Let’s look at the Worlds Socialists countries

a reply to: NihilistSanta

Really? The Mormons were imperialists? The Puritans were imperialists, hell-bent on conquest? That's a oversimplification and appeal to extremes.

a reply to: MystikMushroom

So its OK for some minorities but not others to have preferential treatment and control over the majority? I honestly don't think you know what you are talking about. This is a case of sticking to your guns because of ideology over reason.

a reply to: MystikMushroom

So you are in favor of theocracies now?

a reply to: Leonidas

Because one enshrines and upholds the rights of the individual the other system is concerned with what is "right" for the collective.

a reply to: JohnnyCanuck

In Ontario, it's not a monthly cash payment, it's...as mentioned above...worked out in the whole income tax scheme. I don't feel it, and as I have also said before, the end result was the curing of my cancer for $32 out of pocket...parking at the oncology centre.

Very nice, sir.

Of course, that's not adding up the sum total of your income tax payments, which I wager you've been paying for quite some time. If we were to add that to your $32, we'd have a more truthful dollar amount of your treatments. Because it is out of sight out of mind, doesn't mean your earnings were not paying for it. Money is being taken from your wages. In realistic terms, you likely paid quite a substantial amount. Even without the cancer, you'd still be out of a substantial amount of money. On the surface, sure, it sounds cheap, but in reality, it isn't.

a reply to: NihilistSanta

What happened to balancing the two?

a reply to: onequestion

Well what happens when one side takes over academia and the media for generations? Kind of throws things out of balance wouldn't you say?

originally posted by: NihilistSanta
a reply to: MystikMushroom

So its OK for some minorities but not others to have preferential treatment and control over the majority? I honestly don't think you know what you are talking about. This is a case of sticking to your guns because of ideology over reason.

How is equality (not being murdered or allowed to marry and vote) even in the same league as being upset about how tax money is spent?

How EQUALITY ever became special or preferential to some people is beyond me. Yeah, ethnic minorities and LGBT people are asking to be in charge and dictate to white people and non-LGBT how they should conduct themselves. Right...

The fact is, we have a political system that works by majority rule. These minority groups you so adamantly claim "dictate to the majority" clearly have more than just minority support. Clearly, the majority of people in the USA favor women being able to vote, interracial marriages, desegregation and LGBT people's ability to marry. The public's opinion over the issues of the minorities clearly mirrors that of a MAJORITY opinion.

So those claiming these minorities are running around, throwing weight and pushing their agendas and dictating to everyone how things ought to be? Those people are an even SMALLER minority of the entire whole. They're a tiny little minority upset because the majority favors treating these ethnic and LGBT groups equally, not specially or extraordinarily.

And we do treat those people equally. They can marry, vote, not have to use a "conservatives only" bathroom. Those people with the minority political view are treated just as equally as everyone else. We hear their complaints, we see their protests, we allow them to moan and wail all they want.

I simply propose that they stop wasting their time and put their money where their mouths are. Demonstrate to the world how much better their ideal system is. Show us this better way to do things, prove to us that the majority is wrong.

My big thing here is that the USA is already a Quasi-socialist country. But we do it expensively and not well. We have free healthcare (at emergency rooms) and infrastructure and medicaid and medicare and social security free education and welfare and unemployment insurance and Obama Care and Foster care and food stamps and WIC and planned Parenthood funding and government grants for college, and subsidies for big oil and coal companies and tax breaks for very large corporations and bail outs and many other things that we all consider socialist Ideals.

Then some of you say no socialism, but what do you mean? No healthcare for the homeless person having a heart attack on the street? No public education?

And If there is no public education, how will I afford to educate my children? Even a voucher system is at it's heart, socialism.

Now the question is this: We already live in a socialist country, how much of it do you want to keep and how much do you want to do away with?

The second question is: Which presidential candidate is the real socialist? The one who will lie and tell you he/she is going to change everything but in reality will not change a thing? Which is every single candidate except Rand Paul and Bernie Sanders. One says he'll get down to libertarian values with a real small government and the other says he's fix and continue the socialist programs we already have. If you think Cruz Carson trump Fiorina, bush clinton OMally Rubio are going to get rid of any of our socialist programs your in for a big awakening.

Back to education, many of you tell me it's broken and that homeschooling is much better, I can't afford home schooling, we both work over 40 hours a week and I work 60-70 hours a week, just to make ends meet. And I'm better off then most people in the country. So how do I educate my kids without free public education? Some of you guys aren't living in reality.

a reply to: amazing

Your right, we instinctively know it's how it should be, and we edge close to it...but we waste a TON of money throwing up a facade so as not to appear like our European cousins.

It's like we're hiding in the democratic socialist closet.

a reply to: NihilistSanta

Doesn't change the fact that balance between the two is necessary.

a reply to: amazing

Well said.

Except I like Trump, that's the only difference. I think he'll be good for the economy.

a reply to: MystikMushroom

We're not suppose to have a majority rule system were suppose to protect the rights of individuals.

We have a majority rule system because of ignorance and corruption.

a reply to: amazing

Then some of you say no socialism, but what do you mean? No healthcare for the homeless person having a heart attack on the street? No public education?

It means No to social or state ownership over the means of production. Government services are not "socialist". Compulsory education is not "socialist". Compulsory education has been around before socialism was even conceived. Paying taxes for government services has been around before socialism has been conceived. Same with the military. It's simply false that these notions would be considered socialist.

originally posted by: TheTory
a reply to: JohnnyCanuckVery nice, sir.
Of course, that's not adding up the sum total of your income tax payments, which I wager you've been paying for quite some time. If we were to add that to your $32, we'd have a more truthful dollar amount of your treatments. Because it is out of sight out of mind, doesn't mean your earnings were not paying for it. Money is being taken from your wages. In realistic terms, you likely paid quite a substantial amount. Even without the cancer, you'd still be out of a substantial amount of money. On the surface, sure, it sounds cheap, but in reality, it isn't.

But....balance that out against our standard of living and quality of life, and it all becomes relative again. We weathered the last recession better that the US because those damaging banking/mortgage practices that threw people out of their homes there...were illegal here. Those medical payments that put people into bankruptcy there, do not occur here. Ask any Canadian...wanna swap?
Just saw this on-line...
25 Best Countries

originally posted by: NihilistSanta
a reply to: Leonidas

Because one enshrines and upholds the rights of the individual the other system is concerned with what is "right" for the collective.

I am sure you are aware that these other countries have individual rights enshrined in their constitutions and function perfectly well, so could you point to something specific in the Bill of Rights or Constitution that would make it impossible in the US?

a reply to: onequestion

Exactly! I am glad someone gets it.

a reply to: Leonidas

Interesting because to my knowledge those constitutions are subservient to the rules and regulations of the socialist EU.

a reply to: TheTory

Wouldn't those programs be a means of exchange?

originally posted by: Ghost147


I never really understood why American Politicians really pushed the hatred of Socialism so strongly. It's unfortunate just how many believe their poisonous words.

Of course you dont understand. You likely don't understand freedom of self determination either. Free people dont want to be dependent on a government. It's hard to stay a free people that way. Especially when the people pushing for more dependency are also pushing for disarmament of the people.