It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Socialism is Not a 4 Letter Word

page: 13
37
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 12:25 PM
link   
The most ironic thing about many people who are worried about socialism, is that they don't do enough to protect capitalism from itself. Everyone who buys into the the idea that regulated capitalism is a bad thing is playing into the hands of socialists. The longer you enable crony capitalism to ruin the balance, the more people are going to start looking for other options.




posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 12:25 PM
link   
a reply to: greencmp

No i meant distribution. Scientists make technological advances. The capitalist is the one to profit off the distribution of technology.

Sometimes the scientists is also the capitalist.

But some men like Tesla envisioned free energy for all. And who knows what inventions the FBI seized from his apartment when he died a poor man.

edit on 9-8-2015 by Isurrender73 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 12:28 PM
link   
a reply to: mahatche

Your argument is fallaciously inverted.

We despise cronyism which is the product of socialist economic policies.



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 12:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: Isurrender73
a reply to: greencmp

No i meant distribution. Scientists make technological advances. The capitalist is the one to profit off the distribution of technology.

Sometimes the scientists is also the capitalist.

But some men like Tesla envisioned free energy for all. And who knows what inventions the FBI seized from his apartment when he died a poor man.


Wow, just wow.

I really don't know what to say to that.

And you say that you were an economist?



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 12:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: greencmp
Your argument is fallaciously inverted.

Is it?


We despise cronyism which is the product of socialist economic policies.

Is it?



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 12:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: buster2010

Why not just start a mass sterilization program of the poor that should solve a lot of the problems shouldn't it?


I told you I do not know how to fix it, do you? What I do know is it will only get worst even if you make minimum wage 25 bucks an hour. There is no parental guidance anymore and so kids are raising kids. The family model has changed too. People do not want to get married, or even live together, and they have little issues about having kids out of wedlock too. So I do not know how to fix this, maybe you socialism can... State care from cradle to grave, what ya think?

I think something along the lines of a 5 year Norplant would help a lot in preventing unwanted pregnancies. Hell my niece got pregnant at 17 and at 15 I talked to her, talk to her mom about getting her on a program and in the end nothing, but a baby. Yea her life was basically over before it started or at least delayed 15 to 20 years to achieve any goals she wanted in life.



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 12:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: greencmp
originally posted by: Isurrender73
a reply to: greencmp

No i meant distribution. Scientists make technological advances. The capitalist is the one to profit off the distribution of technology.

Sometimes the scientists is also the capitalist.

But some men like Tesla envisioned free energy for all. And who knows what inventions the FBI seized from his apartment when he died a poor man.




Wow, just wow.

I really don't know what to say to that.

And you say that you were an economist?


I have no idea what your point is.

Tesla is the one who envisioned AC current. But he died a poor man. So someone other than the scientist distributed the idea for profit.

Tesla died a poor man, but the capitalists who came to own his technology became billionaires without inventing anything.

Again, I have no idea what your point is. And I have provided you with an example to prove mine.


edit on 9-8-2015 by Isurrender73 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 12:40 PM
link   
a reply to: Isurrender73

Taking other people's money without permission is morally wrong. Socialism involves taking other people's property without their permission. Its not actually generous or considerate to spend other people's money, or take other people's production equipment for your charity programs. What would be generous is spending your own time, your own money, and your own efforts, on charity programs.

Its not generous of the Social Security program to take 16% of people's money then give it back to them forty years later at a low interest rate. Its not generous of Obamacare to give them selves cushy jobs and force people with penalties if they don't buy their health insurance.

Its quite a miracle to me how people coveting other people's property somehow consider themselves generous simply because they don't respect property rights of others, but my willingness to respect other people's right to spend their money as they wish, instead of my own causes, somehow makes me selfish? I won't say most socialists are guilty of greed, but I believe they are all guilty of coveting, and definitely they are accessories to theft.

I believe socialism should be stopped with physical force in self defense of those people who own their own production equipment, the minimum force necessary to defend their property. If the wealthy people are greedy, too bad for you... they are human just like you and the proper and fitting collective punishment for that is humanity suffers because of greedy people. But, to try to fix that by making two wrongs equal one right isn't going to work. Never has, never will.



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 12:43 PM
link   
So the USSA will look to the collective at the sacrifice of the individual.

Technology won't be implemented, because those in power are corrupt. A corrupt government desires socialism because it benefits them at the loss of the individual.

Inflation will be rampant, my standard of living will decrease..

It is a fantasy to think I'd work less hours when government has no control over my job. Unless government starts dictating how I need to do my job.

Again, I see this as inevitable. We will become the USSA.

But it won't be the utopian society so many envision. It'll be a dystopian society where government, our corrupt government gats to dictate the sodas we buy, the houses we live in, the wages we earn.

Many will applaud it. most will hate it.

And we certainly won't be talking about it, as the internet will be just another utility at the control of a socialist government.

Just my opinion. Fortunately, I'm still free enough to express it.

For now.



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 12:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: Isurrender73

This is why I would lean towards a higher min wage without welfare, but the problem created by impoverished children must be fixed.


Ok I gave you an example of 9 to 10 bucks per hour, what do you suggest? Also, if they live with the dad too then there are two incomes coming into the mix... At what point do you put blame and responsibility on the parents? You want to fix it by putting the burden on the business to pay more, and we are talking minimum wage, why are two adults with kids only making minimum wage anyways? The big problem is when they are not working at all, so what do we do in that situation?



Add - Even if half the women on welfare are required to work at a daycare this would be better than the 10 year old raising their siblings.


I have said in the past if you have 1000 single women unemployed with kids, you pay them from the State to do work, 40 hour per week work, not real fun work...100 of them are trained in daycare, 100 of them are training in youth center advisers/workers, 800 work whatever the state needs and 200 take care of their kids while they work.

I can go along with a program like this and pay taxes into it.


edit on 9-8-2015 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 12:46 PM
link   
a reply to: wayforward

I hope you and your descendants are among those who have high IQ or the ability to keep the elitists entertained.

Once they create enough technology to build a utopia for themselves you will be completely unnecessary ro the fascist corpocracy that they will force on you.

You will be lucky if they feed you, and be certain that at some point forced sterilization to eliminate every bloodline that is not theirs will be coming your way as well.

What are you going do when your job is replaced by technology and you have no skill set useful to the one's who own all the technology?

The age of technology is here. You are only one technological advancement away from unemployment.



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 12:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: greencmp
Your argument is fallaciously inverted.

Is it?


We despise cronyism which is the product of socialist economic policies.

Is it?


Yes and yes.



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 12:50 PM
link   
a reply to: beezzer

What a melodramatic bunny.

I don't think anyone want's to try USSR 2.0



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 12:50 PM
link   
a reply to: NthOther

It is a word. Free countries use the word too. The Nazi's policies made labor unions illegal, censored and burned books, sent gays, lesbians, jehovah witnesses, jews to death camps, increased the military spending at the cost of food for their people, instituted their own homeland security with the SS, got rid of free speech. This attempt to link socialism to communism and fascism is at least 60 years old.



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 12:51 PM
link   
a reply to: greencmp

I'm pretty sure cronyism existed before socialist economic policies.



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 12:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: greencmp
a reply to: mahatche

Your argument is fallaciously inverted.

We despise cronyism which is the product of socialist economic policies.


Are you really implying that socialists are the ones who oppose protective regulations? The corporations who threaten to leave America if they have to pay taxes are socialist? The people defending economic inequality are socialists? The people who created the "greed is good" mantra are socialists? The socialists are speaking against these trade deals, and want to raise minimum wage, and they are accused of cronyism?

You can't rant about income redistribution, while also claiming they favor the crony capitalists, it doesn't work both ways.

Do you know anything about socialism or is it just a bad word you all the worlds problems to?



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 12:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Xtrozero

A work based system is exactly what I support as well. Stay at home welfare causes a lazy person with no motivation. I only said I would comprise on child welfare.

I just think we need to provide some job for all, exactly like you have presented. If everyone had to show up for work, and I agree the work should be real work, it would be better for everyone.

We agree on this point. The current welfare system sucks.

How to deal with the children of the lazy is a very difficult question. One that I think needs to be answered by a majority vote. And the law should have an expiration date. At the expiration date the people should vote to extend or change the program.
edit on 9-8-2015 by Isurrender73 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 12:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: beezzer

What a melodramatic bunny.

I don't think anyone want's to try USSR 2.0


I don't think Marx and Lenin and their supporters envisioned the USSR either.



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 12:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Xtrozero

You're using LOGIC you know...
GOVERNMENT...HELLO?
These ideas are great but when you stick a buereaucrat on that the corruption starts and soon these day care places are sustandard while the system says admin costs are high.



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 12:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: CB328



these systems always produce an elite political class who still gets to live like kings while the masses starve


That's bogus, no one's starving in Europe. In fact a lot of Europeans have a better quality of life than many Americans.


Poverty rates are high in Europe.

google it.



Depends what parts ....

Again why can you not grasp that Europe is NOT one big country ? It is made up of multiple country's some good, some bad and most average.
edit on 9-8-2015 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
37
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join