Socialism is Not a 4 Letter Word

a reply to: Xtrozero

I think we need to poll the American People on what a living wage should include. My idea would be enough for a woman to support 2 children without welfare.

So a used car, a two bedroom apartment. food and utilities. With enough money for some form of monthly entertainment for the children. Cable, Wifi, going to the movies, but not necessarily all three.

Add - Although I am not completely opposed to a slighty lower living wage and some form of child welfare. I just don't like seeing welfare abused by women who continuously have children to stay on welfare.

originally posted by: Isurrender73
a reply to: Xtrozero

I think we need to poll the American People on what a living wage should include. My idea would be enough for a woman to support 2 children without welfare.

So a used car, a two bedroom apartment. food and utilities. With enough money for some form of monthly entertainment for the children. Cable, Wifi, going to the movies, but not necessarily all three.

Add - Although I am not completely opposed to a slighty lower living wage and some form of child welfare. I just don't like seeing welfare abused by women who continuously have children to stay on welfare.

So if that woman is living in San Francisco, you'd want to provide her with a "living wage" of 140,000 a year?

And they say I'm sarcastic!

a reply to: beezzer

That is a tough question. Is it right to force people to move to a less desirable location?

I think the federal min wage should be a median wage and we should leave the states to work out the smaller details like this.

It's my opinion that most social programs should have some level of federal oversight, as a check and balance system, but they should be administered at the state level.

I don't want a federal government with too much power. Plus it is good for the different states to take different approaches so we can step back and see which approaches work best for the taxpayers and workers.

This is California my home state your talking about, it's likely we would be paying the 140,000 living wage.

But with a separation between a federal median wage and state sponsored program only residents of CA would be responsible for making up the difference.

So if you want less taxes move to one of the less desirable states.

A flat federal tax, and a flat state tax. And corporations pay state taxes based on GDP in each state without the damm loopholes.

I don't understand the point of and all the concern with being left or right.
For me; and this applies in all countries, the real issue is:

1. recognise that having xyz millions of people being 'governed' by just a few hundred people may have been appropriate for a bygone era such as before telephones and the internet.

2. Recognise also that for the elite it is and has a relatively simple task to influence, corrupt, debase, intimidate and control just a few hundred people than it is to intimidate, threaten, corrupt and control millions of people. This current situation where the elite only have to deal with a few hundred people suits their interests extremely well.

3. Recognise to that the unknown and the untried are not automatically better just because we don't know, appreciate or have experienced the downside of the the unknown.

4. Recognise also that if we are to have government of the people, for the people, we must become a referendum driven society.

5. Recognise that a society driven by referendums becomes very hard to corrupt, threaten, intimidate and control. In a referendum driven society, the rich, the powerful, the influential are rendered powerless because we the people vastly outnumber them.

Government are supposed to be servants not rulers. We the people, are supposed to be the executive government, we the people are the Senate or the Upper House.

Democracy is about much more than casting a vote every xyz years and then be relegated to spectators on the sidelines until the next election, that arrangement is only a pretend democracy.

In a real democracy we the people instruct the government what to implement. In a real democracy we the people rule the government.

Democracy is like some other things, use it or lose it. If we want a democracy we have to be prepared to do a bit of work to get it and keep it. Participating in the democratic process is a responsibility that goes with self government and freedom.

Electing a government to 'rule' for xyz years may have been appropriate in an era where communications were like they were before telephones and the internet.

So what do I mean by becoming a referendum driven society?

Well, for example:

No government would be permitted to send troops to fight on foreign soil until we the people have approved of it in a referendum.

No government can sign any international agreement or conventions until we the people have ratified it first through a referendum. The entire agreement or convention would have to be published on the web for 3 months before the referendum.

No government could implement Obama Care until we the people have first given our approval through a referendum before it can become law.

No government could create the federal reserve until we the people have first given our approval through a referendum before it can become law.

Moreover, all referendum decisions would automatically have a sunset clause in them. This would give we the people the opportunity to 'undo' a previous approval after having experienced the approved decision.

originally posted by: Isurrender73

originally posted by: greencmp
a reply to: Isurrender73

"It is no crime to be ignorant of economics, which is, after all, a specialized discipline and one that most people consider to be a ‘dismal science.’ But it is totally irresponsible to have a loud and vociferous opinion on economic subjects while remaining in this state of ignorance."

-Murray N. Rothbard

My level of understanding of economics is much higher than most. I was in a six figure job consulting millionaires on business economics.

I doubt you want to get into an economic debate with me. But you can create a thread on your vast economic understanding and I would be happy to join the thread and teach you business economics.

Just because I don't agree with you, and you are unable to understand the ideas that I have presented, does not mean that I am ignorant of economics. I was paid quite well for my understanding of economics.

Why does that not surprise me?

I think we are having an economic debate right here and now.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Wouldn't surprise me. I just saw an article where the guy was making the case something bad just happened behind the scenes in the derivatives markets. You and I agree though that if something happens in the market were done. We pulled out all of the tricks in 2008 , we have no more magic left to recover.

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.

There is the parable of the wolf and the dog.

A starving wolf came through the woods and came upon a fat, well-fed dog. The dog seemed dismayed to see the wolf in such sorry condition, and the wolf asked the dog how he looked so well fed through the winter. The dog explained that he had a warn house and all the food he wanted. The wolf asked how he had it, and the dog said he would show him if he came along.

As they were turning, the wolf saw a collar on the dog, and asked about it. The dog explained that his master often chained him up, and that he had to do whatever his master wanted in exchange for all the food and shelter.

The wolf left the dog then because although he might be cold and hungry, he was still free.

a reply to: Azureblue

You do understand that pure democracy is mob rule? And the mob would only be a as wise and as just as it's ability to be manipulated.

You yourself admit we are being manipulated now. Running a society completely by referendum would not change that. It would only make it worse and much more erratic.

a reply to: ketsuko

Nice story but I can promise you a good 95% percent of the US population would wear the collar instead of be cold and hungry. People scream freedom about this and that. They don't want it, they want security disguised as freedom. My personal feeling is that choice will be on the horizon soon. All these freedom lovers will readily accept the collar.

originally posted by: ketsuko

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.

There is the parable of the wolf and the dog.

A starving wolf came through the woods and came upon a fat, well-fed dog. The dog seemed dismayed to see the wolf in such sorry condition, and the wolf asked the dog how he looked so well fed through the winter. The dog explained that he had a warn house and all the food he wanted. The wolf asked how he had it, and the dog said he would show him if he came along.

As they were turning, the wolf saw a collar on the dog, and asked about it. The dog explained that his master often chained him up, and that he had to do whatever his master wanted in exchange for all the food and shelter.

The wolf left the dog then because although he might be cold and hungry, he was still free.

WTF?? So you think in Europe we have masters but in America you're oh-so-free??

*rolls eyes*

originally posted by: Isurrender73
a
I think we need to poll the American People on what a living wage should include. My idea would be enough for a woman to support 2 children without welfare.

So a used car, a two bedroom apartment. food and utilities. With enough money for some form of monthly entertainment for the children. Cable, Wifi, going to the movies, but not necessarily all three.

Add - Although I am not completely opposed to a slighty lower living wage and some form of child welfare. I just don't like seeing welfare abused by women who continuously have children to stay on welfare.

Or.......DONT BLOODY WELL HAVE CHILDREN UNTIL YOU CAN AFFORD IT!

originally posted by: Reallyfolks
a reply to: ketsuko

Nice story but I can promise you a good 95% percent of the US population would wear the collar instead of be cold and hungry. People scream freedom about this and that. They don't want it, they want security disguised as freedom. My personal feeling is that choice will be on the horizon soon. All these freedom lovers will readily accept the collar.

Oh, I completely agree, and it's sad. People have forgotten how to suffer for the important things. A lot of people in this country have already become dogs and don't realize it.

a reply to: blupblup

A government big enough to give you everything you have is also big enough to take it all away.

Who else do you think the dog's master is?

originally posted by: ketsuko

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.

There is the parable of the wolf and the dog.

A starving wolf came through the woods and came upon a fat, well-fed dog. The dog seemed dismayed to see the wolf in such sorry condition, and the wolf asked the dog how he looked so well fed through the winter. The dog explained that he had a warn house and all the food he wanted. The wolf asked how he had it, and the dog said he would show him if he came along.

As they were turning, the wolf saw a collar on the dog, and asked about it. The dog explained that his master often chained him up, and that he had to do whatever his master wanted in exchange for all the food and shelter.

The wolf left the dog then because although he might be cold and hungry, he was still free.

Yeah

The USA is not much freerer than most of Europe....and we are even freerer in some areas.


But you carry on watching fox news.....

originally posted by: blupblup

originally posted by: ketsuko

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.

There is the parable of the wolf and the dog.

A starving wolf came through the woods and came upon a fat, well-fed dog. The dog seemed dismayed to see the wolf in such sorry condition, and the wolf asked the dog how he looked so well fed through the winter. The dog explained that he had a warn house and all the food he wanted. The wolf asked how he had it, and the dog said he would show him if he came along.

As they were turning, the wolf saw a collar on the dog, and asked about it. The dog explained that his master often chained him up, and that he had to do whatever his master wanted in exchange for all the food and shelter.

The wolf left the dog then because although he might be cold and hungry, he was still free.

WTF?? So you think in Europe we have masters but in America you're oh-so-free??

*rolls eyes*

I know right?



Some of these people on ATS are still living in the 1800's

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: blupblup

A government big enough to give you everything you have is also big enough to take it all away.

Who else do you think the dog's master is?

Do you pay tax?

Do you have to obey laws?

Do you have a safety net in place for the most vulnerable in society?


You are NO different than Europe in most respects, just attitude by many of selfishness.


We don't have some all powerful government that micro manages every area of your life in Europe.... despite what your Fox News and propaganda BS tell you.

a reply to: crazyewok

Did I say the US was "freer"?

I just used that parable when pointing out the standard of living. Euros have a higher standard of living? Well, why? Is it because you have social programs from your government (i.e. things from your master) or is it because you all earn and keep enough to create that standard for yourself?

The dog was living quite well and satisfied with it as you all seem to be.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: crazyewok

Did I say the US was "freer"?

I just used that parable when pointing out the standard of living. Euros have a higher standard of living? Well, why? Is it because you have social programs from your government (i.e. things from your master) or is it because you all earn and keep enough to create that standard for yourself?

The dog was living quite well and satisfied with it as you all seem to be.

First it depends on the EU country we are not all the same, far from it.

Secondly calling all European dogs and looking down on us is insulting. Its like me painting all the US as dumb bible thumping warmongers.

The modern United States (that all who are posting here have benefited from) is based on a mixed economy model combining both capitalist and socialist elements.

To insist that socialism is harmful or dangerous or ineffective in and of itself is just patently not true.

The endless and false comparisons with the Soviet Union (or China or even Scandinavia) are either ignorant, disingenuous or both.

originally posted by: Gryphon66


The endless and false comparisons with the Soviet Union, or China or even Scandanavia are either ignorant, disingenuous or both.

Yeah unlike the USA the Scandinavia country's have a more stable, sustainable economies

Of course yeas I know it likely only works as they have less than 10 million people.