Socialism is like sex.....they are both "dirty" words

page: 2
6
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 21 2010 @ 05:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Mr Sunchine
 


In Socialist countries , we are allowed to make money , unlimited amounts.

In fact , probably the only difference , between the US and Socialist
Countries , would be Health Care.
American's , for some reason, like that they are ranked 37th in the world, the
Socialist Countries , enjoy top 10 status.




posted on Feb, 21 2010 @ 05:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Sean48
 


Then you are not trully socialist, you are a hybrid of capitalism and socialism. The capitalism part is what allows you to make unlimited money, the socialism part is what taxes what you make and redistributes it.



posted on Feb, 21 2010 @ 05:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Mr Sunchine
 


I never considered myself socialist,Canada, But according to the US MSM
we are Barbarian's who eat our babies, and have Social Medicine.

The Majority of American's believe this to be true.



posted on Feb, 21 2010 @ 05:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Sean48
 


I am pretty sure we Americans do not think you eat your babies or that you are barbarians. I don't think we really care what Canadians do, most of us just do not want another government entitlement program that our country cannot afford. Did you hear that we are 14 trillion dollars in debt? If you were 14 trillion dollars in debt do you think it would be a good idea to add more entitlements? Maybe we should phase out some we already have and cannot afford, like Medicare and Medicaid and Social Security, which are all more or less insolvent.



posted on Feb, 21 2010 @ 05:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mr Sunchine
reply to post by Sean48
 


You are aware, i hope, that people in socialist countries got their computer systems and most likely there houses, if they are at all nice, from capitalists making and selling them for profit.

[edit on 21-2-2010 by Mr Sunchine]


Of course the money come from capitalists, as we all are in a socialist country, but we also are socialists which means we are not as greedy or egoistic about our money..if you need an example of an socialist country you can always take mine Sweden..



posted on Feb, 21 2010 @ 05:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Mr Sunchine
 


Well good luck with that sir.

Lobbyist and speacil Interest have destroyed your country and under

your Capitalist System, will bleed every penny from you

Go USA



posted on Feb, 21 2010 @ 06:00 PM
link   
reply to post by swecret
 




but we also are socialists which means we are not as greedy or egoistic about our money


No socialists are just as greedy and way more egotistical, they are just lazy and risk averse so they need the nanny state to hold their hand through life so they don't get any boo-boo's along the way.



posted on Feb, 21 2010 @ 06:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sean48
reply to post by Mr Sunchine
 


Well good luck with that sir.

Lobbyist and speacil Interest have destroyed your country and under

your Capitalist System, will bleed every penny from you

Go USA


Did you forget that there are also socialist lobbyists as well. There are not just capitalist lobbyists in this country. Plus, a lobbyist would have no effect if our politicians had one ounce of integrity. Lobbyists arent the problem, greedy politicians are.



posted on Feb, 21 2010 @ 06:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Mr Sunchine
 



If you haven't heard capitalism is working great. It raised our standard of living to the highest in the history of the world. It is even responsible for the computer you are using to type this and why this website was created. Go figure.


Ever heard of Kantega? It's a Norwegian based software companies (one of the biggest in Europe) that was voted one of the 100 best places to work in Europe two years in a row by Financial Time... that might have to do with the fact that it is a worker co-operative...

Do you know what a worker co-op is? It's a business owned by it's employees... i.e. SOCIALISM.

Obviously technological progress and the capitalist system aren't necessarily synonymous.



posted on Feb, 21 2010 @ 06:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Someone336
 


LOL, an employee owned company is not socialism. A government owned company is socialism. You might want to look into that.



posted on Feb, 21 2010 @ 06:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Mr Sunchine
 


LOL, you might want to look at what socialism was originally conceived to be before you knock it.

I'll help you: it was meant to be a system where the workers directly owned the means of production... thus, the worker co-op. Of course, right-wingers always want to dismiss and say "well, that didn't work out, so the government took over." This co-operative concept clearly contradicts this, because it does work. That's why socialism is commonly referred to as a "third way" between Communism and capitalism.

Why don't you contact some of the current 'guild socialist' movements and let them know that they aren't actually socialists?



[edit on 21-2-2010 by Someone336]



posted on Feb, 21 2010 @ 06:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Someone336
 


LOL,you might want to give me their number so I can call them. Socialism was originally meant for the means of production to be owned by the whole society (hence SOCIAL), and not just a subgroup of people who work at the means of production.



posted on Feb, 21 2010 @ 06:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Mr Sunchine
 


I guess it depends who one treats as the original socialist theoreticians. You sound as if you're basing your assumptions more on Marx and Engels, or others belonging to the "Utopian Socialism" school of thought. I'm basing mine on the early Christian socialists and individuals like Robert Owen.

However, let's look at a few of the pioneers of the "Co-operative Economics" (more commonly known as Co-operative Federalism) system:

Charles Gide: notable Christian socialist, wrote Consumers' Co-operative Societies in 1904 which put the co-operative concept on the map.

Robert Owen: one of the key founders of the concept of 'socialism'.

Beatrice Webb: member of the socialist Fabian society. Co-authored History of Trade Unionism with her husband, Sydney Webb.

Sydney Webb: husband of Beatrice, member of the socialist Fabian society. Co-authored History of Trade Unionism.

Race Matthews: member of the socialist Fabian society. Supporter of the idea of Distributionism, which is socialism lacking a lot of the ideas on private property that had been tacked on over the years.

David Griffith: advocate of Guild Socialism.

G. D. H. Cole: member of the socialist Fabian society, self-professed 'libertarian socialist'. Advocated Guild Socialism.

The largest worker co-op in the world, the Indian Coffee House, was founded by A.K. Goplan...


Ayillyath Kuttiari Gopalan Nambiar (Malayalam: ആയില്യത്ത് കുറ്റ്യാറി ഗോപാലന്‍ നമ്പ്യാര്‍), 1 October 1904 to March 22, 1977, popularly known as A. K. Gopalan or AKG, was an Indian communist leader.


A. K. Gopalan





[edit on 21-2-2010 by Someone336]



posted on Feb, 21 2010 @ 06:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Someone336
 


Well the whole Christian thing where they shared what they had to grow the ministry is one thing. I don't know if I would really say they were being socialists as much as following their leaders request.

The thing is something like that is fine, because it was their choice. However, when you start making a whole country where wealth is redistributed based on the whims of the government then it is against some peoples will and therefore it is thievery more or less.



posted on Feb, 21 2010 @ 08:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Mr Sunchine
 


You are correct in that free markets are often the best way to allocate resources, but they are not always the best way to allocate resources. When free markets allocate resources poorly, the phenomenon is called market failure.

Leading industrial societies, like the United States, often institute socialism when market failures occur.

Here is a wiki article on it.

en.wikipedia.org..." target="_blank" class="postlink" rel="nofollow">en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Feb, 21 2010 @ 09:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Mr Sunchine
 


I would not like to think of socialism as an STD that eats away at your body. I would like to think as socialism as a fire that burns down your house. Of course, if your house is burning down, you call the fire department, which is a free-market capitalist entity to put the fire out in order to save what is left of your house and the rest of the neighborhood.

The fire department's engine does not come to your house by magic. It travels across roads which are built, maintained, and 100% funded by capitalist free market entities. When they come to your house, they tap into the "free market" that is the municipal water source.

Of course, you may not have had a fire in your house in the first place because your house was built up to code. Your house was inspected by a free-market capitalist entity to insure that the contractor who built it did not cut any corners.

I think most of the people that are reading this post get the point. They are able to read it because every single one of them were educated by free-market capitalist entities. As we can plainly see, socialism has no place whatsover in a civilized society.



posted on Feb, 21 2010 @ 09:17 PM
link   
anyone in a similar age and station in their life, i.e. accruing debt, unemployed, and pursuing formal education, would be an idiot or a perfect altruist not to vote for public education and health care. Ironically, it's just naked self-interest, which is how the political system practically functions - socialist, liberal, conservative or fascist.

I've been meaning to confront these contradictions in my philosophy for some time now: marrying my fondness for traditional, eternal values with the modern, selfish creature that I am. I feel trapped in the transition between classical Conservative values, and the wonders of liberal progressivism: by traditional standards I'm a Jezebel, by Western standards I'm practically chaste.

Not being tied to religion, or culture (my ethnic, national, and civil affiliations are all incongruent), leaves me groping in foreign, untreaded territory when it comes to protecting my heritage, or values. For me, it will always be heritage in general and values that are secular, and philosophical, which will always appear hollow to those that have been cultivated in myth for centuries.

Those who reside in a similar vacuum identify more easily with liberalism, and though it's more effort, thinking and deliberating like a true philosopher should, you should eventually come to the conclusion that it's more worthwhile to stand for something rather than nothing. There is such a thing as culture without a nation, and so to, there is such a thing as secular morality. It's possible not to buy into the perpetual stream of constructed falsehoods, whilst protecting your vision of the Good, and come out a better person for it in the end.



posted on Feb, 21 2010 @ 09:59 PM
link   
reply to post by hotpinkurinalmint
 


LOL, well they are all mostly paid for by the taxes of the capitalists and their employees. You know those capitalists, the successful few percent that pay almost have of the taxes for the entire nation.

Do you think it is impossible for roads to be owned and maintained by capitalists. I think they would probably last longer and be cheaper to maintain and we could all save money by letting capitalists own the roads instead of paying gas taxes and other taxes to build and maintain them. Now I am not talking some BS quasi capitalism where a guy has to pay people union wages. I am talking people getting paid free market wages which places a real value on them.

There are also privately held water companies, so it is not like the
government has to provide water service.

I am sure a private company could provide inspectors to make sure my house is up to code. Actuallly, that is a great idea because they would be serivice oriented and have competition and not take a f'ing month to get around to inspectng it.

I am sorry that you have been defeated by the government teachers into thinking that you need government to do things private companies can do more cost effectively and successfully. Private school might have spared you from that, and for a lot less money.



posted on Feb, 21 2010 @ 11:12 PM
link   
Socialism is also like sex, in the fact that a bunch or idiotic, selfish and greedy people ruin its power and meaning by misusing it to gain power.

Socialism works; people just aren't ready for it. Maybe in a hundred years we'll be ready, but not now.



posted on Feb, 21 2010 @ 11:54 PM
link   
Actually Capitalism is having your choice of prostitutes. If you have the money, you can have the best one. If you don't, you have to lower your standards or go home to, well an empty hand so to speak.

Socialism means getting no choice, same price and same opportunity. Chances are she will be scary as all get out but you might get lucky and the door opens to a luscious redhead.

Communism is paying up front, entering the room and there may or not be a woman inside.

The US is somewhat between Socialism and Capitalism. Every room does have a woman, if you have the cash you get the redhead, if not then pay for what would have been the redhead and get a scary one instead.

Of course in reality the US did own and ran a whorehouse once.....straight into bankruptcy. And you actually expect the average US citizens to trust healthcare to these same people?

Some things are better left in your own hand.

[edit on 21-2-2010 by Ahabstar]





new topics
top topics
 
6
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join