Bernie Sanders just melted away a 30-point Hillary Clinton lead in a new poll

originally posted by: WhateverYouSay

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: Justoneman

Marx didn't invent Socialism, this is a myth.

He defined it.

But where does anybody officially use the actual word before Marx?

Just because you're ignorant of its use does not mean it didn't happen.

en.m.wikipedia.org...

Jump to the history section. Generally a lot of French thinkers, as well as Thomas Paine, yes, the Thomas Paine of the American Revolution - who advocated redistributive taxes on farmers to the poor.

But you see we objected to Payne and went another way 250 or so years and right up until the rule of law was stomped on, it worked well enough. We even had those nasty right leaning types end slavery too while they were up to doing good.

originally posted by: Justoneman

originally posted by: whatsup86

originally posted by: Justoneman

originally posted by: whatsup86


How do you think any Northern European country do it with even higher taxes; while making less hours per worker, have more/better social programs and still have bigger middle classes than the US?

These country's are falling apart as we watch, if you had been watching the reports. They have had to invite refugees basically in my estimation to keep the Ponzi scheme alive. The days of free men are numbered without the rule of law winning out.

Edit to add

Have you noticed that we are not moving to Europe but Europeans are moving here and refugees are moving to both America and Europe. This, I believe, is our clue.

I live in those countries and this is just propaganda. Its just a bit messy till we sorted out who are economical refugees and who arent. And about 80-90% will be send back.

But even if they/we were then it still wasnt because of our more socialistic system now was it? So my point still stands.

Gee how many of these European countries do you live in and why do you feel you need to move around so? What bigger middle class is there than America,,, maybe the burgeoning Chinese middle class who are living in a changing system that still MIGHT be communist in 50 years?

Truly, with the exception of England for whom the American model was borrowed and tweaked to eliminate a monarchy despite itself, they all are very young governments compared to the current USA, Greece in old times or Rome. Very, very young in the big scheme of things of politics too.

Excuse me ofcourse I ment to say that I live in a country like that.

But the fact that a lot of Northern European countries earn about the same per capita as the US does, some more, while the gap between rich and poor in the US is far greater than in those countries tells you their middle class is bigger. So again my point still stands. And actually the English middle class more or less rides along with the American, which has declined since the 2000s.

a reply to: whatsup86

I have been starring you for those observations and i agree a bit with all that you believe. But for certain a Ponzi scheme means that somebody will be left, eventually, holding the bag of all that debt it takes to make it happen. It is a fine line to put food on the table now for the working class.

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: introvert

I think Socialism is a better economic model but Americans may never want it, I will very likely never see anything close it anywhere in my lifetime and it may never happen anywhere, ever... it's too hard for people, I guess. I can live with Social Democracy within a Republic though especially with our Constitution.

As technology, science and culture advances, we will see the slow and steady move towards socialization of sections of economies.

While capitalism is good in theory, it cannot sustain itself over the long term because the very premise of capitalism is perpetual growth. Of course, that's impossible and gives way to depressions and recessions. Socialism is used to cover for the failings of capitalism and one should not exist without the other.

originally posted by: Justoneman

originally posted by: whatsup86

I agree but that one group they take money from used to be the middle class, I hope you do understand that. Rich will still be rich and poor still poor if Sanders gets elected.

Oh yes, the issue is do we let criminals keep their ill gotten gain? We solve that one and we solve this problem.

We need capitol to invest and those stealing it for their own selfish reasons was for free men to issues laws and ordinances against. Now Bernie is spot on about the influences of lobby to control our laws. Once it gets to the point of capitalists being allowed to steal money and property by gaming the system, we have to act or the "house of cards" (great show btw) comes tumbling down . We all see this right now i believe. We are not in agreement on how to proceed.

We all might see that, but what other credible option do you have that will fight those issues? He is the only sincere candidate who will do so. So either you fix it in a way you might not like, probably with a lot of compromises which make the actual implementations less extreme, or you dont fix it at all..

It will always be a pick from 2 turds in the same sewer, but this time there is a difference; this turd wants to fight the asshole the turds are coming from. That must account for something, at least enough to take a gamble...

Does this sound like a man that will ruin your country, pushing his ideas to the extreme, or does it sound like a man that is open for suggestions and reason? Meaning if there are other, better ways he wont be too proud to consider them?:




Edit: he is not only the only one sincere enough to do so, he is the only sincere candidate.

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: introvert

But the source they cite doesn't show any actual genuine printed examples of the word (in any language).

They just "back into" an "acceptable" definition by default.

Typical.

The whole concept is based on deception anyway, so it makes sense to use deception for modern definitions.

Sorry man. I know you like to make things in to some nutbag conspiracy when your assertions are proven false, but I don't play that game.

There is not a conspiracy over 100 plus years old to deceive people on the origins of the term socialism.

You're just being absurd and trolling.

originally posted by: Justoneman

originally posted by: WhateverYouSay

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: Justoneman

Marx didn't invent Socialism, this is a myth.

He defined it.

But where does anybody officially use the actual word before Marx?

Just because you're ignorant of its use does not mean it didn't happen.

en.m.wikipedia.org...

Jump to the history section. Generally a lot of French thinkers, as well as Thomas Paine, yes, the Thomas Paine of the American Revolution - who advocated redistributive taxes on farmers to the poor.

But you see we objected to Payne and went another way 250 or so years and right up until the rule of law was stomped on, it worked well enough. We even had those nasty right leaning types end slavery too while they were up to doing good.

The heyday of America was filled with socialist policies thanks to FDR. The WPA, social security etc. The notion that "right leaning types" ended slavery doesn't really reflect modern policies either. Yes they were of the republican party, but he was a Federalist. Furthermore, "right leaning types" like Teddy Roosevelt founded the national parks service and conservation, the very things that "right leaning types" on here keep railing against like with that whole Bundy and Oregon militia nonsense.
Even Richard Nixon favored environmental policies.

Speaking of Richard Nixon, that is the very president that Bernie Sanders said he is going to mirror his tax policies after. That means he will tax less than Dwight Eisenhower, you know, that filthy socialist (R).

a reply to: avgguy

Oh...well then that's a perfect reason not to vote for him...

Seriously....he'll get nothing done? wish I had your crystal ball.

a reply to: Justoneman

These country's are falling apart as we watch, if you had been watching the reports.

So is this country - the USA.....
as we watch.

And....you mean 'countries', not "country's".

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: Justoneman

These country's are falling apart as we watch, if you had been watching the reports.

So is this country - the USA.....
as we watch.

And....you mean 'countries', not "country's".

Not sure if a spelling flaw should matter. Some think it is more important instead of the idea being shared. Maybe, as a form of deflection. However,the idea is what was supposed to be clear.

So, lets clear this up. It is the socialist who's plans are to give lots of things to those who won't do what they should. They plan to do so by taking from those who DO work for a living. No doubt in my mind that this is causing the "falling apart" of all the Western world as there will be more people with their hands out wanting something for nothing than working class people who can help society meet the needs. We see financial issues in Europe now with huge taxation. Not only that but it seems there are delays in people getting the Medical help for months on end in that system. The socialist in America want to copy this mess?

A good example, was the results of the Bolsheviks.

In the Soviet Union, the workers realized what was happening just like the workers in Ahn Rand's book "Atlas Shrugged" and sloughed off until the country we know as Russia was destitute and the people had to wait hours for a loaf of bread.

Eventually, the worker class people get tired of seeing their efforts go to prop up someone who is able but not willing to work or help society.

The incentive to improve is not necessary any more if big government is going to do all that for you. Improvement of society occurs when people,using their free will and also out of necessity, build or create new things or ideas. Society without incentives is a social disaster waiting on a date of completion.

a reply to: WhateverYouSay

Glad you can see that right leaning types are good people, as opposed to the far right (and left) i will agree may not be.

The facts are, most here in the US get taxed at roughly a 23% rate. This is not counting the social security insurance we pay for, that our government calls "entitlements" when we ask for our return of our investment as FDR promised. They have ransacked SS for their own greed. So for now we are taxed less than Europe because the people will vote those suckers out if they get too frisky with our income.

The real issue as stated before, is that there are corporate thieves who are not being prosecuted, who have stolen from society and have placed their lackeys where they will be protected from punishment, sorta Mafioso style. Unpunished criminality creates more unpunished criminals as all of them want a "piece of the action".

Also, I too liked Nixon and think that he was right to be paranoid. After all someone killed JFK in broad daylight and changed the world forever.

a reply to: Justoneman

So much nope.

I know all about the Bolshevik revolution.....
nothing that Bernie is proposing would lead to that.

Nope.

Nice chatting to you.

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: Justoneman

So much nope.

I know all about the Bolshevik revolution.....
nothing that Bernie is proposing would lead to that.

Nope.

Nice chatting to you.

Well, I can only attempt to educate those who need it to the facts. I wish you good luck when you get what you think you are after. Me i am after individual freedom as long as your or my freedom doesn't harm others. I know it works.

a reply to: Justoneman

Well, I can only attempt to educate those who need it to the facts. I wish you good luck when you get what you think you are after.

Same, friend.

Good luck.

Socialist Bernie will never win.

The GOP has promised to destroy Obamacare the first day they take the White House, with their already in place GOP Senate and House. The people hate with a passion Obamacare because it is socialist and imposes a penalty for not obeying, which is the most un-American thing this Country has ever seen. Nobody wants a floodgate of Socialist tyranny.

That Sanders destroyed Hillary's lead just proves how weak a candidate she really is, just a paper tiger. The pendulum will swing the other way, it always does so whoever is falling for this Sanders Lenin Marxist crap are the ones who will feel the burn.

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: Xcathdra

Democratic Socialist

and

You can register to run in any party you want to.

Which is exactly how closet socialists have been sneaking in under the radar for many decades when it wasn't so fashionable to be an enemy of the United States Constitution.

a reply to: TinfoilTP

Socialist Bernie will never win.

He will win the popular vote.

Mark my words.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

& if Hillary wins the electoral we might have a bonafide revolution on our hands.

a reply to: TinfoilTP

You clearly are ignorant of the US's legal system.

Most of my generation is too well informed to be scared of a potential great president because people like you label him a socialist and hope that label scares voters away.

Times are changing and the US has many solicist policies.

originally posted by: jrod

Times are changing and the US has many solicist policies.

And massive failures.