of not having a clue or a Cause.

I cede nothing show me authoritative sources citing encyclopedias as superior to dictionaries in definition.

dear, special pleading is just that, a fallacy.

Socialism is a social and economic system characterised by social ownership and/or social control[1] of the means of production and co-operative management of the economy,[2][3] as well as a political theory and movement that aims at the establishment of such a system.[4][5] "Social ownership" may refer to cooperative enterprises, common ownership, state ownership (achieved by nationalization), citizen ownership of equity, or any combination of these.[6] There are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them.[7]--https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism

Ah I see you have no idea what an authority is.Wikipedia is not an accepted authority. The use of Wikipedia as reference material is sophomoric at best, ignorant at worst.
Since you bleat for an encyclopedic citation the following is from the Encyclopedia Britannica:
"A lexical definition simply reports the way in which a term is already used within a language community."
Lexical refers to lexicon. My use of the Merriam Webster definition is a lexical definition. Your allegation of it being a special pleading fails therefore.

dear, any encyclopedia is more authoritative than political-science jargon invented for the clueless and the Causeless, during the Cold War. That war is over and so is the need for that special pleading.

Socialism starts with a social Contract like our Constitutions. It really is that simple, except to the right.

Does your moms' basement seem to be closing in on you? Has your monitor been talking to you again? Are the bugs back under
you skin again? If so please, please tell you mom so she can make sure you get your meds.

 

[danielpalos]

dears, simply using the (other) People's tax monies is socialism.

Capitalism needs regulating and not everything should be run by capitalists.

I have never seen any system in which capitalists ran everything.

It certainly isn't our system. And most of the systems where people claim as much, it's actually socialists running the companies. Like all those "private capitalists" companies in Tunisia, that just happened to all be run by members of the presidents family. All by random market forces I'm sure.

As for regulation, I'd be hard pressed to discover an example that actually was a benefit to the public. There was a documentary air a few years back, where at one point a guy in the auto industry listed off all the safety innovations found in Formula 1 racing cars, that are prevented by regulations from being introduced in production retail cars, and he also mentioned alternative cars that could not be sold retail, because regulations made it impossible to sell them to the public.

In fact there is a 'car' that is supposed to come onto the market sometime next year, with 3 wheels. The whole reason they made the vehicle with 3 wheels, is to avoid the expensive burden of regulations. (regulations on cars is massive, but 'car' is defined as 4 wheeled vehicle. 3 wheels avoids the regulations).

So as much as people claim regulations are so great, in reality, it only harms the consumer, at the benefit of the rich.

What ever you are referring to has nothing to do with the point being discussed. What is RCC I looked at the homepage and
found no "about us" I did find a request for donation.

dear, only shills have nothing but argumentum ad hominem instead of sound lines of reasoning.