This is why I hate socialists

a reply to: XAnarchistX

Who knew that by marginalizing the role of government, and giving power to a single man would turn so bad!

Communism is a fairy tale

a reply to: Nikola014

But, that is not communist theory or ideology, the idea of giving one person power is authoritarian dictatorship, we have seen it exist under many 'economic systems' "communism" doesn't bring dictators, especially since the entire communist ideology calls for the abolishment of hierarchal power IE: dictators

originally posted by: XAnarchistX
a reply to: neo96

Do you know most "Revolutionary" ideologies are pro-guns, right?

Well those socialist and communist utopia's have outlawed them.

So pro gun my snip.

a reply to: neo96

Yes, authoritarian dictators banned guns, I am talking about Socialists, Communists, anarchists etc most are pro-gun.

a reply to: Nikola014

What we saw in the 20th century wasn't communism. True communism is impossible in humans. Greed and laziness being too prevalent in us makes it so. But if you want to go down the other route it seemed to work out well in Yugoslavia.

People do not understand, if you tax the corporations that supply products to us, they just raise the price of their products. The CEOS do not lose money from their own pockets, their wages and benefits will always be excessive. This may not lower prices, but it may make it so that businesses can expand a bit.

By the time businesses get done, they pay little taxes anyway, I do not know what people against this are thinking, it is not going to reduce their taxes much at all. They don't pay much taxes.

a reply to: XAnarchistX

Funny SO AM I.

he term "Communist state" is used by Western historians, political scientists and media to refer to these countries. However, contrary to Western usage, these states do not describe themselves as "communist" nor do they claim to have achieved communism; they refer to themselves as socialist states or workers' states that are in the process of constructing socialism.[6][7][8][9]

en.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: neo96

Yeah, so this propaganda fueled notion that "socialist want your guns" is false, Liberals/Democrats use the anti-gun stance to appease the left-moralists, Revolutionary/Insurrectionary ideologies, and those that follow them are mostly pro-gun

a reply to: XAnarchistX

Yeah, so this propaganda fueled notion that "socialist want your guns" is false,

How so ?

However, contrary to Western usage, these states do not describe themselves as "communist" nor do they claim to have achieved communism; they refer to themselves as socialist states or workers' states that are in the process of constructing socialism

a reply to: XAnarchistX

I would say an ideology is pretty flawed when it's failed every time it's been executed on any large scale.

"True communism has never been tried!" is a great line and all, but it really just illustrates how impractical the system is anywhere other than on a piece of paper.

a reply to: neo96

how does that quote prove anything?

a reply to: Shamrock6

any and every economic system will have ruling aspects to keep it in place, it is not as if this sacred "Revolution" will happen and all of a sudden everyone will become communists.

a reply to: intrepid

Yeah, it worked wonders as you can see. What I liked the most about it though, is not being able to do anything, unless you're a part of the Communist party. Or the fact that religion was banned. And that little gulag island of our own. Fun times

a reply to: XAnarchistX

Right. Which is basically what I just said dressed in different clothes. Working towards "true communism" always fails because people are people.

As an anarchist, what's your position on an economic model?

a reply to: DBCowboy

2. Sanders thinks that keeping more of our own money is "robbing the treasury".

No, he doesn't. He thinks that ultimately raising taxes on the middle class while giving permanent tax cuts to corporations (the lobbyists of whom had a great deal of influence in this bill and the language therein), which this bill appears to do after the initial 'grace period' of select, minor tax cuts that also eliminates a variety of individual deductions, is akin to corporate robbery.

And he's correct.

a reply to: Nikola014

Doesn't sound much different than what we have now. Not to mention what happened after Tito. Better times.

a reply to: Shamrock6

as an anarchist, I am against any form of domination, economically and socially, so I advocate the negation of economic 'system's or 'models'

there has been this (mostly Americanised) blend of anarchy and economic systems IE: anarcho-communists, but communism and anarchy don't coincide, as even communism can suppress the individual.

I am not here defending communism as something I seek to install, just the absurd Right/Left propaganda fueled nonsense that people spew about it

a reply to: Liquesence

No he's not.

He's full of snip.

I just read it.

Democrats dismissed the bill as a gift to its wealthy and business backers at the expense of lower-earning people. They played up the fact that the bill would permanently reduce corporate tax rates, from 35 percent to 20 percent, while offering only temporary tax cuts to individuals, lasting until 2026.

Sunsets in 2026.

Late changes introduced by GOP leaders included helping millions of companies whose owners pay individual, not corporate, taxes on their profits by allowing deductions of 23 percent, up from 17.4 percent. That helped win over Wisconsin’s Johnson and Steve Daines of Montana.

Individual owners.

People would be allowed to deduct up to $10,000 in property taxes, a demand of Sen. Susan Collins of Maine. That matched a House provision to keep some GOP votes from high-tax states like New York, New Jersey and California.

10 grand.

Thats pretty damn good.

The changes added nearly $300 billion to the tax bill’s costs. To pay for that, leaders decided not to erase the alternative minimum tax. Instead, they reduced the number of high-earners who must pay it. They also increased a one-time tax on profits U.S.-based corporations are holding overseas and they would require firms to keep paying the business version of the alternative minimum tax.

The alternative minimum tax is still around and business STILL pay for it.

The alternative minimum tax BS.

Basically doesn't matter what tax bracket someone is in they still have to pay an additional tax rate.

Double taxation. Unconstitutional by the way.

Deductions for state and local income taxes, moving expenses and other items would vanish, the standard deduction — used by most Americans — would nearly double to $12,000 for individuals and $24,000 for couples, and the per-child tax credit would grow.

Standard deduction.

There were also breaks for the wine, beer and spirits industries, Alaska Natives and aircraft management firms.

I really love this part.

Tax breaks beer and wine.

apnews.com...

That hardly constitutes robbery.

Some can play word-games and twist definitions, but it all comes down to how much you can justify stealing from someone else.

Yeah, taxes are necessary. But justifying taking more, taking everything to "promote infrastructure" or some other lame excuse is pure bull#.

Until government shows that it is spending responsibly, they're going to have to fight to get any money from me.

Socialists or whatever you want to call Comrade Bernie, try to justify theft as their ideological foundation.

a reply to: XAnarchistX

I am not here defending communism as something I seek to install

I can read, so I know what your username is. You did, however, say a page or two ago, that you were in the position in this thread of defending communism which is why I made the point I made. If you don't want to get stuck defending things you don't care to defend then perhaps you shouldn't defend them.

as an anarchist, I am against any form of domination, economically and socially, so I advocate the negation of economic 'system's or 'models'

That's not really an answer so I'll rephrase the question: in your version of an anarchist society how would commerce be carried out as it pertains to goods and services?