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.
Originally posted by Neo_Serf
reply to post by LeftWingLarry
PS an 'investment' is a voluntary decision to allocate funds. Taxation without permission is theft. Lets at least use the proper terms.
Originally posted by LeftWingLarry
reply to post by JR MacBeth
"Those who continue to label the United States (or any other nation in the world at this moment in time) as 'Communist' is abusing terms. "
www.libertyzone.com...
The 10 PLANKS stated in the Communist Manifesto and some of their American counterparts are...
1. Abolition of private property and the application of all rents of land to public purposes.
Americans do these with actions such as the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution (1868), and various zoning, school & property taxes. Also the Bureau of Land Management (Zoning laws are the first step to government property ownership)
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
Americans know this as misapplication of the 16th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, 1913, The Social Security Act of 1936.; Joint House Resolution 192 of 1933; and various State "income" taxes. We call it "paying your fair share".
3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.
Americans call it Federal & State estate Tax (1916); or reformed Probate Laws, and limited inheritance via arbitrary inheritance tax statutes.
4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
Americans call it government seizures, tax liens, Public "law" 99-570 (1986); Executive order 11490, sections 1205, 2002 which gives private land to the Department of Urban Development; the imprisonment of "terrorists" and those who speak out or write against the "government" (1997 Crime/Terrorist Bill); or the IRS confiscation of property without due process. Asset forfeiture laws are used by DEA, IRS, ATF etc...).
5. Centralization of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.
Americans call it the Federal Reserve which is a privately-owned credit/debt system allowed by the Federal Reserve act of 1913. All local banks are members of the Fed system, and are regulated by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) another privately-owned corporation. The Federal Reserve Banks issue Fiat Paper Money and practice economically destructive fractional reserve banking.
ect...
Must be tiring for you Statists. You know, the intellectual yoga you have to engage in daily in order to defend your dying and intrinsically violent ideology.
"The welfare state has helped to vastly reduce poverty in most of the
developed nations of the world today."
"We know there's no such thing as a free lunch. That's what the taxes are for."
"Those who continue to label the United States (or any other nation in
the world at this moment in time) as 'Communist' is abusing terms."
"The US, and to a lesser degree pretty much all the developed nations of the world today are essentially oligarchies with various democratic and corporate elements which utilise mainly centre-right broadly Keynesian economic policies."
The politics involved is one obvious factor, almost the proverbial joke in the US, but politicians will always default to a "deficit" approach, since taxes are always unpopular.
I will concede that there is a distinct inflamatory element in any use of the infamous word "communist". And yet, if anyone read my reasoning for it's legitimate application (as Neo has certainly noticed), it would be harder to disagree.
OK. And, if someone else came along and tried to correct this statement with fine points, and argue that in fact more precisely we have a "plutocracy" instead, and that "centre-right" today, would have been considered rather "left" only 20 years ago, then what?
AGAIN, the "welfare state" is a dismal failure, when seen in it's proper perspective.
Originally posted by time91
* Heavy Progressive Income Tax.
* Central Bank.
* Government Ownership of Communication and Transportation.
* Government Control of Education.
We're on our way...Just posted this but I'll repost it.
Originally posted by Neo_Serf
reply to post by LeftWingLarry
Taxation without permission is theft. Lets at least use the proper terms.
Originally posted by LeftWingLarry
reply to post by JR MacBeth
The politics involved is one obvious factor, almost the proverbial joke in the US, but politicians will always default to a "deficit" approach, since taxes are always unpopular.
This is not the fault of the Welfare state but arguably of democracy in general.
I will concede that there is a distinct inflamatory element in any use of the infamous word "communist". And yet, if anyone read my reasoning for it's legitimate application (as Neo has certainly noticed), it would be harder to disagree.
Marxism advocates the removal of the State.
OK. And, if someone else came along and tried to correct this statement with fine points, and argue that in fact more precisely we have a "plutocracy" instead, and that "centre-right" today, would have been considered rather "left" only 20 years ago, then what?
In the US, maybe. Western Europe (and this trend has been extremely prevalent in the UK.) has drifted consistently to the right since the end of the Cold War.
AGAIN, the "welfare state" is a dismal failure, when seen in it's proper perspective.
I disagree.
Interestingly, I tend to agree. However, it might not surprise me to find that if you were to choose between the two, you might more easily jettison democracy, in favor of the welfare state. In doing so, one would certainly solve the incompatibility issue, but at what cost?
And so I agree again, official Marxism does indeed advocate (actually, it "predicts"), the removal of the state. But, it isn't anything anyone takes seriously, not even the most "communist" of communists. The actual, real application of what people generally refer to as "communism" would be much more to the point, than bringing up Marxist theory, especially that most fanciful tail-end of it (which no one believes in).
Lastly, you "disagree" that the welfare state is a failure, which is a way of saying it has been a success. I would ask, for whom exactly?
As I pointed out in my previous posts, we may have registered some progress when it comes to a reduction in poverty, in the developed nations (few would deny that), but to boldly assert that this was due to the dawning of the modern welfare state, is to ignore the complexity of such an issue., and to give credit where little to none is due.
Originally posted by Neo_Serf
reply to post by mothershipzeta
Hmmm lets see. Ever vote for an income tax? Was that ever on the ballot? How about inflation, caused by state sanctioned central banking? No? Hmmm how the myriad of hundreds of thousands of lines of tax code that we must adhere to under threat of violence? Ever vote for them? Any chance you can abstain from paying? What would happen if you did?
I do not support your 'state' (guys with guns) but I'm forced to pay for it, heavily. The sky is blue, spades a spade, involuntary taxation is theft. But thanks for attempting to overcomplicate an issue a toddler understands! Always a revered past time of a statist.
How about inflation, caused by state sanctioned central banking?
Originally posted by LeftWingLarry
reply to post by JR MacBeth
Interestingly, I tend to agree. However, it might not surprise me to find that if you were to choose between the two, you might more easily jettison democracy, in favor of the welfare state. In doing so, one would certainly solve the incompatibility issue, but at what cost?
Me personally? Perhaps you shouldn't make assumptions.
And so I agree again, official Marxism does indeed advocate (actually, it "predicts"), the removal of the state. But, it isn't anything anyone takes seriously, not even the most "communist" of communists. The actual, real application of what people generally refer to as "communism" would be much more to the point, than bringing up Marxist theory, especially that most fanciful tail-end of it (which no one believes in).
Anarcho-Communism takes it seriously. The fact that nobody else does does not mean we should redefine the word 'Communism'.
This is not the fault of the Welfare state but arguably of democracy in general.
Originally posted by LeftWingLarry
Originally posted by Neo_Serf
reply to post by mothershipzeta
"You can vote for people who will reduce (or even do away with) the income tax and verbally endorse (and even finance) your preferred candidate. In the mean time, If you abstain from paying, you'll likely go to prison. "