You are unemployed and want a new job, under a Democratic president you have a better chance of getting one!

[Hector12]

Team ???. Oh so you want me to be a team member that shares my spoils with low life's, criminals, poor or bad choice maker's, lazy ace's that won't work in a pie factory, illegal aliens, gang member's, and other walks of life that covet what I earned eh ???????

This is your socialist, communist belief in life, but it is absolutely a farce.

Millions of Americans support democratic socialism because capitalism is not working for them.

 

[jc456]

The voters, of course.

How, tell us how voters control spending with a vote?

 

[Hector12]

How, tell us how voters control spending with a vote?

The voters vote for politicians.

For decades popular opinion surveys have indicated majority support for higher taxes for the rich.

Google Search

www.google.com

 

[jc456]

The voters vote for politicians.

For decades popular opinion surveys have indicated majority support for higher taxes for the rich.

Google Search

www.google.com

voters don't vote for spending. Sorry, they vote for a person who makes deals that may not be a representation of my vote. If the candidate I voted for lost, the person making deals isn't doing it for me. Sorry, you're fking ignorant.

 

[Mashmont]

What is grossly unfair is that the rich have as much money as they do after paying taxes.

How is that unfair? Others can do the same.
Getting rich is exactly the same as losing weight. The directions on how to do so are right out there in public view for anyone to have, yet only a small percentage will do it.

 

[Hector12]

voters don't vote for spending. Sorry, they vote for a person who makes deals that may not be a representation of my vote. If the candidate I voted for lost, the person making deals isn't doing it for me. Sorry, you're fking ignorant.

Actually, you are ignorant of the way democracy works.

 

[jc456]

Actually, you are ignorant of the way democracy works.

Well you think every voter wins

 

[Dismantle this Country]

Politico is not a valid source. Try again.

 

[Hector12]

Well you think every voter wins

I never said that. The voters in the majority win.

 

[BluesLegend]

You are unemployed and want a new job, under a Democratic president you have a better chance of getting one!​

There's some truth in that.

 

[TruthNotBS]

Thanks for the age-old spiel that I got fully hooked into 55 years ago, and was a Democrat & Green for 40 years afterward.

With all the lunacy of the left we have today all this grandiose ideology has been sidelined by Democrats in favor of racist pandering to blacks, pandering to illegal migrants, pandering to sex perverts, and God knows who else, all for VOTES.

Yes, the cost of living today is obscene, but NO, it absolutely was NOT that way before Biden and Trump. As I stated previously in this thread,
housing rents have skyrocketed more & faster that anything imaginable in all my 78 years. My own case is a good example. In 2020, I was paying $600/mo for a 1 bdrm apartment. Through all Trump's years, my rent went up $25 each year.
In 2021, it went to $850. In 2022, $1000. In 2023, $1200. In 2024, still $1200 (100% inflation), but some apartments are required to be renovated, pushing the rent ro $1600/mo (167% inflation).
Apartments that were less than $1000/mo under Trump, are now $2000/mo, commonly.

Dems aren't leftists, they're liberals serving the exact same vested interests as Republicans. Biden has tried to pass rental controls to no avail thanks to Republicans blocking every effort to do so. Hence in that area, Dems are better than Republicans, but the Repubs think allowing landlords to spike rents as much as possible is good for the economy. It's clearly not, because workers need affordable housing, so making housing too expensive for most people, undermines our economy. There should be rental controls, you can only raise the rent a certain % and that's it, if at all.

 

[Hector12]

Dems aren't leftists, they're liberals serving the exact same vested interests as Republicans. Biden has tried to pass rental controls to no avail thanks to Republicans blocking every effort to do so. Hence in that area, Dems are better than Republicans, but the Repubs think allowing landlords to spike rents as much as possible is good for the economy. It's clearly not, because workers need affordable housing, so making housing too expensive for most people, undermines our economy. There should be rental controls, you can only raise the rent a certain % and that's it, if at all.

Because I rent, I understand the appeal of rent control. What we really need is lots and lots of high density, affordable housing, within walking distance to public transportation hubs. This requires the repeal of laws against high density housing.

 

[TruthNotBS]

Because I rent, I understand the appeal of rent control. What we really need is lots and lots of high density, affordable housing, within walking distance to public transportation hubs. This requires the repeal of laws against high density housing.

​

 

[Hector12]

​

Back in the day I considered myself to be a democratic socialist. I no longer believe in socialism. I do not dislike it. I accept capitalism, but I do not like it.

The problem with democratic socialism, as I see it, is that there is nowhere an example of democratic socialism that is working. Venezuela came close. We all know how that turned out.

The closest approximation to democratic socialism that actually works is Scandinavian Social Democracy. In that we have a high minimum wage, strong labor unions, and a well financed public sector of the economy paid for by steeply progressive taxation.

By criteria I value, that is better than what we have in the United States.

The memory of the Soviet Union dies hard. Bertrand Russell, who spent his life in the democratic left, described the Soviet Union as "the greatest exercise in organized, systematic hypocrisy the world has ever known." I.F. Stone was a left wing journalist who became famous as a critic of the War in Vietnam. On a visit to the Soviet Union he wrote in his Bi Weekly, "This is not a good society, and it is not run by honest men."

While the Soviet Union existed it was always the case that working class people in the United States enjoyed more affluence and freedom than working class people in the Soviet Union.

After watching the video, I still do not understand how it is more profitable for developers to do anything but build more homes and apartments.

My explanation for the rise in home prices and rents is that those who already own homes and apartments vote for politicians that pass zoning regulations that prevent the construction of more homes and apartments. Meanwhile, the U.S. population continues to grow, mainly because of immigration.

By competing for rental units, immigrants enable landlords to raise rents. By competing for jobs, immigrants enable employers to reduce or eliminate pay increases.

Much of the opposition to immigration is ethnic and racial bigotry. Nevertheless, immigration is an economic issue too, one that contributes to the growing income gap.

The Democrat Party is ill suited to exploit the growing income gap. Beginning with the War in Vietnam the Democrat Party has come to be dominated by well educated, well paid bi coastal professionals. These lack the enthusiasm the Republican Donor class has for tax cuts for the rich, but they do not mind, because they are rich themselves. They would rather promote social issues. Social liberalism alienates lower income whites from the Democrat Party. This causes lower income whites to either vote Republican, or to avoid voting.

​

 

[beagle9]

Back in the day I considered myself to be a democratic socialist. I no longer believe in socialism. I do not dislike it. I accept capitalism, but I do not like it.

The problem with democratic socialism, as I see it, is that there is nowhere an example of democratic socialism that is working. Venezuela came close. We all know how that turned out.

The closest approximation to democratic socialism that actually works is Scandinavian Social Democracy. In that we have a high minimum wage, strong labor unions, and a well financed public sector of the economy paid for by steeply progressive taxation.

By criteria I value, that is better than what we have in the United States.

The memory of the Soviet Union dies hard. Bertrand Russell, who spent his life in the democratic left, described the Soviet Union as "the greatest exercise in organized, systematic hypocrisy the world has ever known." I.F. Stone was a left wing journalist who became famous as a critic of the War in Vietnam. On a visit to the Soviet Union he wrote in his Bi Weekly, "This is not a good society, and it is not run by honest men."

While the Soviet Union existed it was always the case that working class people in the United States enjoyed more affluence and freedom than working class people in the Soviet Union.

After watching the video, I still do not understand how it is more profitable for developers to do anything but build more homes and apartments.

My explanation for the rise in home prices and rents is that those who already own homes and apartments vote for politicians that pass zoning regulations that prevent the construction of more homes and apartments. Meanwhile, the U.S. population continues to grow, mainly because of immigration.

By competing for rental units, immigrants enable landlords to raise rents. By competing for jobs, immigrants enable employers to reduce or eliminate pay increases.

Much of the opposition to immigration is ethnic and racial bigotry. Nevertheless, immigration is an economic issue too, one that contributes to the growing income gap.

The Democrat Party is ill suited to exploit the growing income gap. Beginning with the War in Vietnam the Democrat Party has come to be dominated by well educated, well paid bi coastal professionals. These lack the enthusiasm the Republican Donor class has for tax cuts for the rich, but they do not mind, because they are rich themselves. They would rather promote social issues. Social liberalism alienates lower income whites from the Democrat Party. This causes lower income whites to either vote Republican, or to avoid voting.

I bet you are one of those people who are feeding 40 stray cats, and this either at your house or at your job if it allows it. You then watch in horror as the population grows out of control as of you are clueless as to why. It quickly gets out of control, then someone has to rescue you by telling you that you screwed up, and now they will help you fix it.

 

[beagle9]

Because I rent, I understand the appeal of rent control. What we really need is lots and lots of high density, affordable housing, within walking distance to public transportation hubs. This requires the repeal of laws against high density housing.

High density housing full of what type of renter's ? We've seen the broken model of filling high density housing with broke spirited citizen's. What a nightmare it can become, especially if government puts it's left dealing hand's in it.

 

[TruthNotBS]

Back in the day I considered myself to be a democratic socialist. I no longer believe in socialism. I do not dislike it. I accept capitalism, but I do not like it.

The problem with democratic socialism, as I see it, is that there is nowhere an example of democratic socialism that is working. Venezuela came close. We all know how that turned out.

The closest approximation to democratic socialism that actually works is Scandinavian Social Democracy. In that we have a high minimum wage, strong labor unions, and a well financed public sector of the economy paid for by steeply progressive taxation.

By criteria I value, that is better than what we have in the United States.

The memory of the Soviet Union dies hard. Bertrand Russell, who spent his life in the democratic left, described the Soviet Union as "the greatest exercise in organized, systematic hypocrisy the world has ever known." I.F. Stone was a left wing journalist who became famous as a critic of the War in Vietnam. On a visit to the Soviet Union he wrote in his Bi Weekly, "This is not a good society, and it is not run by honest men."

While the Soviet Union existed it was always the case that working class people in the United States enjoyed more affluence and freedom than working class people in the Soviet Union.

After watching the video, I still do not understand how it is more profitable for developers to do anything but build more homes and apartments.

My explanation for the rise in home prices and rents is that those who already own homes and apartments vote for politicians that pass zoning regulations that prevent the construction of more homes and apartments. Meanwhile, the U.S. population continues to grow, mainly because of immigration.

By competing for rental units, immigrants enable landlords to raise rents. By competing for jobs, immigrants enable employers to reduce or eliminate pay increases.

Much of the opposition to immigration is ethnic and racial bigotry. Nevertheless, immigration is an economic issue too, one that contributes to the growing income gap.

The Democrat Party is ill suited to exploit the growing income gap. Beginning with the War in Vietnam the Democrat Party has come to be dominated by well educated, well paid bi coastal professionals. These lack the enthusiasm the Republican Donor class has for tax cuts for the rich, but they do not mind, because they are rich themselves. They would rather promote social issues. Social liberalism alienates lower income whites from the Democrat Party. This causes lower income whites to either vote Republican, or to avoid voting.

Back in the day I considered myself to be a democratic socialist. I no longer believe in socialism. I do not dislike it. I accept capitalism, but I do not like it.

Democratic socialism is the economic system, the "mode of production" of the future. The more advanced robotics and AI become, the less need there is for human wage labor, hence the need for socialism. Capitalism and capitalists, can't exist without wages.

The problem with democratic socialism, as I see it, is that there is nowhere an example of democratic socialism that is working. Venezuela came close. We all know how that turned out.

There isn't one example of "free-market" capitalism where it's working independently or "free" of government bailouts and cronyism. In other words:

​

Socialism is constantly bailing out capitalism.

Conservative Republicans often accuse progressive Dems like AOC and Bernie Sanders of being socialists, or even "commies", for simply being for labor unions, universal healthcare, tuition-free education, eliminating homelessness by housing people, taxing the rich more..etc, yet all of these policies are taken for granted in Western Europe and wherever else there's an industrialized, modern country. Why aren't these countries with mixed economies, robust social safety nets, and a significant % of their labor force unionized, not "commie"?

How convenient, when American progressives and leftists propose policies that are common in other modern countries, they're labeled socialists or even "commies", but somehow those other countries aren't socialist or "democratic socialist".

Even a few third-world countries like Costa Rica, a nation where I lived and worked for a few years (As an American expat), have universal healthcare. Look at the life expectancy and infant mortality of Costa Rica compared to the US. Last time I checked, Costa Rica had a higher life expectancy than the US and lower infant mortality. Education is tuition-free.

It's easy to blame socialism for the situation in Venezuela and Cuba, when one completely ignores the fact that the American 800 pound, capitalist gorilla/EMPIRE-HEGEMON, is imposing economic warfare against these countries, by imposing brutal sanctions, freezing their assets and even stopping their cargo ships with the US Navy, in international waters to prevent them from trading with other countries.

Why even mention Venezuela (I mentioned Cuba, you didn't), why not mention the USSR, the first country in history, to rise up against capitalism and its powerful defenders, which like Rocky vs Apollo in Rocky I, gave the US capitalist empire and its allies a hell of a fight. Sure Rocky lost the first fight, but he eventually came back. Socialism is coming back now with a vengeance. Advanced automation and AI, makes socialism inevitable and a necessity, because without it, we fall into techno-feudalism. Extreme deprivation and chaos.

Notwithstanding, all of the challenges, and obstacles the Soviet Union had to deal with, it still managed to turn an under-industrialized, agrarian society of impoverished peasants, into a world super-power within a few decades. The second-largest economy in the world by 1970. It didn't collapse until internal elements within the Soviet government tried to end the Cold War by appeasing the US, thinking they could introduce a little capitalism and reduce the chances of a thermal nuclear war. That's what brought its demise in the end. The more socialist the USSR was the stronger it became, even in the fact of National Socialist Germany, Hitler's Third Reich. Hitler was a non-Marxist socialist.

Look at how Hitler completely transformed Germany economically from its deplorable state in the 1920s, to the most productive, prosperous economy in the world. The government was involved in every facet of the economy, from the heavy industries which constitute the major centers of economic power, to social services..etc. The Weimar Republic was a economic disaster, and Hitler by applying some simple socialist principles, turned Germany into the most powerful nation on Earth. Hitler's grave error was going to war with other socialists. Seven out of ten German soldiers were fighting in Soviet Russia. The Eastern Front decimated Germany and led to its eventual defeat. WW2 in Europe was essentially a war between socialists.

While the Soviet Union existed it was always the case that working class people in the United States enjoyed more affluence and freedom than working class people in the Soviet Union.

There's no comparison between the American working class after WW2. and the Soviets. The American worker was a member of the aristocracy of labor. America came out of the war, unscathed compared to Western Europe, Russia, Japan..etc. We're surrounded by two vast oceans (i.e. WALLS), that make our country extremely difficult to invade. You first have to get through our navy and if there's anything left of your invading force, it will have to deal with hundreds of millions of men and women armed to the teeth. The "easiest" way to invade the US would be through Alaska, but you have to fight your way down, through Canada. Extremely difficult. America became the manufacturing hub of the world.

The USSR lost 28 million people in WW2, that's 14% of its population. Much of its national infrastructure was left in ruins. The Soviets had to rebuild unlike the USA, which lost less than half a million of its citizens, about 460K KIA. It's infrastructure was fully intact. So when you criticize the USSR or socialism, what are the metrics or standards of your critique? What's the context of the events you're citing or appealing to? Are you aware that Soviet Russia was invaded by the US, UK, France, and 10 other countries immediately after WW1?

In 1918 we sent thousands of our marines and soldiers, to fight in Soviet Russia alongside other capitalist powers, in order to defeat the Red Army. The so-called "White Army" comprised of tsarist, pro-capitalist fighters, got plenty of assistance from the Western ruling elites, who hated the fact that they were losing Russia as their prey, to exploit. Russia is one of the wealthiest countries in the world, as far as natural resources. The Red Army won that war, but at a heavy price. They had to centralize power, taking it away from the "soviets"/councils, becoming less democratic and more authoritarian. War can do that.

The US forced Japanese Americans into concentration camps and imposed price controls and rationing on the whole country.

Housing should be a human right in my opinion. All private property in the USA should be prohibited. I'm for personal property, not private. Private property is defined as property that is used to exploit others for profit. So landlordism should be abolished in the USA. Everyone should have housing, for personal use, that way no one is homeless. American society needs to be seriously reformed to avoid the chaos that is going to ensue when advanced automation and AI take most jobs.

The big-money capitalists see the writing on the wall for capitalism. ​

 

[TruthNotBS]

Democratic socialism is the economic system, the "mode of production" of the future. The more advanced robotics and AI become, the less need there is for human wage labor, hence the need for socialism. Capitalism and capitalists, can't exist without wages.



There isn't one example of "free-market" capitalism where it's working independently or "free" of government bailouts and cronyism. In other words:

​

Socialism is constantly bailing out capitalism. Conservative Republicans often accuse progressive Dems like AOC and Bernie Sanders of being socialists, or even "commies", for simply being for labor unions, universal healthcare, tuition-free education, eliminating homelessness by housing people, taxing the rich more..etc, yet all of these policies are taken for granted in Western Europe and wherever else there's an industrialized, modern country. Why aren't these countries with mixed economies, robust social safety nets, and a significant % of their labor force unionized, not "commie"?

How convenient, when American progressives and leftists propose policies that are common in other modern countries, they're labeled socialists or even "commies", but somehow those other countries aren't socialist or "democratic socialist".

Even a few third-world countries like Costa Rica, a nation where I lived and worked for a few years (As an American expat), have universal healthcare. Look at the life expectancy and infant mortality of Costa Rica compared to the US. Last time I checked, Costa Rica had a higher life expectancy than the US and lower infant mortality. Education is tuition-free.

It's easy to blame socialism for the situation in Venezuela and Cuba, when one completely ignores the fact that the American 800 pound, capitalist gorilla/EMPIRE-HEGEMON, is imposing economic warfare against these countries, by imposing brutal sanctions, freezing their assets and even stopping their cargo ships with the US Navy, in international waters to prevent them from trading with other countries.

Why even mention Venezuela (I mentioned Cuba, you didn't), why not mention the USSR, the first country in history, to rise up against capitalism and its powerful defenders, which like Rocky vs Apollo in Rocky I, gave the US capitalist empire and its allies a hell of a fight. Sure Rocky lost the first fight, but he eventually came back. Socialism is coming back now with a vengeance. Advanced automation and AI, makes socialism inevitable and a necessity, because without it, we fall into techno-feudalism. Extreme deprivation and chaos.

Notwithstanding, all of the challenges, and obstacles the Soviet Union had to deal with, it still managed to turn an under-industrialized, agrarian society of impoverished peasants, into a world super-power within a few decades. The second-largest economy in the world by 1970. It didn't collapse until internal elements within the Soviet government tried to end the Cold War by appeasing the US, thinking they could introduce a little capitalism and reduce the chances of a thermal nuclear war. That's what brought its demise in the end. The more socialist the USSR was the stronger it became, even in the fact of National Socialist Germany, Hitler's Third Reich. Hitler was a non-Marxist socialist.

Look at how Hitler completely transformed Germany economically from its deplorable state in the 1920s, to the most productive, prosperous economy in the world. The government was involved in every facet of the economy, from the heavy industries which constitute the major centers of economic power, to social services..etc. The Weimer Republic was a economic disaster, and Hitler by applying some simple socialist principles, turned Germany into the most powerful nation on Earth. Hitler's grave error was going to war with other socialists. Seven out of ten German soldiers were fighting in Soviet Russia. The Eastern Front decimated Germany and led to its eventual defeat. WW2 in Europe was essentially a war between socialists.



There's no comparison between the American working class after WW2. and the Soviets. The American worker was a member of the aristocracy of labor. America came out of the war, unscathed compared to Western Europe, Russia, Japan..etc. We're surrounded by two vast oceans (i.e. WALLS), that make our country extremely difficult to invade. You first have to get through our navy and if there's anything left of your invading force, it will have to deal with hundreds of millions of men and women armed to the teeth. The "easiest" way to invade the US would be through Alaska, but you have to fight your way down, through Canada. Extremely difficult. America became the manufacturing hub of the world.

The USSR lost 28 million people in WW2, that's 14% of its population. Much of its national infrastructure was left in ruins. The Soviets had to rebuild unlike the USA, which lost less than half a million of its citizens, about 460K KIA. It's infrastructure was fully intact. So when you criticize the USSR or socialism, what are the metrics or standards of your critique? What's the context of the events you're citing or appealing to? Are you aware that Soviet Russia was invaded by the US, UK, France, and 10 other countries immediately after WW1?

In 1918 we sent thousands of our marines and soldiers, to fight in Soviet Russia alongside other capitalist powers, in order to defeat the Red Army. The so-called "White Army" comprised of tsarist, pro-capitalist fighters, got plenty of assistance from the Western ruling elites, who hated the fact that they were losing Russia as their prey, to exploit. Russia is one of the wealthiest countries in the world, as far as natural resources. The Red Army won that war, but at a heavy price. They had to centralize power, taking it away from the "soviets"/councils, becoming less democratic and more authoritarian. War can do that.

The US forced Japanese Americans into concentration camps and imposed price controls and rationing on the whole country.

Housing should be a human right in my opinion. all private property in the USA should be prohibited. I'm for personal property, not private. Private property is defined as property that is used to exploit others for profit. So landlordism should be abolished in the USA. Everyone should have housing, for personal use, that way no one is homeless. American society needs to be seriously reformed to avoid the chaos that is going to ensue when advanced automation and AI take most jobs.

The big-money capitalists see the writing on the wall for capitalism. ​

Typo correction: "therman" = thermal. -- Weimer = Weimar

 

[protectionist]

Dems aren't leftists, they're liberals serving the exact same vested interests as Republicans. Biden has tried to pass rental controls to no avail thanks to Republicans blocking every effort to do so. Hence in that area, Dems are better than Republicans, but the Repubs think allowing landlords to spike rents as much as possible is good for the economy. It's clearly not, because workers need affordable housing, so making housing too expensive for most people, undermines our economy. There should be rental controls, you can only raise the rent a certain % and that's it, if at all.

You are correct that allowing landlords to spike rents as much as possible is not good for the economy.

It may interest you to know that I have authored multiple threads and hundreds of posts saying that same thing you just said, about spiking rents being bad for the economy, only in greater detail.

As for Dems being better than Republicans on rent control, that is a tough case to make, when 15 blue states that voted for Biden in 2020, have bans on rent control. Another 5 blue states have no law, thereby allowing landlords to escalate rents indiscriminately.
In fact, only 4 states have a state rent control law.

 

[beagle9]

Democratic socialism is the economic system, the "mode of production" of the future. The more advanced robotics and AI become, the less need there is for human wage labor, hence the need for socialism. Capitalism and capitalists, can't exist without wages.



There isn't one example of "free-market" capitalism where it's working independently or "free" of government bailouts and cronyism. In other words:

​

Socialism is constantly bailing out capitalism.

Conservative Republicans often accuse progressive Dems like AOC and Bernie Sanders of being socialists, or even "commies", for simply being for labor unions, universal healthcare, tuition-free education, eliminating homelessness by housing people, taxing the rich more..etc, yet all of these policies are taken for granted in Western Europe and wherever else there's an industrialized, modern country. Why aren't these countries with mixed economies, robust social safety nets, and a significant % of their labor force unionized, not "commie"?

How convenient, when American progressives and leftists propose policies that are common in other modern countries, they're labeled socialists or even "commies", but somehow those other countries aren't socialist or "democratic socialist".

Even a few third-world countries like Costa Rica, a nation where I lived and worked for a few years (As an American expat), have universal healthcare. Look at the life expectancy and infant mortality of Costa Rica compared to the US. Last time I checked, Costa Rica had a higher life expectancy than the US and lower infant mortality. Education is tuition-free.

It's easy to blame socialism for the situation in Venezuela and Cuba, when one completely ignores the fact that the American 800 pound, capitalist gorilla/EMPIRE-HEGEMON, is imposing economic warfare against these countries, by imposing brutal sanctions, freezing their assets and even stopping their cargo ships with the US Navy, in international waters to prevent them from trading with other countries.

Why even mention Venezuela (I mentioned Cuba, you didn't), why not mention the USSR, the first country in history, to rise up against capitalism and its powerful defenders, which like Rocky vs Apollo in Rocky I, gave the US capitalist empire and its allies a hell of a fight. Sure Rocky lost the first fight, but he eventually came back. Socialism is coming back now with a vengeance. Advanced automation and AI, makes socialism inevitable and a necessity, because without it, we fall into techno-feudalism. Extreme deprivation and chaos.

Notwithstanding, all of the challenges, and obstacles the Soviet Union had to deal with, it still managed to turn an under-industrialized, agrarian society of impoverished peasants, into a world super-power within a few decades. The second-largest economy in the world by 1970. It didn't collapse until internal elements within the Soviet government tried to end the Cold War by appeasing the US, thinking they could introduce a little capitalism and reduce the chances of a thermal nuclear war. That's what brought its demise in the end. The more socialist the USSR was the stronger it became, even in the fact of National Socialist Germany, Hitler's Third Reich. Hitler was a non-Marxist socialist.

Look at how Hitler completely transformed Germany economically from its deplorable state in the 1920s, to the most productive, prosperous economy in the world. The government was involved in every facet of the economy, from the heavy industries which constitute the major centers of economic power, to social services..etc. The Weimar Republic was a economic disaster, and Hitler by applying some simple socialist principles, turned Germany into the most powerful nation on Earth. Hitler's grave error was going to war with other socialists. Seven out of ten German soldiers were fighting in Soviet Russia. The Eastern Front decimated Germany and led to its eventual defeat. WW2 in Europe was essentially a war between socialists.



There's no comparison between the American working class after WW2. and the Soviets. The American worker was a member of the aristocracy of labor. America came out of the war, unscathed compared to Western Europe, Russia, Japan..etc. We're surrounded by two vast oceans (i.e. WALLS), that make our country extremely difficult to invade. You first have to get through our navy and if there's anything left of your invading force, it will have to deal with hundreds of millions of men and women armed to the teeth. The "easiest" way to invade the US would be through Alaska, but you have to fight your way down, through Canada. Extremely difficult. America became the manufacturing hub of the world.

The USSR lost 28 million people in WW2, that's 14% of its population. Much of its national infrastructure was left in ruins. The Soviets had to rebuild unlike the USA, which lost less than half a million of its citizens, about 460K KIA. It's infrastructure was fully intact. So when you criticize the USSR or socialism, what are the metrics or standards of your critique? What's the context of the events you're citing or appealing to? Are you aware that Soviet Russia was invaded by the US, UK, France, and 10 other countries immediately after WW1?

In 1918 we sent thousands of our marines and soldiers, to fight in Soviet Russia alongside other capitalist powers, in order to defeat the Red Army. The so-called "White Army" comprised of tsarist, pro-capitalist fighters, got plenty of assistance from the Western ruling elites, who hated the fact that they were losing Russia as their prey, to exploit. Russia is one of the wealthiest countries in the world, as far as natural resources. The Red Army won that war, but at a heavy price. They had to centralize power, taking it away from the "soviets"/councils, becoming less democratic and more authoritarian. War can do that.

The US forced Japanese Americans into concentration camps and imposed price controls and rationing on the whole country.

Housing should be a human right in my opinion. All private property in the USA should be prohibited. I'm for personal property, not private. Private property is defined as property that is used to exploit others for profit. So landlordism should be abolished in the USA. Everyone should have housing, for personal use, that way no one is homeless. American society needs to be seriously reformed to avoid the chaos that is going to ensue when advanced automation and AI take most jobs.

The big-money capitalists see the writing on the wall for capitalism. ​

You leave out the most valuable ingredients in capitalism, and that is these two ingredients - "rewarding merit" and "good character".

Your idea's work great if building a standing army of millions in hopes to conquer the world with them, but that shouldn't be the goal of our nation.

The future is to continue modernizing our military in order to make it an efficient killing machine that can protect this nation without sending wave after wave after wave of our citizen's into a meat grinder that has no end.

A PROFFESIONAL QUALITY MODERNIZED MILITARY IS KEY.

A professional quality modernized citizenry, otherwise that is built up off of merit and recognizes character when they are being educated, and it recognizes merit that rewards quality and skill in their workmanship (when applied), is the best model that any nation can have.

Recognizing character, and having or keeping the building blocks in place to reward merits + good character, and to feed it, is essential in a capitalistic merit based society.

However, we must always remember that we aren't perfect, and we will slip, stumble, and fall, so we must always be humble, empathetic, and compassionate for those who might need a helping hand in life, otherwise just a little lift to help them get back on track, but not in a way that it encourages dependency or creates it.