Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Obamanomics Doomed to FAILURE! Socialism Simply Does Not WORK

page: 2
17
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 23 2011 @ 03:17 PM
link   
yeah Carl Marx.. I mean Obama really screwed us here... 3 years of fail... only one left!




posted on Nov, 23 2011 @ 03:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by DrNotforhire
yeah Carl Marx.. I mean Obama really screwed us here... 3 years of fail... only one left!


You are beautifully demonstrating the real reason why this country is failing. Kudos. Marx no less. Just brilliant!



posted on Nov, 23 2011 @ 03:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by DrNotforhire
yeah Carl Marx.. I mean Obama really screwed us here... 3 years of fail... only one left!


You are beautifully demonstrating the real reason why this country is failing. Kudos. Marx no less. Just brilliant!



sorry you are still brain washed by hope and change.... hope that changes (pun intended)



posted on Nov, 23 2011 @ 03:25 PM
link   
reply to post by DrNotforhire
 


Oh I see, I'm brainwashed! Sure, repeal of Glass-Steagall (not on Obama's watch, by the way) was a Marxist plot. Same with bailouts after, where the govt didn't even nationalize the banks (which they could).

Some logic here.



posted on Nov, 23 2011 @ 03:40 PM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 


You are so right, as we've seen with the last round of wealth redistribution: the bank/stock market bailouts, which redistributed wealth from the poor and middle-class to the wealthy and super-wealthy.

We see it the near-zero interest rate the Fed is charging banksters for the money they loan them while the banksters are charging their customers upwards of 30% on the same money.

A bankster isn't working hard earning anything when adding additional fees on debit cards, unemployment ebt cards, and the myriad other fees they charge for allowing you the use of your own money, and collecting a few thousand more per cent on borrowed money than they pay for it.

The people who caused the economic mess are doing the very same things that wrecked the economy in the first place, and are using taxpayer money redistributed from the lower ranks to enrich themselves even further with excessive bonuses, perks, and stock transfers.

That sort of wealth redistribution certainly does everything you claim.

I'd wager, though, that if it were flowing the other way, the economy would boom.
edit on 23-11-2011 by apacheman because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 23 2011 @ 03:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem
I would agree with that, i.e. deficiency of our education system.

But what you describe here is not socialism unless you choose to call it that.


Some of the reason’s I consider Obummer a “socialist” are:

1) His close relationship with anti-capitalist group ACORN
2) He received an endorsement from the Democratic Socialists of America when running for senate
3) Publically endorsed the first self-described “socialist” senator Bernie Sanders

4) He was endorsed by the Communist Party USA when running for president
5) Obamacare is government run health care (AKA socialized medicine)
6) He openly supports and has called for wealth redistribution
7) He has increased national debt more than any president in US history
8) He believes big government is the solution for every problem

I call that a socialist. You’re welcome to call it whatever you’d like. Regardless what we call it, I don’t like it, I don’t support it, I voted against it and I’m ready to see it GO AWAY!

I will gladly OCCUPY A VOTING BOOTH next November!

EDIT**** For the record...BUSH sucked too. He wasn't a socialist but he most certainly sucked!

edit on 23-11-2011 by seabag because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 23 2011 @ 03:53 PM
link   
To be honest I don't know enough about socialism to really criticize it, at-least in every aspect. One thing that irriates me is people who scream "socialist", as if it's the devils' system; yet most of these people don't know a single thing about it in the first place.

Now, the OPs post comes off to me as demonstration of communism more-so than socialism. Socialism is a economic system where the government oversees corporations/businesses to make sure they're not cheating the public; the people pay higher taxes but are supplied with the basic necessities, e.g. free education, healthcare, etc. Socialist criticize capitalism for materialist reasons, but I do believe they can intermingle.

What we have today essentially is a government with pseudo-socialist oversight, that has now devolved into a crony-capitalist, corporatist welfare state; approaching full-on fascism. The biggest problem is government and corporations are absorbing each-other, becoming a symbiotic abomination that favors the ___ percent. Pathocrats, plutocrats, & oligarchs call the shots; they own and run the media, bailout their buddies on an international scale. Being the lawmakers, they absolve themselves from acts of fraud, counterfeiting, money laundering, armed robbery, terrorism, and other crimes against humanity.

So, to be honest, I wouldn't really mind seeing some socialist policies in place, just not full on socialism. Free-market capitalism is appealing but if the market doesn't self-regulate and keep each-other in check, there should be safety nets in place. Free education and free healthcare sound great, but as far as I know, socialist ideology relies on heavy taxes to enact. This goes against principles such as, the individual has the right to choose whether or not to pay income taxes. Currently that's not the case and I find it extremely unethical; especially seeing as most of our tax dollars are going towards perpetuating wars and supplying the special interest with the extra momentum they need to continue to rape the country. Perhaps we could have an opt out for [some] taxes, in which case those that keep all their profits don't receive free education or healthcare. Those that opt in will. The same goes for entitlement programs. In any case, I believe individual sovereignty should be respected to the utmost.

At the very least, GET THE MONEY OUT OF POLITICS. End this corporate welfare and return power to the people. We can debate about which socialist policies will or will not work afterwards.



posted on Nov, 23 2011 @ 04:00 PM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 


Thanks for that seabag...just saved me from tracking down those exact key points!


What Obama proposes is even worse than 'socialism' as we know/knew it. More like a bastardisation of the WORST of ALL '...ism's' combined, including capitalism & corporatism, in my book



posted on Nov, 23 2011 @ 04:03 PM
link   
Socialism by Obama?

I simply don't see it, unless you mean his socialist policies for the rich, such as his Wall Street Bankster Buddies, his Corporate tax free buddies, and his Big Pharma Buddies.

That is, unless you mean his "socialist talk", used to divide and conquer while helping the elite at the top out.



posted on Nov, 23 2011 @ 04:09 PM
link   
reply to post by jacobe001
 


Exactly...see my post above.

I think we need to invent a new name for what he's pushing..ObamaiZm?



posted on Nov, 23 2011 @ 04:16 PM
link   
reply to post by SpaceJockey1
 


You rehashed a chain e-mail that has been floating around for at least 5 years to make a point about Obama being a socialist.

Brilliant, now can we get some evidence of actual socialism in this thread?
edit on 23-11-2011 by antonia because: forgot something



posted on Nov, 23 2011 @ 04:32 PM
link   
reply to post by SpaceJockey1
 


Simply , without the Creation of Wealth , Any Society is Doomed to Regress Economically to a point where it can no longer Substain itself . Socialism Takes , but it Never Creates Wealth. Your summation is Correct............:@@
edit on 23-11-2011 by Zanti Misfit because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 23 2011 @ 04:41 PM
link   
reply to post by SpaceJockey1
 


The metaphor does not work. The students work for the sole purpose of getting grades.. People in jobs paying taxes do not work for the sole purpose of getting health care... It is a vastly over simplified model. Poor show for a academic..



posted on Nov, 23 2011 @ 04:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zanti Misfit
reply to post by SpaceJockey1
 


Simply , without the Creation of Wealth , Any Society is Doomed to Regress Economically to a point where it can no longer Substain itself . Socialism Takes , but it Never Creates Wealth. Your summation is Correct............:@@
edit on 23-11-2011 by Zanti Misfit because: (no reason given)
Reverse of that, if the rich keep taking and taking, eventually there will be no more to take, so capitalism fails also.



posted on Nov, 23 2011 @ 04:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by purplemer
reply to post by SpaceJockey1
 


The metaphor does not work. The students work for the sole purpose of getting grades.. People in jobs paying taxes do not work for the sole purpose of getting health care... It is a vastly over simplified model. Poor show for a academic..



Standard of Living Index RULES Our Lives here in America ...........We Work for US ............



posted on Nov, 23 2011 @ 04:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Mister_Bit
 


The Alledged " Rich " Create Wealth by the use of Intelligence , the Masses Create Poverty by the use of Ignorance ............This is Capitalism in America , Love it or Leave it.........
edit on 23-11-2011 by Zanti Misfit because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 23 2011 @ 04:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zanti Misfit
reply to post by Mister_Bit
 


The Alledged " Rich " Create Wealth by the use of Intelligence , the Masses Create Poverty by the use of Ignorance ............This is Capitalism in America , Love it or Leave it.........
edit on 23-11-2011 by Zanti Misfit because: (no reason given)
When your "insert employer name here" realises he can make more of a profit by outsourcing to another country and turfing you to the road, tell me again about the ignorant masses.



posted on Nov, 23 2011 @ 05:13 PM
link   
reply to post by SpaceJockey1
 


So when did Obama turn the means of production over to the 'workers' to own and control?

Did I miss that?

edit on 11/23/2011 by ANOK because: typo



posted on Nov, 23 2011 @ 05:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Mister_Bit
 


" When your "insert employer name here" realises he can make more of a profit by outsourcing to another country and turfing you to the road, tell me again about the ignorant masses. "

The Employer is a " Doer " , and as a " Doer " , he is Intitled to a Profit if he Invests Capital into any Business . The Employee is Not Intitled to Anything other than a Agreed Wage for the Fruits of his Labor that he gives in Exchange to a Employer .............Simple Concept , Right ? .........Capitalism is Not Perfect , but it does give the " Non Doer " an Option to Substain Himself other than Living off the Land he happens to Occupy......Outsourcing Jobs is another Concept that is Usually effected by the Demand for Labor , Labors Demands , and Goverment Involvment (Regulation and Taxes) in effecting the " Bottom Line " of Any Business Operation ...........




posted on Nov, 23 2011 @ 05:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Mister_Bit
 


This comes back to a point I made earlier...who's responsible for creating an enviroment where local/national jobs, in their hundeds of thousands, are allowed to be sourced offshore, all for the purpose of cheaper goods for the consumer, and bigger profits from big business?

Without the creation and or keeping of local jobs, how can the average person hope to lift themselves out of poverty, let alone build wealth?

The big problem I see with Obama polices is that they are more about attacking the middle-class, than putting right the damage done by past policies, that have enabled all the corporate greed, at the expense of local job creation.





new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join