DOH! It's About SOCIALISM !!!!

Sorry to burst a few bubbles but the level of class struggle in the US is at an all-time low. You may have a left of centre party ( by the right's standards but nothing exits to threaten the status quo at present. Amazingly other countries have repealed outdated or outmoded laws...Perhaps the US may do so regarding the Constitution. Wait until mass unemployment takes place and then socialism or barbarism may emerge.

Besides the capitalists sold America down the river years ago...The future is Chinese...

Cut military spending to 2%, and use the money for free health, education, and energy. That is my idea of much needed socialism in America

reply to post by trysts


If your still using taxes taken from the citizens how is it "FREE"?

reply to post by jimmiec


That Sarah Brady quote is disputed. I have no idea if she said it or not... only she and the persons present would know. Even if she did though, that would make her a complete moron and not worth giving a second thought about. The right to bear arms has absolutely nothing to do with an Economic system. A government system attempting to thwart it's own Constitution would be called Authoritarian not Socialist.

Socialism can be brought about through Authority but not necessarily, conversely Conservatism can also be Authoritarian.

Originally posted by MrSpad
Will people who have no idea what the word socialism means please stop using it. Explain to me how a gun ban some how leads to all the companies handing over control of and all sharing all their profits to the people? Maybe you mean a dictastorship or some other form of government. A simple idea of what socialism is the NFL. The teams have thing called profit sharing so the big market teams and small market teams all put their money in one big pot and spead it among the all the teams. Of course the idea of a true socialist economy does not seem possible, Just a true capitalist one does not. What we already have, as does most of the world, is a mixture of those and others. So please, stop using the word socialism like you know what it means.

I think a better example would be that the profits are returned to the workers who do all the work rather than being funneled off by the ceo to fund his private yacht, because socialism is the worker ownership of the means of production.

Originally posted by Kali74
ETA The 2nd Amendment isn't going anywhere, but even if it were... what the hell would that have to do with the ECONOMY?

edit on 24-12-2012 by Kali74 because: (no reason given)

The best retail-gun-sales-marketing-tool in the world?
Deutsch-Wagram, a small town in lower austria, home of the Glock Gesmbh would hate to see it go!
Please, dear american freedom loving folks, buy more Glocks! If you didn't we would be forced to sell machines to the chinese, so they can make I-Phones for you!

You are ALREADY paying taxes.

(Your) Money is taken and flows here and there, into the military etc.... but no one ever complains or would have even come up with the idea to call this socialism.

Changing WHERE the money goes to does not change the system. If tax money is taken and instead flows in health care or unemployment, it's STILL the same system and not all of a sudden "socialism" just because your tax money goes elsewhere.

Is America turning "socialist" since someone came up with the idea it would be good to use some of the tax money for "social" causes, unemployment, health care etc.? Again..you are ALREADY paying taxes, taken from your paycheck and when you buy stuff...so what does it matter? Why has no one ever (before Obama) complained that America is going towards socialism because they had to pay tax and were not happy with where the tax money goes? This is why the socialism argument is becoming silly, idiotic and old.

Originally posted by Carreau

Cut military spending to 2%, and use the money for free health, education, and energy. That is my idea of much needed socialism in America

reply to post by trysts

 

If your still using taxes taken from the citizens how is it "FREE"?

It isn't free, but the people who promote socialism feel that it is "fair" and "equitable" to steal from the bourgeoisie to give to the Proletariat in their desire to equalize things.

I think the main thrust is about government control. Call it what you will, when the government usurps individual rights, then the argument to what you call it is moot.

reply to post by Tiger5


The Second Amendment is NOT outdated, nor will it ever be. A study of how authoritarian Communist and National Socialist regimes operate shows they always have to take the arms away from the people to enforce their dictatorship of the Proletariat.

Originally posted by Carreau

Cut military spending to 2%, and use the money for free health, education, and energy. That is my idea of much needed socialism in America

reply to post by trysts

 

If your still using taxes taken from the citizens how is it "FREE"?

If you don't have control of the taxes now, then it's not your money, is it? The taxes are being taken regardless of what that money is used for, so it's not your money anyways. Therefore one may either say that taxes should be used for payment for health, education, and energy, so you don't have to pay for it with the money you control, or you can say it's "free".

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus

Originally posted by Carreau

Cut military spending to 2%, and use the money for free health, education, and energy. That is my idea of much needed socialism in America

reply to post by trysts

 

If your still using taxes taken from the citizens how is it "FREE"?

It isn't free, but the people who promote socialism feel that it is "fair" and "equitable" to steal from the bourgeoisie to give to the Proletariat in their desire to equalize things.

I see no problem with taxes being used for free education, health, and energy. The bourgeoisie who think this is theft are not that bright.

Originally posted by trysts

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus

Originally posted by Carreau

Cut military spending to 2%, and use the money for free health, education, and energy. That is my idea of much needed socialism in America

reply to post by trysts

 

If your still using taxes taken from the citizens how is it "FREE"?

It isn't free, but the people who promote socialism feel that it is "fair" and "equitable" to steal from the bourgeoisie to give to the Proletariat in their desire to equalize things.

I see no problem with taxes being used for free education, health, and energy. The bourgeoisie who think this is theft are not that bright.

You just don't get that education and healthcare is NEVER free for the people who have to pay higher taxes to give it to people who didn't pay.

You either don't understand how that system works, or you do and yet wish to obfuscate that for others in your desire to promote Socialism.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus

Originally posted by trysts

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus

Originally posted by Carreau

Cut military spending to 2%, and use the money for free health, education, and energy. That is my idea of much needed socialism in America

reply to post by trysts

 

If your still using taxes taken from the citizens how is it "FREE"?

It isn't free, but the people who promote socialism feel that it is "fair" and "equitable" to steal from the bourgeoisie to give to the Proletariat in their desire to equalize things.

I see no problem with taxes being used for free education, health, and energy. The bourgeoisie who think this is theft are not that bright.

You just don't get that education and healthcare is NEVER free for the people who have to pay higher taxes to give it to people who didn't pay.

Everyone pays taxes. A country should have free health, education, and energy, even if it means the bourgeoisie can't privatize those things for profit.

reply to post by trysts

I see no problem with taxes being used for free education, health, and energy. The bourgeoisie who think this is theft are not that bright.

Of course you don't! Because you want and expect others to pay for your stuff. Naturally you don't think it is theft to force someone else with a paycheck or money to pay for it. It's only the Marxist ideal of getting those who have more to give their pie to those who have less. Michelle Obama is for that, at least for everyone but herself, as she is using taxpayer money to go on fancy vacations with her family, and throw expensive parties at the WH.

Is she bourgeoisie? I guess SHE doesn't think so. I'm guessing SHE sees it as her DUE from the evil rich white folks.

Anyone else tired of all the little wannabe commies trying to redefine socialism/communism/fascism and then argue endlessly that we do not know what the definition of socialism is and then post a wiki page as their reference... Sigh!

Its like sock puppet central around here lately or something... Please go live in the socialistic country of your choice and get the hell out of America it is a constitutional republic and will remain so despite all the BS going on and we will never give up the guns in order to preserve our constitutional republic!

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by trysts

 

I see no problem with taxes being used for free education, health, and energy. The bourgeoisie who think this is theft are not that bright.

Of course you don't! Because you want and expect others to pay for your stuff. Naturally you don't think it is theft to force someone else with a paycheck or money to pay for it. It's only the Marxist ideal of getting those who have more to give their pie to those who have less. Michelle Obama is for that, at least for everyone but herself, as she is using taxpayer money to go on fancy vacations with her family, and throw expensive parties at the WH.

Is she bourgeoisie? I guess SHE doesn't think so. I'm guessing SHE sees it as her DUE from the evil rich white folks.

edit on 24-12-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

Are you saying that every citizen of this country can't have free health, education and energy, because a huge percentage of their taxes should go to a world-wide military?

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus


So a few annual massacres are an acceptable outcome of freedom. We are truly in a sad place. We need to have some sort of stronger gun control especially over assualt weapons. If we have armed guards at schools then the killers will simply be mor eheavily armed. Yes an arms race.

reply to post by trysts

A country should have free health, education, and energy, even if it means the bourgeoisie can't privatize those things for profit.

"Should" in your mind at least. Not everyone agrees, especially those who have to PAY for it for everyone else. Socialism is taking something from some people and giving it to others. It is NOT fair, nor equitable by any means. It is redistribution of income by force. It is one faction(the Proletariat or the ruling Elite) deciding how to spend other people's(the bourgeoisie middle class merchants) money. You totally bought the lie that everything will be fair by equalizing the income.
Look, if you went to a friend and said You buy a bag of M and M's with YOUR money, then bring me the bag, and we will evenly divide up all the M & M's in the bag, so that each of us will have our fair share of the candy, do you think your friend would think it was fair?
Do you really think it is fair?
It doesn't matter if it is healthcare, or foodstamps, or welfare for unmarried women with lots of children, or Section 8 housing for the poor, or emergency services for illegals, or cash for clunkers, or cash for gun-kers, it's all the same thing, someone has to pay up. And we will all pay the piper when the debt goes higher and higher and inflation goes hyperspeed.

reply to post by Tiger5


So you would toss the second Amendment for that reason?


Freedom is a double-edged sword. To sacrifice freedom for supposed security will get you neither. (B. Franklin)

Originally posted by Tiger5
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

So a few annual massacres are an acceptable outcome of freedom. We are truly in a sad place. We need to have some sort of stronger gun control especially over assualt weapons. If we have armed guards at schools then the killers will simply be mor eheavily armed. Yes an arms race.

Of course, in your Statist mind, you think the authoritarian Nanny State can and should be able to control all the actions of the individual citizens regardless of the methods used.
DId gun control stop that Chinese guy from chopping up innocent people with a meat cleaver? Has it stopped the knife of the abortionist?

Who is going to pay all the medical for those who got chopped with a meat cleaver?