The Political Discussion Thread

[SoulReaver]

socialism is the government taking direct and complete control of every means of production, reducing the worth of the citizenry to little more than slaves to government bureaucrats...

as opposed to being slaves to megacorporations?

since socialists are all about government control

american neoconservatives would make good socialists then

[Annoyed]

You folks wonder why I oppose socialism and the rest of the bile spewed forth by the Democrats?

Consider this: NY State has been governed by the Democrats for a very long time now. Even the few "Republicans" such as Pataki that have held the governor's seat are far enough left that they would be Democrats in any other state.

Now consider the results:

http://prntly.com/blog/2015/09/20/up...in-us-to-live/

Plagued by sky-high taxes, the coldest winters, the largest continuous loss of residents of any region in America, and the percentage of residents on some sort of government assistance or subsidy to survive, Upstate New York was ranked by a leading journal in Albany the worst place in America to live.
“The poverty and unemployment rate among millennials is at almost 30%. Most people can barely afford to pay their bills in the harsh winters. The economy dries up when all the folks with money leave Upstate New York in the summer. It’s just a bad place to be right now.”

Upstate New York is likely to remain on the list of the worst region in America to live in for some time. Food prices are higher than the national average, gas is among the highest in the country, and income tax remains the worst. All of these and a surplus of citizens looking for jobs, with a limited amount available in the state, keeps employers from having to remain competitive with salaries and benefits. The current system has no signs of changing either. The voters who own homes in New York, while under constant strain, don’t know anything different and thus show no signs to call for change. Since they don’t realize how broken everything is in the first place, the exodus of people and wealth will continue unabated.

You can theorize all you want about various forms of government, but to borrow a quote from Robert Heinlein's character "Lazarus Long".

Oh, I have strong opinions, but a thousand reasoned opinions are never equal to one case of diving in and finding out. Galileo proved that and it may be the only certainty we have.

Here in NY, we are a proven example of what happens when the liberal agenda is allowed to govern, unchecked. In the large cities which govern he politics of this state, whoever promises the most to the various FSA's* wins the statewide elections and therefore dictates the policy of the state. It has been impossible to pry the liberals out of power for many decades now. The exorbitant tax rates required to support liberal spending has driven many businesses and the jobs they provide out of the state.

Is it any wonder why I oppose liberalism?? I live in a test lab for it, and it fails miserably.

*FSA = Free Shiznit Army

[mad_gater]

as opposed to being slaves to megacorporations?
american neoconservatives would make good socialists then

actually there is little difference since the vast majority of those "megacorporations" tend to be in bed with the socialist democrat party

and conservatives are actually all about restoring the Constitution as the rule of law, not abolishing it like the socialist democrats and their RINO allies want

[Womble]

Once, a while ago, I posted the difference between communism and socialism... wasn't in the mood to find it again.



Roots doesn't mean the same.



Congratulations, you just explained communism.

Communism vs Socialism

As a matter of fact, Communism IS socialism. When you plow through the rhetorical fluff, the original difference was that socialism referred to common ownership of means of production whereas communism (at the time with a small c) also aimed to socialize distribution and consumption. In pragmatic terms, the difference is negligible as social control over means of production necessarily dictates control over where the produced goods go.

Historically speaking, the two were treated as synonyms, alongside lesser used "mutualism" and "associationism". "Communism" a term conjured up by Karl Marx in order to suggest that socialism was the "original" mode of human existence during the hunter-gatherer stage when people lived in what he termed "communes". It was Vladimir Lenin who drew a full-on distinction between the two and defined socialism as the transitional stage between capitalism and Communism.

[mad_gater]

You folks wonder why I oppose socialism and the rest of the bile spewed forth by the Democrats?

Consider this: NY State has been governed by the Democrats for a very long time now. Even the few "Republicans" such as Pataki that have held the governor's seat are far enough left that they would be Democrats in any other state.

Now consider the results:

http://prntly.com/blog/2015/09/20/up...in-us-to-live/





You can theorize all you want about various forms of government, but to borrow a quote from Robert Heinlein's character "Lazarus Long".



Here in NY, we are a proven example of what happens when the liberal agenda is allowed to govern, unchecked. In the large cities which govern he politics of this state, whoever promises the most to the various FSA's* wins the statewide elections and therefore dictates the policy of the state. It has been impossible to pry the liberals out of power for many decades now.

Is it any wonder why I oppose liberalism?? I live in a test lab for it, and it fails miserably.

*FSA = Free Shiznit Army

indeed....with NYC and LI being FSA central

[Womble]

I meant the real deal: no centralized control
let the People control the economy

Seriously?

I challenge you to explain how "the People" can conceivably control something as vast and complex as a society's economy without delegating control to a center that can collect information, do the planning and make binding decisions. In other words, without creating a government to control it.

We'll discuss the definition of "the People" later.

[SoulReaver]

Seriously?

I challenge you to explain how "the People" can conceivably control something as vast and complex as a society's economy without delegating control to a center that can collect information, do the planning and make binding decisions. In other words, without creating a government to control it.

hey where did I ever say it's easy. that's why such a system never existed (on a large scale). I'm just talking about the idea/concept not feasibility

maybe direct democracy would be a good compromise granting the People indirect but strong control over the economy
I recall a certain referendum in Switzerland outlawing golden parachutes

We'll discuss the definition of "the People" later.

no doubt the definition's open to discussion so how about a reliable source: the 'People' as mentioned in the Preamble to the United States Constitution
can't argue with that one can we ^^

[Annoyed]

hey where did I ever say it's easy. that's why such a system never existed (on a large scale). I'm just talking about the idea/concept not feasibility

maybe direct democracy would be a good compromise granting the People indirect but strong control over the economy
I recall a certain referendum in Switzerland outlawing golden parachutes

no doubt the definition's open to discussion so how about a reliable source: the 'People' as mentioned in the Preamble to the United States Constitution
can't argue with that one can we ^^

How do you motivate people to invest their time, energy, money and other resources in a business if they have to cede control of that business to "the people"?

Would you put everything you have into starting a business or improving your current product or business if you knew that you would have to operate it by a consensus of what "the people" want? And that you wouldn't be allowed to keep the fruit of your labor?

[SoulReaver]

How do you motivate people to invest their time, energy, money and other resources in a business if they have to cede control of that business to "the people"?

Would you put everything you have into starting a business or improving your current product or business if you knew that you would have to operate it by a consensus of what "the people" want? And that you wouldn't be allowed to keep the fruit of your labor?

control is not ownership

[garhkal]

OK I will just ask the question without the video link because the video contained a few F-Bombs which I wasn't aware of as I hadn't watched the whole thing....

A school principle has cancelled student elections because of the students that won. They were not diverse enough..

What does that even mean?

Can someone explain that?

Here's a link from the Washington Post

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/m...iverse-enough/

Liberalism at it's best. A vote only matters if that vote goes the way the left wants it to. Just like everyone's entitled to their own opinions only as long as they match what the left wills.

IMO that Dean needs to get fired!

You folks wonder why I oppose socialism and the rest of the bile spewed forth by the Democrats?

Consider this: NY State has been governed by the Democrats for a very long time now. Even the few "Republicans" such as Pataki that have held the governor's seat are far enough left that they would be Democrats in any other state.

Now consider the results:

http://prntly.com/blog/2015/09/20/up...in-us-to-live/





You can theorize all you want about various forms of government, but to borrow a quote from Robert Heinlein's character "Lazarus Long".



Here in NY, we are a proven example of what happens when the liberal agenda is allowed to govern, unchecked. In the large cities which govern he politics of this state, whoever promises the most to the various FSA's* wins the statewide elections and therefore dictates the policy of the state. It has been impossible to pry the liberals out of power for many decades now. The exorbitant tax rates required to support liberal spending has driven many businesses and the jobs they provide out of the state.

Is it any wonder why I oppose liberalism?? I live in a test lab for it, and it fails miserably.

*FSA = Free Shiznit Army

Great point Annoyed..

[Womble]

hey where did I ever say it's easy. that's why such a system never existed (on a large scale). I'm just talking about the idea/concept not feasibility

How can you possibly divorce one from the other?

maybe direct democracy would be a good compromise granting the People indirect but strong control over the economy

I recall a certain referendum in Switzerland outlawing golden parachutes

That would, quite obviously, result in favoring populist decisions over economically sound ones.

no doubt the definition's open to discussion so how about a reliable source: the 'People' as mentioned in the Preamble to the United States Constitution
can't argue with that one can we ^^

We can. In fact, people do all the time.

[SoulReaver]

How can you possibly divorce one from the other?

idealism pragmatism, same old same old
(besides who knows today's utopia concept could be feasible some day)

That would, quite obviously, result in favoring populist decisions over economically sound ones.

absolutely - but it'd be a very popular system :|

We can. In fact, people do all the time.

I reckon the definition of ~ anything can be discussed (I recall a discussion here where the ignostics brought up the matter on the definition of God itself)

this could almost be a debate in & of itself
though how to define the People is a new one. it can't be that complicated?

[Annoyed]

actually there is little difference since the vast majority of those "megacorporations" tend to be in bed with the socialist democrat party

and conservatives are actually all about restoring the Constitution as the rule of law, not abolishing it like the socialist democrats and their RINO allies want

Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner.

[aretood2]

there may be miniscule differences which might lead 2 insane dictators to fight with each other....however both forms of collectivism have very clear socialist roots

Only problem is that during Nazi rule, we see 0 socialist reforms outside military necesities. On the contrary, there was some privatization.Besides, we are all collectivist to some extent.

oh and you may also want to read "The Myth of Hitler's Pope" by Rabbi David Dalin before spouting off about things you clearly do not understand

He spoke regarding the 30's while I was speaking to the 20's. I am well aware of the "Hitler's Pope" myth.

[Annoyed]

Originally Posted by Annoyed
How do you motivate people to invest their time, energy, money and other resources in a business if they have to cede control of that business to "the people"?

Would you put everything you have into starting a business or improving your current product or business if you knew that you would have to operate it by a consensus of what "the people" want? And that you wouldn't be allowed to keep the fruit of your labor?

control is not ownership

From another post of yours:

maybe direct democracy would be a good compromise granting the People indirect but strong control over the economy
I recall a certain referendum in Switzerland outlawing golden parachutes

You are apparently advocating that "the people" have the ability to tell business owners what they can and can't do with the fruits of their labors; what they can pay themselves, and no doubt many other things as well.

Again, I ask you. Would YOU be willing to invest your time, effort, energy and resources in a company knowing that "the people" would be able to tell you what you can and cannot do with it, how much you can earn as a result of your efforts and the rest?