It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.



page: 13
<< 10  11  12   >>

log in


posted on Feb, 13 2018 @ 10:47 AM
a reply to: xuenchen

No actually every society has used socialism..

Capitalism and money are the relatively new experiments..

There are expamples of moneyless societies that lasted thousands of years..

There is NO example of a society that didn’t/doesn’t use socialism..

posted on Feb, 13 2018 @ 10:57 AM
It's all a matter of degree, and time.

Originally, we had to socialize things like the post office, at least until private options came along.
Likewise, we had schools tied to government, and then we got private schools.

Problem is, our government doesn't have a great track record on socialized programs. So trusting them with MORE of them just seems foolhardy in the extreme.

posted on Feb, 13 2018 @ 11:00 AM
a reply to: JoshuaCox

Thank You Professor for your brilliant analysis


posted on Feb, 13 2018 @ 11:54 AM
a reply to: Gazrok

But for the first time in human history we actually have the ability to track every dollar and end corruption.. or atleast minimize it..

Plus how effective those programs are depends on what your measuring..

Food stamps have stopped millions from starving to death..

posted on Feb, 13 2018 @ 11:57 AM
a reply to: xuenchen

Is that supposed to be a counterpoint???


Well I guess it’s better than normal!!
edit on 13-2-2018 by JoshuaCox because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 13 2018 @ 12:53 PM

Food stamps have stopped millions from starving to death..

And yet is rife with corruption and abuse.

The VA has saved millions of lives, and made others well, and yet has also committed heinous acts.

But, if you compare these federally run programs to comparable market driven ones, that's where we start to see just how inept it would be under pure socialism.

I do feel that the right course of action is SOME socialization, but this has to be coupled with private sector options as well, in order to reap the benefits of this, such as innovation and growth that is driven by profit.

For example, I think necessities of life, like POWER should be socialized, or allow competition, vs. the permitted monopolies that exist now. Likewise, I believe in a degree of socialized medicine, but coupled with private medical insurance and options. As they say, the devil is in the details.

posted on Feb, 13 2018 @ 02:06 PM
a reply to: Gazrok

A) The VA has been accused of neglect and mismanagment..

Which has led to horrendous events..

The VA has not committed some strange malesiousniss to veterans..

It’s a strawman.. they make it sound like we are using them to test make-up and chemical waste.

If I’m right it is even base because of some conspiracy theory stuff that stopped them going digital.. someone claiming the government could start tracking veterans to get their guns, or some their nonesense..

Then they didn’t allocate the funds to keep up with paper.. (it’s been a really long time since I heard about that.. so it’s super fuzzy..)


There is no market to educate poor children who’s parents are barely able to feed them..

There is no market for anything people don’t want to have to do..

It’s not profitable..

Conclusion) the problem is now and always have been too many middlemen and caring about is some food stamp recipient got sirloin instead of ground beef..

I would bet dollars to donuts. If you cut out everything but the functional inferstructure. Then we could’ve increase services and cut taxes..

posted on Feb, 13 2018 @ 02:41 PM
As I said, I am all for some degree of socialization for life necessities. But federalizing something also invites rampant corruption, so this needs to be tempered with wisdom and (where possible), a method for allowing private and profit driven elements to lead to innovation and efficiency.

While I'd agree that a food stamp recipient getting sirloin vs. ground beef may be a trivial concern when the program is saving lives, there is also no reason this couldn't be somewhat regulated to do it's job, which is to assist a recipient in meeting their financial needs while getting food. It's as simple as regulating what is and is not able to be bought with the card. For example, you can't buy a hot, prepared meal with it as it is. (because the program isn't designed to pay for convenience foods, but staple foods). But, you could buy Twinkies with it, or a Lobster. So, some room for improvement here.

Too many middlemen, too much bureaucracy. Always a problem with big government. Yet something the more liberal minded will cry and jeer about as Trump makes cuts too. I'm not a big fan of the guy, but he is doing more, and planning more, to trim that fat than some previous presidents.

posted on Feb, 13 2018 @ 03:11 PM

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

That’s such a cop out....

“It doesn’t matter what one side of the other does, they are all the same...”

It’s a bs excuse not to pick sides, make decisions or take a stand..

Fall in where you will, but pretending like it doesn’t matter is lazy and inaccurate..

I’m sure the German people said the same about the nazis..

“No use standing up.. both political sides are the same..”

Stand up and do what exactly, stand on the middle of both teams yelling " we need to take down both teams, join me people, drop your side and join me in the middle ".....

Um no thanks ...

edit on 13-2-2018 by hopenotfeariswhatweneed because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 14 2018 @ 08:42 AM
There are other teams, but they aren't allowed on the field to play ball, because the two big teams co-opted the park.

Doesn't help that often, they (the other teams) pick a whack-a-do to be their, there's that.

When Trump looks sane or competent compared to you, there's a problem with your party spokesperson....

posted on Feb, 21 2018 @ 12:24 AM

originally posted by: JoshuaCox

I have no idea how the people getting screwed, decide to shill for the ones doing the screwing..

Not that surprising if you can't recognize the behavioural pattern in yourself either. You might one day want to consider if you are inadvertently assisting or following the path of "the ruler of this world" or "god of this system of things" (while having your attention on the so-called "elite" or "establishment" instead, which is where he wants your attention to be directed at, distracting you from contemplating his existence and activities).

John 14:30

30 I will not speak with you much more, for the ruler of the world is coming, and he has no hold on me.

2 Corinthians 4:3, 4

3 If, in fact, the good news we declare is veiled, it is veiled among those who are perishing, 4 among whom the god of this system of things has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, so that the illumination of the glorious good news about the Christ, who is the image of God, might not shine through.

Ephesians 2:1, 2

2 Furthermore, God made you alive, though you were dead in your trespasses and sins, 2 in which you at one time walked according to the system of things of this world, according to the ruler of the authority of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience.

1 John 5:19

19 We know that we originate with God, but the whole world is lying in the power of the wicked one.

That's the only 'conspiracy' (or form of deception, conditioning, indoctrination and manipulation) you should be 'worried' about (as in being alert to it, waking up to it). That's the one in control of both Trump and the establishment or so-called "elite" (as well as the military industrial complex, religion, the media, the promotion and succes of...popular philosophy such as the new age movement or evolutionary philosophies* and storylines, philosophical naturalism, agnosticism and the UN, to name a few examples).

Who Really Is the Ruler of the World?
The video below is an introduction to the video below that, don't take the 1st video too seriously, it's meant as a demonstration of the keyword: "confusion" in the 2nd question in the bottem video (and the commentary regarding that question):

*: here are some of the bigshots in marketing evolutionary philosophies and philosophical naturalism (often accompanied with selective agnosticism), see if you can recognize some names in it (from wikipedia's page on Ernst Mayr):

...Mayr was introduced by Stresemann to banker and naturalist Walter Rothschild...
He returned to Germany in 1930, and in 1931 he accepted a curatorial position at the American Museum of Natural History, where he played the important role of brokering and acquiring the Walter Rothschild collection of bird skins, which was being sold in order to pay off a blackmailer. During his time at the museum he produced numerous publications on bird taxonomy, and in 1942 his first book Systematics and the Origin of Species, which completed the evolutionary synthesis started by Darwin.
His work contributed to the conceptual revolution that led to the modern evolutionary synthesis of Mendelian genetics, systematics, and Darwinian evolution, and to the development of the biological species concept.
His theory of peripatric speciation (a more precise form of allopatric speciation which he advanced), based on his work on birds, is still considered a leading mode of speciation, and was the theoretical underpinning for the theory of punctuated equilibrium, proposed by Niles Eldredge and Stephen Jay Gould.

Funded and supported by a Rothschild, funny how that doesn't ring any bells with those talking about "the establishment" while thinking evolutionary philosophers are honest scientists without an agenda (usually involving personal financial gain).

Try to find me an eugenicist of the 20th century that wasn't also a promoter, teacher or adherent to evolutionary philosophies and mythology.

Evolution—Myths and Facts
edit on 21-2-2018 by whereislogic because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 21 2018 @ 12:34 PM

The video below is an introduction to the video below that, don't take the 1st video too seriously, it's meant as a demonstration of the keyword: "confusion" in the 2nd question in the bottem video (and the commentary regarding that question):

Well, you've succeeded in demonstrating the concept of "confusion"...that's for sure...

top topics

<< 10  11  12   >>

log in