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.

 

Bernie Sanders Supporters Can’t Describe Socialism

page: 10
21
<< 7  8  9    11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 11:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Not easy to "go back".

It's better when it never happens in the first place.



Well that's a wish that can never be fulfilled. You can't close Pandora's box.




posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 11:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kitana
a reply to: enlightenedservant

You have the same OPPORTUNITY as I do today. I cannot change the fact of slavery... but we already had the civil rights movement, that is done, it is past. I am not responsible for the ignorance of others, but today, I have the very same opportunity as anyone else in this country, and stealing is wrong. Stealing is stealing, whether you want to call it socialism or theft, it is theft.

In a free market society you are rewarded based on intelligence and hard work. Most people who desire socialism do not think they have any value in the free market and no desire to do the hard work, they see themselves as too stupid and lazy to make it in this life for themselves so they desire to make it off the backs of those who are willing to think it through and do the hard work and make the sacrifices.

Try valuing yourselves a little bit, and be willing to put in the work it takes to make it, use the brains God gave you and you will succeed.

Yes I have the same opportunity today. You're the one who keeps claiming the country was supposedly founded on that equal opportunity, which is clearly wasn't. Those are 2 completely different things. That's the point I keep arguing.

Also, it still doesn't change the fact that "the general welfare" is mentioned in the Constitution while "capitalism" & "free market" are not. The "general welfare clause" even gives the government the ability to provide for the general welfare. How does socialism go against that?



posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 11:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

originally posted by: Semicollegiate

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
You don't have to be an economics major to like someone's proposed policies. Duh. How many Cruz or Trump supporters can explain supply side economics? I'm sure there are some, but it's obviously not a prerequisite for supporting a candidate.


Kinda makes you wonder about Democracy.

How can voters make the right choices unless they all know economics?

That doesn't even make sense. Going by that logic, only insiders with the highest security clearances and doctorate degrees in every academic field should be allowed to vote. Then again, your first sentence implies you question the merit of democracy anyway.


Quite frankly, one of the problems now is that everyone can vote no matter how ignorant they are of the issues. I don't believe anyone needs to have an economics degree, but I do believe voters should have to demonstrate some basic competency of the founding of the country and our political system.

We require immigrants to pass a basic civics test and I believe that test should be used in qualifying people to vote.


Then your beef is with the inadequate curriculum in our public school systems. What's the point in having taxpayer funded schools that don't teach the soon-to-be citizens the basics of being a citizen? That should be the point in a public schooling system; to teach the next generation how to become responsible citizens & to teach them the rights, duties, responsibilities, and opportunities that come with being citizens of the city, country, State, and nation.


I agree in principle. However, you cannot deny that our public school system has been a colossal failure and nothing more than a jobs program at this point for the teachers union. Public schools spend more time teaching about global warming and Timmy has Two Daddies than focusing on reading, writing, and math. They sure as hell aren't teaching a whit about the constitution, economics, or anything else useful.


Actually, that's not true. My Mom's a recently retired school teacher & my sister, aunt, and one of my first cousins are all school teachers right now. The problem with public schools are many, but the biggest problem in my opinion is the screwed up curriculum. Many districts don't mandate civics anymore, much less things like consumer finance. Even when I was in high school, I had to take an AP Government class to learn about the political system. And that class was an elective (meaning, it was voluntary).

So instead of demonizing the public school system, I'd prefer we upgrade it into something that actually works for all of our soon-to-be-adults. That includes upgrading the teaching materials & classroom technology, as well as developing a curriculum that actually prepares our students to become responsible citizens. Of course, that requires major changes at the administrative level, since school boards & major publishers have been the driving forces behind the dumbing down of the school curriculum.



posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 11:51 AM
link   
a reply to: enlightenedservant

It WAS founded upon that opportunity, it was not believed by some that blacks were human beings or "men". ( a rather sick idea imho, but pervasive nonetheless)

The whole thing, is we have to stop this whole victim attitude. Don't worry its not just blacks either. I am from Appalachia and we have that same victim mindset here. Most people from third world countries think Appalachia is deeper in poverty than any third world nation. In business we have to hide our accents to avoid being treated like ignorant hillbillies and discriminated against. We have our own issues to rise above, but I am outspoken that we HAVE to, I am outspoken that we have to stop playing the victim and start DOING what it takes to succeed.

We aren't stupid, none of us are, we are only victims if we want to be, if we allow ourselves to be. In the end, we are only victims of ourselves by not using what God gave us all, by not actively rising above and just plain do better. Asking for handouts accomplishes nothing, does nothing but hurt us all. When we demand better of ourselves, we will become better.

edit on 3-2-2016 by Kitana because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 12:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

originally posted by: Semicollegiate

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
You don't have to be an economics major to like someone's proposed policies. Duh. How many Cruz or Trump supporters can explain supply side economics? I'm sure there are some, but it's obviously not a prerequisite for supporting a candidate.


Kinda makes you wonder about Democracy.

How can voters make the right choices unless they all know economics?

That doesn't even make sense. Going by that logic, only insiders with the highest security clearances and doctorate degrees in every academic field should be allowed to vote. Then again, your first sentence implies you question the merit of democracy anyway.


Quite frankly, one of the problems now is that everyone can vote no matter how ignorant they are of the issues. I don't believe anyone needs to have an economics degree, but I do believe voters should have to demonstrate some basic competency of the founding of the country and our political system.

We require immigrants to pass a basic civics test and I believe that test should be used in qualifying people to vote.


Then your beef is with the inadequate curriculum in our public school systems. What's the point in having taxpayer funded schools that don't teach the soon-to-be citizens the basics of being a citizen? That should be the point in a public schooling system; to teach the next generation how to become responsible citizens & to teach them the rights, duties, responsibilities, and opportunities that come with being citizens of the city, country, State, and nation.


I agree in principle. However, you cannot deny that our public school system has been a colossal failure and nothing more than a jobs program at this point for the teachers union. Public schools spend more time teaching about global warming and Timmy has Two Daddies than focusing on reading, writing, and math. They sure as hell aren't teaching a whit about the constitution, economics, or anything else useful.


Actually, that's not true. My Mom's a recently retired school teacher & my sister, aunt, and one of my first cousins are all school teachers right now. The problem with public schools are many, but the biggest problem in my opinion is the screwed up curriculum. Many districts don't mandate civics anymore, much less things like consumer finance. Even when I was in high school, I had to take an AP Government class to learn about the political system. And that class was an elective (meaning, it was voluntary).

So instead of demonizing the public school system, I'd prefer we upgrade it into something that actually works for all of our soon-to-be-adults. That includes upgrading the teaching materials & classroom technology, as well as developing a curriculum that actually prepares our students to become responsible citizens. Of course, that requires major changes at the administrative level, since school boards & major publishers have been the driving forces behind the dumbing down of the school curriculum.


We agree. I live in probably one of the most progressively liberal communities in the country. We have excellent public schools mainly because it is a relatively high income community so the kids' parents are going to be involved. However, the schools spend an inordinate amount of time teaching all this liberal propaganda instead of focusing on the basics.

For example, they were trying to teach kindergartners about gay parents! Yeah, we have a sizable gay population, many of whom are parents. However, I don't think it is appropriate to be teaching five and six year olds about having two daddies. There is constant global warming this, global warming that. I mean I can go on and on.

What annoys me most is that we often have an achievement gap between black and white students. So instead of figuring out why black students aren't performing, we spend tons of money on all these liberal causes du jour. As a black parent, I want the basics first. If social issues are importnat, the parents can teach that crap at home. I want the schools to focus on subjects that matter in the real world.





edit on 3-2-2016 by Edumakated because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 12:24 PM
link   
a reply to: enlightenedservant

I would like you to read this short essay. It will give you a good idea how far we have come from the founders definitions.

Limited Government, Unlimited Administration: Is it Possible to Restore Constitutionalism?

If I can find another good essay for you I will post a link. This is simply one of the first ones I found to show you some of what our founders were thinking concerning the constitution and the place of government.



posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 12:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: greencmp

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
a reply to: greencmp

The first time two cave men decided to work together on something, or share something we began moving that direction...


Voluntary cooperation is not state ownership of the means of production.

It's not even socioeconomic interventionism.


We wouldn't be communicating right now if everything was governed by "voluntary cooperation". Things large like the internet that involve various countries on other continents simply aren't possible by getting everyone to "agree" and "volunteer".

Sorry, it's not realistic and it's even more of a fantasy utopia than Star Trek world.



posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 01:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: MystikMushroom

originally posted by: greencmp

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
a reply to: greencmp

The first time two cave men decided to work together on something, or share something we began moving that direction...


Voluntary cooperation is not state ownership of the means of production.

It's not even socioeconomic interventionism.


We wouldn't be communicating right now if everything was governed by "voluntary cooperation". Things large like the internet that involve various countries on other continents simply aren't possible by getting everyone to "agree" and "volunteer".

Sorry, it's not realistic and it's even more of a fantasy utopia than Star Trek world.


International communication and trade preexist the internet and there are lots of examples of mass voluntarism.

I'm not exactly sure what you're saying though, my apologies if my answer seems patronizing.

Your original example was this:



The first time two cave men decided to work together on something, or share something we began moving that direction...



posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 02:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: ugmold
a reply to: xuenchen

I don't think anyone can accurately describe Socialism, or for that matter Capitalism.


Socialism is the workers owning the means of production.
The laws are aimed for the good(and protection) of the society as a whole.


Capitalism is private ownership of the means of production.
The laws are aimed for the good(and protection) of commerce as a whole(small,medium and large business).



posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 05:14 PM
link   
a reply to: Kitana


I believe there is a balance between the two views.


The average U.S. family is fairly 'socialist' in the sense of each according to need. (It used to be the dad that decided...). We share the cost of schools, roads, hospitals etc.even though there may not be a need of one personally. common and accepted by almost all.

A group in agreement to operate on a shared basis can and does work in small groups even nations, perhaps state size.

This starts to break down when common sense is trumped by political expediency and enforcement on those that don't agree with the current and expanding level of 'socializing' the country. I among them.

The drive for vote support and retention of political power is obvious. California now has made it legal for illegals to vote.
The current candidates on the left offer 'free university', cancellation of college tuition debt, increases in wage levels, 'compensation for slavery', doubling of the limit of immigrants to two million from one, open borders. Freebies all.

That is not one man helping another. That is a political rape of a nation disguised as 'compassion' a balm for unmerited guilt trips.

I, for one, will pass, thank you very much.



posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 05:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

originally posted by: Semicollegiate

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
You don't have to be an economics major to like someone's proposed policies. Duh. How many Cruz or Trump supporters can explain supply side economics? I'm sure there are some, but it's obviously not a prerequisite for supporting a candidate.


Kinda makes you wonder about Democracy.

How can voters make the right choices unless they all know economics?

That doesn't even make sense. Going by that logic, only insiders with the highest security clearances and doctorate degrees in every academic field should be allowed to vote. Then again, your first sentence implies you question the merit of democracy anyway.


Everyone who votes should know the basic scientific truths of every field. The basic stuff is not hard to understand.

How many voters can vaguely describe the Law of Supply and Demand?

Less than half?

Why should they ever have voted about issues concerning the economy?

How is that not obvious? (Meant for the general reader, not you in particular enlightenedservant)
edit on 3-2-2016 by Semicollegiate because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 05:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

originally posted by: Semicollegiate

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
You don't have to be an economics major to like someone's proposed policies. Duh. How many Cruz or Trump supporters can explain supply side economics? I'm sure there are some, but it's obviously not a prerequisite for supporting a candidate.


Kinda makes you wonder about Democracy.

How can voters make the right choices unless they all know economics?

That doesn't even make sense. Going by that logic, only insiders with the highest security clearances and doctorate degrees in every academic field should be allowed to vote. Then again, your first sentence implies you question the merit of democracy anyway.


Quite frankly, one of the problems now is that everyone can vote no matter how ignorant they are of the issues. I don't believe anyone needs to have an economics degree, but I do believe voters should have to demonstrate some basic competency of the founding of the country and our political system.

We require immigrants to pass a basic civics test and I believe that test should be used in qualifying people to vote.


Then your beef is with the inadequate curriculum in our public school systems. What's the point in having taxpayer funded schools that don't teach the soon-to-be citizens the basics of being a citizen? That should be the point in a public schooling system; to teach the next generation how to become responsible citizens & to teach them the rights, duties, responsibilities, and opportunities that come with being citizens of the city, country, State, and nation.


I agree in principle. However, you cannot deny that our public school system has been a colossal failure and nothing more than a jobs program at this point for the teachers union. Public schools spend more time teaching about global warming and Timmy has Two Daddies than focusing on reading, writing, and math. They sure as hell aren't teaching a whit about the constitution, economics, or anything else useful.


Ten bucks says that you haven't looked at a school curriculum in decades. If you have kids, I doubt you know much about what your kid is learning either. That is unless you are willing to admit you are being massively hyperbolic here.


I have looked for a used college chemistry text and they are all rife with global warming propaganda. Somewhere between one interrelated chapter and half of the book.

All of them.



posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 05:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Semicollegiate

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: TheBulk

originally posted by: Krazysh0t


You mean like the War on Drugs?


Yes, just like that. So you agree with me?


I agree that the War on Drugs is a conservative policy and not a socialist one.


The War on Drugs is from conservative socialists. Only socialists use government to solve a problem.


So you admit that we've had Socialism within our country, and not only that but conservatives have been in support of it?


Socialists live in a predigested world where "conservatives" are whatever the Media says they are.

The last real conservative political body, the Old Right, died of old age in the 1950's.

No one should be called a conservative that has been in the two party system since Senator Robert A. Taft lost the primary in 1952.

Socialists have been making the country more socialistic since 1900 or so. Buying votes with the tax payer's money one election at a time.



posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 06:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: MystikMushroom

originally posted by: greencmp

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
a reply to: greencmp

The first time two cave men decided to work together on something, or share something we began moving that direction...


Voluntary cooperation is not state ownership of the means of production.

It's not even socioeconomic interventionism.


We wouldn't be communicating right now if everything was governed by "voluntary cooperation". Things large like the internet that involve various countries on other continents simply aren't possible by getting everyone to "agree" and "volunteer".

Sorry, it's not realistic and it's even more of a fantasy utopia than Star Trek world.


Before WW1 everything international was commercial.

All of the railroads in Europe, except for Russia, were interconnected by gov free business. So were the telegraph systems. The sciences made themselves international with the Metric System.

The railroads made the time zones, no gov.

Typically the gov steps in and makes a standard-- arbitrarily.

Is there really only one way to connect computers? The gov "gave" us the Internet so as to keep a choke on it and an eye in it.

Same same education and mass media.
edit on 3-2-2016 by Semicollegiate because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 06:51 PM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker

We lost the balance. The balance used to be found in compromise between reasonable opposites. Now there are no opposing voices, conservatives got silenced, our party taken over. When the tea party started up to regain our conservative voice, it got taken over and our voices once more silenced.

The only way to keep from going over the cliff into total socialism, is to stand totally opposed at this point. Socialist light is what we have had for a republican party, socialist is what we had for a democratic party. It is time to stand utterly opposed, or watch the free fall of this country all the while knowing it will take another civil war to get this country away from the hands of those who abuse power.

That is my opinion. This is my last stand against what has been happening. After this, I fight no more, people simply deserve what they get after this, but now, I will stand opposed and explain why it needs opposed.
edit on 3-2-2016 by Kitana because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 07:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kitana
a reply to: nwtrucker

We lost the balance. The balance used to be found in compromise between reasonable opposites. Now there are no opposing voices, conservatives got silenced, our party taken over. When the tea party started up to regain our conservative voice, it got taken over and our voices once more silenced.

The only way to keep from going over the cliff into total socialism, is to stand totally opposed at this point. Socialist light is what we have had for a republican party, socialist is what we had for a democratic party. It is time to stand utterly opposed, or watch the free fall of this country all the while knowing it will take another civil war to get this country away from the hands of those who abuse power.

That is my opinion. This is my last stand against what has been happening. After this, I fight no more, people simply deserve what they get after this, but now, I will stand opposed and explain why it needs opposed.


I couldn't agree more.



posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 07:18 PM
link   
a reply to: Semicollegiate

IF that school board will allow you access
to your child's curriculum.... violating the child's 'privacy'....



posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 09:12 PM
link   


If they don't know what a "Socialist" is, how would they know how much it costs?


You can't find two conservatives who can agree on what a "real conservative" is, so why would this be different?

I don't care that Bernie's a socialist, what I care about is he is the only one running who understands the huge danger to our society from letting a handful of people have all the wealth and power.

And speaking of costs, when you add up wars and criminal enterprises like the pharmaceutical and medical industries fleecing the American people for billions of dollars capitalism is extremely expensive.
edit on 3-2-2016 by CB328 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 4 2016 @ 12:59 AM
link   
a reply to: CB328

Sure, he talks about it, but offers up no solutions
except freebies.

Says he's against the TPP, so where's the list of member corporations? The articles of the bill? Says he's gonna bust the Fed? Doesn't say who he's giving that power to in replacement. Touches on the subjects, but other than freebies, for the dummies that believe it's free..same old same old from an OLD man with 19th century socialist theories...pass..



posted on Feb, 4 2016 @ 06:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: Semicollegiate

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Semicollegiate

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: TheBulk

originally posted by: Krazysh0t


You mean like the War on Drugs?


Yes, just like that. So you agree with me?


I agree that the War on Drugs is a conservative policy and not a socialist one.


The War on Drugs is from conservative socialists. Only socialists use government to solve a problem.


So you admit that we've had Socialism within our country, and not only that but conservatives have been in support of it?


Socialists live in a predigested world where "conservatives" are whatever the Media says they are.

The last real conservative political body, the Old Right, died of old age in the 1950's.

No one should be called a conservative that has been in the two party system since Senator Robert A. Taft lost the primary in 1952.

Socialists have been making the country more socialistic since 1900 or so. Buying votes with the tax payer's money one election at a time.


You sound bitter that the public at large is able to afford to live day to day. You do realize that the reason the middle class became so large in this country is directly due to Socialist programs right?



new topics

top topics



 
21
<< 7  8  9    11  12 >>

log in

join