While You Were Sleeping: Among Democrats 49% Favorable To Socialism

originally posted by: Isurrender73
a reply to: Semicollegiate

You can either guarantee the unemployed a job, or you can guarantee poverty.

There will always be unemployment. In a strong economy the periods of unemployment will be shorter than in a controlled and fettered economy.

You are against helping or employing the poor. So I guess you think they should just be homeless and beg for food?

You provide no solution.

The solution is a free market, like the one that moved the world from horses and watermills to cars and factories.

Guaranteeing the unemployed a public works job does not lock anyone into employment. The private sector would pay nore and thus be more desirable.

The ideology behind Public works jobs ties up resources that would be making real living wage jobs. Without the public works ideology, capitalism would be making the most of all resources and producing enough wealth that people would NOT need to work 40 hours a week.

95% of the wealth that would have been owned by each and every person has been inflated away to the plutocrats.

You are supporting the people who made all of the poverty that you claim to hate.

IMO you don't have any solution for the bigger picture, you simply know that you don't want to pay for it.

You have no idea how much you ideology has taken from you.

a reply to: Annee

At least the Pope are more welcoming of extraterrestrials.

Now what if those aliens were socialsts, some posters' heads would explode.

a reply to: Annee

Faith never had squat to do with it,JESUS woman get off THAT high horse..
IT'S THE OLIGARCHS who control commerse,we should have been off of gas 10 years after we began,but they took Tesla down a good deal more and here we are.
I believe because I'M ALIVE when I should NOT be.
I was in the lead track formation when my unit took an artillery barrage, either they had NEVER fired their waepons with any accuracy before or I got a little help.
DON'T try to change my mind. I have already made it up.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: cavtrooper7
a reply to: Annee

If we don't expand into space we are already dying anyway.

Oh GAWD!

Don't even get me started on how religion has severely held us back from where we should be in space exploration.

Now, how can I re-direct that to Socialism?

Faith based information gathering.

originally posted by: cavtrooper7

IT'S THE OLIGARCHS who control commerse,we should have beeen off of gas 10 year after we began,but they took Tesla down a good deal more and here we are.

You're going to deny that organized religion is about control?

You gonna deny their interference in Stem Cell research?

Last I checked, the majority of those in the 1% claim God belief. I doubt its about saving their soul.

OK - - - drifting too far. Gotta end this direction.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: cavtrooper7

IT'S THE OLIGARCHS who control commerse,we should have beeen off of gas 10 year after we began,but they took Tesla down a good deal more and here we are.

You're going to deny that organized religion is not about control?

Last I checked, the majority of those in the 1% claim God belief. I doubt its about saving their soul.

Control through language and socializing, same as now.

The more that things change the more they stay the same.

a reply to: Annee

Yes, let's get back to the central issue of socialism .

a reply to: Semicollegiate

Your idea of a utopian capitalist society is so far from the reality that capitalism has created anywhere on the planet, you really have no idea what your talking about IMO.

originally posted by: Semicollegiate

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: cavtrooper7

IT'S THE OLIGARCHS who control commerse,we should have beeen off of gas 10 year after we began,but they took Tesla down a good deal more and here we are.

You're going to deny that organized religion is not about control?

Last I checked, the majority of those in the 1% claim God belief. I doubt its about saving their soul.

Control through language and socializing, same as now.

The more that things change the more they stay the same.

I want REAL change.

And safe guards for the direction it takes.

originally posted by: cavtrooper7
a reply to: Annee

Yes, let's get back to the central issue of socialism .

I support my version.

originally posted by: Isurrender73
a reply to: Semicollegiate

Your idea of a utopian capitalist society is so far from the reality that capitalism has created anywhere on the planet, you really have no idea what your talking about IMO.

The free market is not utopian. The free market just happens without direction.

Utopias are man made, the free market is natural consequence of spontaneous human choices.

a reply to: Semicollegiate

And one of the offshoots of uncontrolled free markets is uncontrolled income disparity and uncontrolled poverty.

If you can't see what I am saying, simply put your free market utopian glasses back on and enjoy the delusion.

Until you end up being overcome by the elitists who made it to the top of the pyramid and impose facisim on you.

When wealth becomes boring the elitists will go after power. This is history 101

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Semicollegiate

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: cavtrooper7

IT'S THE OLIGARCHS who control commerse,we should have beeen off of gas 10 year after we began,but they took Tesla down a good deal more and here we are.

You're going to deny that organized religion is not about control?

Last I checked, the majority of those in the 1% claim God belief. I doubt its about saving their soul.

Control through language and socializing, same as now.

The more that things change the more they stay the same.

I want REAL change.

And safe guards for the direction it takes.

Wanting and working to make safe guards makes sense.

However, is giving to Leviathan the complete control of your life a safe way to go?

a reply to: Semicollegiate

Guaranteed employment...kind of; Second Bill of Rights

In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all—regardless of station, race, or creed.

Among these are:
The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;
The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;
The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;
The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;
The right of every family to a decent home;
The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;
The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;
The right to a good education.

All of these rights spell security.

That was 71 years ago. Ideology aside (or not), I believe these are American ideals worth striving for. Americans, as individuals, deserve economic security. Be it in the form of law handed down by the federal government or by shifting the cultural understanding of what it means to be responsible, not just individually but socially.

originally posted by: Isurrender73
a reply to: Semicollegiate

And one of the offshoots of uncontrolled free markets is uncontrolled income disparity and uncontrolled poverty.

How?

A free market is people trading with maximum profit for each and every person.

All resources are allocated according to the demands of the buyers. No resources are wasted, all resources go to the highest demanded products.

Monopolies are impossible because anyone trying to exploit his customers will lose his customers to some other business.

Wealth is accumulated throughout society from increased production and keeps its value over generations from a real valued money.

If you can't see what I am saying, simply put your free market utopian glasses back on and enjoy the delusion.

What are your logical premises?

Mine are that people will do what they want to, and the market system proved itself by the Industrial Revolution.

originally posted by: Semicollegiate

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Semicollegiate

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: cavtrooper7

IT'S THE OLIGARCHS who control commerse,we should have beeen off of gas 10 year after we began,but they took Tesla down a good deal more and here we are.

You're going to deny that organized religion is not about control?

Last I checked, the majority of those in the 1% claim God belief. I doubt its about saving their soul.

Control through language and socializing, same as now.

The more that things change the more they stay the same.

I want REAL change.

And safe guards for the direction it takes.

Wanting and working to make safe guards makes sense.

However, is giving to Leviathan the complete control of your life a safe way to go?

I actually don't support Free Market - - without guidelines. Abuse is too easy.

Man used to barter by need. Need is not necessarily equal in monetary value.

a reply to: infolurker

In the US, if you're a Socialist, you call yourself a progressive, because it sounds like you're "for progress", even though in reality, Socialism is completely "regressive", given that it has failed every time that it has been tried, leaving countries economically stagnant or devastated. The only reason why David Cameron calls himself a "progressive", is because he agrees with the morality of collectivist-altruism, which lies at the root of Socialism. How can he oppose an insidious political ideology, such as Socialism, when he can't even bring himself to oppose its moral code? - Rougie, London

Ridiculous. Did you just Google terms until you found some text that you thought sounded cool? These are nothing more than anonymous quotes from random Brits, published in this 2010 BBC article. If you're going to quote inherently unquotable garbage anyway, wouldn't you just be better off stating your opinions in your own words?

Hardly a mic dropping moment.

A progressive is essentially anyone who believes that using the ever increasing body of human knowledge, society can act to shape its future for the common good. It's more methodology than ideology.

In the context of modern American politics, the terms socialism and socialist are often used to label ideas that more closely tied to those of social democracy — such as those of the Nordic Model — than to the revolutionary socialism of the hardcore Marxists like the ISO.

What you're blaming on the "dumbed down US education system" is simply the gradual drift in the connotations of political terms bringing about changes in denotation.

originally posted by: links234
a reply to: Semicollegiate

Guaranteed employment...kind of; Second Bill of Rights

In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all—regardless of station, race, or creed.

Among these are:
The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;
The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;
The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;
The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;
The right of every family to a decent home;
The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;
The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;
The right to a good education.

All of these rights spell security.

That was 71 years ago. Ideology aside (or not), I believe these are American ideals worth striving for. Americans, as individuals, deserve economic security. Be it in the form of law handed down by the federal government or by shifting the cultural understanding of what it means to be responsible, not just individually but socially.

Striving for the wrong thing yields wrong results.

I really don't understand how deserving something insures its availability.

Capitalism makes things cheaper and more plentiful.

Socialism has never made more, it has only promised control by everyone else.

a reply to: Annee

I actually don't support Free Market - - without guidelines. Abuse is too easy.

Abuse is nearly impossible.

The seller must sell at the lowest price or else the buyer will go elsewhere. Every time.

Man used to barter by need. Need is not necessarily equal in monetary value.

The "coincidence of unequal wants" is the basis of every trade. Each person values the thing he trades away less than the thing he gets by the transaction.

From each person's point of view, trading is getting more than is given up.

originally posted by: Semicollegiate
a reply to: Annee

I actually don't support Free Market - - without guidelines. Abuse is too easy.

Abuse is nearly impossible.

The seller must sell at the lowest price or else the buyer will go elsewhere. Every time.

In a Free Market.

If prices are regulated - - service becomes the competition.