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.

 

The Postmodern Socialist

page: 4
34
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 22 2017 @ 04:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Bluntone22




Actually social security is a welfare program.


It' not a socialist program, however.




posted on Sep, 22 2017 @ 04:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Bluntone22

If the banks were honest with those people the people would have known they couldn't afford it and probably wouldn't have taken it.

Is it ok to lure a mentally handicapped person into working a job for less than minimum wage because they're ignorant of the minimum wage?



posted on Sep, 22 2017 @ 04:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Krazysh0t




It's as socialist as any other welfare program.


Welfare programs are not socialist.


That is a point I think we could debate endlessly, but I think we can generally agree that the monetary resources of the collective whole are gathered and redistributed to the poor according to their need in a welfare program. That sure does sound like socialism.

Anyway, the term welfare capitalism could also be used. In a capitalist system, money and resources generally trend towards the top to those that have controls over goods, services and have access to governments in order to create laws favorable to those that 'have'. As poverty increases and the bottom feeders struggle more and more, those at the top have to do something to keep people barely making it, so they can continue to consume and work.

That's where welfare comes in to play. Capitalism creates poverty and the need for welfare. And that's even in a system that is not entirely designed to be pure capitalism.

In other words, you cannot have capitalism without socialism. And visa versa. The inherent dangers of both can be cancelled out by having an economic system in place that allows both when and where needed.
edit on 22-9-2017 by introvert because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 22 2017 @ 04:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: Fools
Post modernism was born only of the problem that the horrors of the Soviet Union and Mao's China came to light it was hard for the Paris intellectual class to keep supporting communism in public. They came up with that particular philosophy to get around flaws in their arguments. It is in a nutshell, the philosophy of "any explanation is a better explanation even if there is no historical or logical basis - it just needs to be an explanation that supports the left."

Another issue to investigate is the Frankfurt school. This is where the SJW peops have their birth.




Post Modernism is just a rebrand of Cultural Marxism.



posted on Sep, 22 2017 @ 04:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: Bluntone22

If the banks were honest with those people the people would have known they couldn't afford it and probably wouldn't have taken it.

Is it ok to lure a mentally handicapped person into working a job for less than minimum wage because they're ignorant of the minimum wage?


No, they'd scream banks are discriminating because they can't qualify for a mortgage...

Lenders are in a no win situation... if you don't make loans, you get accused of being discriminatory. If you do make loans and the loans don't perform, you get accused of being predatory.



posted on Sep, 22 2017 @ 04:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: 4003fireglo



Wrong.

The whole post sounded pedantic and unsincere, as though the OP just wants to try out his writing skills before he starts a blog.

I could be wrong, though. I typically am.



And your post sounds infantile, but I won't hold it against you.


It was extremely infantile. Why not hold it against me? Look, I'm just angry that no one is discussing post modernism here. It's just the same old socialism vs capitalism argument we see everywhere, right? I would like to see you discuss more about the post modern bit, if you would. Has socialism renewed or stagnated? Bernie Sanders surely was a stagnate old bore and I'm glad we didn't end up with him. But if it had renewed or is in a state of renewal I hafta ask what's next for the Democrats? Now, I realize I'm moving away from theory and into practice here a bit, but what's next? Surely Old Hill isn't really thinking about 2020 as she hinted at recently. I'm thinking the left and the Democrats are going to react against President Trump in more violent displays until they feel they have gotten their way, but their ways and end goals keep changing. You've got to wonder what they're gonna want next week.



posted on Sep, 22 2017 @ 04:07 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

You hit the nail on the head. Walmart is one of the most profitable businesses in the world yet their employees cost taxpayers over $6 billion a year for welfare.

Welfare is great for corporations, it just means they can pay their employees less.



posted on Sep, 22 2017 @ 04:07 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

As already mentioned, welfare programs, in one form or other, have been around since ancient times, before socialism was ever conceived. It neither comes from socialist thinkers or practices.

Welfare capitalism makes more sense, I think.



posted on Sep, 22 2017 @ 04:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: Bluntone22

If the banks were honest with those people the people would have known they couldn't afford it and probably wouldn't have taken it.

Is it ok to lure a mentally handicapped person into working a job for less than minimum wage because they're ignorant of the minimum wage?


It is not the government's responsibility to protect you from your own ignorance. It is not the bank's job to do it either.

The bank makes a deal with you over a loan. Because a mortgage is a serious, long-term commitment, you better the heck know what you are getting into and for how much and what your terms are.

If you enter into this deal from a position of ignorance, that's no one's fault but your own, and it's not anyone's responsibility to fix that but your own.

And if you are too stupid to educate yourself on home mortgage terms and what it all means, then you're likely too stupid to be signing off on a mortgage. Harsh, but there it is, and it's no one's job to try to "fix" that for you.

The bank is only being predatory if they outright lie to you about what the terms of the agreement are.



posted on Sep, 22 2017 @ 04:08 PM
link   
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

I can tell you from having a wife working in lending that people will literally sit in front of you and lie just to get a loan.
They exaggerate their income.
They omit large debts.
All so they can buy a new car they can't afford.

Yes banks can suck, but so do the fools borrowing the money.

As I said, lots of blame to be had.



posted on Sep, 22 2017 @ 04:11 PM
link   
What happens when ones cortex gets messed up?
www.forbes.com...
In what way could this aid creating mind control?
www.scientificamerican.com...
Why are the progs so DAMNED close to Epsilon -Semi -morons?



posted on Sep, 22 2017 @ 04:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Bluntone22

I wouldn't doubt that one bit, that doesn't mean banks are totally innocent though. They have all the information they need to make an informed decision on whether someone can afford a loan or not. If they approve a loan knowing the recipient can't afford it according to the official documentation provided to them then they are guilty of predatory lending.

Why do you think H.R. 1728 was introduced the year following the collapse?



posted on Sep, 22 2017 @ 04:12 PM
link   
a reply to: 4003fireglo




It was extremely infantile. Why not hold it against me? Look, I'm just angry that no one is discussing post modernism here. It's just the same old socialism vs capitalism argument we see everywhere, right? I would like to see you discuss more about the post modern bit, if you would. Has socialism renewed or stagnated? Bernie Sanders surely was a stagnate old bore and I'm glad we didn't end up with him. But if it had renewed or is in a state of renewal I hafta ask what's next for the Democrats? Now, I realize I'm moving away from theory and into practice here a bit, but what's next? Surely Old Hill isn't really thinking about 2020 as she hinted at recently. I'm thinking the left and the Democrats are going to react against President Trump in more violent displays until they feel they have gotten their way, but their ways and end goals keep changing. You've got to wonder what they're gonna want next week.


I'm very interested in having that conversation, but you instead attempted to ridicule me, like a good postmodernist.

Yes, most if not all postmodernists were explicit socialists, Marxists, and communists. I would argue they are attempting to resurrect the plight of the old sophists of ancient Greece, the ones Plato warned us about.

Out of curiosity, who do you think I plagiarized?
edit on 22-9-2017 by LesMisanthrope because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 22 2017 @ 04:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

I can tell you from having a wife working in lending that people will literally sit in front of you and lie just to get a loan.
They exaggerate their income.
They omit large debts.
All so they can buy a new car they can't afford.

Yes banks can suck, but so do the fools borrowing the money.

As I said, lots of blame to be had.


I work in mortgage finance... see it every single day. People would be shocked at how much fraud goes on in mortgages from consumers. It is one of the reasons mortgage underwriting is so tedious.

During the house boom, banks relaxed a lot of the underwriting and it opened up an avenue for a lot of fraud which is what really took down the housing market. People lying about their incomes, assets, etc so they could buy investment properties to flip.



posted on Sep, 22 2017 @ 04:15 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

Not everyone has a degree in banking, that's why expert lenders are there, to guide you in making a smart decision. If those experts lie to you and say you can afford a loan you can't then they are in the wrong.

Lenders have quotas to make and also make commission, you don't think that leaves any room for deception?

Why do you think H.R. 1728 was introduced after the collapse? It wasn't just for the heck of it.



posted on Sep, 22 2017 @ 04:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: Bluntone22

I wouldn't doubt that one bit, that doesn't mean banks are totally innocent though. They have all the information they need to make an informed decision on whether someone can afford a loan or not. If they approve a loan knowing the recipient can't afford it according to the official documentation provided to them then they are guilty of predatory lending.

Why do you think H.R. 1728 was introduced the year following the collapse?


It was introduced much like a lot of legislation... so politicians can say they did something even though it doesn't really address the root cause or any of the issues that actually led to collapse.



posted on Sep, 22 2017 @ 04:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: 4003fireglo




It was extremely infantile. Why not hold it against me? Look, I'm just angry that no one is discussing post modernism here. It's just the same old socialism vs capitalism argument we see everywhere, right? I would like to see you discuss more about the post modern bit, if you would. Has socialism renewed or stagnated? Bernie Sanders surely was a stagnate old bore and I'm glad we didn't end up with him. But if it had renewed or is in a state of renewal I hafta ask what's next for the Democrats? Now, I realize I'm moving away from theory and into practice here a bit, but what's next? Surely Old Hill isn't really thinking about 2020 as she hinted at recently. I'm thinking the left and the Democrats are going to react against President Trump in more violent displays until they feel they have gotten their way, but their ways and end goals keep changing. You've got to wonder what they're gonna want next week.


I'm very interested in having that conversation, but you instead attempted to ridicule me, like a good postmodernist.

Yes, most if not all postmodernists were explicit socialists, Marxists, and communists. I would argue they are attempting to resurrect the plight of the old sophists of ancient Greece, the ones Plato warned us about.

Out of curiosity, who do you think I plagiarized?


I never said you plagiarized anyone. I said it looked like you wrote an essay and submitted it to turnitin because it looks like something you're about to publish elsewhere or turn in for a grade.



posted on Sep, 22 2017 @ 04:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Edumakated

So they passed the bill for no good reason? Ok, if you say so.



posted on Sep, 22 2017 @ 04:19 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope



As already mentioned, welfare programs, in one form or other, have been around since ancient times, before socialism was ever conceived. It neither comes from socialist thinkers or practices.


Like I said, the definition can be debated endlessly. While you may approach the term in a very literal sense, like those that claim the Nazis were socialist because it was in the party name, the term can evolve and become part of new political/economic philosophies.

In my opinion, welfare is socialism. SS is socialism and has been considered as such by those that disagreed with it since the New Deal.



Welfare capitalism makes more sense, I think.


I can agree with that as well. In the end, it doesn't really matter what you call it. The results are the same.

Capitalism begets poverty. Capitalism begets more in the hands of the few, and less in the hands of the many. And in order to rectify that capitalism, through the government, must take from the collective whole and give to those that have fallen to the bottom of a flawed system.

Capitalism is just as flawed as any other sort of system.
edit on 22-9-2017 by introvert because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 22 2017 @ 04:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: Edumakated

So they passed the bill for no good reason? Ok, if you say so.



Who the hell said some banks didn't take advantage of people?
I know many of those people that were taken advantage of had been turned down by other banks because of bad credit or insufficient income.



new topics

top topics



 
34
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join