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.

 

A question for critics of Socialism

page: 17
30
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 11 2015 @ 09:29 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

You are seriously going to make me dig up quotes against central banking by the founders? It is pretty much common knowledge ...


“A wise and frugal government… shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government.” — Thomas Jefferson, First Inaugural Address, March 4, 1801



“A people… who are possessed of the spirit of commerce, who see and who will pursue their advantages may achieve almost anything.” – George Washington



“Government is instituted to protect property of every sort; as well that which lies in the various rights of individuals, as that which the term particularly expresses. This being the end of government, that alone is a just government which impartially secures to every man whatever is his own.” – James Madison, Essay on Property, 1792



“To take from one, because it is thought his own industry and that of his fathers has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers, have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, the guarantee to everyone the free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it.” — Thomas Jefferson, letter to Joseph Milligan, April 6, 1816



Beware the greedy hand of government thrusting itself into every corner and crevice of industry.” – Thomas Paine



“If we can but prevent the government from wasting the labours of the people, under the pretence of taking care of them, they must become happy.” – Thomas Jefferson to Thomas Cooper, November 29, 1802



“All the perplexities, confusion and distress in America arise not from defects in the Constitution or Confederation, not from a want of honor or virtue so much as from downright ignorance of the nature of coin, credit and circulation.” – John Adams, at the Constitutional Convention (1787)



“Liberty must at all hazards be supported. We have a right to it, derived from our Maker. But if we had not, our fathers have earned and bought it for us, at the expense of their ease, their estates, their pleasure, and their blood.” – John Adams, 1765



“I wish it were possible to obtain a single amendment to our Constitution. I would be willing to depend on that alone for the reduction of the administration of our government to the genuine principles of its Constitution; I mean an additional article, taking from the federal government the power of borrowing.” – Thomas Jefferson


This last one is why people see the decline of America through socialist dreams. Talk of entitlements etc.


“When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.” — Benjamin Franklin


and so forth....




posted on Nov, 11 2015 @ 09:29 AM
link   
a reply to: enlightenedservant

lol!! He's been here for a while now.


High fives all round!!



posted on Nov, 11 2015 @ 09:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: NihilistSanta
a reply to: enlightenedservant

You theory of socialism's coming dominance is reliant on technologies that are non-existant, rely on capitalist investments, and a general idealism that people would somehow no longer have irrational desires if their basic needs were met. If the last were true then how do you explain the elite? Sounds like a bunch of pie in the sky. By the way I think what you are proposing is closer to a technocracy.


"Irrational desires if their basic needs were met?" How's that any different from now? Why is that bad in a socialist society but good in a capitalist society? Besides, isn't that the whole point in "freedom" and being able to pursue our own wants & dreams? LOL I have one person arguing against socialism because they think it will enable people to pursue irrational new desires & another arguing against it because they think it'll make people slaves with no choices at all!

More importantly, I think you're missing the most important & most basic point of what I'm advocating. We would be ending homelessness, food insecurity, and the lack of healthcare. That's literally the whole point in a social safety net anyway, which includes programs like Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, welfare, and food stamps. I even said this in this post, 3rd paragraph:


In fact, even in a society like modern America, I believe something similar. I think our federal & State govts should provide a strong social safety net so there is no homelessness, food insecurity or lack of healthcare. Even if the homelessness is addressed with "homeless dorms" located in each county. And even if it's just online programs, the basics of higher education should be available for free to citizens. In other words, tax dollars would make sure our "needs" are taken care of. But people would still work for or barter for their "wants".

I have to admit, I'm getting both bored & a bit frustrated that I keep having to repeat myself. I know I know, I type reeeeeally long posts so it's TL;DR. But still... Also, I'm clearly talking about 2 separate scenarios: one for our modern societies & one that's a vision for a possible future. And I've even mentioned in this very thread that people can opt out if they want. Because truthfully, I wouldn't want people in the collective that don't want the collective to succeed. That would be counterproductive anyway.



posted on Nov, 11 2015 @ 09:34 AM
link   
a reply to: enlightenedservant

You misunderstood. It is not different from now nor should it be. You cant accurately predict these outcomes. People are irrational. You act like basic needs being met will somehow create world peace. Yet prisons are full of people who had those basic needs met and yet it wasn't enough.



posted on Nov, 11 2015 @ 09:36 AM
link   
a reply to: NihilistSanta

None of those quotes have anything to do with central banking though. Like I don't even see an instance of the word "bank" in any of those quotes. I mean after all, our founding fathers instituted the very first Fed with the First Bank of the United States.

I also fail to see a connection to them saying that Socialism is wrong as well. It seems that you are predicating these quotes along the lines that "taxes = theft". Well clearly the founding fathers agreed with taxation. They wrote the ability for the government to tax into the Constitution.



posted on Nov, 11 2015 @ 09:37 AM
link   
a reply to: TheBandit795

Brilliant addition to the thread

Muchas gracias. Ta. Thanks. Benne. And other languages as well.

AFRIKAANS – dankie
ALBANIAN – faleminderit
ARABIC – shukran
ARMENIAN – Շնորհակալություն / chnorakaloutioun
BOSNIAN – hvala (HVAH-lah)
BULGARIAN – благодаря / blagodaria
CATALAN – gràcies (GRAH-syuhs)
CANTONESE – M̀h’gōi
CROATIAN – hvala (HVAH-lah)
CZECH – děkuji (Dyekooyih)
DANISH – tak (tahg)
DUTCH – dank u
ESTONIAN – tänan (TA-nahn)
FINNISH – kiitos (KEE-tohss)
FRENCH – merci
GERMAN – danke
GREEK – ευχαριστώ (ef-hah-rees-TOH)
HAWAIIAN – mahalo (ma-HA-lo)
HEBREW – .תודה / todah (toh-DAH)
HINDI – dhanyavād / shukriya
HUNGARIAN – köszönöm (KØ-sø-nøm)
ICELANDIC – takk (tahk)
INDONESIAN – terima kasih. (tuh-REE-mah KAH-see)
ITALIAN – grazie (GRAHT-tsyeh)
JAPANESE – arigatô (ah-ree-GAH-toh)
KOREAN – 감사합니다 (gamsahamnida)
LATVIAN – paldies (PUHL-dyehs)
LEBANESE – choukrane
LITHUANIAN – ačiū (AH-choo)
MACEDONIAN – Благодарам / blagodaram (blah-GOH-dah-rahm)
MALAY – terima kasih (TREE-muh KAH-seh)
MALTESE – grazzi (GRUTS-ee)
MANDARIN – Xièxiè
MONGOLIAN – Баярлалаа (bayarlalaa)
NORWEGIAN – takk
POLISH – dziękuję (Jenkoo-yen)
PORTUGUESE – obrigado [masculine] / obrigada [feminine] (oh-bree-GAH-doo / oh-bree-GAH-dah)
ROMANIAN – mulţumesc (mool-tzoo-MESK)
RUSSIAN – спасибо (spuh-SEE-buh)
SERBIAN – xвала / hvala (HVAH-lah)
SLOVAK – Ďakujem (JAH-koo-yehm)
SLOVENIAN – hvala (HVAA-lah)
SPANISH – gracias (GRAH-syahs)
SWEDISH – tack
TAMIL – nandri
THAI – kop khun
TURKISH – teşekkür ederim (teh shek uer eh der eem)
UKRAINIAN – Дякую (DYAH-koo-yoo)
WELSH – diolch (DEE-ol’ch)
YIDDISH – a dank
ZULU – ngiyabonga




posted on Nov, 11 2015 @ 09:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: enlightenedservant

lol!! He's been here for a while now.


High fives all round!!


Lol. I think this may be the first time I've admitted it out loud though.



posted on Nov, 11 2015 @ 09:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: NihilistSanta
a reply to: enlightenedservant

Lets just shrug off all of those words uttered by the founders against things like the taxation involved in a socialist system or central banking.

Did you miss this part?


Also, the "founding fathers" permitted slavery & treated women, black people, and Native Americans as literal second class citizens. So excuse me if I don't treat their words as Gospel. (Though to their credit, Franklin & the Adams' were mostly against slavery.)

Also, it's not like they're going to come back to life & help today's poor, are they? Their America didn't even have a basic safety net for the masses, much less a robust one like the one I'm advocating. In fact, most white males couldn't even vote when the Constitution was ratified, much less any other citizens. And let's not even go into the treatment of gay people back then or the fact that most domestic abuse wasn't even a crime then.

So like I said before, excuse me if I don't treat their words as Gospel.



posted on Nov, 11 2015 @ 09:40 AM
link   
Extreme left ideologies rely on a certain intentionally naivete. They insist man is inherently good and that his environment is the cause for this societal madness. I don't believe that for a second. If man were inherently good these systems would be the natural state or would not be needed at all.



posted on Nov, 11 2015 @ 09:41 AM
link   
a reply to: NihilistSanta


So in other words countries that are predominantly white(homogeneous)?

What the ---- WHAT?

How did race suddenly become part of this?
We are talking about systems of economy! The ones that work are liberal, progressive, and democratic socialist.
oh man. I can't believe you just did that.
Made it about race.

Classic.



posted on Nov, 11 2015 @ 09:44 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I feel you are being deceptive here or trying to conflate the point. Those quotes talk about property rights, about unjust taxation of labor, they talk about labor, they talk about entitlements, one even specifically warns against a government based upon "taking care" of society which is exactly what socialism proposes. I left out the central bank stuff when searching for the quotes because the ones I offered cut more to the heart of the argument against socialism.



posted on Nov, 11 2015 @ 09:45 AM
link   
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Typical knee jerk yet you ignore the point. You say their success is based on their political and economic system. I propose that it is due to their homogeneous people and culture. The same could be said for diversity. Point is you can see what you want to see in the information you provided and is as not cut and dry as you think.



posted on Nov, 11 2015 @ 09:47 AM
link   
a reply to: enlightenedservant

I don't care what you treat as gospel. You are using logical fallacies anyways. Their actions towards others or the makeup of their society has nothing to do with the truth of their words or the validity of the constitution.



posted on Nov, 11 2015 @ 09:55 AM
link   
a reply to: NihilistSanta

You're right, it's not as cut and dr[ied] as you think.

Please continue investigating before dismissing it entirely. I still don't know what 'white' has to do with the topic at hand according to your thinking....



posted on Nov, 11 2015 @ 09:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: NihilistSanta
a reply to: enlightenedservant

You misunderstood. It is not different from now nor should it be. You cant accurately predict these outcomes. People are irrational. You act like basic needs being met will somehow create world peace. Yet prisons are full of people who had those basic needs met and yet it wasn't enough.


Where in my posts did I say anything about this creating world peace? I never even mentioned world peace, war, judicial systems, crime, or punishment. People are people & there will always be people who don't want to follow rules, like to hurt other people, etc. So there will always be a need for a criminal justice system. That doesn't mean we should stop moving forward because of those people. Or to put it another way, would you give up your political ideology just because people are still committing crimes, with or without your system?

Besides, I literally haven't figured out how to create world peace yet, so of course it's not in my plans (technically, i figured out 2 ways but one is virtually impossible & the other is... "off limits", so i'm starting from scratch).



posted on Nov, 11 2015 @ 09:58 AM
link   
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

I hope you really understand what I've posted there.



posted on Nov, 11 2015 @ 10:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: NihilistSanta
a reply to: enlightenedservant

I don't care what you treat as gospel. You are using logical fallacies anyways. Their actions towards others or the makeup of their society has nothing to do with the truth of their words or the validity of the constitution.

The best part about the Constitution is that is has a process to amend it. The sole purpose of that is because those very same "founders" knew their document would become dated with time. So they wanted a method for later generations to be able to update or "amend" their document.

So yes, it seems pretty silly to me to treat their words as an infallible guide when even they knew their works would need alterations & corrections over time.



posted on Nov, 11 2015 @ 10:01 AM
link   
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

You don't consider demographics when judging a countries successes? You are pointing to democratic socialism as the key indicator of their success yet you ignore other information. America is not a homogeneous population and so the same indicators are not necessarily indicative that the system could be applied here. Japan has low crime rates and other indicators of a successful culture and are a homogeneous people. They are not socialist so the common factor is a homogeneous culture.

BTW the expression is said both ways dry or dried as if it matters



posted on Nov, 11 2015 @ 10:05 AM
link   
a reply to: NihilistSanta


You don't consider demographics when judging a countries successes?

I do, as a matter of fact! I look at population, median age, etc.
Race never even entered my mind in this thread.

But go ahead, I guess - tell us how the race of a person has anything to do with the discussion of how to help the people of all nations become prosperous?

Or how the racial makeup of any of them is indicative of anything that would somehow "upend" the success these countries are having? How is this relevant?



posted on Nov, 11 2015 @ 10:07 AM
link   
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

It is not necessarily about race but more about culture. You know same customs values etc. Your PC urge to avoid looking at issues dealing with race is blinding you. I am not saying race is a key factor for success or espousing some superiority. You said race NEVER entered your mind so how can you be so confident about your conclusion?



new topics

top topics



 
30
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join