You'd have thought if it was so great some country would have tried it in the last 160 years
The Great Depression
- Thread starter ryansride2017
- Start date
- Status
You'd have thought if it was so great some country would have tried it in the last 160 years
my father live throught the 30s some of the stories he told and no he never trusted banks would not put money in them
I believe Russia and China did try it.....but after the revolution, it took them all of a few months to realize that human nature doesn't work the way Marx predicted (Marx must have never raised any kids). Then the secret police had to be assembled and command and control had to be used to keep the facade up.
North Korea is still at it. And they certainly do have equality - everybody is poor and gets to starve, not just the 12 or 13% that typically live below poverty.
North Korea is still at it. And they certainly do have equality - everybody is poor and gets to starve, not just the 12 or 13% that typically live below poverty.
Don't confuse communism with socialism. Communists are "socialist" in the same way that Republicans are "compassionate conservatives". That is, they give lip service to ideals they have no intention of practicing.
Socialism is more an economic systerm while communism is a political system.
There are actually quite a few socialist countries, Sweden, Finland and Denmark come to mind quickly.
Many European countries, as well as Canada, Australia and New Zealand can be considered socialist by some definitions.
Just like most things, some thrive, some don't. Any system that involves people is only as good as the people involved. Corruption can be found anywhere.
Socialism is more an economic systerm while communism is a political system.
There are actually quite a few socialist countries, Sweden, Finland and Denmark come to mind quickly.
Many European countries, as well as Canada, Australia and New Zealand can be considered socialist by some definitions.
Just like most things, some thrive, some don't. Any system that involves people is only as good as the people involved. Corruption can be found anywhere.
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,799
Why does the term "socialism" get divested from "socialized" nations
Everyone who sees socialist (besides me) sees Nazi Germany since they called it so. Yet many of you will say "socialized medicine" "socialized housing" and socialized whatever ..as though it is something other the the REAL EXTENSION of SOCIALISM.
What's up with this ...errr
My bad.
Lack of drive to start with. Finland. There's an example....but really high unemployment is another example. Despite your ongoing rants about how we were sold out (true enough), the few things we have left are free enterprise (although it is easier to start a business in China) mostly I disagree with the government collective being the way to handle everything. I know - the private sector sucks at this and that. But the roads built by private companies with rewards for quality and on-time and under budget seem to get done faster, cheaper and hold up longer. USPS. Social Security (if I had all those dollars myself).....pretty much the stuff you think may be better if we hand it off to the government meets the lowest common denominator.
Socialism in the USA will not:
1) Solve poverty. We tried giving the poor, drunken, drugged, insane people money. Didn't work.
2) Solve crime. Sure - tell me how? Everyone sorta equal so no one will steal or rape or murder. How simple!
3) Good health care. No - mediocre health care for BILLIONS of dollars.
4) Stable economy with 15% unemployment. Cool!
5) Lack of socio-economic shifts - is this code speak for stopping success? Don't want people to be successful, this might create people with less than......
No fear really. Just reality. Hillary gets elected, tax rates go way up, unemployment follows, then you'll get your recession you want so bad.
Socialism in the USA will not:
1) Solve poverty. We tried giving the poor, drunken, drugged, insane people money. Didn't work.
2) Solve crime. Sure - tell me how? Everyone sorta equal so no one will steal or rape or murder. How simple!
3) Good health care. No - mediocre health care for BILLIONS of dollars.
4) Stable economy with 15% unemployment. Cool!
5) Lack of socio-economic shifts - is this code speak for stopping success? Don't want people to be successful, this might create people with less than......
No fear really. Just reality. Hillary gets elected, tax rates go way up, unemployment follows, then you'll get your recession you want so bad.
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,799
No ...we didn't produced needed people. We pacified those we didn't care to socialize ..and created a comfortable underclass. We then integrated our underclass. Don't confused economic theory with social integration at its best.
Works for most of the nordics (mori - don't start). Do you call them smacked arses? Think they're low life disgustingly filthy societies that have nothing to admire?
Only in a place where you're raised to help your fellow man for a cut. Corrupt application of privatized profit via socialized costs via proxy. You already have it, Pabs. You and I are paying for our premium care and for everyone on DWP or Medicare and whomever else. I don't see HP taking the cheaper route to monitors..the medical tubing sector still is owned by a millionaire and blablablabla. Choke hold via demographics. Where reducing costs means "we'll only stick the head in".
What do you REALLY think we're at now? That 5% figure is in funny numbers, pal. Figures don't lie ..but liars sure do figure. Add that to the useless eaters ..and what do you have?
That's what you've been conditioned to view (and preach) it as. Who says you can't be successful? Who makes you not become a doctor or a chemist or a physicist? So it's ONLY a buck that makes you what you are? You have no natural ambition to better yourself? No motivation to be more than you have to be? So "greed" is your only motivator of merit? You're willing to create a sewer of a society as long as the same corrupt system rewards you? Nice social attitude.
Greed and need are twins looking at each other in the mirror. They don't even know who the evil one is. But when one turns on the other for a cut ..it kinda tells you what they're made of.
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2003
- Messages
- 23,591
*starts*
Only North Germanic tribes, the Daner and Suiones were Nordics. Nordic countries are today all Scandinavian countries (Denmark, Sweden and Norway) and in addition Finland, Iceland and Faroe.
Most Germanic people in Central Europe are NOT NORDIC, not matter how much you adhere to your faulty belief. And that's it. ¡Ya basta!
The money you make symbolizes your efforts to help another person in society, and they give it to you in return for doing good for them. Money is a symbol of good, not evil as you seem to believe.
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,799
So
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,799
I'm laughing. The money you make symbolized your efforts to help yourself and to the sewer with everyone else.
You're correct. Money doesn't have a good or evil component to it. That's the decision of the holder. What one will do to attain it can give you insight into the holders inherent attitude to humanity.
Just what would you do to your neighbor to better yourself economically? What view would you allow yourself to put him in to allow you to gain via his loss? Demonize him? Devaluate him? Call him names? Would you be willing to remove his means of self support? Put him in poverty? Hunger?
Just how much do slips of green paper mean to you?
Hurting people for money is illegal. Enforcing those laws is one legitimate job of government in the economy.
some other thoughts:
Without the Rural Electrification Program, and federal highway grants, perhaps there would be less urban sprawl, tighter, more efficient cities, and less per-capita energy use.
some other thoughts:
Without the Rural Electrification Program, and federal highway grants, perhaps there would be less urban sprawl, tighter, more efficient cities, and less per-capita energy use.
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2003
- Messages
- 23,591
Quote:
SoWho cares? Nordic is just my misnomer for all the Nazi like nations (socialized = socialist according to hard core reactionaries)
Your credibility just took yet another dive. What do Nazis have to do with it all?
True enough. But the original term socialism was synonymous with Marxism and I think that is the question Al is asking (correct me if I'm wrong Al). But modern definitions are much more blurry.
In any case, I do think that neither pure capitalism nor socialism can realistically work without collapsing on itself. The real debate is whether we should be a few notches to the right of center or to the left of center.
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,799
Oh, really? Well, first I think we need to completely define "hurting people" before I could comment.
The globalization newspeak. We aren't hurting people, we're helping them. Who cares where they live? We're really quite benevolent. We're doing our part ..and you need to do yours. We provide the ways ..and ..well.. that leaves you to provide the means ...your means
Quote:
The globalization newspeak. We aren't hurting people, we're helping them. Who cares where they live? We're really quite benevolent. We're doing our part ..and you need to do yours. We provide the ways ..and ..well.. that leaves you to provide the means ...your means
Data and statistics please. And I want both the costs and benefits, not just the costs. And I want them relative to before and after globalization. All this political/ideological verbal strong arming is fascinating and fun to read but ultimately tells us very little.
Can't produce the data? Then how are you so sure you are right?
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,799
How does it feel to want? I want you to prove to me that the USA is gaining in net worth. Data and statistics, please? That you can "create wealth" within the USA when indexed for debt increases (in all forms) against economic expansion ..indexed for population.
You can't do it. If you can, in any legit manner ...gosh ..you're the messiah.
I want anyone who's in the know to run their personal finances just like the USA runs its economy. See how much sense it makes to you. Just go out and throw a party on credit. You may be able to sell your children to allow the heads of household to continue with the myth.
You can't do it. If you can, in any legit manner ...gosh ..you're the messiah.
I want anyone who's in the know to run their personal finances just like the USA runs its economy. See how much sense it makes to you. Just go out and throw a party on credit. You may be able to sell your children to allow the heads of household to continue with the myth.
That's the root of the problem - the economy is being run by a government. How many good and quick decisions ever come out of a committee?
Again its the fault of some entity (government, group of people, or corporation) that caused or is responsible for a class of people living in their personal sewer. "We" pay for their drugs or whatever they use to squander their lives on. "They" refuse to use their minute brains and efforts to better themselves.
I understand perfectly. [/thread]
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,799
short version:
The civil rights movement had all kinds of visions of some magic elevation to the presumed "Horn of Plenty" that the mainstream America was enjoying. The our "Great Society" tried a few tricks and figured out that they really didn't want to mingle as much as we rhetorically spoke. So we pacified those contained in poverty. They were happy there. When the sociologist kept pointing to unfair statistical propensities ..we evened the playing field...we integrated our ghettos. Without manufacturing, the crude and rude didn't have all that much to offer. Now being a low life is an equal opportunity situation.
The civil rights movement had all kinds of visions of some magic elevation to the presumed "Horn of Plenty" that the mainstream America was enjoying. The our "Great Society" tried a few tricks and figured out that they really didn't want to mingle as much as we rhetorically spoke. So we pacified those contained in poverty. They were happy there. When the sociologist kept pointing to unfair statistical propensities ..we evened the playing field...we integrated our ghettos. Without manufacturing, the crude and rude didn't have all that much to offer. Now being a low life is an equal opportunity situation.
- Status
Similar threads
