# communism v capitalism



## 22orchards

communism is better than capitalism.
debate me using facts and not ad hominems.


----------



## progressive hunter

22orchards said:


> communism is better than capitalism.
> debate me using facts and not ad hominems.


if you dont accept communism they kill you,,,

thats a historic fact,,,


----------



## night_son

22orchards said:


> communism is better than capitalism.
> debate me using facts and not ad hominems.



TROLL^^^


----------



## Erinwltr

US Constitution does not make any mention about "communism is better than capitalism."  So, debate your soiled, stained paintez that your mother is going to wash tomorrow morning.








						Constitution of the United States - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## daveman

22orchards said:


> communism is better than capitalism.
> debate me using facts and not ad hominems.


Anyone who makes that claim isn't interested in facts.

Run along now.


----------



## MaryL

This has has to be a joke, Communism collapsed like dark matter on itself because all things being equal: It was overrun with demagogues. Like the American Democratic party  supporting race riots and the BLM.


----------



## 22orchards

MaryL said:


> This has has to be a joke, Communism collapsed like dark matter on itself because all things being equal: It was overrun with demagogues. Like the American Democratic party  supporting race riots and the BLM.


no country has existed under communism. stop using ad hominems. they make your argument look weaker than it is because you have to employ the use of pathos in a decidedly logos-fueled debate.


----------



## 22orchards

daveman said:


> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> communism is better than capitalism.
> debate me using facts and not ad hominems.
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone who makes that claim isn't interested in facts.
> 
> Run along now.
Click to expand...

so you can't debate me?


----------



## progressive hunter

22orchards said:


> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> 
> This has has to be a joke, Communism collapsed like dark matter on itself because all things being equal: It was overrun with demagogues. Like the American Democratic party  supporting race riots and the BLM.
> 
> 
> 
> no country has existed under communism. stop using ad hominems. they make your argument look weaker than it is because you have to employ the use of pathos in a decidedly logos-fueled debate.
Click to expand...

did you forget communism is a form of capitalism???,,, just a smaller group of people keep the profits,,,


----------



## 22orchards

Erinwltr said:


> US Constitution does not make any mention about "communism is better than capitalism."  So, debate your soiled, stained paintez that your mother is going to wash tomorrow morning.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Constitution of the United States - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org


the idea is that communism would work better than the constitution and i couldn't really find another place to post this. also quit using ad hominems, they make your point look invalid.


----------



## progressive hunter

22orchards said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> communism is better than capitalism.
> debate me using facts and not ad hominems.
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone who makes that claim isn't interested in facts.
> 
> Run along now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> so you can't debate me?
Click to expand...

you havent given anything to debate,,,


----------



## 22orchards

progressive hunter said:


> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> 
> This has has to be a joke, Communism collapsed like dark matter on itself because all things being equal: It was overrun with demagogues. Like the American Democratic party  supporting race riots and the BLM.
> 
> 
> 
> no country has existed under communism. stop using ad hominems. they make your argument look weaker than it is because you have to employ the use of pathos in a decidedly logos-fueled debate.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> did you forget communism is a form of capitalism???,,, just a smaller group of people keep the profits,,,
Click to expand...

communism exists under the idea that there is no capital, no money, no class, no private property, and that the people own the means of production.


----------



## progressive hunter

22orchards said:


> Erinwltr said:
> 
> 
> 
> US Constitution does not make any mention about "communism is better than capitalism."  So, debate your soiled, stained paintez that your mother is going to wash tomorrow morning.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Constitution of the United States - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the idea is that communism would work better than the constitution and i couldn't really find another place to post this. also quit using ad hominems, they make your point look invalid.
Click to expand...

the constitution has lasted 230yr,,, no communist country has made it 75 yrs,,,


----------



## night_son

22orchards said:


> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> 
> This has has to be a joke, Communism collapsed like dark matter on itself because all things being equal: It was overrun with demagogues. Like the American Democratic party  supporting race riots and the BLM.
> 
> 
> 
> no country has existed under communism. stop using ad hominems. they make your argument look weaker than it is because you have to employ the use of pathos in a decidedly logos-fueled debate.
Click to expand...


Learn the definition of words you are trying to use to make yourself look well read. Whose sock are you, by the way? Should we guess or are you gonna come out on your own?


----------



## 22orchards

progressive hunter said:


> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> communism is better than capitalism.
> debate me using facts and not ad hominems.
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone who makes that claim isn't interested in facts.
> 
> Run along now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> so you can't debate me?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> you havent given anything to debate,,,
Click to expand...

use logos, not pathos.


----------



## progressive hunter

22orchards said:


> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> 
> This has has to be a joke, Communism collapsed like dark matter on itself because all things being equal: It was overrun with demagogues. Like the American Democratic party  supporting race riots and the BLM.
> 
> 
> 
> no country has existed under communism. stop using ad hominems. they make your argument look weaker than it is because you have to employ the use of pathos in a decidedly logos-fueled debate.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> did you forget communism is a form of capitalism???,,, just a smaller group of people keep the profits,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> communism exists under the idea that there is no capital, no money, no class, no private property, and that the people own the means of production.
Click to expand...

you clearly dont understand a communist system,,,


----------



## 22orchards

progressive hunter said:


> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Erinwltr said:
> 
> 
> 
> US Constitution does not make any mention about "communism is better than capitalism."  So, debate your soiled, stained paintez that your mother is going to wash tomorrow morning.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Constitution of the United States - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the idea is that communism would work better than the constitution and i couldn't really find another place to post this. also quit using ad hominems, they make your point look invalid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> the constitution has lasted 230yr,,, no communist country has made it 75 yrs,,,
Click to expand...

no communist country has ever existed.


----------



## 22orchards

progressive hunter said:


> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> 
> This has has to be a joke, Communism collapsed like dark matter on itself because all things being equal: It was overrun with demagogues. Like the American Democratic party  supporting race riots and the BLM.
> 
> 
> 
> no country has existed under communism. stop using ad hominems. they make your argument look weaker than it is because you have to employ the use of pathos in a decidedly logos-fueled debate.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> did you forget communism is a form of capitalism???,,, just a smaller group of people keep the profits,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> communism exists under the idea that there is no capital, no money, no class, no private property, and that the people own the means of production.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> you clearly dont understand a communist system,,,
Click to expand...

define it for me then.


----------



## progressive hunter

22orchards said:


> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Erinwltr said:
> 
> 
> 
> US Constitution does not make any mention about "communism is better than capitalism."  So, debate your soiled, stained paintez that your mother is going to wash tomorrow morning.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Constitution of the United States - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the idea is that communism would work better than the constitution and i couldn't really find another place to post this. also quit using ad hominems, they make your point look invalid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> the constitution has lasted 230yr,,, no communist country has made it 75 yrs,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no communist country has ever existed.
Click to expand...

OH I forgot youre not that educated,,,

wait a minute,,, how can you say its better of its never existed before???


----------



## MaryL

Communism is well meaning, I get it. Really, communism is the political equivalent of the perpetual  motion machine, it sounds nice but never works in actuality.


----------



## 22orchards

night_son said:


> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> 
> This has has to be a joke, Communism collapsed like dark matter on itself because all things being equal: It was overrun with demagogues. Like the American Democratic party  supporting race riots and the BLM.
> 
> 
> 
> no country has existed under communism. stop using ad hominems. they make your argument look weaker than it is because you have to employ the use of pathos in a decidedly logos-fueled debate.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Learn the definition of words you are trying to use to make yourself look well read. Whose sock are you, by the way? Should we guess or are you gonna come out on your own?
Click to expand...

i know what my words mean. also i'll happily come out when you admit that capitalism breeds deep seeded insecurities that consumerism requires to exist.


----------



## night_son

22orchards said:


> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> 
> This has has to be a joke, Communism collapsed like dark matter on itself because all things being equal: It was overrun with demagogues. Like the American Democratic party  supporting race riots and the BLM.
> 
> 
> 
> no country has existed under communism. stop using ad hominems. they make your argument look weaker than it is because you have to employ the use of pathos in a decidedly logos-fueled debate.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> did you forget communism is a form of capitalism???,,, just a smaller group of people keep the profits,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> communism exists under the idea that there is no capital, no money, no class, no private property, and that the people own the means of production.
Click to expand...


Fool, communism is a hyper class centric system of government. A dictatorship of the proletariat composed of a few hedonists controls EVERYTHING while the actual proletariat starve and fucking die if they don't worship the party line. The people own nothing. Open a book and read it.


----------



## MaryL

I doubt you read my reply...


----------



## 22orchards

progressive hunter said:


> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Erinwltr said:
> 
> 
> 
> US Constitution does not make any mention about "communism is better than capitalism."  So, debate your soiled, stained paintez that your mother is going to wash tomorrow morning.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Constitution of the United States - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the idea is that communism would work better than the constitution and i couldn't really find another place to post this. also quit using ad hominems, they make your point look invalid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> the constitution has lasted 230yr,,, no communist country has made it 75 yrs,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no communist country has ever existed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> OH I forgot youre not that educated,,,
> 
> wait a minute,,, how can you say its better of its never existed before???
Click to expand...

because the idea of communism is still well explored. by that mentality, innovation is impossible and should be ridiculed.


----------



## MisterBeale




----------



## 22orchards

night_son said:


> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> 
> This has has to be a joke, Communism collapsed like dark matter on itself because all things being equal: It was overrun with demagogues. Like the American Democratic party  supporting race riots and the BLM.
> 
> 
> 
> no country has existed under communism. stop using ad hominems. they make your argument look weaker than it is because you have to employ the use of pathos in a decidedly logos-fueled debate.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> did you forget communism is a form of capitalism???,,, just a smaller group of people keep the profits,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> communism exists under the idea that there is no capital, no money, no class, no private property, and that the people own the means of production.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Fool, communism is a hyper class centric system of government. A dictatorship of the proletariat composed of a few hedonists controls EVERYTHING while the actual proletariat starve and fucking die if they don't worship the party line. The people own nothing. Open a book and read it.
Click to expand...

you described capitalism. a dictatorship of the people who own production (it's called the bourgoise by the way), that stand upon the efforts of the working class (the proletariat), who are unable to live how they like because if they don't, they won't have enough money to survive.


----------



## 22orchards

MisterBeale said:


>


stalin wasn't communist, neither was lennin. if you want some reading material but don't wanna pay for it, check out the wikipedia articles on marxism-lenninism, communism, stalinism, etc. they offer a lot of insight.


----------



## 22orchards

MaryL said:


> Communism is well meaning, I get it. Really, communism is the political equivalent of the perpetual  motion machine, it sounds nice but never works in actuality.


it could work in reality. it just requires the people to work hard to maintain a society. capitalism the equivalent of taking all easy classes in high school, sure they're all easy and really hard to mess up, but it won't last you very long in the real world. communism is like ap courses. they're far harder, but if you can maintain it, you'll be far happier in the long run.


----------



## MaryL

22orchards said:


> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Erinwltr said:
> 
> 
> 
> US Constitution does not make any mention about "communism is better than capitalism."  So, debate your soiled, stained paintez that your mother is going to wash tomorrow morning.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Constitution of the United States - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the idea is that communism would work better than the constitution and i couldn't really find another place to post this. also quit using ad hominems, they make your point look invalid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> the constitution has lasted 230yr,,, no communist country has made it 75 yrs,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no communist country has ever existed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> OH I forgot youre not that educated,,,
> 
> wait a minute,,, how can you say its better of its never existed before???
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> because the idea of communism is still well explored. by that mentality, innovation is impossible and should be ridiculed.
Click to expand...

Mainly because it doesn't work , human beings don't operate the way communism says it works. Sorry.


----------



## 22orchards

MaryL said:


> I doubt you read my reply...


just got to it, i've been getting a surprising number responses and haven't been able to scroll up very far


----------



## 22orchards

MaryL said:


> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Erinwltr said:
> 
> 
> 
> US Constitution does not make any mention about "communism is better than capitalism."  So, debate your soiled, stained paintez that your mother is going to wash tomorrow morning.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Constitution of the United States - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the idea is that communism would work better than the constitution and i couldn't really find another place to post this. also quit using ad hominems, they make your point look invalid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> the constitution has lasted 230yr,,, no communist country has made it 75 yrs,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no communist country has ever existed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> OH I forgot youre not that educated,,,
> 
> wait a minute,,, how can you say its better of its never existed before???
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> because the idea of communism is still well explored. by that mentality, innovation is impossible and should be ridiculed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Mainly because it doesn't work , human beings don't operate the way communism says it works. Sorry.
Click to expand...

then you tell me, how does communism work?


----------



## daveman

22orchards said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> communism is better than capitalism.
> debate me using facts and not ad hominems.
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone who makes that claim isn't interested in facts.
> 
> Run along now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> so you can't debate me?
Click to expand...

No, I can't, but not for the reason you imagine.  

Make your case.


----------



## daveman

22orchards said:


> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Erinwltr said:
> 
> 
> 
> US Constitution does not make any mention about "communism is better than capitalism."  So, debate your soiled, stained paintez that your mother is going to wash tomorrow morning.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Constitution of the United States - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the idea is that communism would work better than the constitution and i couldn't really find another place to post this. also quit using ad hominems, they make your point look invalid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> the constitution has lasted 230yr,,, no communist country has made it 75 yrs,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no communist country has ever existed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> OH I forgot youre not that educated,,,
> 
> wait a minute,,, how can you say its better of its never existed before???
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> because the idea of communism is still well explored. by that mentality, innovation is impossible and should be ridiculed.
Click to expand...

Under Communism, innovation is impossible.


----------



## MaryL

22orchards said:


> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Erinwltr said:
> 
> 
> 
> US Constitution does not make any mention about "communism is better than capitalism."  So, debate your soiled, stained paintez that your mother is going to wash tomorrow morning.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Constitution of the United States - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the idea is that communism would work better than the constitution and i couldn't really find another place to post this. also quit using ad hominems, they make your point look invalid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> the constitution has lasted 230yr,,, no communist country has made it 75 yrs,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no communist country has ever existed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> OH I forgot youre not that educated,,,
> 
> wait a minute,,, how can you say its better of its never existed before???
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> because the idea of communism is still well explored. by that mentality, innovation is impossible and should be ridiculed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Mainly because it doesn't work , human beings don't operate the way communism says it works. Sorry.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> then you tell me, how does communism work?
Click to expand...

Simply, it doesn't.  And the onus is on you to explain HOW it is a viable alternative given how Communism has managed to kill so many of its adherents. I could quote how Mao or Stalin either worked to death, starved millions, or lets see here, tried to obliterate those that had different political beliefs.


----------



## daveman

22orchards said:


> night_son said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> 
> This has has to be a joke, Communism collapsed like dark matter on itself because all things being equal: It was overrun with demagogues. Like the American Democratic party  supporting race riots and the BLM.
> 
> 
> 
> no country has existed under communism. stop using ad hominems. they make your argument look weaker than it is because you have to employ the use of pathos in a decidedly logos-fueled debate.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> did you forget communism is a form of capitalism???,,, just a smaller group of people keep the profits,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> communism exists under the idea that there is no capital, no money, no class, no private property, and that the people own the means of production.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Fool, communism is a hyper class centric system of government. A dictatorship of the proletariat composed of a few hedonists controls EVERYTHING while the actual proletariat starve and fucking die if they don't worship the party line. The people own nothing. Open a book and read it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> you described capitalism. a dictatorship of the people who own production (it's called the bourgoise by the way), that stand upon the efforts of the working class (the proletariat), who are unable to live how they like because if they don't, they won't have enough money to survive.
Click to expand...

Lemme guess...you really don't want to have to get a job.


----------



## MisterBeale

22orchards said:


> MisterBeale said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> stalin wasn't communist, neither was lennin. if you want some reading material but don't wanna pay for it, check out the wikipedia articles on marxism-lenninism, communism, stalinism, etc. they offer a lot of insight.
Click to expand...


And, what makes you believe, that any leader, or group of leaders, could ever implement the theoretical, or hypothetical "ideal?"

No, Stalin is a PERFECT example, that is precisely the point.

And the opposite side always argues, well, how come there has never been a perfect anarcho-capitalist, non-aggression, or libertarian state?

Well, duh?!

People man, people.  You can't create utopian societies based on theory, they are based on personalities and leaders, not theories.


Now, if you want to debate me on technocracy?  Sure, we can go a few rounds on that.  But you will get your ass handed to you on that as well.

Pack it in Seymour.

American culture IS freedom, it IS liberty, and it IS individual sovereignty, it is our personal and collective history, and it is who we are as a people, and thus, they are diametrically opposed to the very notion of technocracy.  It won't work, not here, not to a top down approach, so sell that shit somewhere else.


----------



## MisterBeale

daveman said:


> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> night_son said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> 
> This has has to be a joke, Communism collapsed like dark matter on itself because all things being equal: It was overrun with demagogues. Like the American Democratic party  supporting race riots and the BLM.
> 
> 
> 
> no country has existed under communism. stop using ad hominems. they make your argument look weaker than it is because you have to employ the use of pathos in a decidedly logos-fueled debate.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> did you forget communism is a form of capitalism???,,, just a smaller group of people keep the profits,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> communism exists under the idea that there is no capital, no money, no class, no private property, and that the people own the means of production.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Fool, communism is a hyper class centric system of government. A dictatorship of the proletariat composed of a few hedonists controls EVERYTHING while the actual proletariat starve and fucking die if they don't worship the party line. The people own nothing. Open a book and read it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> you described capitalism. a dictatorship of the people who own production (it's called the bourgoise by the way), that stand upon the efforts of the working class (the proletariat), who are unable to live how they like because if they don't, they won't have enough money to survive.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Lemme guess...you really don't want to have to get a job.
Click to expand...

Are you saying that danielpalos has a sock now?!


----------



## progressive hunter

22orchards said:


> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Erinwltr said:
> 
> 
> 
> US Constitution does not make any mention about "communism is better than capitalism."  So, debate your soiled, stained paintez that your mother is going to wash tomorrow morning.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Constitution of the United States - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the idea is that communism would work better than the constitution and i couldn't really find another place to post this. also quit using ad hominems, they make your point look invalid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> the constitution has lasted 230yr,,, no communist country has made it 75 yrs,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no communist country has ever existed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> OH I forgot youre not that educated,,,
> 
> wait a minute,,, how can you say its better of its never existed before???
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> because the idea of communism is still well explored. by that mentality, innovation is impossible and should be ridiculed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Mainly because it doesn't work , human beings don't operate the way communism says it works. Sorry.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> then you tell me, how does communism work?
Click to expand...

thats simple,,,
a small group of people at the very top are in charge and you do what they tell you to do or they kill you,,,


----------



## MisterBeale

22orchards said:


> i've been getting a surprising number responses




Oh gee. . . shocker!

What are you. . . 25?  30? 35?  No recollection of the cold war or the Mao's cultural revolution eh?  No memories of Fidel, that it?  

Can't remember the Wall coming down or the E. Germans streaming across the border. . is that your problem?


----------



## MaryL

22orchards said:


> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> 
> Communism is well meaning, I get it. Really, communism is the political equivalent of the perpetual  motion machine, it sounds nice but never works in actuality.
> 
> 
> 
> it could work in reality. it just requires the people to work hard to maintain a society. capitalism the equivalent of taking all easy classes in high school, sure they're all easy and really hard to mess up, but it won't last you very long in the real world. communism is like ap courses. they're far harder, but if you can maintain it, you'll be far happier in the long run.
Click to expand...

 Ok, yes, it could work.  Theoretically.  But its doesn't work in practice.  Its been proven that people don't act like this. Look at the Chinese. The Chinese don't care if the communist or the Tang dynasty rules. Nope, in the long term. These assholes are buying out our media, and they tell us George Floyd died not  from a fentanyl overdose (Chinese induced breaking bad scenario) but a white cop had a knee on his neck. No mention of the fentanyl induced hysteria, or the fact he died from an overdose...Just tiny issue of the white cops are the focus. No matter the huge black on black murder rate...


----------



## Mikeoxenormous

22orchards said:


> communism is better than capitalism.
> debate me using facts and not ad hominems.


Lets see, in Communism, if everyone is paid equally, why should a doctor do 12 years of college just to be paid the same as a bread maker?  In Communism, everyone can only have 1 car, 1 tv, 1 channel, 1 child, 1 house, with 1 bedroom, unless you are the Communist Elites, who think they are better than you, so eat very expensive ice cream while you eat potato soup.  Yep, I know all about Communism, i studied Russian back in the 1970s, and how the Russians would climb over barbed wire and face machine guns just so they could be free in a capitalist country....


----------



## 22orchards

andaronjim said:


> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> communism is better than capitalism.
> debate me using facts and not ad hominems.
> 
> 
> 
> Lets see, in Communism, if everyone is paid equally, why should a doctor do 12 years of college just to be paid the same as a bread maker?  In Communism, everyone can only have 1 car, 1 tv, 1 channel, 1 child, 1 house, with 1 bedroom, unless you are the Communist Elites, who think they are better than you, so eat very expensive ice cream while you eat potato soup.  Yep, I know all about Communism, i studied Russian back in the 1970s, and how the Russians would climb over barbed wire and face machine guns just so they could be free in a capitalist country....
Click to expand...

your point about equal distribution of belongings forgets to acknowledge that personal property is a thing under communism. also, under _pure_ communism (which is harder to implement), there wouldn't be any capital at all, so it would be people who just work and do the jobs they love. and when you say "communist elites" that's also more of a flaw with past attempts to implement communism that ended in corruption. i definitely acknowledge that that _was_ a very real issue, but again, in pure communism, everyone would be equal. communism in the soviet union was really cloudy, as it successfully used certain aspects of communism,  while failing in other respects. it was mainly under stalin that the ussr fell to shit (mainly because stalin was a horrible person). a big part of the reason people would do all that to escape was simply because they felt that the commune established by the ussr had become tainted and no longer was what they stood for.

i really appreciate the fact that you came at this with facts and not just names. it definitely makes debating a lot more engaging and less of a game of who can call each other a meaner word.


----------



## Soupnazi630

22orchards said:


> communism is better than capitalism.
> debate me using facts and not ad hominems.



First one has to define ones terms. Communism is NOT a stateless, moneyless, egalitarian, society where the workers own the means of production. Communism is a political ideology which attempts to move towards that utopian society. Which means so long as one is following the prescribed ideology one is a communist and lives within a communist society.

This is why modern communists foolishly claim that the USSR and China and Cuba and any other communist nation are not true communist nations. They are communist nations stuck under the dictatorship of the proletariate.

Marx himself stated that the dictatorship of the proletariate would be necessary to work towards the goal. He specified that no one can know how long the dictatorship will last but that it would last as long as it needs to. Which of course can easily mean thousands of years. But as long as that dictatorship claims that they will one day achieve the class less egalitarian society and then the state will whither away and die then that brutal despotic relationship is in fact a communist government. Just skip over the fact but do not forget that NO government just whithers away and dies because they are no longer needed and no government ever will do that.

Make no mistake Marx also stated that said dictatorship would be despotic and that said despotism would be necessary along with violent terror to exterminate the reactionaries. Which means anyone who disagrees. Modern communists ignore this because they lie endlessly claiming that the dictatorship of the proletariate does not mean a literal dictatorship. When in fact that is precisely what Marx meant. Tyrannical, bloodthirsty, brutal, genocidal, dictatorship. Which is precisely what every communist government is.

In contrast capitalism does not rely on such brutality but instead relies on respect and peace. When you want something and pay for it it is a peaceful sign of respect that you and the person selling it are exchanging value for value and no one is taking from another by force. Communism demands such force be applied because people do not ever and never will be inclined to just give all that they are capable of giving to others for nothing. This is why " From each according to his ability and to each according to his need " is a description of the ideal communist world AND a description of slavery. Communism and slavery are one and the same. Slaves have their ability taken from them to benefit another while they are given just what they need. Sure slavery has existed in capitalist nations but was proven to be inneffecient and done away with. Communism simply enslaves EVERYONE and cannot exist without universal slavery.

So if you wish to argue communism is better start by explaining why hanging the words " of the proletariate" after the word dictator makes the dictatorship a good thing. Do not dodge and claim he meant something else. He meant dictatorship and it is absolutely mandatory to have that dictatorship after the revolution. Marx NEVER wrote anything to explain what he meant other than DESPOTISM under the dictatorship.

Then explain how communism is so much better without money which people use to engage in trade. Without it there is only theft and violence.


----------



## daveman

MisterBeale said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> night_son said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> 
> This has has to be a joke, Communism collapsed like dark matter on itself because all things being equal: It was overrun with demagogues. Like the American Democratic party  supporting race riots and the BLM.
> 
> 
> 
> no country has existed under communism. stop using ad hominems. they make your argument look weaker than it is because you have to employ the use of pathos in a decidedly logos-fueled debate.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> did you forget communism is a form of capitalism???,,, just a smaller group of people keep the profits,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> communism exists under the idea that there is no capital, no money, no class, no private property, and that the people own the means of production.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Fool, communism is a hyper class centric system of government. A dictatorship of the proletariat composed of a few hedonists controls EVERYTHING while the actual proletariat starve and fucking die if they don't worship the party line. The people own nothing. Open a book and read it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> you described capitalism. a dictatorship of the people who own production (it's called the bourgoise by the way), that stand upon the efforts of the working class (the proletariat), who are unable to live how they like because if they don't, they won't have enough money to survive.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Lemme guess...you really don't want to have to get a job.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Are you saying that danielpalos has a sock now?!
Click to expand...

May as well.  Not a single internet Commie has ever had an original thought.


----------



## MaryL

Communism is a brilliant idea, accept it never actually works in reality. It's the political version of a perpetual motion machine. It clicks all the boxes and yet it never works in reality.


----------



## Mikeoxenormous

22orchards said:


> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> communism is better than capitalism.
> debate me using facts and not ad hominems.
> 
> 
> 
> Lets see, in Communism, if everyone is paid equally, why should a doctor do 12 years of college just to be paid the same as a bread maker?  In Communism, everyone can only have 1 car, 1 tv, 1 channel, 1 child, 1 house, with 1 bedroom, unless you are the Communist Elites, who think they are better than you, so eat very expensive ice cream while you eat potato soup.  Yep, I know all about Communism, i studied Russian back in the 1970s, and how the Russians would climb over barbed wire and face machine guns just so they could be free in a capitalist country....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> your point about equal distribution of belongings forgets to acknowledge that personal property is a thing under communism. also, under _pure_ communism (which is harder to implement), there wouldn't be any capital at all, so it would be people who just work and do the jobs they love. and when you say "communist elites" that's also more of a flaw with past attempts to implement communism that ended in corruption. i definitely acknowledge that that _was_ a very real issue, but again, in pure communism, everyone would be equal. communism in the soviet union was really cloudy, as it successfully used certain aspects of communism,  while failing in other respects. it was mainly under stalin that the ussr fell to shit (mainly because stalin was a horrible person). a big part of the reason people would do all that to escape was simply because they felt that the commune established by the ussr had become tainted and no longer was what they stood for.
> 
> i really appreciate the fact that you came at this with facts and not just names. it definitely makes debating a lot more engaging and less of a game of who can call each other a meaner word.
Click to expand...

Lenin was a horrible person, where do you think Stalin, Mao and Castro learned to be such dickstator?


----------



## 22orchards

andaronjim said:


> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> communism is better than capitalism.
> debate me using facts and not ad hominems.
> 
> 
> 
> Lets see, in Communism, if everyone is paid equally, why should a doctor do 12 years of college just to be paid the same as a bread maker?  In Communism, everyone can only have 1 car, 1 tv, 1 channel, 1 child, 1 house, with 1 bedroom, unless you are the Communist Elites, who think they are better than you, so eat very expensive ice cream while you eat potato soup.  Yep, I know all about Communism, i studied Russian back in the 1970s, and how the Russians would climb over barbed wire and face machine guns just so they could be free in a capitalist country....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> your point about equal distribution of belongings forgets to acknowledge that personal property is a thing under communism. also, under _pure_ communism (which is harder to implement), there wouldn't be any capital at all, so it would be people who just work and do the jobs they love. and when you say "communist elites" that's also more of a flaw with past attempts to implement communism that ended in corruption. i definitely acknowledge that that _was_ a very real issue, but again, in pure communism, everyone would be equal. communism in the soviet union was really cloudy, as it successfully used certain aspects of communism,  while failing in other respects. it was mainly under stalin that the ussr fell to shit (mainly because stalin was a horrible person). a big part of the reason people would do all that to escape was simply because they felt that the commune established by the ussr had become tainted and no longer was what they stood for.
> 
> i really appreciate the fact that you came at this with facts and not just names. it definitely makes debating a lot more engaging and less of a game of who can call each other a meaner word.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Lenin was a horrible person, where do you think Stalin, Mao and Castro learned to be such dickstator?
Click to expand...

nevermind i take back every good thing i said about you lmao


----------



## Mikeoxenormous

MaryL said:


> Communism is a brilliant idea, accept it never actually works in reality. It's the political version of a perpetual motion machine. It clicks all the boxes and yet it never works in reality.


I really hate this ugly bitch, but at least she spoke honestly..


----------



## Mikeoxenormous

22orchards said:


> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> communism is better than capitalism.
> debate me using facts and not ad hominems.
> 
> 
> 
> Lets see, in Communism, if everyone is paid equally, why should a doctor do 12 years of college just to be paid the same as a bread maker?  In Communism, everyone can only have 1 car, 1 tv, 1 channel, 1 child, 1 house, with 1 bedroom, unless you are the Communist Elites, who think they are better than you, so eat very expensive ice cream while you eat potato soup.  Yep, I know all about Communism, i studied Russian back in the 1970s, and how the Russians would climb over barbed wire and face machine guns just so they could be free in a capitalist country....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> your point about equal distribution of belongings forgets to acknowledge that personal property is a thing under communism. also, under _pure_ communism (which is harder to implement), there wouldn't be any capital at all, so it would be people who just work and do the jobs they love. and when you say "communist elites" that's also more of a flaw with past attempts to implement communism that ended in corruption. i definitely acknowledge that that _was_ a very real issue, but again, in pure communism, everyone would be equal. communism in the soviet union was really cloudy, as it successfully used certain aspects of communism,  while failing in other respects. it was mainly under stalin that the ussr fell to shit (mainly because stalin was a horrible person). a big part of the reason people would do all that to escape was simply because they felt that the commune established by the ussr had become tainted and no longer was what they stood for.
> 
> i really appreciate the fact that you came at this with facts and not just names. it definitely makes debating a lot more engaging and less of a game of who can call each other a meaner word.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Lenin was a horrible person, where do you think Stalin, Mao and Castro learned to be such dickstator?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> nevermind i take back every good thing i said about you lmao
Click to expand...

Which is typical of a Communist punk...because the Commie fag, doesnt like it when you talk bad about their gods(little g).


----------



## 22orchards

Soupnazi630 said:


> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> communism is better than capitalism.
> debate me using facts and not ad hominems.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> First one has to define ones terms. Communism is NOT a stateless, moneyless, egalitarian, society where the workers own the means of production. Communism is a political ideology which attempts to move towards that utopian society. Which means so long as one is following the prescribed ideology one is a communist and lives within a communist society.
> 
> This is why modern communists foolishly claim that the USSR and China and Cuba and any other communist nation are not true communist nations. They are communist nations stuck under the dictatprship of the proletariate.
> 
> Marx himself stated that the dictatorship of the proletariate would be necessary to work towards the goal. He specified that no one can know how long the dictatorship will last but that it would last as long as it needs to. Which of course cdan easily mean thousands of years. But as long as that dictatorship claims that they will one day achieve the class less egalitarian society and then the state will whither away and die then that brutal despotic relationship is in fact a communist government. Just skip over the fact but do not forget that NO government just whithers away and dies because they are no longer needed and no government ever will do that.
> 
> Make no mistake Marx also stated that said dictatorship would be despotic and that said despotism would be necessary along with violent terror to exterminate the reactionaries. Which means anyone who disagrees. Modern communists ignore this because they lie endlessly claiming that the dictatorship of the proletariate does not mean a literal dictatorship. When in fact that is precisely what Marx meant. Tyrannical, bloodthirsty, brutal, genocidal, dictatorship. Which is precisely what every communist government is.
> 
> In contrast capitalism does not rely on such burtality but instead relies on respect and peace. When you want something and pay for it it is a peaceful sign of respect that you and the person selling it are exchanging value for value and no one is taking from another by force. Communism demands such force be applied because people do not ever and never will be inclined to just give all that they are capable of giving to others for nothing. This is why " From each according to his ability and to each according to his need " is a description of the ideal communist world AND a description of slavery. Communism and slavery are one and the same. Slaves have their ability taken from them to benefit another while they are given just what they need. Sure slavery has existed in capitalist nations but was proven to be inneffecient and done away with. Communism simply enslaves EVERYONE and cannot exist without universal slavery.
> 
> So if you wish to argue communism is better start by explaining why hanging the words " of the proletariate" after the word dictator makes the dictatorship a good thing. Do not dodge and claim he meant something else. He meant dictatorship and it is absolutely mandatory to have that dictatorship after the revolution. Marx NEVER wrote anything to explain what he meant other than DESPOTISM under the dictatorship.
> 
> Then explain how communism is so much better without money which people use to engage in trade. Without it there is only theft and violence.
Click to expand...

firstly: i loved reading your response, super well written, super well thought out, overall i liked it a lot.
secondly: i guess you and i had different interpretations of what i meant by communism. i meant the end goal, y'know, that utopia _*after*_ all the horrible stuff marx described. when it comes to practicality, capitalism is definitely a lot easier than communism, it doesn't require any transitional period because we already exist in capitalism, right. my personal view (and this varies from person to person) is that ideally, to transition to communism, we would skip over the bloodshed by taking things slower, with a more libertarian socialist approach. with a more controlled transition, we could prevent unneeded deaths, as well as create a more thought out society. it's interesting that you use the term universal slavery, it makes me think of capitalism and how ultimately, we're all slaves to whoever has the most money (i.e. amazon, jeff bezos, elon musk, etc).


----------



## 22orchards

andaronjim said:


> I really hate this ugly bitch, but at least she spoke honestly..


don't call someone an ugly bitch unless you'd want it done to you, you racist piece of white trash


----------



## 22orchards

andaronjim said:


> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> communism is better than capitalism.
> debate me using facts and not ad hominems.
> 
> 
> 
> Lets see, in Communism, if everyone is paid equally, why should a doctor do 12 years of college just to be paid the same as a bread maker?  In Communism, everyone can only have 1 car, 1 tv, 1 channel, 1 child, 1 house, with 1 bedroom, unless you are the Communist Elites, who think they are better than you, so eat very expensive ice cream while you eat potato soup.  Yep, I know all about Communism, i studied Russian back in the 1970s, and how the Russians would climb over barbed wire and face machine guns just so they could be free in a capitalist country....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> your point about equal distribution of belongings forgets to acknowledge that personal property is a thing under communism. also, under _pure_ communism (which is harder to implement), there wouldn't be any capital at all, so it would be people who just work and do the jobs they love. and when you say "communist elites" that's also more of a flaw with past attempts to implement communism that ended in corruption. i definitely acknowledge that that _was_ a very real issue, but again, in pure communism, everyone would be equal. communism in the soviet union was really cloudy, as it successfully used certain aspects of communism,  while failing in other respects. it was mainly under stalin that the ussr fell to shit (mainly because stalin was a horrible person). a big part of the reason people would do all that to escape was simply because they felt that the commune established by the ussr had become tainted and no longer was what they stood for.
> 
> i really appreciate the fact that you came at this with facts and not just names. it definitely makes debating a lot more engaging and less of a game of who can call each other a meaner word.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Lenin was a horrible person, where do you think Stalin, Mao and Castro learned to be such dickstator?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> nevermind i take back every good thing i said about you lmao
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Which is typical of a Communist punk...because the Commie fag, doesnt like it when you talk bad about their gods(little g).
Click to expand...

ok grandpa, go back to jerking off into your american flag thinking about world war ii


----------



## 22orchards

progressive hunter said:


> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> communism is better than capitalism.
> debate me using facts and not ad hominems.
> 
> 
> 
> if you dont accept communism they kill you,,,
> 
> thats a historic fact,,,
Click to expand...

it's also a historic fact that there's never been a communist country. the very term is an oxymoron.


----------



## 22orchards

daveman said:


> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> communism is better than capitalism.
> debate me using facts and not ad hominems.
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone who makes that claim isn't interested in facts.
> 
> Run along now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> so you can't debate me?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, I can't, but not for the reason you imagine.
> 
> Make your case.
Click to expand...

you go first since you're so adamant about embarrassing yourself.


----------



## 22orchards

MaryL said:


> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> 
> Communism is well meaning, I get it. Really, communism is the political equivalent of the perpetual  motion machine, it sounds nice but never works in actuality.
> 
> 
> 
> it could work in reality. it just requires the people to work hard to maintain a society. capitalism the equivalent of taking all easy classes in high school, sure they're all easy and really hard to mess up, but it won't last you very long in the real world. communism is like ap courses. they're far harder, but if you can maintain it, you'll be far happier in the long run.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ok, yes, it could work.  Theoretically.  But its doesn't work in practice.  Its been proven that people don't act like this. Look at the Chinese. The Chinese don't care if the communist or the Tang dynasty rules. Nope, in the long term. These assholes are buying out our media, and they tell us George Floyd died not  from a fentanyl overdose (Chinese induced breaking bad scenario) but a white cop had a knee on his neck. No mention of the fentanyl induced hysteria, or the fact he died from an overdose...Just tiny issue of the white cops are the focus. No matter the huge black on black murder rate...
Click to expand...

and there's the unbridled racism that bars you from ever stepping above the bottom rung on the ol' respect ladder. go back to crying about masks, mary, you're getting old to laugh at


----------



## 22orchards

night_son said:


> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> communism is better than capitalism.
> debate me using facts and not ad hominems.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TROLL^^^
Click to expand...

nah capitalism sucks ass


----------



## progressive hunter

22orchards said:


> night_son said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> communism is better than capitalism.
> debate me using facts and not ad hominems.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TROLL^^^
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> nah capitalism sucks ass
Click to expand...

only for lazy people,,,

now communism will kill your ass dead,,,

I'd rather have my ass sucked than killed,,,


----------



## 22orchards

daveman said:


> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Erinwltr said:
> 
> 
> 
> US Constitution does not make any mention about "communism is better than capitalism."  So, debate your soiled, stained paintez that your mother is going to wash tomorrow morning.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Constitution of the United States - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the idea is that communism would work better than the constitution and i couldn't really find another place to post this. also quit using ad hominems, they make your point look invalid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> the constitution has lasted 230yr,,, no communist country has made it 75 yrs,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no communist country has ever existed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> OH I forgot youre not that educated,,,
> 
> wait a minute,,, how can you say its better of its never existed before???
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> because the idea of communism is still well explored. by that mentality, innovation is impossible and should be ridiculed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Under Communism, innovation is impossible.
Click to expand...

no it isn't. you're neglecting the idea that maybe people want to learn about stuff for more than just money.


----------



## 22orchards

progressive hunter said:


> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> night_son said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> communism is better than capitalism.
> debate me using facts and not ad hominems.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TROLL^^^
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> nah capitalism sucks ass
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> only for lazy people,,,
> 
> now communism will kill your ass dead,,,
> 
> I'd rather have my ass sucked than killed,,,
Click to expand...

where's your evidence that communism would kill my ass dead


----------



## progressive hunter

22orchards said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Erinwltr said:
> 
> 
> 
> US Constitution does not make any mention about "communism is better than capitalism."  So, debate your soiled, stained paintez that your mother is going to wash tomorrow morning.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Constitution of the United States - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the idea is that communism would work better than the constitution and i couldn't really find another place to post this. also quit using ad hominems, they make your point look invalid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> the constitution has lasted 230yr,,, no communist country has made it 75 yrs,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no communist country has ever existed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> OH I forgot youre not that educated,,,
> 
> wait a minute,,, how can you say its better of its never existed before???
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> because the idea of communism is still well explored. by that mentality, innovation is impossible and should be ridiculed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Under Communism, innovation is impossible.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no it isn't. you're neglecting the idea that maybe people want to learn about stuff for more than just money.
Click to expand...

those things dont benefit a society,,,


----------



## progressive hunter

22orchards said:


> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> night_son said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> communism is better than capitalism.
> debate me using facts and not ad hominems.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TROLL^^^
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> nah capitalism sucks ass
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> only for lazy people,,,
> 
> now communism will kill your ass dead,,,
> 
> I'd rather have my ass sucked than killed,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> where's your evidence that communism would kill my ass dead
Click to expand...

history over the last 120 yrs,,,


----------



## 22orchards

MisterBeale said:


> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> i've been getting a surprising number responses
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh gee. . . shocker!
> 
> What are you. . . 25?  30? 35?  No recollection of the cold war or the Mao's cultural revolution eh?  No memories of Fidel, that it?
> 
> Can't remember the Wall coming down or the E. Germans streaming across the border. . is that your problem?
Click to expand...

the soviets were first in the space race and literally only lost in one single aspect: landing on the moon. also their diet was reported to be healthier than the american diet. and germany was never communist, it was fascist. they aren't the same thing.


----------



## 22orchards

progressive hunter said:


> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Erinwltr said:
> 
> 
> 
> US Constitution does not make any mention about "communism is better than capitalism."  So, debate your soiled, stained paintez that your mother is going to wash tomorrow morning.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Constitution of the United States - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the idea is that communism would work better than the constitution and i couldn't really find another place to post this. also quit using ad hominems, they make your point look invalid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> the constitution has lasted 230yr,,, no communist country has made it 75 yrs,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no communist country has ever existed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> OH I forgot youre not that educated,,,
> 
> wait a minute,,, how can you say its better of its never existed before???
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> because the idea of communism is still well explored. by that mentality, innovation is impossible and should be ridiculed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Under Communism, innovation is impossible.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no it isn't. you're neglecting the idea that maybe people want to learn about stuff for more than just money.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> those things dont benefit a society,,,
Click to expand...

innovation doesn't benefit a society?



are you dumb?


----------



## 22orchards

progressive hunter said:


> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> night_son said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> communism is better than capitalism.
> debate me using facts and not ad hominems.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TROLL^^^
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> nah capitalism sucks ass
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> only for lazy people,,,
> 
> now communism will kill your ass dead,,,
> 
> I'd rather have my ass sucked than killed,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> where's your evidence that communism would kill my ass dead
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> history over the last 120 yrs,,,
Click to expand...

at least i wouldn't be making the poor pay all the taxes while the rich sit on their asses and pay 750 a year in taxes


----------



## Soupnazi630

22orchards said:


> Soupnazi630 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> communism is better than capitalism.
> debate me using facts and not ad hominems.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> First one has to define ones terms. Communism is NOT a stateless, moneyless, egalitarian, society where the workers own the means of production. Communism is a political ideology which attempts to move towards that utopian society. Which means so long as one is following the prescribed ideology one is a communist and lives within a communist society.
> 
> This is why modern communists foolishly claim that the USSR and China and Cuba and any other communist nation are not true communist nations. They are communist nations stuck under the dictatprship of the proletariate.
> 
> Marx himself stated that the dictatorship of the proletariate would be necessary to work towards the goal. He specified that no one can know how long the dictatorship will last but that it would last as long as it needs to. Which of course cdan easily mean thousands of years. But as long as that dictatorship claims that they will one day achieve the class less egalitarian society and then the state will whither away and die then that brutal despotic relationship is in fact a communist government. Just skip over the fact but do not forget that NO government just whithers away and dies because they are no longer needed and no government ever will do that.
> 
> Make no mistake Marx also stated that said dictatorship would be despotic and that said despotism would be necessary along with violent terror to exterminate the reactionaries. Which means anyone who disagrees. Modern communists ignore this because they lie endlessly claiming that the dictatorship of the proletariate does not mean a literal dictatorship. When in fact that is precisely what Marx meant. Tyrannical, bloodthirsty, brutal, genocidal, dictatorship. Which is precisely what every communist government is.
> 
> In contrast capitalism does not rely on such burtality but instead relies on respect and peace. When you want something and pay for it it is a peaceful sign of respect that you and the person selling it are exchanging value for value and no one is taking from another by force. Communism demands such force be applied because people do not ever and never will be inclined to just give all that they are capable of giving to others for nothing. This is why " From each according to his ability and to each according to his need " is a description of the ideal communist world AND a description of slavery. Communism and slavery are one and the same. Slaves have their ability taken from them to benefit another while they are given just what they need. Sure slavery has existed in capitalist nations but was proven to be inneffecient and done away with. Communism simply enslaves EVERYONE and cannot exist without universal slavery.
> 
> So if you wish to argue communism is better start by explaining why hanging the words " of the proletariate" after the word dictator makes the dictatorship a good thing. Do not dodge and claim he meant something else. He meant dictatorship and it is absolutely mandatory to have that dictatorship after the revolution. Marx NEVER wrote anything to explain what he meant other than DESPOTISM under the dictatorship.
> 
> Then explain how communism is so much better without money which people use to engage in trade. Without it there is only theft and violence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> firstly: i loved reading your response, super well written, super well thought out, overall i liked it a lot.
> secondly: i guess you and i had different interpretations of what i meant by communism. i meant the end goal, y'know, that utopia _*after*_ all the horrible stuff marx described. when it comes to practicality, capitalism is definitely a lot easier than communism, it doesn't require any transitional period because we already exist in capitalism, right. my personal view (and this varies from person to person) is that ideally, to transition to communism, we would skip over the bloodshed by taking things slower, with a more libertarian socialist approach. with a more controlled transition, we could prevent unneeded deaths, as well as create a more thought out society. it's interesting that you use the term universal slavery, it makes me think of capitalism and how ultimately, we're all slaves to whoever has the most money (i.e. amazon, jeff bezos, elon musk, etc).
Click to expand...

We are not slaves to those who have the most money.

When has amazon FORCED you to buy their goods? When has Elon Musk forced you to do so?

Some of the biggest, wealthiest corporations are the most prozaic. Mcdonalds, Coca Cola Microsoft etc. None of them force us to do a damn thing.

I cant stand mcdonalds and so I have not spent a dime there in decades and they are helpless to make me do otherwise. That is precisely the opposite of slavery.

SO explain when musk or bezos or anyone else FORCED you to purchase from them. Lack of options does not count.

No one especially YOU can build a communist society without the violence and brutality and bloodshed, you are not that smart. No one is. Explain why you think you can do better than Castro and Mao and Lenin and Stalin and Kim and Pol Pot and MInh and all the others who commited mass murder to bring about the communist revolution and then failed. Why are you so much more gifted so you can make it work better than they did?

Remember the definition of insanity ( or stupidity ) is trying the same idea over and over expecting different results.

You still dodged over my other question. Why would I want to live in a world without money which allows me to engage in peaceful trade with others and instead give all of my labor to the benefit of others while receiving only what others decide I need? Whether I am Bill Gates or just an obscure convenience store clerk my ability is MINE to profit and enrich my own life it is not the right of others to take. The final goal of the perfect communist society dictates that everyone owes all of their ability to others.

You have yet to explain how this society is BETTER.


----------



## 22orchards

progressive hunter said:


> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Erinwltr said:
> 
> 
> 
> US Constitution does not make any mention about "communism is better than capitalism."  So, debate your soiled, stained paintez that your mother is going to wash tomorrow morning.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Constitution of the United States - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the idea is that communism would work better than the constitution and i couldn't really find another place to post this. also quit using ad hominems, they make your point look invalid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> the constitution has lasted 230yr,,, no communist country has made it 75 yrs,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no communist country has ever existed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> OH I forgot youre not that educated,,,
> 
> wait a minute,,, how can you say its better of its never existed before???
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> because the idea of communism is still well explored. by that mentality, innovation is impossible and should be ridiculed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Mainly because it doesn't work , human beings don't operate the way communism says it works. Sorry.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> then you tell me, how does communism work?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> thats simple,,,
> a small group of people at the very top are in charge and you do what they tell you to do or they kill you,,,
Click to expand...

that's not communism, that's totalitarianism


----------



## 22orchards

daveman said:


> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> night_son said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> 
> This has has to be a joke, Communism collapsed like dark matter on itself because all things being equal: It was overrun with demagogues. Like the American Democratic party  supporting race riots and the BLM.
> 
> 
> 
> no country has existed under communism. stop using ad hominems. they make your argument look weaker than it is because you have to employ the use of pathos in a decidedly logos-fueled debate.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> did you forget communism is a form of capitalism???,,, just a smaller group of people keep the profits,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> communism exists under the idea that there is no capital, no money, no class, no private property, and that the people own the means of production.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Fool, communism is a hyper class centric system of government. A dictatorship of the proletariat composed of a few hedonists controls EVERYTHING while the actual proletariat starve and fucking die if they don't worship the party line. The people own nothing. Open a book and read it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> you described capitalism. a dictatorship of the people who own production (it's called the bourgoise by the way), that stand upon the efforts of the working class (the proletariat), who are unable to live how they like because if they don't, they won't have enough money to survive.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Lemme guess...you really don't want to have to get a job.
Click to expand...

i have one


----------



## progressive hunter

22orchards said:


> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Erinwltr said:
> 
> 
> 
> US Constitution does not make any mention about "communism is better than capitalism."  So, debate your soiled, stained paintez that your mother is going to wash tomorrow morning.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Constitution of the United States - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the idea is that communism would work better than the constitution and i couldn't really find another place to post this. also quit using ad hominems, they make your point look invalid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> the constitution has lasted 230yr,,, no communist country has made it 75 yrs,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no communist country has ever existed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> OH I forgot youre not that educated,,,
> 
> wait a minute,,, how can you say its better of its never existed before???
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> because the idea of communism is still well explored. by that mentality, innovation is impossible and should be ridiculed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Under Communism, innovation is impossible.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no it isn't. you're neglecting the idea that maybe people want to learn about stuff for more than just money.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> those things dont benefit a society,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> innovation doesn't benefit a society?
> 
> 
> 
> are you dumb?
Click to expand...

I guess youre right,, refrigeration hasnt had any positive benefit to anyone,,,


----------



## progressive hunter

22orchards said:


> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Erinwltr said:
> 
> 
> 
> US Constitution does not make any mention about "communism is better than capitalism."  So, debate your soiled, stained paintez that your mother is going to wash tomorrow morning.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Constitution of the United States - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the idea is that communism would work better than the constitution and i couldn't really find another place to post this. also quit using ad hominems, they make your point look invalid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> the constitution has lasted 230yr,,, no communist country has made it 75 yrs,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no communist country has ever existed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> OH I forgot youre not that educated,,,
> 
> wait a minute,,, how can you say its better of its never existed before???
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> because the idea of communism is still well explored. by that mentality, innovation is impossible and should be ridiculed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Mainly because it doesn't work , human beings don't operate the way communism says it works. Sorry.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> then you tell me, how does communism work?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> thats simple,,,
> a small group of people at the very top are in charge and you do what they tell you to do or they kill you,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> that's not communism, that's totalitarianism
Click to expand...

thats what communism is,,,

your ignorance on the subject is your problem not mine,,,


----------



## Soupnazi630

22orchards said:


> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> communism is better than capitalism.
> debate me using facts and not ad hominems.
> 
> 
> 
> if you dont accept communism they kill you,,,
> 
> thats a historic fact,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> it's also a historic fact that there's never been a communist country. the very term is an oxymoron.
Click to expand...

Yes there has as I explained. As long as one is working towards the classless stateless society then it is a communist society.

And killing all those who disagree is the approved method of working towards it


----------



## progressive hunter

22orchards said:


> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> night_son said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> communism is better than capitalism.
> debate me using facts and not ad hominems.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TROLL^^^
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> nah capitalism sucks ass
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> only for lazy people,,,
> 
> now communism will kill your ass dead,,,
> 
> I'd rather have my ass sucked than killed,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> where's your evidence that communism would kill my ass dead
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> history over the last 120 yrs,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> at least i wouldn't be making the poor pay all the taxes while the rich sit on their asses and pay 750 a year in taxes
Click to expand...

thats where your education has failed you,,,

the top wage earners pay the most while the lowest 50% pay nothing,,,


----------



## Soupnazi630

22orchards said:


> night_son said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> communism is better than capitalism.
> debate me using facts and not ad hominems.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TROLL^^^
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> nah capitalism sucks ass
Click to expand...


" nah capitalism suck ass "

Typed on a computer and sent over the internet all of which is made possible by capitalism.


----------



## daveman

22orchards said:


> MisterBeale said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> i've been getting a surprising number responses
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh gee. . . shocker!
> 
> What are you. . . 25?  30? 35?  No recollection of the cold war or the Mao's cultural revolution eh?  No memories of Fidel, that it?
> 
> Can't remember the Wall coming down or the E. Germans streaming across the border. . is that your problem?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> the soviets were first in the space race and literally only lost in one single aspect: landing on the moon. also their diet was reported to be healthier than the american diet. and germany was never communist, it was fascist. they aren't the same thing.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that makes up for the millions they killed, doesn't it?


----------



## Wyatt earp

22orchards said:


> Soupnazi630 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> communism is better than capitalism.
> debate me using facts and not ad hominems.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> First one has to define ones terms. Communism is NOT a stateless, moneyless, egalitarian, society where the workers own the means of production. Communism is a political ideology which attempts to move towards that utopian society. Which means so long as one is following the prescribed ideology one is a communist and lives within a communist society.
> 
> This is why modern communists foolishly claim that the USSR and China and Cuba and any other communist nation are not true communist nations. They are communist nations stuck under the dictatprship of the proletariate.
> 
> Marx himself stated that the dictatorship of the proletariate would be necessary to work towards the goal. He specified that no one can know how long the dictatorship will last but that it would last as long as it needs to. Which of course cdan easily mean thousands of years. But as long as that dictatorship claims that they will one day achieve the class less egalitarian society and then the state will whither away and die then that brutal despotic relationship is in fact a communist government. Just skip over the fact but do not forget that NO government just whithers away and dies because they are no longer needed and no government ever will do that.
> 
> Make no mistake Marx also stated that said dictatorship would be despotic and that said despotism would be necessary along with violent terror to exterminate the reactionaries. Which means anyone who disagrees. Modern communists ignore this because they lie endlessly claiming that the dictatorship of the proletariate does not mean a literal dictatorship. When in fact that is precisely what Marx meant. Tyrannical, bloodthirsty, brutal, genocidal, dictatorship. Which is precisely what every communist government is.
> 
> In contrast capitalism does not rely on such burtality but instead relies on respect and peace. When you want something and pay for it it is a peaceful sign of respect that you and the person selling it are exchanging value for value and no one is taking from another by force. Communism demands such force be applied because people do not ever and never will be inclined to just give all that they are capable of giving to others for nothing. This is why " From each according to his ability and to each according to his need " is a description of the ideal communist world AND a description of slavery. Communism and slavery are one and the same. Slaves have their ability taken from them to benefit another while they are given just what they need. Sure slavery has existed in capitalist nations but was proven to be inneffecient and done away with. Communism simply enslaves EVERYONE and cannot exist without universal slavery.
> 
> So if you wish to argue communism is better start by explaining why hanging the words " of the proletariate" after the word dictator makes the dictatorship a good thing. Do not dodge and claim he meant something else. He meant dictatorship and it is absolutely mandatory to have that dictatorship after the revolution. Marx NEVER wrote anything to explain what he meant other than DESPOTISM under the dictatorship.
> 
> Then explain how communism is so much better without money which people use to engage in trade. Without it there is only theft and violence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> firstly: i loved reading your response, super well written, super well thought out, overall i liked it a lot.
> secondly: i guess you and i had different interpretations of what i meant by communism. i meant the end goal, y'know, that utopia _*after*_ all the horrible stuff marx described. when it comes to practicality, capitalism is definitely a lot easier than communism, it doesn't require any transitional period because we already exist in capitalism, right. my personal view (and this varies from person to person) is that ideally, to transition to communism, we would skip over the bloodshed by taking things slower, with a more libertarian socialist approach. with a more controlled transition, we could prevent unneeded deaths, as well as create a more thought out society. it's interesting that you use the term universal slavery, it makes me think of capitalism and how ultimately, we're all slaves to whoever has the most money (i.e. amazon, jeff bezos, elon musk, etc).
Click to expand...

You only have two choices rich private citizens or rich politicians, pick your poison


----------



## Soupnazi630

22orchards said:


> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> night_son said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> communism is better than capitalism.
> debate me using facts and not ad hominems.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TROLL^^^
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> nah capitalism sucks ass
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> only for lazy people,,,
> 
> now communism will kill your ass dead,,,
> 
> I'd rather have my ass sucked than killed,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> where's your evidence that communism would kill my ass dead
Click to expand...

20 million murdered by their own government in the USSR, 50 million the same in china, hundreds of thousands in cambodia and in north vietnam ( not the war casaulties ) millions and still piling up in north korea. hundreds of thousands in cuba if not millions.

It is not possible without genocide.

Notice how no one defends national socialism saying " oh its a great idea and we can make it work without the mass murder of jews"

Because you cannot make it work without said genocide whether you mean naziism or communism.


----------



## Wyatt earp

22orchards said:


> MisterBeale said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> i've been getting a surprising number responses
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh gee. . . shocker!
> 
> What are you. . . 25?  30? 35?  No recollection of the cold war or the Mao's cultural revolution eh?  No memories of Fidel, that it?
> 
> Can't remember the Wall coming down or the E. Germans streaming across the border. . is that your problem?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> the soviets were first in the space race and literally only lost in one single aspect: landing on the moon. also their diet was reported to be healthier than the american diet. and germany was never communist, it was fascist. they aren't the same thing.
Click to expand...

Of vodka???


----------



## Soupnazi630

22orchards said:


> MisterBeale said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> i've been getting a surprising number responses
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh gee. . . shocker!
> 
> What are you. . . 25?  30? 35?  No recollection of the cold war or the Mao's cultural revolution eh?  No memories of Fidel, that it?
> 
> Can't remember the Wall coming down or the E. Germans streaming across the border. . is that your problem?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> the soviets were first in the space race and literally only lost in one single aspect: landing on the moon. also their diet was reported to be healthier than the american diet. and germany was never communist, it was fascist. they aren't the same thing.
Click to expand...


Yes they did accomplish a list of firsts in the space race. Which means ? ..................nothing. Their diet was never reported to be better outside of state propaganda which was proven to be fiction. During the holodomor which, was deliberately implemented by lenin and stalin , the state propaganda agency had to print posters adminishing people that it is " immoral to eat your own children ". This was necessary because they deliberately starved people into submission with such effectiveness that parents were eating the bodies of their own kids.

All through the seventies and eighties they HAD to import massive amouunts of grain from the US which was surplus from our farmers. This is because they could not feed their own population despite having many times more fertile and rich farmland than the US does.

The average soviet citizen often had to send boys into the woods to find wild birds nests to collect small eggs because they lacked protein.

But yes they shot a few people into space ahead of us without so much as a wiondow to observe the environment of space and learn a few things

East Germany was communist after wwII.


----------



## night_son

One fucking word defines communism. Never forget it.

DEMOCIDE

Look it up.


----------



## MisterBeale

22orchards said:


> MisterBeale said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> i've been getting a surprising number responses
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh gee. . . shocker!
> 
> What are you. . . 25?  30? 35?  No recollection of the cold war or the Mao's cultural revolution eh?  No memories of Fidel, that it?
> 
> Can't remember the Wall coming down or the E. Germans streaming across the border. . is that your problem?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> the soviets were first in the space race and literally only lost in one single aspect: landing on the moon. also their diet was reported to be healthier than the american diet. and germany was never communist, it was fascist. they aren't the same thing.
Click to expand...

IOW. . . You ARE a millenial, and you didn't live that history, you only know what you have been propagandized with, read out of books, or think you know.

I am not talking about Nazi Germany, I am talking about Communist E. Germany.  The *German 'democratic' Republic?*  eh?




And your statements about the Soviet diet?  Preposterous.  Malnutrition was the real problem they had toward the end.  And in the beginning?  Have you even heard of the  *The Holodomor* ?

The amount of food you were allotted depended greatly on your patronage of the party line, not on how well you worked, or your contribution to society.  It was all about who you knew, everything in society was politicized.  Corruption was terrible, worse than it is now in the U.S.  That is always that case with large government controlled societies, whether they are right wing or left wing.  

This is what the situation looked like in a typical supermarket in Moscow, right before the end.  It was worse than second world nations like Mexico. . . and they were the world's supposed second most powerful nation.  The only folks that lived half-way decent lives were yes, cosmonauts, scientists and scholars, top rank military and politicians, and Olympiads and propagandists. . . everyone else suffered.  That is the way it has been in EVERY COMMUNIST NATION THAT HAS EVER EXISTED.   The only exception is those that have chosen *Dirigisme*. But then, those aren't really communism, are they? China, has sort of, morphed into state capitalism, hasn't it?



. . . now.  Do we have problems in the US today because of government collusion with industry, and the elite classes causing corruption and lawlessness in society?  You bet.  Are we headed toward total societal breakdown like the Soviet Union. . . probably, if the elites controlling the show don't get their act together and wise up.

. . . but, bear this in mind, THEY are the one brainwashing you with delusions of technocracy, don't swallow that poison, it won't lead to utopia, only slavery, prison, destitution and death.


----------



## MisterBeale

"When anybody preaches disunity, tries to pit one of us against the other through class warfare, race hatred, or religious intolerance, you know that person seeks to rob us of our freedom and destroy our very lives."


----------



## Deplorable Yankee

progressive hunter said:


> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Erinwltr said:
> 
> 
> 
> US Constitution does not make any mention about "communism is better than capitalism."  So, debate your soiled, stained paintez that your mother is going to wash tomorrow morning.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Constitution of the United States - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the idea is that communism would work better than the constitution and i couldn't really find another place to post this. also quit using ad hominems, they make your point look invalid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> the constitution has lasted 230yr,,, no communist country has made it 75 yrs,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no communist country has ever existed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> OH I forgot youre not that educated,,,
> 
> wait a minute,,, how can you say its better of its never existed before???
Click to expand...


does not compute in the useful idiots mind


----------



## Mikeoxenormous

22orchards said:


> Soupnazi630 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> communism is better than capitalism.
> debate me using facts and not ad hominems.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> First one has to define ones terms. Communism is NOT a stateless, moneyless, egalitarian, society where the workers own the means of production. Communism is a political ideology which attempts to move towards that utopian society. Which means so long as one is following the prescribed ideology one is a communist and lives within a communist society.
> 
> This is why modern communists foolishly claim that the USSR and China and Cuba and any other communist nation are not true communist nations. They are communist nations stuck under the dictatprship of the proletariate.
> 
> Marx himself stated that the dictatorship of the proletariate would be necessary to work towards the goal. He specified that no one can know how long the dictatorship will last but that it would last as long as it needs to. Which of course cdan easily mean thousands of years. But as long as that dictatorship claims that they will one day achieve the class less egalitarian society and then the state will whither away and die then that brutal despotic relationship is in fact a communist government. Just skip over the fact but do not forget that NO government just whithers away and dies because they are no longer needed and no government ever will do that.
> 
> Make no mistake Marx also stated that said dictatorship would be despotic and that said despotism would be necessary along with violent terror to exterminate the reactionaries. Which means anyone who disagrees. Modern communists ignore this because they lie endlessly claiming that the dictatorship of the proletariate does not mean a literal dictatorship. When in fact that is precisely what Marx meant. Tyrannical, bloodthirsty, brutal, genocidal, dictatorship. Which is precisely what every communist government is.
> 
> In contrast capitalism does not rely on such burtality but instead relies on respect and peace. When you want something and pay for it it is a peaceful sign of respect that you and the person selling it are exchanging value for value and no one is taking from another by force. Communism demands such force be applied because people do not ever and never will be inclined to just give all that they are capable of giving to others for nothing. This is why " From each according to his ability and to each according to his need " is a description of the ideal communist world AND a description of slavery. Communism and slavery are one and the same. Slaves have their ability taken from them to benefit another while they are given just what they need. Sure slavery has existed in capitalist nations but was proven to be inneffecient and done away with. Communism simply enslaves EVERYONE and cannot exist without universal slavery.
> 
> So if you wish to argue communism is better start by explaining why hanging the words " of the proletariate" after the word dictator makes the dictatorship a good thing. Do not dodge and claim he meant something else. He meant dictatorship and it is absolutely mandatory to have that dictatorship after the revolution. Marx NEVER wrote anything to explain what he meant other than DESPOTISM under the dictatorship.
> 
> Then explain how communism is so much better without money which people use to engage in trade. Without it there is only theft and violence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> firstly: i loved reading your response, super well written, super well thought out, overall i liked it a lot.
> secondly: i guess you and i had different interpretations of what i meant by communism. i meant the end goal, y'know, that utopia _*after*_ all the horrible stuff marx described. when it comes to practicality, capitalism is definitely a lot easier than communism, it doesn't require any transitional period because we already exist in capitalism, right. my personal view (and this varies from person to person) is that ideally, to transition to communism, we would skip over the bloodshed by taking things slower, with a more libertarian socialist approach. with a more controlled transition, we could prevent unneeded deaths, as well as create a more thought out society. it's interesting that you use the term universal slavery, it makes me think of capitalism and how ultimately, we're all slaves to whoever has the most money (i.e. amazon, jeff bezos, elon musk, etc).
Click to expand...

Why dont you go to Cuba, where you can try out your Communistic Utopian Dream for a few years, get back to me with your opinion then we can talk....


I knew a reporter like you, who ended up going there and report on what Communism is like, he came back a confirmed capitalist.


----------



## Mikeoxenormous

22orchards said:


> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> night_son said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> communism is better than capitalism.
> debate me using facts and not ad hominems.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TROLL^^^
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> nah capitalism sucks ass
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> only for lazy people,,,
> 
> now communism will kill your ass dead,,,
> 
> I'd rather have my ass sucked than killed,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> where's your evidence that communism would kill my ass dead
Click to expand...

want to take that risk, that you could be one of the many?


----------



## verker

22orchards said:


> communism is better than capitalism.
> debate me using facts and not ad hominems.



Self will capitalism in US than the East policy communism.



22orchards said:


> communism is better than capitalism.



No because capitalism is better in Canada, US, Brazil and Europe.

And Canada heavy capitalism of the world.

And two leading conservative party in 2019 election sprint.

And hence the conservative party won Canadian election's.


----------



## Mikeoxenormous

Communism is like a Union.  Some people work hard, and want to keep what they have worked hard to produce.  There are some people who barely work, ride the coattails of the hard working person, yet wants to get the same as the hard working person.  What ends up is the hard working person, decides that this is bullshit then stops working as hard thus getting less over all.

This shit has been introduced here in this country before, it didnt work, but when it went Capitalist, it became a power house country.









						The Pilgrims’ Failed Experiment With Socialism Should Teach America A Lesson - Off The Grid News
					

Listen To The Article Socialism doesn’t work. Just ask the Pilgrims. Most Americans are familiar with the story of the Puritans landing at Plymouth Rock in 1620, but few perhaps understand their early experiment with socialism and how its failure led them to embrace individual-driven capitalism...




					www.offthegridnews.com
				





" 

“Today we would call this a socialist commune,” Patton wrote. “In other words, the Pilgrims accepted the socialist principle, ‘from each according to his ability, to each according to his need.’ Each person was to place his production into the common warehouse and receive back, through the Governor, only what he needed for himself or his family. The surplus after seven years was to be divided equally, along with the houses, lands, and chattels, ‘betwixt the Adventurers and Planters.’”

The Pilgrims actually wanted to own their own lands and homes and to work two days a week for their own gain, but the adventurers would not allow it.

Once the agreement was signed, two ships were outfitted for the journey, the _Speedwell _and the _Mayflower_. But the _Speedwell_ proved unseaworthy, so everyone still willing to make the journey—102 persons—crowded aboard the _Mayflower_ and set sail.

Patton wrote that after landing on Dec 21, 1620, the Pilgrims suffered horribly their first winter, with around half the colonists perishing. Aid from the now-famous native, Squanto, helped them survive with new planting techniques, but the harvests of 1621 and 1622 were still small.

The colony’s governor, William Bradford, wrote that its socialist philosophy greatly hindered its growth: Young men resented working for the benefit of other men’s wives and children without compensation; healthy men who worked thought it unjust that they received no more food than weak men who could not; wives resented doing household chores for other men, considering it a kind of slavery.

Governor Bradford wrote that to avoid famine in 1623, the Pilgrims abandoned socialism, Patton said.

“At length, after much debate of things, the Governor (with the advice of the chiefest amongst them) gave way that they should set corn every man for his own particular, and in that regard trust to themselves; in all other things to go on in the general way as before. And so assigned to every family a parcel of land,” Bradford wrote.

The colonists, each of whom now had to grow their own food, suddenly became very industrious, with women and children who earlier claimed weakness now going into the fields to plant corn. Three times the amount of corn was planted that year under the new system.

When a drought threatened the year’s harvest, Governor Bradford called a day of fasting and prayer to “seek the Lord by humble and fervent prayer in this great distress.” God answered that same night with rain that continued in coming days, and the year brought a plentiful harvest.

“By the fall of 1624, the colonists were able to export a full boat load of corn!” Patton wrote. “And the Pilgrims settled with the Adventurers. They purchased the Adventurers stock in the colony and completed the transition to private property and free markets.” "


----------



## verker

U.S.S.R. inception each on hundred year then however US encounter neer the Union.


----------



## 22orchards

verker said:


> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> communism is better than capitalism.
> debate me using facts and not ad hominems.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Self will capitalism in US than the East policy communism.
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> communism is better than capitalism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No because capitalism is better in Canada, US, Brazil and Europe.
> 
> And Canada heavy capitalism of the world.
> 
> And two leading conservative party in 2019 election sprint.
> 
> And hence the conservative party won Canadian election's.
Click to expand...

i'm not sure what you're trying to say here.


----------



## 22orchards

andaronjim said:


> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> night_son said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> communism is better than capitalism.
> debate me using facts and not ad hominems.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TROLL^^^
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> nah capitalism sucks ass
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> only for lazy people,,,
> 
> now communism will kill your ass dead,,,
> 
> I'd rather have my ass sucked than killed,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> where's your evidence that communism would kill my ass dead
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> want to take that risk, that you could be one of the many?
> View attachment 412050
Click to expand...

i'd love to


----------



## 22orchards

andaronjim said:


> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soupnazi630 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> communism is better than capitalism.
> debate me using facts and not ad hominems.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> First one has to define ones terms. Communism is NOT a stateless, moneyless, egalitarian, society where the workers own the means of production. Communism is a political ideology which attempts to move towards that utopian society. Which means so long as one is following the prescribed ideology one is a communist and lives within a communist society.
> 
> This is why modern communists foolishly claim that the USSR and China and Cuba and any other communist nation are not true communist nations. They are communist nations stuck under the dictatprship of the proletariate.
> 
> Marx himself stated that the dictatorship of the proletariate would be necessary to work towards the goal. He specified that no one can know how long the dictatorship will last but that it would last as long as it needs to. Which of course cdan easily mean thousands of years. But as long as that dictatorship claims that they will one day achieve the class less egalitarian society and then the state will whither away and die then that brutal despotic relationship is in fact a communist government. Just skip over the fact but do not forget that NO government just whithers away and dies because they are no longer needed and no government ever will do that.
> 
> Make no mistake Marx also stated that said dictatorship would be despotic and that said despotism would be necessary along with violent terror to exterminate the reactionaries. Which means anyone who disagrees. Modern communists ignore this because they lie endlessly claiming that the dictatorship of the proletariate does not mean a literal dictatorship. When in fact that is precisely what Marx meant. Tyrannical, bloodthirsty, brutal, genocidal, dictatorship. Which is precisely what every communist government is.
> 
> In contrast capitalism does not rely on such burtality but instead relies on respect and peace. When you want something and pay for it it is a peaceful sign of respect that you and the person selling it are exchanging value for value and no one is taking from another by force. Communism demands such force be applied because people do not ever and never will be inclined to just give all that they are capable of giving to others for nothing. This is why " From each according to his ability and to each according to his need " is a description of the ideal communist world AND a description of slavery. Communism and slavery are one and the same. Slaves have their ability taken from them to benefit another while they are given just what they need. Sure slavery has existed in capitalist nations but was proven to be inneffecient and done away with. Communism simply enslaves EVERYONE and cannot exist without universal slavery.
> 
> So if you wish to argue communism is better start by explaining why hanging the words " of the proletariate" after the word dictator makes the dictatorship a good thing. Do not dodge and claim he meant something else. He meant dictatorship and it is absolutely mandatory to have that dictatorship after the revolution. Marx NEVER wrote anything to explain what he meant other than DESPOTISM under the dictatorship.
> 
> Then explain how communism is so much better without money which people use to engage in trade. Without it there is only theft and violence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> firstly: i loved reading your response, super well written, super well thought out, overall i liked it a lot.
> secondly: i guess you and i had different interpretations of what i meant by communism. i meant the end goal, y'know, that utopia _*after*_ all the horrible stuff marx described. when it comes to practicality, capitalism is definitely a lot easier than communism, it doesn't require any transitional period because we already exist in capitalism, right. my personal view (and this varies from person to person) is that ideally, to transition to communism, we would skip over the bloodshed by taking things slower, with a more libertarian socialist approach. with a more controlled transition, we could prevent unneeded deaths, as well as create a more thought out society. it's interesting that you use the term universal slavery, it makes me think of capitalism and how ultimately, we're all slaves to whoever has the most money (i.e. amazon, jeff bezos, elon musk, etc).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why dont you go to Cuba, where you can try out your Communistic Utopian Dream for a few years, get back to me with your opinion then we can talk....
> 
> 
> I knew a reporter like you, who ended up going there and report on what Communism is like, he came back a confirmed capitalist.
Click to expand...

i'd love to


----------



## verker

22orchards said:


> verker said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> communism is better than capitalism.
> debate me using facts and not ad hominems.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Self will capitalism in US than the East policy communism.
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> communism is better than capitalism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No because capitalism is better in Canada, US, Brazil and Europe.
> 
> And Canada heavy capitalism of the world.
> 
> And two leading conservative party in 2019 election sprint.
> 
> And hence the conservative party won Canadian election's.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> i'm not sure what you're trying to say here.
Click to expand...


Say to lyrics cum debate????


----------



## verker

22orchards said:


> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Erinwltr said:
> 
> 
> 
> US Constitution does not make any mention about "communism is better than capitalism."  So, debate your soiled, stained paintez that your mother is going to wash tomorrow morning.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Constitution of the United States - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the idea is that communism would work better than the constitution and i couldn't really find another place to post this. also quit using ad hominems, they make your point look invalid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> the constitution has lasted 230yr,,, no communist country has made it 75 yrs,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no communist country has ever existed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> OH I forgot youre not that educated,,,
> 
> wait a minute,,, how can you say its better of its never existed before???
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> because the idea of communism is still well explored. by that mentality, innovation is impossible and should be ridiculed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Mainly because it doesn't work , human beings don't operate the way communism says it works. Sorry.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> then you tell me, how does communism work?
Click to expand...


Communist's lies to the right even in massacre in Vietnam conflicts.


----------



## Mikeoxenormous

22orchards said:


> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soupnazi630 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> communism is better than capitalism.
> debate me using facts and not ad hominems.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> First one has to define ones terms. Communism is NOT a stateless, moneyless, egalitarian, society where the workers own the means of production. Communism is a political ideology which attempts to move towards that utopian society. Which means so long as one is following the prescribed ideology one is a communist and lives within a communist society.
> 
> This is why modern communists foolishly claim that the USSR and China and Cuba and any other communist nation are not true communist nations. They are communist nations stuck under the dictatprship of the proletariate.
> 
> Marx himself stated that the dictatorship of the proletariate would be necessary to work towards the goal. He specified that no one can know how long the dictatorship will last but that it would last as long as it needs to. Which of course cdan easily mean thousands of years. But as long as that dictatorship claims that they will one day achieve the class less egalitarian society and then the state will whither away and die then that brutal despotic relationship is in fact a communist government. Just skip over the fact but do not forget that NO government just whithers away and dies because they are no longer needed and no government ever will do that.
> 
> Make no mistake Marx also stated that said dictatorship would be despotic and that said despotism would be necessary along with violent terror to exterminate the reactionaries. Which means anyone who disagrees. Modern communists ignore this because they lie endlessly claiming that the dictatorship of the proletariate does not mean a literal dictatorship. When in fact that is precisely what Marx meant. Tyrannical, bloodthirsty, brutal, genocidal, dictatorship. Which is precisely what every communist government is.
> 
> In contrast capitalism does not rely on such burtality but instead relies on respect and peace. When you want something and pay for it it is a peaceful sign of respect that you and the person selling it are exchanging value for value and no one is taking from another by force. Communism demands such force be applied because people do not ever and never will be inclined to just give all that they are capable of giving to others for nothing. This is why " From each according to his ability and to each according to his need " is a description of the ideal communist world AND a description of slavery. Communism and slavery are one and the same. Slaves have their ability taken from them to benefit another while they are given just what they need. Sure slavery has existed in capitalist nations but was proven to be inneffecient and done away with. Communism simply enslaves EVERYONE and cannot exist without universal slavery.
> 
> So if you wish to argue communism is better start by explaining why hanging the words " of the proletariate" after the word dictator makes the dictatorship a good thing. Do not dodge and claim he meant something else. He meant dictatorship and it is absolutely mandatory to have that dictatorship after the revolution. Marx NEVER wrote anything to explain what he meant other than DESPOTISM under the dictatorship.
> 
> Then explain how communism is so much better without money which people use to engage in trade. Without it there is only theft and violence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> firstly: i loved reading your response, super well written, super well thought out, overall i liked it a lot.
> secondly: i guess you and i had different interpretations of what i meant by communism. i meant the end goal, y'know, that utopia _*after*_ all the horrible stuff marx described. when it comes to practicality, capitalism is definitely a lot easier than communism, it doesn't require any transitional period because we already exist in capitalism, right. my personal view (and this varies from person to person) is that ideally, to transition to communism, we would skip over the bloodshed by taking things slower, with a more libertarian socialist approach. with a more controlled transition, we could prevent unneeded deaths, as well as create a more thought out society. it's interesting that you use the term universal slavery, it makes me think of capitalism and how ultimately, we're all slaves to whoever has the most money (i.e. amazon, jeff bezos, elon musk, etc).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why dont you go to Cuba, where you can try out your Communistic Utopian Dream for a few years, get back to me with your opinion then we can talk....
> 
> 
> I knew a reporter like you, who ended up going there and report on what Communism is like, he came back a confirmed capitalist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> i'd love to
Click to expand...

If you dont mind me asking, What skills do you have that makes you a valuable asset to society?


----------



## verker

22orchards said:


> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Erinwltr said:
> 
> 
> 
> US Constitution does not make any mention about "communism is better than capitalism."  So, debate your soiled, stained paintez that your mother is going to wash tomorrow morning.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Constitution of the United States - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the idea is that communism would work better than the constitution and i couldn't really find another place to post this. also quit using ad hominems, they make your point look invalid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> the constitution has lasted 230yr,,, no communist country has made it 75 yrs,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no communist country has ever existed.
Click to expand...


The are idiot thou feel off Cuba.


----------



## Soupnazi630

22orchards said:


> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Soupnazi630 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> communism is better than capitalism.
> debate me using facts and not ad hominems.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> First one has to define ones terms. Communism is NOT a stateless, moneyless, egalitarian, society where the workers own the means of production. Communism is a political ideology which attempts to move towards that utopian society. Which means so long as one is following the prescribed ideology one is a communist and lives within a communist society.
> 
> This is why modern communists foolishly claim that the USSR and China and Cuba and any other communist nation are not true communist nations. They are communist nations stuck under the dictatprship of the proletariate.
> 
> Marx himself stated that the dictatorship of the proletariate would be necessary to work towards the goal. He specified that no one can know how long the dictatorship will last but that it would last as long as it needs to. Which of course cdan easily mean thousands of years. But as long as that dictatorship claims that they will one day achieve the class less egalitarian society and then the state will whither away and die then that brutal despotic relationship is in fact a communist government. Just skip over the fact but do not forget that NO government just whithers away and dies because they are no longer needed and no government ever will do that.
> 
> Make no mistake Marx also stated that said dictatorship would be despotic and that said despotism would be necessary along with violent terror to exterminate the reactionaries. Which means anyone who disagrees. Modern communists ignore this because they lie endlessly claiming that the dictatorship of the proletariate does not mean a literal dictatorship. When in fact that is precisely what Marx meant. Tyrannical, bloodthirsty, brutal, genocidal, dictatorship. Which is precisely what every communist government is.
> 
> In contrast capitalism does not rely on such burtality but instead relies on respect and peace. When you want something and pay for it it is a peaceful sign of respect that you and the person selling it are exchanging value for value and no one is taking from another by force. Communism demands such force be applied because people do not ever and never will be inclined to just give all that they are capable of giving to others for nothing. This is why " From each according to his ability and to each according to his need " is a description of the ideal communist world AND a description of slavery. Communism and slavery are one and the same. Slaves have their ability taken from them to benefit another while they are given just what they need. Sure slavery has existed in capitalist nations but was proven to be inneffecient and done away with. Communism simply enslaves EVERYONE and cannot exist without universal slavery.
> 
> So if you wish to argue communism is better start by explaining why hanging the words " of the proletariate" after the word dictator makes the dictatorship a good thing. Do not dodge and claim he meant something else. He meant dictatorship and it is absolutely mandatory to have that dictatorship after the revolution. Marx NEVER wrote anything to explain what he meant other than DESPOTISM under the dictatorship.
> 
> Then explain how communism is so much better without money which people use to engage in trade. Without it there is only theft and violence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> firstly: i loved reading your response, super well written, super well thought out, overall i liked it a lot.
> secondly: i guess you and i had different interpretations of what i meant by communism. i meant the end goal, y'know, that utopia _*after*_ all the horrible stuff marx described. when it comes to practicality, capitalism is definitely a lot easier than communism, it doesn't require any transitional period because we already exist in capitalism, right. my personal view (and this varies from person to person) is that ideally, to transition to communism, we would skip over the bloodshed by taking things slower, with a more libertarian socialist approach. with a more controlled transition, we could prevent unneeded deaths, as well as create a more thought out society. it's interesting that you use the term universal slavery, it makes me think of capitalism and how ultimately, we're all slaves to whoever has the most money (i.e. amazon, jeff bezos, elon musk, etc).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why dont you go to Cuba, where you can try out your Communistic Utopian Dream for a few years, get back to me with your opinion then we can talk....
> 
> 
> I knew a reporter like you, who ended up going there and report on what Communism is like, he came back a confirmed capitalist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> i'd love to
Click to expand...

why are you still here?


----------



## Soupnazi630

22orchards said:


> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> night_son said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> communism is better than capitalism.
> debate me using facts and not ad hominems.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TROLL^^^
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> nah capitalism sucks ass
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> only for lazy people,,,
> 
> now communism will kill your ass dead,,,
> 
> I'd rather have my ass sucked than killed,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> where's your evidence that communism would kill my ass dead
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> want to take that risk, that you could be one of the many?
> View attachment 412050
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> i'd love to
Click to expand...

So your ok with mass murder to achieve your ends 

Now you know why communism is evil


----------



## daveman

22orchards said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> night_son said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> 
> This has has to be a joke, Communism collapsed like dark matter on itself because all things being equal: It was overrun with demagogues. Like the American Democratic party  supporting race riots and the BLM.
> 
> 
> 
> no country has existed under communism. stop using ad hominems. they make your argument look weaker than it is because you have to employ the use of pathos in a decidedly logos-fueled debate.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> did you forget communism is a form of capitalism???,,, just a smaller group of people keep the profits,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> communism exists under the idea that there is no capital, no money, no class, no private property, and that the people own the means of production.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Fool, communism is a hyper class centric system of government. A dictatorship of the proletariat composed of a few hedonists controls EVERYTHING while the actual proletariat starve and fucking die if they don't worship the party line. The people own nothing. Open a book and read it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> you described capitalism. a dictatorship of the people who own production (it's called the bourgoise by the way), that stand upon the efforts of the working class (the proletariat), who are unable to live how they like because if they don't, they won't have enough money to survive.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Lemme guess...you really don't want to have to get a job.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> i have one
Click to expand...

Uh huh.


----------



## DGS49

"Communism" is a form of socialism.  Socialism is a form of government in which the Sovereign owns all of the means of production (factories, farms, hospitals, mills, mines, etc.), the workers all work for the Sovereign, and the Sovereign distributes goods and services according to the Sovereign's view of who needs what.  This is why stores in socialist countries are either empty or filled with shit that nobody actually needs or wants.  Regardless of which term you use, it is based on THEFT.  The Sovereign steals the property of the People and steals the products of their labor, then passes it out according to the whims of bureaucrats.  Which is why workers in those countries have the worst productivity in the world.

While the U.S. founding documents - the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution - do not mention "capitalism" by name, they presume private ownership of property and a God-given right to pursue happiness - which is to say, to prosper, economically.  So they foster the OPPOSITE of socialism, which happens to be capitalism.

The Federal Government is a government of strictly limited powers - at least theoretically - and those powers are to be exercised for the common good, as defined in Article I, Section 8.  (U.S. Constitution - Article 1 Section 8 - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net). All of the benefits bestowed by the Federal government are PUBLIC benefits - the post office, the banking system, the armed forces, the patent and copyright office, and so on - no private benefits.

There is not a single power granted to Congress that envisions Federal taxpayer money going into the pocket of any individual or corporate entity...ever.  No welfare, no housing subsidies, no college grants or Small Business grants, no farm subsidies, no food stamps...none of that.

And to be political for a moment, this is why the Left is petrified of having an "Originalist" Supreme Court.  Almost half of all Congressional spending is unconstitutional.  The government spending that (mainly) Leftists rely upon to buy votes is a figurative House of Cards, that could be toppled in a moment if the right case were to come before a "Conservative" Supreme Court.


----------



## verker

Either communism and socialism is communism these too marxism and leftism so it is ...


----------



## verker

Everybody black assert how Hitler is the evil politician harm he blubber according to mama decease.


----------



## verker

*The silly Marxist left are familiar with this techno song it is the Marxist left's modern music they did not dance to the song because the Marxist left is not too rigid in their body rhythm the Marxist left like football more than hockey I think I know their faith and their faith too communism and socialism and all of them are against the metal music of western culture and they want to meet us and the US in the military.*


----------



## Monk-Eye

*" Contacting NSA And CIA To Have Your Immigration Status Investigated "

* Puerto Rican Idiot And Take Beijing Biden With You **


22orchards said:


> communism is better than capitalism.
> debate me using facts and not ad hominems.





			https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title8-section1424&num=0&edition=prelim
		

*§1424. Prohibition upon the naturalization of persons opposed to government or law, or who favor totalitarian forms of government*
_(a) Notwithstanding the provisions of section 405(b) of this Act, *no person shall hereafter be naturalized as a citizen of the United States-*_
*
(1) who advocates or teaches, or who is a member of or affiliated with any organization that advocates or teaches, opposition to all organized government; or
*
_*(2) who is a member of or affiliated with (A) the Communist Party of the United States; (B) any other totalitarian party of the United States; (C) the Communist Political Association; (D) the Communist or other totalitarian party of any State of the United States, of any foreign state, or of any political or geographical subdivision of any foreign state; (E) any section, subsidiary, branch, affiliate, or subdivision of any such association or party; or (F) the direct predecessors or successors of any such association or party, regardless of what name such group or organization may have used, may now bear, or may hereafter adopt, *unless such alien establishes that he did not have knowledge or reason to believe at the time he became a member of or affiliated with such an organization (and did not thereafter and prior to the date upon which such organization was so registered or so required to be registered have such knowledge or reason to believe) that such organization was a Communist-front organization; or
_
_*(3) who, although not within any of the other provisions of this section, advocates the economic, international, and governmental doctrines of world communism or the establishment in the United States *of a totalitarian dictatorship, or who is a member of or affiliated with any organization that advocates the economic, international, and governmental doctrines of world communism or the establishment in the United States of a totalitarian dictatorship, either through its own utterances or through any written or printed publications issued or published by or with the permission or consent of or under authority of such organization or paid for by the funds of such organization; or_


----------



## verker

Socialism, social and economic doctrine that calls for public rather than private ownership or control of property private ownership and natural resources. According to the socialist view, individuals do not live or work in isolation but live in cooperation with one another. Furthermore, everything that people produce is in some sense a social product, and everyone who contributes to the production of a good is entitled to a share in it. Society as a whole, therefore, should own or at least control property for the benefit of all its members.

This conviction puts socialism in opposition to capitalism, which is based on private ownership of the means of production and allows individual choices in a free market to determine how goods and services are distributed. Socialists complain that capitalism necessarily leads to unfair and exploitative concentrations of wealth and power in the hands of the relative few who emerge victorious from free-market competition—people who then use their wealth and power to reinforce their dominance in society. Because such people are rich, they may choose where and how to live, and their choices in turn limit the options of the poor. As a result, terms such as _individual freedom_ and _equality of opportunity_ may be meaningful for capitalists but can only ring hollow for working people, who must do the capitalists’ bidding if they are to survive. As socialists see it, true freedom and true equality require social control of the resources that provide the basis for prosperity in any society. Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels made this point in Manifesto_ of the Communist Party _(1848) when they proclaimed that in a socialist society “the condition for the free development of each is the free development of all.”

This fundamental conviction nevertheless leaves room for socialists to disagree among themselves with regard to two key points. The first concerns the extent and the kind of property that society should own or control. Some socialists have thought that almost everything except personal items such as clothing should be public property; this is true, for example, of the society envisioned by the English humanist Sir Thomas More in his _Utopia_ (1516). Other socialists, however, have been willing to accept or even welcome private ownership of farms, shops, and other small or medium-sized businesses.


----------



## TNHarley

Communism can work in small groups.
No, no true communist country has never existed. Because it is a pipedream. People wont give up their power. That has been shown over and over with millions of lives lost.
Capitalism is freedom. There is also no capitalist countries. Obviously.
A pipe dream vs. Freedom. Hmmm


----------



## Zorro!




----------



## theHawk

22orchards said:


> communism is better than capitalism.
> debate me using facts and not ad hominems.


Move to Cuba, North Korea, or China and let us know how much better life is.


----------



## theHawk

Zorro! said:


> View attachment 425502


Communists fly quite well...


----------



## justinacolmena

Monk-Eye said:


> §1424. Prohibition upon the naturalization of persons opposed to government or law, or who favor totalitarian forms of government


That covers the entire Democratic Party of the United States.


----------



## Monk-Eye

*" Authoritarian Arrogance And The Wise King Meme "

* Contradiction Of Paradox Offering Liberty Through Bondage **


verker said:


> Socialism, social and economic doctrine that calls for public rather than private ownership or control of property private ownership and natural resources. According to the socialist view, individuals do not live or work in isolation but live in cooperation with one another. Furthermore, everything that people produce is in some sense a social product, and everyone who contributes to the production of a good is entitled to a share in it. Society as a whole, therefore, should own or at least control property for the benefit of all its members.
> 
> This conviction puts socialism in opposition to capitalism, which is based on private ownership of the means of production and allows individual choices in a free market to determine how goods and services are distributed. Socialists complain that capitalism necessarily leads to unfair and exploitative concentrations of wealth and power in the hands of the relative few who emerge victorious from free-market competition—people who then use their wealth and power to reinforce their dominance in society. Because such people are rich, they may choose where and how to live, and their choices in turn limit the options of the poor. As a result, terms such as _individual freedom_ and _equality of opportunity_ may be meaningful for capitalists but can only ring hollow for working people, who must do the capitalists’ bidding if they are to survive. As socialists see it, true freedom and true equality require social control of the resources that provide the basis for prosperity in any society. Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels made this point in Manifesto_ of the Communist Party _(1848) when they proclaimed that in a socialist society “the condition for the free development of each is the free development of all.”
> 
> *This fundamental conviction nevertheless leaves room for socialists to disagree among themselves with regard to two key points. The first concerns the extent and the kind of property that society should own or control. Some socialists have thought that almost everything except personal items such as clothing should be public property; this is true, for example, of the society envisioned by the English humanist Sir Thomas More in his Utopia (1516). Other socialists, however, have been willing to accept or even welcome private ownership of farms, shops, and other small or medium-sized businesses.*



The ignorance of a belief in collective ownership is its ambition to replace the hierarchy of capitalism with a hierarchy of bureaucracy , through a lie that replacing a dual system of free enterprise and bureaucracy with a single bureauracracy system will somehow guarantee all individuals greater opportunities for liberty and wealth  .

While successes and failures of individuals are available through capitalism , the socialist ignores the great benefits of capitalism and dramatizes misfortunes of capitalism as an excuse for others to adopt its platform without ever relating the deleterious consequences to individual liberty and wealth of its dictatorial ideals - a sales pitch for a mentality of buy this because that is bad without consideration for why this is bad .

The socialist promotes egalitarianism as a virtue to be implemented through collective ownership , while failing to disclose that collective ownership deprives individuals of exceptionalism and reward for their efforts that consequently results in a bland , uniform , mediocrity , while bureaurats having zero actual intent to apply egalitarianism to themselves bequeath the sparse remaining vestiges of individual freedom and wealth to themselves by kleptocracy and harumph authoritarian dictates .

While plutocracy and oligarchy are capable of suppressing and even destroying individual liberty , the public has recourse to free enterprise collaboration as well as a greater individual of state to ensure that truly deleterious circumstances are mitigated .

Alternatively , socialism seeks to destroy capitalism so that only government remains - against which no individual may stand , through arrogance with ignorance for getting rid of a system far more capable of facilitating individual liberty and wealth than its own , while socialists promote its religion of secular humanism dictating everyone be indoctrinated into selflessness , or else suffer the punishments from its theocracy where bureaucrats are gawd .

** Authoritarianism And Libertarianism Are Antonyms **






						A Treatise of Legal Philosophy on Adequate Political Science Terms for Civics Pedagogy
					

" A Treatise of Legal Philosophy on Adequate Political Science Terms for Civics Pedagogy "  * Obfuscation Mock Heir Clock Hair *  There is little doubt regarding my disdain for a liberal versus conservative paradigm as it is as near to intellectual buffoonery as one could conceive , as the...



					www.usmessageboard.com
				








						Political Science Terminology : Negative / Positive : Wrights / Liberties : Protections / Endowments
					

" Political Science Terminology : Negative / Positive : Wrights / Liberties : Protections / Endowments "  * Express Agreement Or Disagreement With These Premises *  Does any agree or disagree that " equal wrights " advocates must make a distinction between negative and positive wrights ?   Does...



					www.usmessageboard.com


----------



## Zorro!

Monk-Eye said:


> *" Authoritarian Arrogance And The Wise King Meme "
> 
> * Contradiction Of Paradox Offering Liberty Through Bondage **
> 
> 
> verker said:
> 
> 
> 
> Socialism, social and economic doctrine that calls for public rather than private ownership or control of property private ownership and natural resources. According to the socialist view, individuals do not live or work in isolation but live in cooperation with one another. Furthermore, everything that people produce is in some sense a social product, and everyone who contributes to the production of a good is entitled to a share in it. Society as a whole, therefore, should own or at least control property for the benefit of all its members.
> 
> This conviction puts socialism in opposition to capitalism, which is based on private ownership of the means of production and allows individual choices in a free market to determine how goods and services are distributed. Socialists complain that capitalism necessarily leads to unfair and exploitative concentrations of wealth and power in the hands of the relative few who emerge victorious from free-market competition—people who then use their wealth and power to reinforce their dominance in society. Because such people are rich, they may choose where and how to live, and their choices in turn limit the options of the poor. As a result, terms such as _individual freedom_ and _equality of opportunity_ may be meaningful for capitalists but can only ring hollow for working people, who must do the capitalists’ bidding if they are to survive. As socialists see it, true freedom and true equality require social control of the resources that provide the basis for prosperity in any society. Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels made this point in Manifesto_ of the Communist Party _(1848) when they proclaimed that in a socialist society “the condition for the free development of each is the free development of all.”
> 
> *This fundamental conviction nevertheless leaves room for socialists to disagree among themselves with regard to two key points. The first concerns the extent and the kind of property that society should own or control. Some socialists have thought that almost everything except personal items such as clothing should be public property; this is true, for example, of the society envisioned by the English humanist Sir Thomas More in his Utopia (1516). Other socialists, however, have been willing to accept or even welcome private ownership of farms, shops, and other small or medium-sized businesses.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The ignorance of a belief in collective ownership is its ambition to replace the hierarchy of capitalism with a hierarchy of bureaucracy , through a lie that replacing a dual system of free enterprise and bureaucracy with a single bureauracracy system will somehow guarantee all individuals greater opportunities for liberty and wealth  .
> 
> While successes and failures of individuals are available through capitalism , the socialist ignores the great benefits of capitalism and dramatizes misfortunes of capitalism as an excuse for others to adopt its platform without ever relating the deleterious consequences to individual liberty and wealth of its dictatorial ideals - a sales pitch for a mentality of buy this because that is bad without consideration for why this is bad .
> 
> The socialist promotes egalitarianism as a virtue to be implemented through collective ownership , while failing to disclose that collective ownership deprives individuals of exceptionalism and reward for their efforts that consequently results in a bland , uniform , mediocrity , while bureaurats having zero actual intent to apply egalitarianism to themselves bequeath the sparse remaining vestiges of individual freedom and wealth to themselves by kleptocracy and harumph authoritarian dictates .
> 
> While plutocracy and oligarchy are capable of suppressing and even destroying individual liberty , the public has recourse to free enterprise collaboration as well as a greater individual of state to ensure that truly deleterious circumstances are mitigated .
> 
> Alternatively , socialism seeks to destroy capitalism so that only government remains - against which no individual may stand , through arrogance with ignorance for getting rid of a system far more capable of facilitating individual liberty and wealth than its own , while socialists promote its religion of secular humanism dictating everyone be indoctrinated into selflessness , or else suffer the punishments from its theocracy where bureaucrats are gawd .
> 
> ** Authoritarianism And Libertarianism Are Antonyms **
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A Treatise of Legal Philosophy on Adequate Political Science Terms for Civics Pedagogy
> 
> 
> " A Treatise of Legal Philosophy on Adequate Political Science Terms for Civics Pedagogy "  * Obfuscation Mock Heir Clock Hair *  There is little doubt regarding my disdain for a liberal versus conservative paradigm as it is as near to intellectual buffoonery as one could conceive , as the...
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmessageboard.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Political Science Terminology : Negative / Positive : Wrights / Liberties : Protections / Endowments
> 
> 
> " Political Science Terminology : Negative / Positive : Wrights / Liberties : Protections / Endowments "  * Express Agreement Or Disagreement With These Premises *  Does any agree or disagree that " equal wrights " advocates must make a distinction between negative and positive wrights ?   Does...
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmessageboard.com
Click to expand...

Yup.  If these folks want to form a commune with other like-minded folks who want the same thing, they are free to do so now, but, as you can see by their responses, that isn't what they want, they want coercive control forcing a formerly free people into collectives.  The idea that this is "Libertarianism" is just their latest Communist/Socialist lie.  

Their claims are always lies, because if they told the truth, no one would want it, and they know it.


----------



## Englewood

How many nations on this Earth have a pure economic system?  Does our[ Constitution only allow capitalism?


----------



## Zorro!

Englewood said:


> How many nations on this Earth have a pure economic system?  Does our[ Constitution only allow capitalism?


Our system allows for you to engage in communism or socialism or whatever.  Form a commune and invite the like minded to join.  So long as you don't violate anyone's rights the rest of us could care less.  But, no matter how many times this is pointed out to you folks, this isn't' what you actually want. You guy want authoritarianism and we refuse to surrender our Liberty to you.  We see who you guys are, your corruption, how the connected are corrupt and pay no penalty, while those not connected are hounded, illegally spied on and subjected to massive witch hunts.

*Firm co-owned by Omar’s husband got $635K in COVID-19 loans … while scoring millions from campaign donations; Made $4M in 2020 *






Grift.

Now that’s keeping it in the family. Ilhan Omar’s 2020 campaign paid the firm co-owned by her husband Tim Mynett over $2.7 million for services rendered, allowing the couple to keep a significant part of the $5.7 million they raised for her re-election. The E Street Group LLC was by far the biggest recipient of Omar’s campaign, accounting for half of all disbursements. The second-ranking recipient was the state Democratic Party (DFL in Minnesota) with just under $400K. 

At the same time E Street Group and Mynett/Omar scored big incomes with the campaign, they also scored big on COVID-19 relief.

Public records show that E Street Group, co-owned by Omar’s husband, Tim Mynett, received nearly $135,000 in Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) loans and $500,000 in Economic Injury Disaster loans. …

Federal Election Commission filings also show that the firm received payments for other campaigns, including $175,000 from the committee of Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., and nearly $130,000 from the Minnesota Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party.

In what world was E Street Group LLC in need of taxpayer support? Why did a member of Congress who personally benefited from campaign donations through E Street Group allow her husband’s firm to get access to $635,000 in subsidized relief loans in the first place? One might think this kind of grift should get the attention of the House Ethics Committee at some point — if not federal prosecutors.

One has to wonder whether Omar knew this was coming out. The Daily Wire recalls that Omar suddenly announced that she would cut ties with E Street Group a fortnight after the election:


> In mid-November, Omar cut ties with her husband’s firm after she won re-election in Minnesota’s 5th Congressional District, saying she wanted to “make sure that anybody who is supporting our campaign with their time or financial support feels there is no perceived issue with that support,” the Star Tribune reported.


Locking the door after she robbed the place blind


> “Every dollar that was spent went to a team of more than twenty that were helping us fight back against attacks and organize on the ground and online in a COVID-19 world,” she added. “And Tim — beyond his salary at the firm — received no profit whatsoever from the consulting relationship the firm provided.”


The Star Tribune noted at the time that this wasn’t a spontaneous demonstration of transparency. Omar cut ties because an outside group had filed a complaint about her campaign-finance ties:


> The Federal Election Commission has taken no public action in response to a complaint last year from a conservative group that alleged money from Omar’s campaign paid to now-husband Tim Mynett and his E Street Group LLC for personal travel expenses.
> Beyond being able to point to Omar as a high-profile client, the contract was a lucrative one for the E Street Group: Omar’s campaign paid the firm more than $1.1 million for advertising and consulting in the third quarter of this year alone — transactions that Omar has defended as legitimate. The firm’s leadership has also previously said that much of the advertising expenses are transferred to other vendors. …


Gee, paid hubby $1.1M in the quarter for "advertising" and then other venders handled advertising?


> Omar stopped short of adequately addressing concerns about how the money was spent by E Street Group, said Thomas Anderson, a spokesman for the National Legal and Policy Center, the group that filed the initial complaint. “We feel Congresswoman Omar is attempting to clean up a mess we laid out in our complaint.”


Add the COVID-19 loans to the mix, and it’s pretty easy to see the grift in Omar’s approach to public "service." That might not make Omar unique in the Beltway, but the sheer chutzpah of draining badly needed relief aid for her family’s business puts Omar in a class of her own. Or _so we hope_, at least.

Just what “economic injury” did E Street Group LLC suffer in 2020? They made $4 million in this cycle, according to Open Secrets. They only made $145,000 in 2018, the first cycle of their operation. The amount of their COVID-19 relief loans was _four times_ their entire income of the 2018 cycle. Where’s the “injury”?

She's a thief.  She also is a vocal advocate of "progressivism" as well as a casual committer of felonies.  And since she is a connected Lefty, she pays no price.


----------



## Skylar

TNHarley said:


> Communism can work in small groups.
> No, no true communist country has never existed. Because it is a pipedream. People wont give up their power. That has been shown over and over with millions of lives lost.
> Capitalism is freedom. There is also no capitalist countries. Obviously.
> A pipe dream vs. Freedom. Hmmm



Is Capitalism 'freedom' though? Both the guided age and the eras of slavery in the US were both capitalistic.

Capitalism in practice is very, very compatible with monopolies, price fixing, hideous exploitation, massive inequality, and horrendous abuses of power. Due to its emphasis on unrestrained growth, capitalism also tends to be utterly brutal on the environment and consequently the people that breath, eat or drink water in such a system.

This same emphasis on growth could be argued to be a strong incentive for starting wars of conquest to open markets and acquire resources. The Opium Wars were draped in the rationale of freedom and commerce......but were in reality about forcing an addictive drug with severe social costs on a country that didn't want it.

Capitalism can also work in an environment of freedom and equality. But there's nothing intrinsic about it.


----------



## Zorro!

Skylar said:


> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> Communism can work in small groups.
> No, no true communist country has never existed. Because it is a pipedream. People wont give up their power. That has been shown over and over with millions of lives lost.
> Capitalism is freedom. There is also no capitalist countries. Obviously.
> A pipe dream vs. Freedom. Hmmm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is Capitalism 'freedom' though? Both the guided age and the eras of slavery in the US were both capitalistic.
> 
> Capitalism in practice is very, very compatible with monopolies, price fixing,
Click to expand...

Fake News.  Those practices are not Free Markets, that is why we have laws against monopoly market distortion and price fixing and certainly the solution isn't turning our Liberty over to the ultimate monopoly, Government.  We limit our Government to specific tasks spelled out in our Constitution.





> capitalism also tends to be utterly brutal on the environment and consequently the people that breath, eat or drink water in such a system....


Fake News.  We have one of the freest markets in the world and also one of the cleanest.


----------



## Skylar

Zorro! said:


> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> Communism can work in small groups.
> No, no true communist country has never existed. Because it is a pipedream. People wont give up their power. That has been shown over and over with millions of lives lost.
> Capitalism is freedom. There is also no capitalist countries. Obviously.
> A pipe dream vs. Freedom. Hmmm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is Capitalism 'freedom' though? Both the guided age and the eras of slavery in the US were both capitalistic.
> 
> Capitalism in practice is very, very compatible with monopolies, price fixing,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Fake News.  Those practices are not Free Markets, that is why we have laws against monopoly market distortion and price fixing and certainly the solution isn't turning our Liberty over to the ultimate monopoly, Government.  We limit our Government to specific tasks spelled out in our Constitution.
Click to expand...


The criticism of communism have been that it always becomes something else. That IN PRACTICE, communism becomes authoritarian. Or collapses. Or that people refuse to give up their power.

Well, if that is our standard, then we must also judge capitalism IN PRACTICE. And see what it morphs into.

And historically, the practice of capitalism has often morphed into monopolies, grotesque exploitation, environmental disasters, horrid abuses, massive inequality. Capitalism has been perfectly comfortable with slavery, oppression, exploitation, and environmental degregation.

And if capitalism in its 'pure' form is the only 'true' capitalism, then capitalism fails for the same reason communism fails: its too fragile to actually exist. As people that accumulate power to suppress competition or exploit people don't want to give that power up.



Zorro! said:


> capitalism also tends to be utterly brutal on the environment and consequently the people that breath, eat or drink water in such a system....
> 
> 
> 
> Fake News.  We have one of the freest markets in the world and also one of the cleanest.
Click to expand...


Absolutely. But not because of capitalism. But instead, because of a centralized government that FORCED the economy to stop polluting at the rates it had been polluting when its only focus was on growth.

It was a decision starkly opposed by many captains of industry that would see their business negatively impacted by environmental regulation necessary to produce cleaner water and cleaner air.

The impetus of cleaner air and water wasn't capitalism. it was environmentalism. And was implemented in spite of capitalism. Same with public education, child labor laws, workplace safety laws, protections against wage theft, overtime rules, and many of the protections that we take for granted today.

All of these occured *in spite* of capitalism.


----------



## TNHarley

Skylar said:


> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> Communism can work in small groups.
> No, no true communist country has never existed. Because it is a pipedream. People wont give up their power. That has been shown over and over with millions of lives lost.
> Capitalism is freedom. There is also no capitalist countries. Obviously.
> A pipe dream vs. Freedom. Hmmm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is Capitalism 'freedom' though? Both the guided age and the eras of slavery in the US were both capitalistic.
> 
> Capitalism in practice is very, very compatible with monopolies, price fixing, hideous exploitation, massive inequality, and horrendous abuses of power. Due to its emphasis on unrestrained growth, capitalism also tends to be utterly brutal on the environment and consequently the people that breath, eat or drink water in such a system.
> 
> This same emphasis on growth could be argued to be a strong incentive for starting wars of conquest to open markets and acquire resources. The Opium Wars were draped in the rationale of freedom and commerce......but were in reality about forcing an addictive drug with severe social costs on a country that didn't want it.
> 
> Capitalism can also work in an environment of freedom and equality. But there's nothing intrinsic about it.
Click to expand...

No pure capitalist wants people dumping chemicals into waterways and shit. You can have a true capitalist economy with basic environmental regulations.
Slavery isnt capitalism. Slavery is an anathema to capitalism.
Abuses of power isnt capitalism. That is the government abusing power. 
Creating war for profit isnt capitalism. War is declared by the government.


----------



## Skylar

TNHarley said:


> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> Communism can work in small groups.
> No, no true communist country has never existed. Because it is a pipedream. People wont give up their power. That has been shown over and over with millions of lives lost.
> Capitalism is freedom. There is also no capitalist countries. Obviously.
> A pipe dream vs. Freedom. Hmmm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is Capitalism 'freedom' though? Both the guided age and the eras of slavery in the US were both capitalistic.
> 
> Capitalism in practice is very, very compatible with monopolies, price fixing, hideous exploitation, massive inequality, and horrendous abuses of power. Due to its emphasis on unrestrained growth, capitalism also tends to be utterly brutal on the environment and consequently the people that breath, eat or drink water in such a system.
> 
> This same emphasis on growth could be argued to be a strong incentive for starting wars of conquest to open markets and acquire resources. The Opium Wars were draped in the rationale of freedom and commerce......but were in reality about forcing an addictive drug with severe social costs on a country that didn't want it.
> 
> Capitalism can also work in an environment of freedom and equality. But there's nothing intrinsic about it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No pure capitalist wants people dumping chemicals into waterways and shit. You can have a true capitalist economy with basic environmental regulations.
> Slavery isnt capitalism. Slavery is an anathema to capitalism.
> Abuses of power isnt capitalism. That is the government abusing power.
> Creating war for profit isnt capitalism. War is declared by the government.
Click to expand...


When have we ever had 'pure capitalism'? This is like 'pure communism'. Its too fragile to exist in the real world. Its an ivory tower idea. In which case, the 'capitalism v communism' debate is easy to resolve:

They're both too fragile to be useful.


----------



## Zorro!

Skylar said:


> Zorro! said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> Communism can work in small groups.
> No, no true communist country has never existed. Because it is a pipedream. People wont give up their power. That has been shown over and over with millions of lives lost.
> Capitalism is freedom. There is also no capitalist countries. Obviously.
> A pipe dream vs. Freedom. Hmmm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is Capitalism 'freedom' though? Both the guided age and the eras of slavery in the US were both capitalistic.
> 
> Capitalism in practice is very, very compatible with monopolies, price fixing,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Fake News.  Those practices are not Free Markets, that is why we have laws against monopoly market distortion and price fixing and certainly the solution isn't turning our Liberty over to the ultimate monopoly, Government.  We limit our Government to specific tasks spelled out in our Constitution.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The criticism of communism have been that it always becomes something else. That IN PRACTICE, communism becomes authoritarian. Or collapses. Or that people refuse to give up their power.
> 
> Well, if that is our standard, then we must also judge capitalism IN PRACTICE. And see what it morphs into...
Click to expand...

Fake News.  First, of course we judge communism on its real world effects.  Communism routinely fails to feed their own people, this is a fundamental system failure.  Secondly, while yes the free flow of capital is important, so is the free flow of labor.  Our system is simply Free Markets and Free Choice with labor and capital free to flow where we ask for it by price point.


> ... And historically, the practice of capitalism has often morphed into monopolies, grotesque exploitation, environmental disasters...


Fake News.  Ours is a sensibly regulated system designed to keep market distorting monopolies in check.  As for environmental impact, we have one of the freest systems as well as the cleanest.

We have the 9th cleanest air in the world.  Our air is twice as clean as Venezuela and they have not even a fraction of our vibrant economy that provides our fundamental needs.








						Countries ranked by PM2.5 air pollution, mean annual exposure (micrograms per cubic meter)
					





					www.indexmundi.com
				




Our air is nearly 3 times cleaner than Cuba.
More than 4x cleaner than North Korea.
4 x cleaner than Vietnam.
8x cleaner than China.


> ... horrid abuses, massive inequality...


Fake News.  Communist China has millions of men in Concentration camps and government agents placed in their homes while they are incarcerated, sharing the bed with the incarcerated men's wives.  You throw these terms about like "horrid abuses, massive inequality, slavery, oppression, exploitation, and environmental degregation (sp)" as if this is occurring in the Free Market Nation you are blessed beyond belief to live in while you pine for the governmental system where that actually occurs.


> ... capitalism fails for the same reason communism fails: its too fragile to actually exist...


Fake News.  Free People and Free Markets are very successful, feeding and providing for their people in abundance.  Socialism/Communism routinely fails at these fundamental tasks.


> ... As people that accumulate power to suppress competition or exploit people don't want to give that power up...


And that's precisely the problem with the Authoritarian system that always comes to power on the promise that they will use that power "to make sure everything is fair".  They don't.  They use that power to take the best for themselves, while making sure the military and others who are essential for their maintenance of control are similarly provided for, while the majority are disarmed and exploited to serve those in power.

But, if you want to start a commune in the US, inhabited and shared by the like minded on a free will basis, you are more than free to do so. 

So, what's your problem?  If your way is so wondrous, go do it.  What is stopping you?  You sure talk a lot about how confident you are that it's vastly superior to Free Will/Choice/Markets, so how come a bunch of you Communist/Socialists aren't pooling your resources and starting a commune?


----------



## Skylar

Zorro! said:


> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Zorro! said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> Communism can work in small groups.
> No, no true communist country has never existed. Because it is a pipedream. People wont give up their power. That has been shown over and over with millions of lives lost.
> Capitalism is freedom. There is also no capitalist countries. Obviously.
> A pipe dream vs. Freedom. Hmmm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is Capitalism 'freedom' though? Both the guided age and the eras of slavery in the US were both capitalistic.
> 
> Capitalism in practice is very, very compatible with monopolies, price fixing,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Fake News.  Those practices are not Free Markets, that is why we have laws against monopoly market distortion and price fixing and certainly the solution isn't turning our Liberty over to the ultimate monopoly, Government.  We limit our Government to specific tasks spelled out in our Constitution.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The criticism of communism have been that it always becomes something else. That IN PRACTICE, communism becomes authoritarian. Or collapses. Or that people refuse to give up their power.
> 
> Well, if that is our standard, then we must also judge capitalism IN PRACTICE. And see what it morphs into...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Fake News.  First, of course we judge communism on its real world effects.  Communism routinely fails to feed their own people, this is a fundamental system failure.  Secondly, while yes the free flow of capital is important, so is the free flow of labor.  Our system is simply Free Markets and Free Choice with labor and capital free to flow where we ask for it by price point.
Click to expand...


Our system hasn't always been. Look at our history. Our system involved extraordinary exploitation, oppression and environmental devastation.

We've recovered from a fair amount of it because we mitigated capitalism with regulation and social safetynets, public works, public education, child labor laws, public and national parks, national banks, and a variety of other measures that borrowed tenets right out of the communist manifesto.

We have a hybrid system that has in many ways traded capitalism for greater economic stability. As pure capitalism tends to be wildly unstable, exploitative and environmentally destructive. If it can exist at all without quickly morphing into anti-competitive practices.



Zorro! said:


> ... And historically, the practice of capitalism has often morphed into monopolies, grotesque exploitation, environmental disasters...
> 
> 
> 
> Fake News.  Ours is a sensibly regulated system designed to keep market distorting monopolies in check.  As for environmental impact, we have one of the freest systems as well as the cleanest.
Click to expand...


Monopolies are  natural product of capitalism. As people with power, marketshare and leverage will attempt to maximize that power to make more money. Competition reduces profits. Anti-competitive practices are generally more profitable.

We have to adopt a central government control more akin to socialism to mitigate capitalism natural tendancy toward monopoly in a manner similar to how we used similar central government power to mitigate capitalism's devastating environmental impacts.

And each of these mitigations are done in spite of capitalism. Not because of it.


----------



## Zorro!

Skylar said:


> Zorro! said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Zorro! said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> Communism can work in small groups.
> No, no true communist country has never existed. Because it is a pipedream. People wont give up their power. That has been shown over and over with millions of lives lost.
> Capitalism is freedom. There is also no capitalist countries. Obviously.
> A pipe dream vs. Freedom. Hmmm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is Capitalism 'freedom' though? Both the guided age and the eras of slavery in the US were both capitalistic.
> 
> Capitalism in practice is very, very compatible with monopolies, price fixing,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Fake News.  Those practices are not Free Markets, that is why we have laws against monopoly market distortion and price fixing and certainly the solution isn't turning our Liberty over to the ultimate monopoly, Government.  We limit our Government to specific tasks spelled out in our Constitution.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The criticism of communism have been that it always becomes something else. That IN PRACTICE, communism becomes authoritarian. Or collapses. Or that people refuse to give up their power.
> 
> Well, if that is our standard, then we must also judge capitalism IN PRACTICE. And see what it morphs into...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Fake News.  First, of course we judge communism on its real world effects.  Communism routinely fails to feed their own people, this is a fundamental system failure.  Secondly, while yes the free flow of capital is important, so is the free flow of labor.  Our system is simply Free Markets and Free Choice with labor and capital free to flow where we ask for it by price point.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ... Our system hasn't always been....
Click to expand...

This is the thesis statement of our form of government:

_We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed_...​
That is the purpose of our government, for us to mutually secure our collective fundamental rights. Our government derives its legitimacy from our consent, and these rights are secured not through just any power, but through_ just_ power.  In our system our government cannot legitimately exercise unjust power.

And ours is a constantly improving system.  In the Preamble to the Constitution:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form _a more perfect_ Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this *Constitution* for the United States of America.​
This constantly perfecting of our system to secure our rights is a task we inherit from our parents and pass to our children.  The anti-slavery amendments should have been part of the original constitution, it shouldn't have waited 70 years.  Women should have had the vote immediately, but the initial generation did what they could and left these improvements for following generations who didn't have to first defeat the reining world power to even begin.  Rather than sitting in judgment on those that went before us, who accomplished far more than we have of this task, we should be diligently looking for ways to more perfectly secure the rights of our fellow citizens now.  Should whole family lines be locked into intergenerational squalor or intergenerational incarceration?

Should our prisons be houses of systematic and daily rape?
Should our inner cities be failing hell holes little different from some elements of a 3rd world nation?
Could our criminal justice system be improved to a system of restitution rather than retribution where once restitution is made, including penalty, the violator has a clean slate and hopefully a marketable skill?

Look around, we do a great deal of belly aching when the same effort could instead improve the lot of those who share our national identity.


> ... we mitigated capitalism with regulation...


Sensible regulation has always been a government power, it's endemic to our system, and of course the more time we have to sensibly regulate the more improved the outcome.


> ... wildly unstable, exploitative and environmentally destructive...


You are perseverating.  We are the longest surviving national government in the world today.  There isn't a single national government in existence today that has survived as long as ours, we are also one of the very cleanest, our people's rights are secured like few others yet you throw these buzz phrases "wildly unstable, exploitative and environmentally destructive" into every post like mindlessly blown around word salad.  How can you describe the most stable government in the entire world as defected for being "wildly unstable" and use the term with any sense of integrity?


> ... Monopolies are  natural product of capitalism...


Fake News, they are deliberate distortions of Free Markets, which we deal with through sensible regulation.  You claim the solution is authoritarianism, which is monopolistic by it's very nature.


> ... Competition reduces profits...


Exactly, which is why sensible regulation promotes the free flow of labor and capital so that when people indicate their desire for a particular good or service, others are free to provide those goods and services, which keeps supply and demand balanced, controlling prices.


> ... Anti-competitive practices are generally more profitable...


They actually aren't "profit" based, they are rent-seeking practices, generally a corrupt alliance between politically connected and government power.


> ... We have to adopt a central government control more akin to socialism...


No we don't.  That central government power will promptly engate in rent-seeking monopolistic practices that steal our Freedom and Liberty.

And of course, we need free and fair elections in order to accurate transmit our walking orders to our elected representatives who _govern_, they do not rule us.  In our system WE are the sovereign power.  But, if you want to form your commune with centralized production and distribution, you are free to do so, so long as you don't attempt to coerce anyone into participating.

So, you are good to go.  Go do it and then report back to us on how your social experiment is going.  I wish you the best.


----------



## Skylar

Zorro! said:


> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Zorro! said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Zorro! said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> Communism can work in small groups.
> No, no true communist country has never existed. Because it is a pipedream. People wont give up their power. That has been shown over and over with millions of lives lost.
> Capitalism is freedom. There is also no capitalist countries. Obviously.
> A pipe dream vs. Freedom. Hmmm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is Capitalism 'freedom' though? Both the guided age and the eras of slavery in the US were both capitalistic.
> 
> Capitalism in practice is very, very compatible with monopolies, price fixing,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Fake News.  Those practices are not Free Markets, that is why we have laws against monopoly market distortion and price fixing and certainly the solution isn't turning our Liberty over to the ultimate monopoly, Government.  We limit our Government to specific tasks spelled out in our Constitution.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The criticism of communism have been that it always becomes something else. That IN PRACTICE, communism becomes authoritarian. Or collapses. Or that people refuse to give up their power.
> 
> Well, if that is our standard, then we must also judge capitalism IN PRACTICE. And see what it morphs into...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Fake News.  First, of course we judge communism on its real world effects.  Communism routinely fails to feed their own people, this is a fundamental system failure.  Secondly, while yes the free flow of capital is important, so is the free flow of labor.  Our system is simply Free Markets and Free Choice with labor and capital free to flow where we ask for it by price point.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ... Our system hasn't always been....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> This is the thesis statement of our form of government:
> 
> _We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed_...​
> That is the purpose of our government, for us to mutually secure our collective fundamental rights. Our government derives its legitimacy from our consent, and these rights are secured no through just any power, but through_ just_ power.  In our system our government cannot legitimately exercise unjust power.
Click to expand...


And while that was being written, we kept millions of people in slavery. With slavery codified into our constitution by counting them as 3/5ths a person. Undue power was baked into our nation from the moment of its inception.

Its only through imbuing the central government with more power could we mitigate the horrifying exploitation that capitalism tends toward. And the massive environmental damage. And the monopolies that capitalism natural trends toward.

All of these things weren't done because of capitalism, but in spite of it. And our nation has been better for it.



Zorro! said:


> And ours is a constantly improving system.  In the Preamble to the Constitution:
> 
> We the People of the United States, in Order to form _a more perfect_ Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this *Constitution* for the United States of America.​
> This constantly perfecting of our system to secure our rights is a task we inherit from our parents and pass to our children.  The anti-slavery amendments should have been part of the original constitution, it shouldn't have waited 70 years.  Women should have had the vote immediately, but the initial generation did what they could and left these improvements for following generations who didn't have to first defeat the reining world power to even begin.  Rather than sitting in judgment on those that went before us, who accomplished far more than we have of this task, we should be diligently looking for ways to more perfectly secure the rights of our fellow citizens now.  Should whole family lines be locked into intergenerational squalor or intergenerational incarceration?



With many of those improvements being the dilution of the undue power baked into our system. The elimination of slavery. The dismantling of Jim Crow. The cleaning up of our environment. The abolishment of child labor. The institution of public education and public safety regulation. The setting aside of public lands in our state and national forests. The establishment of national banks.

All of these were departures from capitalism, dilluttion of its most unstable, monopolistic, destructive or exploitative tendancies. And the embracing of more socialistic and even communistic tenets.

And our nation has benefited greatly from this hybrid system in which capitalism has been mitigated. And its often mitigated with socialism inspired tenets.


----------



## progressive hunter

Skylar said:


> Zorro! said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Zorro! said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Zorro! said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> Communism can work in small groups.
> No, no true communist country has never existed. Because it is a pipedream. People wont give up their power. That has been shown over and over with millions of lives lost.
> Capitalism is freedom. There is also no capitalist countries. Obviously.
> A pipe dream vs. Freedom. Hmmm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is Capitalism 'freedom' though? Both the guided age and the eras of slavery in the US were both capitalistic.
> 
> Capitalism in practice is very, very compatible with monopolies, price fixing,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Fake News.  Those practices are not Free Markets, that is why we have laws against monopoly market distortion and price fixing and certainly the solution isn't turning our Liberty over to the ultimate monopoly, Government.  We limit our Government to specific tasks spelled out in our Constitution.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The criticism of communism have been that it always becomes something else. That IN PRACTICE, communism becomes authoritarian. Or collapses. Or that people refuse to give up their power.
> 
> Well, if that is our standard, then we must also judge capitalism IN PRACTICE. And see what it morphs into...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Fake News.  First, of course we judge communism on its real world effects.  Communism routinely fails to feed their own people, this is a fundamental system failure.  Secondly, while yes the free flow of capital is important, so is the free flow of labor.  Our system is simply Free Markets and Free Choice with labor and capital free to flow where we ask for it by price point.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ... Our system hasn't always been....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> This is the thesis statement of our form of government:
> 
> _We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed_...​
> That is the purpose of our government, for us to mutually secure our collective fundamental rights. Our government derives its legitimacy from our consent, and these rights are secured no through just any power, but through_ just_ power.  In our system our government cannot legitimately exercise unjust power.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And while that was being written, we kept millions of people in slavery. With slavery codified into our constitution by counting them as 3/5ths a person. Undue power was baked into our nation from the moment of its inception.
> 
> Its only through imbuing the central government with more power could we mitigate the horrifying exploitation that capitalism tends toward. And the massive environmental damage. And the monopolies that capitalism natural trends toward.
> 
> All of these things weren't done because of capitalism, but in spite of it. And our nation has been better for it.
> 
> 
> 
> Zorro! said:
> 
> 
> 
> And ours is a constantly improving system.  In the Preamble to the Constitution:
> 
> We the People of the United States, in Order to form _a more perfect_ Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this *Constitution* for the United States of America.​
> This constantly perfecting of our system to secure our rights is a task we inherit from our parents and pass to our children.  The anti-slavery amendments should have been part of the original constitution, it shouldn't have waited 70 years.  Women should have had the vote immediately, but the initial generation did what they could and left these improvements for following generations who didn't have to first defeat the reining world power to even begin.  Rather than sitting in judgment on those that went before us, who accomplished far more than we have of this task, we should be diligently looking for ways to more perfectly secure the rights of our fellow citizens now.  Should whole family lines be locked into intergenerational squalor or intergenerational incarceration?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> With many of those improvements being the dilution of the undue power baked into our system. The elimination of slavery. The dismantling of Jim Crow. The cleaning up of our environment. The abolishment of child labor. The institution of public education and public safety regulation. The setting aside of public lands in our state and national forests. The establishment of national banks.
> 
> All of these were departures from capitalism, dilluttion of its most unstable, monopolistic, destructive or exploitative tendancies. And the embracing of more socialistic and even communistic tenets.
> 
> And our nation has benefited greatly from this hybrid system in which capitalism has been mitigated. And its often mitigated with socialism inspired tenets.
Click to expand...

you should educate yourself better,, the list is to long for me to get into,,,


----------



## Skylar

progressive hunter said:


> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Zorro! said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Zorro! said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Zorro! said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> Communism can work in small groups.
> No, no true communist country has never existed. Because it is a pipedream. People wont give up their power. That has been shown over and over with millions of lives lost.
> Capitalism is freedom. There is also no capitalist countries. Obviously.
> A pipe dream vs. Freedom. Hmmm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is Capitalism 'freedom' though? Both the guided age and the eras of slavery in the US were both capitalistic.
> 
> Capitalism in practice is very, very compatible with monopolies, price fixing,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Fake News.  Those practices are not Free Markets, that is why we have laws against monopoly market distortion and price fixing and certainly the solution isn't turning our Liberty over to the ultimate monopoly, Government.  We limit our Government to specific tasks spelled out in our Constitution.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The criticism of communism have been that it always becomes something else. That IN PRACTICE, communism becomes authoritarian. Or collapses. Or that people refuse to give up their power.
> 
> Well, if that is our standard, then we must also judge capitalism IN PRACTICE. And see what it morphs into...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Fake News.  First, of course we judge communism on its real world effects.  Communism routinely fails to feed their own people, this is a fundamental system failure.  Secondly, while yes the free flow of capital is important, so is the free flow of labor.  Our system is simply Free Markets and Free Choice with labor and capital free to flow where we ask for it by price point.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ... Our system hasn't always been....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> This is the thesis statement of our form of government:
> 
> _We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed_...​
> That is the purpose of our government, for us to mutually secure our collective fundamental rights. Our government derives its legitimacy from our consent, and these rights are secured no through just any power, but through_ just_ power.  In our system our government cannot legitimately exercise unjust power.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And while that was being written, we kept millions of people in slavery. With slavery codified into our constitution by counting them as 3/5ths a person. Undue power was baked into our nation from the moment of its inception.
> 
> Its only through imbuing the central government with more power could we mitigate the horrifying exploitation that capitalism tends toward. And the massive environmental damage. And the monopolies that capitalism natural trends toward.
> 
> All of these things weren't done because of capitalism, but in spite of it. And our nation has been better for it.
> 
> 
> 
> Zorro! said:
> 
> 
> 
> And ours is a constantly improving system.  In the Preamble to the Constitution:
> 
> We the People of the United States, in Order to form _a more perfect_ Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this *Constitution* for the United States of America.​
> This constantly perfecting of our system to secure our rights is a task we inherit from our parents and pass to our children.  The anti-slavery amendments should have been part of the original constitution, it shouldn't have waited 70 years.  Women should have had the vote immediately, but the initial generation did what they could and left these improvements for following generations who didn't have to first defeat the reining world power to even begin.  Rather than sitting in judgment on those that went before us, who accomplished far more than we have of this task, we should be diligently looking for ways to more perfectly secure the rights of our fellow citizens now.  Should whole family lines be locked into intergenerational squalor or intergenerational incarceration?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> With many of those improvements being the dilution of the undue power baked into our system. The elimination of slavery. The dismantling of Jim Crow. The cleaning up of our environment. The abolishment of child labor. The institution of public education and public safety regulation. The setting aside of public lands in our state and national forests. The establishment of national banks.
> 
> All of these were departures from capitalism, dilluttion of its most unstable, monopolistic, destructive or exploitative tendancies. And the embracing of more socialistic and even communistic tenets.
> 
> And our nation has benefited greatly from this hybrid system in which capitalism has been mitigated. And its often mitigated with socialism inspired tenets.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> you should educate yourself better,, the list is to long for me to get into,,,
Click to expand...


Then why bother commenting at all? You contributed nothing to the conversation. 

Try again. And please be civil. This is a great conversation.


----------



## progressive hunter

Skylar said:


> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Zorro! said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Zorro! said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Zorro! said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> Communism can work in small groups.
> No, no true communist country has never existed. Because it is a pipedream. People wont give up their power. That has been shown over and over with millions of lives lost.
> Capitalism is freedom. There is also no capitalist countries. Obviously.
> A pipe dream vs. Freedom. Hmmm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is Capitalism 'freedom' though? Both the guided age and the eras of slavery in the US were both capitalistic.
> 
> Capitalism in practice is very, very compatible with monopolies, price fixing,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Fake News.  Those practices are not Free Markets, that is why we have laws against monopoly market distortion and price fixing and certainly the solution isn't turning our Liberty over to the ultimate monopoly, Government.  We limit our Government to specific tasks spelled out in our Constitution.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The criticism of communism have been that it always becomes something else. That IN PRACTICE, communism becomes authoritarian. Or collapses. Or that people refuse to give up their power.
> 
> Well, if that is our standard, then we must also judge capitalism IN PRACTICE. And see what it morphs into...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Fake News.  First, of course we judge communism on its real world effects.  Communism routinely fails to feed their own people, this is a fundamental system failure.  Secondly, while yes the free flow of capital is important, so is the free flow of labor.  Our system is simply Free Markets and Free Choice with labor and capital free to flow where we ask for it by price point.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ... Our system hasn't always been....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> This is the thesis statement of our form of government:
> 
> _We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed_...​
> That is the purpose of our government, for us to mutually secure our collective fundamental rights. Our government derives its legitimacy from our consent, and these rights are secured no through just any power, but through_ just_ power.  In our system our government cannot legitimately exercise unjust power.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And while that was being written, we kept millions of people in slavery. With slavery codified into our constitution by counting them as 3/5ths a person. Undue power was baked into our nation from the moment of its inception.
> 
> Its only through imbuing the central government with more power could we mitigate the horrifying exploitation that capitalism tends toward. And the massive environmental damage. And the monopolies that capitalism natural trends toward.
> 
> All of these things weren't done because of capitalism, but in spite of it. And our nation has been better for it.
> 
> 
> 
> Zorro! said:
> 
> 
> 
> And ours is a constantly improving system.  In the Preamble to the Constitution:
> 
> We the People of the United States, in Order to form _a more perfect_ Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this *Constitution* for the United States of America.​
> This constantly perfecting of our system to secure our rights is a task we inherit from our parents and pass to our children.  The anti-slavery amendments should have been part of the original constitution, it shouldn't have waited 70 years.  Women should have had the vote immediately, but the initial generation did what they could and left these improvements for following generations who didn't have to first defeat the reining world power to even begin.  Rather than sitting in judgment on those that went before us, who accomplished far more than we have of this task, we should be diligently looking for ways to more perfectly secure the rights of our fellow citizens now.  Should whole family lines be locked into intergenerational squalor or intergenerational incarceration?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> With many of those improvements being the dilution of the undue power baked into our system. The elimination of slavery. The dismantling of Jim Crow. The cleaning up of our environment. The abolishment of child labor. The institution of public education and public safety regulation. The setting aside of public lands in our state and national forests. The establishment of national banks.
> 
> All of these were departures from capitalism, dilluttion of its most unstable, monopolistic, destructive or exploitative tendancies. And the embracing of more socialistic and even communistic tenets.
> 
> And our nation has benefited greatly from this hybrid system in which capitalism has been mitigated. And its often mitigated with socialism inspired tenets.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> you should educate yourself better,, the list is to long for me to get into,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Then why bother commenting at all? You contributed nothing to the conversation.
> 
> Try again. And please be civil. This is a great conversation.
Click to expand...

of course I contributed,, you just dont like it,,

tell us more about that 3/5th clause that codified slavery in our constitution???


----------



## Skylar

progressive hunter said:


> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Zorro! said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Zorro! said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Zorro! said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> Communism can work in small groups.
> No, no true communist country has never existed. Because it is a pipedream. People wont give up their power. That has been shown over and over with millions of lives lost.
> Capitalism is freedom. There is also no capitalist countries. Obviously.
> A pipe dream vs. Freedom. Hmmm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is Capitalism 'freedom' though? Both the guided age and the eras of slavery in the US were both capitalistic.
> 
> Capitalism in practice is very, very compatible with monopolies, price fixing,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Fake News.  Those practices are not Free Markets, that is why we have laws against monopoly market distortion and price fixing and certainly the solution isn't turning our Liberty over to the ultimate monopoly, Government.  We limit our Government to specific tasks spelled out in our Constitution.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The criticism of communism have been that it always becomes something else. That IN PRACTICE, communism becomes authoritarian. Or collapses. Or that people refuse to give up their power.
> 
> Well, if that is our standard, then we must also judge capitalism IN PRACTICE. And see what it morphs into...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Fake News.  First, of course we judge communism on its real world effects.  Communism routinely fails to feed their own people, this is a fundamental system failure.  Secondly, while yes the free flow of capital is important, so is the free flow of labor.  Our system is simply Free Markets and Free Choice with labor and capital free to flow where we ask for it by price point.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ... Our system hasn't always been....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> This is the thesis statement of our form of government:
> 
> _We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed_...​
> That is the purpose of our government, for us to mutually secure our collective fundamental rights. Our government derives its legitimacy from our consent, and these rights are secured no through just any power, but through_ just_ power.  In our system our government cannot legitimately exercise unjust power.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And while that was being written, we kept millions of people in slavery. With slavery codified into our constitution by counting them as 3/5ths a person. Undue power was baked into our nation from the moment of its inception.
> 
> Its only through imbuing the central government with more power could we mitigate the horrifying exploitation that capitalism tends toward. And the massive environmental damage. And the monopolies that capitalism natural trends toward.
> 
> All of these things weren't done because of capitalism, but in spite of it. And our nation has been better for it.
> 
> 
> 
> Zorro! said:
> 
> 
> 
> And ours is a constantly improving system.  In the Preamble to the Constitution:
> 
> We the People of the United States, in Order to form _a more perfect_ Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this *Constitution* for the United States of America.​
> This constantly perfecting of our system to secure our rights is a task we inherit from our parents and pass to our children.  The anti-slavery amendments should have been part of the original constitution, it shouldn't have waited 70 years.  Women should have had the vote immediately, but the initial generation did what they could and left these improvements for following generations who didn't have to first defeat the reining world power to even begin.  Rather than sitting in judgment on those that went before us, who accomplished far more than we have of this task, we should be diligently looking for ways to more perfectly secure the rights of our fellow citizens now.  Should whole family lines be locked into intergenerational squalor or intergenerational incarceration?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> With many of those improvements being the dilution of the undue power baked into our system. The elimination of slavery. The dismantling of Jim Crow. The cleaning up of our environment. The abolishment of child labor. The institution of public education and public safety regulation. The setting aside of public lands in our state and national forests. The establishment of national banks.
> 
> All of these were departures from capitalism, dilluttion of its most unstable, monopolistic, destructive or exploitative tendancies. And the embracing of more socialistic and even communistic tenets.
> 
> And our nation has benefited greatly from this hybrid system in which capitalism has been mitigated. And its often mitigated with socialism inspired tenets.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> you should educate yourself better,, the list is to long for me to get into,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Then why bother commenting at all? You contributed nothing to the conversation.
> 
> Try again. And please be civil. This is a great conversation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> of course I contributed,, you just dont like it,,
> 
> tell us more about that 3/5th clause that codified slavery in our constitution???
Click to expand...


Dude, look it up. I'll even start you on your way:









						Three-fifths compromise | Definition, Date, History, Significance, & Facts
					

Three-fifths compromise,  compromise agreement between delegates from the Northern and the Southern states at the United States Constitutional Convention (1787) that three-fifths of the slave population would be counted for determining direct taxation and representation in the House of...



					www.britannica.com
				




Come on back when you have something useful to contribute to the conversation.


----------



## progressive hunter

Skylar said:


> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Zorro! said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Zorro! said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Zorro! said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> Communism can work in small groups.
> No, no true communist country has never existed. Because it is a pipedream. People wont give up their power. That has been shown over and over with millions of lives lost.
> Capitalism is freedom. There is also no capitalist countries. Obviously.
> A pipe dream vs. Freedom. Hmmm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is Capitalism 'freedom' though? Both the guided age and the eras of slavery in the US were both capitalistic.
> 
> Capitalism in practice is very, very compatible with monopolies, price fixing,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Fake News.  Those practices are not Free Markets, that is why we have laws against monopoly market distortion and price fixing and certainly the solution isn't turning our Liberty over to the ultimate monopoly, Government.  We limit our Government to specific tasks spelled out in our Constitution.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The criticism of communism have been that it always becomes something else. That IN PRACTICE, communism becomes authoritarian. Or collapses. Or that people refuse to give up their power.
> 
> Well, if that is our standard, then we must also judge capitalism IN PRACTICE. And see what it morphs into...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Fake News.  First, of course we judge communism on its real world effects.  Communism routinely fails to feed their own people, this is a fundamental system failure.  Secondly, while yes the free flow of capital is important, so is the free flow of labor.  Our system is simply Free Markets and Free Choice with labor and capital free to flow where we ask for it by price point.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ... Our system hasn't always been....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> This is the thesis statement of our form of government:
> 
> _We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed_...​
> That is the purpose of our government, for us to mutually secure our collective fundamental rights. Our government derives its legitimacy from our consent, and these rights are secured no through just any power, but through_ just_ power.  In our system our government cannot legitimately exercise unjust power.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And while that was being written, we kept millions of people in slavery. With slavery codified into our constitution by counting them as 3/5ths a person. Undue power was baked into our nation from the moment of its inception.
> 
> Its only through imbuing the central government with more power could we mitigate the horrifying exploitation that capitalism tends toward. And the massive environmental damage. And the monopolies that capitalism natural trends toward.
> 
> All of these things weren't done because of capitalism, but in spite of it. And our nation has been better for it.
> 
> 
> 
> Zorro! said:
> 
> 
> 
> And ours is a constantly improving system.  In the Preamble to the Constitution:
> 
> We the People of the United States, in Order to form _a more perfect_ Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this *Constitution* for the United States of America.​
> This constantly perfecting of our system to secure our rights is a task we inherit from our parents and pass to our children.  The anti-slavery amendments should have been part of the original constitution, it shouldn't have waited 70 years.  Women should have had the vote immediately, but the initial generation did what they could and left these improvements for following generations who didn't have to first defeat the reining world power to even begin.  Rather than sitting in judgment on those that went before us, who accomplished far more than we have of this task, we should be diligently looking for ways to more perfectly secure the rights of our fellow citizens now.  Should whole family lines be locked into intergenerational squalor or intergenerational incarceration?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> With many of those improvements being the dilution of the undue power baked into our system. The elimination of slavery. The dismantling of Jim Crow. The cleaning up of our environment. The abolishment of child labor. The institution of public education and public safety regulation. The setting aside of public lands in our state and national forests. The establishment of national banks.
> 
> All of these were departures from capitalism, dilluttion of its most unstable, monopolistic, destructive or exploitative tendancies. And the embracing of more socialistic and even communistic tenets.
> 
> And our nation has benefited greatly from this hybrid system in which capitalism has been mitigated. And its often mitigated with socialism inspired tenets.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> you should educate yourself better,, the list is to long for me to get into,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Then why bother commenting at all? You contributed nothing to the conversation.
> 
> Try again. And please be civil. This is a great conversation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> of course I contributed,, you just dont like it,,
> 
> tell us more about that 3/5th clause that codified slavery in our constitution???
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Dude, look it up. I'll even start you on your way:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Three-fifths compromise | Definition, Date, History, Significance, & Facts
> 
> 
> Three-fifths compromise,  compromise agreement between delegates from the Northern and the Southern states at the United States Constitutional Convention (1787) that three-fifths of the slave population would be counted for determining direct taxation and representation in the House of...
> 
> 
> 
> www.britannica.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Come on back when you have something useful to contribute to the conversation.
Click to expand...

arent you leaving out without it that without it we wouldnt have a constitution?? and if it wasnt there slavery might well still exist today,, well in america cause it still exist most places in the world,,,

but go ahead and tell us more about how smart you are and why we are so bad,,,


----------



## Skylar

verker said:


> Socialism, social and economic doctrine that calls for public rather than private ownership or control of property private ownership and natural resources. According to the socialist view, individuals do not live or work in isolation but live in cooperation with one another. Furthermore, everything that people produce is in some sense a social product, and everyone who contributes to the production of a good is entitled to a share in it. Society as a whole, therefore, should own or at least control property for the benefit of all its members.
> 
> This conviction puts socialism in opposition to capitalism, which is based on private ownership of the means of production and allows individual choices in a free market to determine how goods and services are distributed. Socialists complain that capitalism necessarily leads to unfair and exploitative concentrations of wealth and power in the hands of the relative few who emerge victorious from free-market competition—people who then use their wealth and power to reinforce their dominance in society. Because such people are rich, they may choose where and how to live, and their choices in turn limit the options of the poor. As a result, terms such as _individual freedom_ and _equality of opportunity_ may be meaningful for capitalists but can only ring hollow for working people, who must do the capitalists’ bidding if they are to survive. As socialists see it, true freedom and true equality require social control of the resources that provide the basis for prosperity in any society. Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels made this point in Manifesto_ of the Communist Party _(1848) when they proclaimed that in a socialist society “the condition for the free development of each is the free development of all.”
> 
> This fundamental conviction nevertheless leaves room for socialists to disagree among themselves with regard to two key points. The first concerns the extent and the kind of property that society should own or control. Some socialists have thought that almost everything except personal items such as clothing should be public property; this is true, for example, of the society envisioned by the English humanist Sir Thomas More in his _Utopia_ (1516). Other socialists, however, have been willing to accept or even welcome private ownership of farms, shops, and other small or medium-sized businesses.



Its entirely possible to have a hybrid system. For all the claims among conservatives that 'socialism doesn't work', tenets of socialism work fine. For example....single payer healthcare. Almost every industrialized nation on the planet has some form of it. And its leans heavily toward socialism. Public schools, national parks, national banks, labor laws, environmental protections.....all skew the same way.

Capitalism, when restrained and mitigated in a hybrid system, is a powerful engine of commerce.  But left to its own devices, it becomes wildly unstable, environmentally destructive, horrifically exploitative, anti-competitive and monopolistic. A stronger central government tempered by more socialistic tenets can mitigate these tendencies.

And yes, we can absolutely pick and choose what we want. There is no requirement that if we have ANY socialist leaning institutions, all institutions must be. As demonstrated by robust hybrid economies around the world with both free markets....and single payer healthcare and public education.


----------



## progressive hunter

Skylar said:


> verker said:
> 
> 
> 
> Socialism, social and economic doctrine that calls for public rather than private ownership or control of property private ownership and natural resources. According to the socialist view, individuals do not live or work in isolation but live in cooperation with one another. Furthermore, everything that people produce is in some sense a social product, and everyone who contributes to the production of a good is entitled to a share in it. Society as a whole, therefore, should own or at least control property for the benefit of all its members.
> 
> This conviction puts socialism in opposition to capitalism, which is based on private ownership of the means of production and allows individual choices in a free market to determine how goods and services are distributed. Socialists complain that capitalism necessarily leads to unfair and exploitative concentrations of wealth and power in the hands of the relative few who emerge victorious from free-market competition—people who then use their wealth and power to reinforce their dominance in society. Because such people are rich, they may choose where and how to live, and their choices in turn limit the options of the poor. As a result, terms such as _individual freedom_ and _equality of opportunity_ may be meaningful for capitalists but can only ring hollow for working people, who must do the capitalists’ bidding if they are to survive. As socialists see it, true freedom and true equality require social control of the resources that provide the basis for prosperity in any society. Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels made this point in Manifesto_ of the Communist Party _(1848) when they proclaimed that in a socialist society “the condition for the free development of each is the free development of all.”
> 
> This fundamental conviction nevertheless leaves room for socialists to disagree among themselves with regard to two key points. The first concerns the extent and the kind of property that society should own or control. Some socialists have thought that almost everything except personal items such as clothing should be public property; this is true, for example, of the society envisioned by the English humanist Sir Thomas More in his _Utopia_ (1516). Other socialists, however, have been willing to accept or even welcome private ownership of farms, shops, and other small or medium-sized businesses.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Its entirely possible to have a hybrid system. For all the claims among conservatives that 'socialism doesn't work', tenets of socialism work fine. For example....single payer healthcare. Almost every industrialized nation on the planet has some form of it. And its leans heavily toward socialism. Public schools, national parks, national banks, labor laws, environmental protections.....all skew the same way.
> 
> Capitalism, when restrained and mitigated in a hybrid system, is a powerful engine of commerce.  But left to its own devices, it becomes wildly unstable, environmentally destructive, horrifically exploitative, anti-competitive and monopolistic. A stronger central government tempered by more socialistic tenets can mitigate these tendencies.
> 
> And yes, we can absolutely pick and choose what we want. There is no requirement that if we have ANY socialist leaning institutions, all institutions must be. As demonstrated by robust hybrid economies around the world with both free markets....and single payer healthcare and public education.
Click to expand...

why dont you just move to one of those countries and leave us alone???


----------



## Skylar

progressive hunter said:


> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> verker said:
> 
> 
> 
> Socialism, social and economic doctrine that calls for public rather than private ownership or control of property private ownership and natural resources. According to the socialist view, individuals do not live or work in isolation but live in cooperation with one another. Furthermore, everything that people produce is in some sense a social product, and everyone who contributes to the production of a good is entitled to a share in it. Society as a whole, therefore, should own or at least control property for the benefit of all its members.
> 
> This conviction puts socialism in opposition to capitalism, which is based on private ownership of the means of production and allows individual choices in a free market to determine how goods and services are distributed. Socialists complain that capitalism necessarily leads to unfair and exploitative concentrations of wealth and power in the hands of the relative few who emerge victorious from free-market competition—people who then use their wealth and power to reinforce their dominance in society. Because such people are rich, they may choose where and how to live, and their choices in turn limit the options of the poor. As a result, terms such as _individual freedom_ and _equality of opportunity_ may be meaningful for capitalists but can only ring hollow for working people, who must do the capitalists’ bidding if they are to survive. As socialists see it, true freedom and true equality require social control of the resources that provide the basis for prosperity in any society. Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels made this point in Manifesto_ of the Communist Party _(1848) when they proclaimed that in a socialist society “the condition for the free development of each is the free development of all.”
> 
> This fundamental conviction nevertheless leaves room for socialists to disagree among themselves with regard to two key points. The first concerns the extent and the kind of property that society should own or control. Some socialists have thought that almost everything except personal items such as clothing should be public property; this is true, for example, of the society envisioned by the English humanist Sir Thomas More in his _Utopia_ (1516). Other socialists, however, have been willing to accept or even welcome private ownership of farms, shops, and other small or medium-sized businesses.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Its entirely possible to have a hybrid system. For all the claims among conservatives that 'socialism doesn't work', tenets of socialism work fine. For example....single payer healthcare. Almost every industrialized nation on the planet has some form of it. And its leans heavily toward socialism. Public schools, national parks, national banks, labor laws, environmental protections.....all skew the same way.
> 
> Capitalism, when restrained and mitigated in a hybrid system, is a powerful engine of commerce.  But left to its own devices, it becomes wildly unstable, environmentally destructive, horrifically exploitative, anti-competitive and monopolistic. A stronger central government tempered by more socialistic tenets can mitigate these tendencies.
> 
> And yes, we can absolutely pick and choose what we want. There is no requirement that if we have ANY socialist leaning institutions, all institutions must be. As demonstrated by robust hybrid economies around the world with both free markets....and single payer healthcare and public education.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> why dont you just move to one of those countries and leave us alone???
Click to expand...


Because we're already a hybrid economy, having embraced both tenets of capitalism and socialism.

And our economy benefits from both.


----------



## progressive hunter

Skylar said:


> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> verker said:
> 
> 
> 
> Socialism, social and economic doctrine that calls for public rather than private ownership or control of property private ownership and natural resources. According to the socialist view, individuals do not live or work in isolation but live in cooperation with one another. Furthermore, everything that people produce is in some sense a social product, and everyone who contributes to the production of a good is entitled to a share in it. Society as a whole, therefore, should own or at least control property for the benefit of all its members.
> 
> This conviction puts socialism in opposition to capitalism, which is based on private ownership of the means of production and allows individual choices in a free market to determine how goods and services are distributed. Socialists complain that capitalism necessarily leads to unfair and exploitative concentrations of wealth and power in the hands of the relative few who emerge victorious from free-market competition—people who then use their wealth and power to reinforce their dominance in society. Because such people are rich, they may choose where and how to live, and their choices in turn limit the options of the poor. As a result, terms such as _individual freedom_ and _equality of opportunity_ may be meaningful for capitalists but can only ring hollow for working people, who must do the capitalists’ bidding if they are to survive. As socialists see it, true freedom and true equality require social control of the resources that provide the basis for prosperity in any society. Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels made this point in Manifesto_ of the Communist Party _(1848) when they proclaimed that in a socialist society “the condition for the free development of each is the free development of all.”
> 
> This fundamental conviction nevertheless leaves room for socialists to disagree among themselves with regard to two key points. The first concerns the extent and the kind of property that society should own or control. Some socialists have thought that almost everything except personal items such as clothing should be public property; this is true, for example, of the society envisioned by the English humanist Sir Thomas More in his _Utopia_ (1516). Other socialists, however, have been willing to accept or even welcome private ownership of farms, shops, and other small or medium-sized businesses.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Its entirely possible to have a hybrid system. For all the claims among conservatives that 'socialism doesn't work', tenets of socialism work fine. For example....single payer healthcare. Almost every industrialized nation on the planet has some form of it. And its leans heavily toward socialism. Public schools, national parks, national banks, labor laws, environmental protections.....all skew the same way.
> 
> Capitalism, when restrained and mitigated in a hybrid system, is a powerful engine of commerce.  But left to its own devices, it becomes wildly unstable, environmentally destructive, horrifically exploitative, anti-competitive and monopolistic. A stronger central government tempered by more socialistic tenets can mitigate these tendencies.
> 
> And yes, we can absolutely pick and choose what we want. There is no requirement that if we have ANY socialist leaning institutions, all institutions must be. As demonstrated by robust hybrid economies around the world with both free markets....and single payer healthcare and public education.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> why dont you just move to one of those countries and leave us alone???
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because we're already a hybrid economy, having embraced both tenets of capitalism and socialism.
Click to expand...

but youre leaving out its the socialist parts that are causing the biggest obstacles and harm,,,


----------



## Skylar

progressive hunter said:


> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> verker said:
> 
> 
> 
> Socialism, social and economic doctrine that calls for public rather than private ownership or control of property private ownership and natural resources. According to the socialist view, individuals do not live or work in isolation but live in cooperation with one another. Furthermore, everything that people produce is in some sense a social product, and everyone who contributes to the production of a good is entitled to a share in it. Society as a whole, therefore, should own or at least control property for the benefit of all its members.
> 
> This conviction puts socialism in opposition to capitalism, which is based on private ownership of the means of production and allows individual choices in a free market to determine how goods and services are distributed. Socialists complain that capitalism necessarily leads to unfair and exploitative concentrations of wealth and power in the hands of the relative few who emerge victorious from free-market competition—people who then use their wealth and power to reinforce their dominance in society. Because such people are rich, they may choose where and how to live, and their choices in turn limit the options of the poor. As a result, terms such as _individual freedom_ and _equality of opportunity_ may be meaningful for capitalists but can only ring hollow for working people, who must do the capitalists’ bidding if they are to survive. As socialists see it, true freedom and true equality require social control of the resources that provide the basis for prosperity in any society. Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels made this point in Manifesto_ of the Communist Party _(1848) when they proclaimed that in a socialist society “the condition for the free development of each is the free development of all.”
> 
> This fundamental conviction nevertheless leaves room for socialists to disagree among themselves with regard to two key points. The first concerns the extent and the kind of property that society should own or control. Some socialists have thought that almost everything except personal items such as clothing should be public property; this is true, for example, of the society envisioned by the English humanist Sir Thomas More in his _Utopia_ (1516). Other socialists, however, have been willing to accept or even welcome private ownership of farms, shops, and other small or medium-sized businesses.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Its entirely possible to have a hybrid system. For all the claims among conservatives that 'socialism doesn't work', tenets of socialism work fine. For example....single payer healthcare. Almost every industrialized nation on the planet has some form of it. And its leans heavily toward socialism. Public schools, national parks, national banks, labor laws, environmental protections.....all skew the same way.
> 
> Capitalism, when restrained and mitigated in a hybrid system, is a powerful engine of commerce.  But left to its own devices, it becomes wildly unstable, environmentally destructive, horrifically exploitative, anti-competitive and monopolistic. A stronger central government tempered by more socialistic tenets can mitigate these tendencies.
> 
> And yes, we can absolutely pick and choose what we want. There is no requirement that if we have ANY socialist leaning institutions, all institutions must be. As demonstrated by robust hybrid economies around the world with both free markets....and single payer healthcare and public education.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> why dont you just move to one of those countries and leave us alone???
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because we're already a hybrid economy, having embraced both tenets of capitalism and socialism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> but youre leaving out its the socialist parts that are causing the biggest obstacles and harm,,,
Click to expand...


Enlighten us. Remembering of course, that we can pick and choose what we want. 

Capitalism can have horrific costs. But mitigated, it works quite  well. Socialism's costs can be mitigated as well.

Again, you already live in a hybrid of the two.


----------



## progressive hunter

Skylar said:


> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> verker said:
> 
> 
> 
> Socialism, social and economic doctrine that calls for public rather than private ownership or control of property private ownership and natural resources. According to the socialist view, individuals do not live or work in isolation but live in cooperation with one another. Furthermore, everything that people produce is in some sense a social product, and everyone who contributes to the production of a good is entitled to a share in it. Society as a whole, therefore, should own or at least control property for the benefit of all its members.
> 
> This conviction puts socialism in opposition to capitalism, which is based on private ownership of the means of production and allows individual choices in a free market to determine how goods and services are distributed. Socialists complain that capitalism necessarily leads to unfair and exploitative concentrations of wealth and power in the hands of the relative few who emerge victorious from free-market competition—people who then use their wealth and power to reinforce their dominance in society. Because such people are rich, they may choose where and how to live, and their choices in turn limit the options of the poor. As a result, terms such as _individual freedom_ and _equality of opportunity_ may be meaningful for capitalists but can only ring hollow for working people, who must do the capitalists’ bidding if they are to survive. As socialists see it, true freedom and true equality require social control of the resources that provide the basis for prosperity in any society. Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels made this point in Manifesto_ of the Communist Party _(1848) when they proclaimed that in a socialist society “the condition for the free development of each is the free development of all.”
> 
> This fundamental conviction nevertheless leaves room for socialists to disagree among themselves with regard to two key points. The first concerns the extent and the kind of property that society should own or control. Some socialists have thought that almost everything except personal items such as clothing should be public property; this is true, for example, of the society envisioned by the English humanist Sir Thomas More in his _Utopia_ (1516). Other socialists, however, have been willing to accept or even welcome private ownership of farms, shops, and other small or medium-sized businesses.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Its entirely possible to have a hybrid system. For all the claims among conservatives that 'socialism doesn't work', tenets of socialism work fine. For example....single payer healthcare. Almost every industrialized nation on the planet has some form of it. And its leans heavily toward socialism. Public schools, national parks, national banks, labor laws, environmental protections.....all skew the same way.
> 
> Capitalism, when restrained and mitigated in a hybrid system, is a powerful engine of commerce.  But left to its own devices, it becomes wildly unstable, environmentally destructive, horrifically exploitative, anti-competitive and monopolistic. A stronger central government tempered by more socialistic tenets can mitigate these tendencies.
> 
> And yes, we can absolutely pick and choose what we want. There is no requirement that if we have ANY socialist leaning institutions, all institutions must be. As demonstrated by robust hybrid economies around the world with both free markets....and single payer healthcare and public education.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> why dont you just move to one of those countries and leave us alone???
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because we're already a hybrid economy, having embraced both tenets of capitalism and socialism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> but youre leaving out its the socialist parts that are causing the biggest obstacles and harm,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Enlighten us. Remembering of course, that we can pick and choose what we want.
> 
> Capitalism can have horrific costs. But mitigated, it works quite  well. Socialism's costs can be mitigated as well.
> 
> Again, you already live in a hybrid of the two.
Click to expand...

life has horrific costs,,,

we can start with taxs that have destroyed the manufacturing base in this country and moved it to china and go to regs from there,, and of course theres min wage that stops the poor from getting jobs,,

lets not forget welfare that allows for people to not even work at all and live off the people that do,,


----------



## progressive hunter

Skylar said:


> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> verker said:
> 
> 
> 
> Socialism, social and economic doctrine that calls for public rather than private ownership or control of property private ownership and natural resources. According to the socialist view, individuals do not live or work in isolation but live in cooperation with one another. Furthermore, everything that people produce is in some sense a social product, and everyone who contributes to the production of a good is entitled to a share in it. Society as a whole, therefore, should own or at least control property for the benefit of all its members.
> 
> This conviction puts socialism in opposition to capitalism, which is based on private ownership of the means of production and allows individual choices in a free market to determine how goods and services are distributed. Socialists complain that capitalism necessarily leads to unfair and exploitative concentrations of wealth and power in the hands of the relative few who emerge victorious from free-market competition—people who then use their wealth and power to reinforce their dominance in society. Because such people are rich, they may choose where and how to live, and their choices in turn limit the options of the poor. As a result, terms such as _individual freedom_ and _equality of opportunity_ may be meaningful for capitalists but can only ring hollow for working people, who must do the capitalists’ bidding if they are to survive. As socialists see it, true freedom and true equality require social control of the resources that provide the basis for prosperity in any society. Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels made this point in Manifesto_ of the Communist Party _(1848) when they proclaimed that in a socialist society “the condition for the free development of each is the free development of all.”
> 
> This fundamental conviction nevertheless leaves room for socialists to disagree among themselves with regard to two key points. The first concerns the extent and the kind of property that society should own or control. Some socialists have thought that almost everything except personal items such as clothing should be public property; this is true, for example, of the society envisioned by the English humanist Sir Thomas More in his _Utopia_ (1516). Other socialists, however, have been willing to accept or even welcome private ownership of farms, shops, and other small or medium-sized businesses.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Its entirely possible to have a hybrid system. For all the claims among conservatives that 'socialism doesn't work', tenets of socialism work fine. For example....single payer healthcare. Almost every industrialized nation on the planet has some form of it. And its leans heavily toward socialism. Public schools, national parks, national banks, labor laws, environmental protections.....all skew the same way.
> 
> Capitalism, when restrained and mitigated in a hybrid system, is a powerful engine of commerce.  But left to its own devices, it becomes wildly unstable, environmentally destructive, horrifically exploitative, anti-competitive and monopolistic. A stronger central government tempered by more socialistic tenets can mitigate these tendencies.
> 
> And yes, we can absolutely pick and choose what we want. There is no requirement that if we have ANY socialist leaning institutions, all institutions must be. As demonstrated by robust hybrid economies around the world with both free markets....and single payer healthcare and public education.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> why dont you just move to one of those countries and leave us alone???
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because we're already a hybrid economy, having embraced both tenets of capitalism and socialism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> but youre leaving out its the socialist parts that are causing the biggest obstacles and harm,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Enlighten us. Remembering of course, that we can pick and choose what we want.
> 
> Capitalism can have horrific costs. But mitigated, it works quite  well. Socialism's costs can be mitigated as well.
> 
> Again, you already live in a hybrid of the two.
Click to expand...

you cant mitigate what always wants more,,,
capitalism is always based on demand,,,


----------



## Skylar

progressive hunter said:


> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> verker said:
> 
> 
> 
> Socialism, social and economic doctrine that calls for public rather than private ownership or control of property private ownership and natural resources. According to the socialist view, individuals do not live or work in isolation but live in cooperation with one another. Furthermore, everything that people produce is in some sense a social product, and everyone who contributes to the production of a good is entitled to a share in it. Society as a whole, therefore, should own or at least control property for the benefit of all its members.
> 
> This conviction puts socialism in opposition to capitalism, which is based on private ownership of the means of production and allows individual choices in a free market to determine how goods and services are distributed. Socialists complain that capitalism necessarily leads to unfair and exploitative concentrations of wealth and power in the hands of the relative few who emerge victorious from free-market competition—people who then use their wealth and power to reinforce their dominance in society. Because such people are rich, they may choose where and how to live, and their choices in turn limit the options of the poor. As a result, terms such as _individual freedom_ and _equality of opportunity_ may be meaningful for capitalists but can only ring hollow for working people, who must do the capitalists’ bidding if they are to survive. As socialists see it, true freedom and true equality require social control of the resources that provide the basis for prosperity in any society. Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels made this point in Manifesto_ of the Communist Party _(1848) when they proclaimed that in a socialist society “the condition for the free development of each is the free development of all.”
> 
> This fundamental conviction nevertheless leaves room for socialists to disagree among themselves with regard to two key points. The first concerns the extent and the kind of property that society should own or control. Some socialists have thought that almost everything except personal items such as clothing should be public property; this is true, for example, of the society envisioned by the English humanist Sir Thomas More in his _Utopia_ (1516). Other socialists, however, have been willing to accept or even welcome private ownership of farms, shops, and other small or medium-sized businesses.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Its entirely possible to have a hybrid system. For all the claims among conservatives that 'socialism doesn't work', tenets of socialism work fine. For example....single payer healthcare. Almost every industrialized nation on the planet has some form of it. And its leans heavily toward socialism. Public schools, national parks, national banks, labor laws, environmental protections.....all skew the same way.
> 
> Capitalism, when restrained and mitigated in a hybrid system, is a powerful engine of commerce.  But left to its own devices, it becomes wildly unstable, environmentally destructive, horrifically exploitative, anti-competitive and monopolistic. A stronger central government tempered by more socialistic tenets can mitigate these tendencies.
> 
> And yes, we can absolutely pick and choose what we want. There is no requirement that if we have ANY socialist leaning institutions, all institutions must be. As demonstrated by robust hybrid economies around the world with both free markets....and single payer healthcare and public education.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> why dont you just move to one of those countries and leave us alone???
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because we're already a hybrid economy, having embraced both tenets of capitalism and socialism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> but youre leaving out its the socialist parts that are causing the biggest obstacles and harm,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Enlighten us. Remembering of course, that we can pick and choose what we want.
> 
> Capitalism can have horrific costs. But mitigated, it works quite  well. Socialism's costs can be mitigated as well.
> 
> Again, you already live in a hybrid of the two.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> life has horrific costs,,,
> 
> we can start with taxs that have destroyed the manufacturing base in this country and moved it to china and go to regs from there,, and of course theres min wage that stops the poor from getting jobs,,
Click to expand...


Taxes exist in any organized system of government. And your claims that our manufacturing base is 'destroyed' is comically exaggerated.

Manufacturers in the United States account for 11.39% of the total output in the economy, employing 8.51% of the workforce. Total output from manufacturing was $2,334.60 billion in 2018. In addition, there were an average of 12.8 million manufacturing employees in the United States in 2018, with an average annual compensation of $84,832.13 in 2017.

With your claims that 'taxes' destroyed the manufacturing base unfounded. Factors like mechanization and more effecient international distribution networks allowing US manufactureres to shift some of their operations to lower payed workers overseas is a far greater factor in any manufacturing decline than 'taxes'.


----------



## Unkotare

Why are you all helping this freshman with his pol/sci project?


----------



## Skylar

progressive hunter said:


> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> verker said:
> 
> 
> 
> Socialism, social and economic doctrine that calls for public rather than private ownership or control of property private ownership and natural resources. According to the socialist view, individuals do not live or work in isolation but live in cooperation with one another. Furthermore, everything that people produce is in some sense a social product, and everyone who contributes to the production of a good is entitled to a share in it. Society as a whole, therefore, should own or at least control property for the benefit of all its members.
> 
> This conviction puts socialism in opposition to capitalism, which is based on private ownership of the means of production and allows individual choices in a free market to determine how goods and services are distributed. Socialists complain that capitalism necessarily leads to unfair and exploitative concentrations of wealth and power in the hands of the relative few who emerge victorious from free-market competition—people who then use their wealth and power to reinforce their dominance in society. Because such people are rich, they may choose where and how to live, and their choices in turn limit the options of the poor. As a result, terms such as _individual freedom_ and _equality of opportunity_ may be meaningful for capitalists but can only ring hollow for working people, who must do the capitalists’ bidding if they are to survive. As socialists see it, true freedom and true equality require social control of the resources that provide the basis for prosperity in any society. Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels made this point in Manifesto_ of the Communist Party _(1848) when they proclaimed that in a socialist society “the condition for the free development of each is the free development of all.”
> 
> This fundamental conviction nevertheless leaves room for socialists to disagree among themselves with regard to two key points. The first concerns the extent and the kind of property that society should own or control. Some socialists have thought that almost everything except personal items such as clothing should be public property; this is true, for example, of the society envisioned by the English humanist Sir Thomas More in his _Utopia_ (1516). Other socialists, however, have been willing to accept or even welcome private ownership of farms, shops, and other small or medium-sized businesses.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Its entirely possible to have a hybrid system. For all the claims among conservatives that 'socialism doesn't work', tenets of socialism work fine. For example....single payer healthcare. Almost every industrialized nation on the planet has some form of it. And its leans heavily toward socialism. Public schools, national parks, national banks, labor laws, environmental protections.....all skew the same way.
> 
> Capitalism, when restrained and mitigated in a hybrid system, is a powerful engine of commerce.  But left to its own devices, it becomes wildly unstable, environmentally destructive, horrifically exploitative, anti-competitive and monopolistic. A stronger central government tempered by more socialistic tenets can mitigate these tendencies.
> 
> And yes, we can absolutely pick and choose what we want. There is no requirement that if we have ANY socialist leaning institutions, all institutions must be. As demonstrated by robust hybrid economies around the world with both free markets....and single payer healthcare and public education.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> why dont you just move to one of those countries and leave us alone???
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because we're already a hybrid economy, having embraced both tenets of capitalism and socialism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> but youre leaving out its the socialist parts that are causing the biggest obstacles and harm,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Enlighten us. Remembering of course, that we can pick and choose what we want.
> 
> Capitalism can have horrific costs. But mitigated, it works quite  well. Socialism's costs can be mitigated as well.
> 
> Again, you already live in a hybrid of the two.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> you cant mitigate what always wants more,,,
> capitalism is always based on demand,,,
Click to expand...


Sure you can. Pure capitalism is all about unrestrained growth. Unrestrained, it leads to massive environmental damage, horrid exploitation, anti-competative practices, and monopolies.

As capitalism always wants more profits.

Yet we restrain it with social safety nets, environmental regulations, anti-competative practice prohibitions, labor laws, safety regulations, preserve natural resources that it would otherwise consume in their entirity, create central banks to limit economic instability.

Its entirely possible to pick and choose what aspects of each system you want to use. And to mitigate the costs.


----------



## Zorro!

Skylar said:


> Zorro! said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Zorro! said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Zorro! said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> Communism can work in small groups.
> No, no true communist country has never existed. Because it is a pipedream. People wont give up their power. That has been shown over and over with millions of lives lost.
> Capitalism is freedom. There is also no capitalist countries. Obviously.
> A pipe dream vs. Freedom. Hmmm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is Capitalism 'freedom' though? Both the guided age and the eras of slavery in the US were both capitalistic.
> 
> Capitalism in practice is very, very compatible with monopolies, price fixing,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Fake News.  Those practices are not Free Markets, that is why we have laws against monopoly market distortion and price fixing and certainly the solution isn't turning our Liberty over to the ultimate monopoly, Government.  We limit our Government to specific tasks spelled out in our Constitution.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The criticism of communism have been that it always becomes something else. That IN PRACTICE, communism becomes authoritarian. Or collapses. Or that people refuse to give up their power.
> 
> Well, if that is our standard, then we must also judge capitalism IN PRACTICE. And see what it morphs into...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Fake News.  First, of course we judge communism on its real world effects.  Communism routinely fails to feed their own people, this is a fundamental system failure.  Secondly, while yes the free flow of capital is important, so is the free flow of labor.  Our system is simply Free Markets and Free Choice with labor and capital free to flow where we ask for it by price point.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ... Our system hasn't always been....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> This is the thesis statement of our form of government:
> 
> _We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed_...​
> That is the purpose of our government, for us to mutually secure our collective fundamental rights. Our government derives its legitimacy from our consent, and these rights are secured no through just any power, but through_ just_ power.  In our system our government cannot legitimately exercise unjust power.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And while that was being written, we kept millions of people in slavery...
Click to expand...

Yes.  Many of the Framers were uneasy slave owners.  They thought Slavery was dying out, they limited the power of the Slave States to the extent they could with the 3/5ths rule and left it to future leaders to move the ball further down the field when they had the opportunity to do so.   Then, confounding expectations, Eli Whitney invented the cotton gin and slavery exploded, 70 years later the issue of slavery exploded the nation and a terrible price was paid for the injustices that had occurred.  From Abraham Lincoln's second inaugural shortly before his violent death.  He saw the Civil War as God's justice for allowing this evil institution into our Nation:

Fondly do we hope, fervently do we pray, that this mighty scourge of war may speedily pass away. Yet, if God wills that it continue until all the wealth piled by the bondsman's two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk, and until every drop of blood drawn with the lash shall be paid by another drawn with the sword, as was said three thousand years ago, so still it must be said "the judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether."​
With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in, to bind up the nation's wounds, to care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow and his orphan, to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations.​
A great crime was committed, a terrible price was paid.  If you wish to judge them further you are free to do so, but I'll not join you.  We have an abundance of undealt with evil in our society that needs remedy, I'll not sit in judgment of our Great Great Grandfathers rather than focus on more perfectly securing the rights of our fellow Amricans who live and draw breath _today_, in terrible conditions.


> ... Its only through imbuing the central government with more power could we mitigate the horrifying exploitation...


Yes.  In our Constitution as drafted, it spoke of the "priviledges and immunities" that are our right but it did not state how the government was to secure those rights against States that violated those rights.  So some 70 years later a terrible war was fought and the 13th, 14th and 15th amendments were ratified, with the ratification of these amendments the price exacted from the succeeded, defeated slave states under military occupation, in order to resume their place as States with representation in the Federal Government.

And our Federal Government secures individual rights against encroachment by any level of Government, whether Federal, State or Local.


----------



## Unkotare

If you want to do some pondering, take a gander at the first draft of the declaration of independence.


----------



## TNHarley

Skylar said:


> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TNHarley said:
> 
> 
> 
> Communism can work in small groups.
> No, no true communist country has never existed. Because it is a pipedream. People wont give up their power. That has been shown over and over with millions of lives lost.
> Capitalism is freedom. There is also no capitalist countries. Obviously.
> A pipe dream vs. Freedom. Hmmm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is Capitalism 'freedom' though? Both the guided age and the eras of slavery in the US were both capitalistic.
> 
> Capitalism in practice is very, very compatible with monopolies, price fixing, hideous exploitation, massive inequality, and horrendous abuses of power. Due to its emphasis on unrestrained growth, capitalism also tends to be utterly brutal on the environment and consequently the people that breath, eat or drink water in such a system.
> 
> This same emphasis on growth could be argued to be a strong incentive for starting wars of conquest to open markets and acquire resources. The Opium Wars were draped in the rationale of freedom and commerce......but were in reality about forcing an addictive drug with severe social costs on a country that didn't want it.
> 
> Capitalism can also work in an environment of freedom and equality. But there's nothing intrinsic about it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No pure capitalist wants people dumping chemicals into waterways and shit. You can have a true capitalist economy with basic environmental regulations.
> Slavery isnt capitalism. Slavery is an anathema to capitalism.
> Abuses of power isnt capitalism. That is the government abusing power.
> Creating war for profit isnt capitalism. War is declared by the government.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When have we ever had 'pure capitalism'? This is like 'pure communism'. Its too fragile to exist in the real world. Its an ivory tower idea. In which case, the 'capitalism v communism' debate is easy to resolve:
> 
> They're both too fragile to be useful.
Click to expand...

We havent. 
Pure Capitalism is as progressive as you can get. 
Probably never happen, either.


----------



## progressive hunter

Skylar said:


> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Skylar said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> verker said:
> 
> 
> 
> Socialism, social and economic doctrine that calls for public rather than private ownership or control of property private ownership and natural resources. According to the socialist view, individuals do not live or work in isolation but live in cooperation with one another. Furthermore, everything that people produce is in some sense a social product, and everyone who contributes to the production of a good is entitled to a share in it. Society as a whole, therefore, should own or at least control property for the benefit of all its members.
> 
> This conviction puts socialism in opposition to capitalism, which is based on private ownership of the means of production and allows individual choices in a free market to determine how goods and services are distributed. Socialists complain that capitalism necessarily leads to unfair and exploitative concentrations of wealth and power in the hands of the relative few who emerge victorious from free-market competition—people who then use their wealth and power to reinforce their dominance in society. Because such people are rich, they may choose where and how to live, and their choices in turn limit the options of the poor. As a result, terms such as _individual freedom_ and _equality of opportunity_ may be meaningful for capitalists but can only ring hollow for working people, who must do the capitalists’ bidding if they are to survive. As socialists see it, true freedom and true equality require social control of the resources that provide the basis for prosperity in any society. Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels made this point in Manifesto_ of the Communist Party _(1848) when they proclaimed that in a socialist society “the condition for the free development of each is the free development of all.”
> 
> This fundamental conviction nevertheless leaves room for socialists to disagree among themselves with regard to two key points. The first concerns the extent and the kind of property that society should own or control. Some socialists have thought that almost everything except personal items such as clothing should be public property; this is true, for example, of the society envisioned by the English humanist Sir Thomas More in his _Utopia_ (1516). Other socialists, however, have been willing to accept or even welcome private ownership of farms, shops, and other small or medium-sized businesses.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Its entirely possible to have a hybrid system. For all the claims among conservatives that 'socialism doesn't work', tenets of socialism work fine. For example....single payer healthcare. Almost every industrialized nation on the planet has some form of it. And its leans heavily toward socialism. Public schools, national parks, national banks, labor laws, environmental protections.....all skew the same way.
> 
> Capitalism, when restrained and mitigated in a hybrid system, is a powerful engine of commerce.  But left to its own devices, it becomes wildly unstable, environmentally destructive, horrifically exploitative, anti-competitive and monopolistic. A stronger central government tempered by more socialistic tenets can mitigate these tendencies.
> 
> And yes, we can absolutely pick and choose what we want. There is no requirement that if we have ANY socialist leaning institutions, all institutions must be. As demonstrated by robust hybrid economies around the world with both free markets....and single payer healthcare and public education.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> why dont you just move to one of those countries and leave us alone???
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because we're already a hybrid economy, having embraced both tenets of capitalism and socialism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> but youre leaving out its the socialist parts that are causing the biggest obstacles and harm,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Enlighten us. Remembering of course, that we can pick and choose what we want.
> 
> Capitalism can have horrific costs. But mitigated, it works quite  well. Socialism's costs can be mitigated as well.
> 
> Again, you already live in a hybrid of the two.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> you cant mitigate what always wants more,,,
> capitalism is always based on demand,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sure you can. Pure capitalism is all about unrestrained growth. Unrestrained, it leads to massive environmental damage, horrid exploitation, anti-competative practices, and monopolies.
> 
> As capitalism always wants more profits.
> 
> Yet we restrain it with social safety nets, environmental regulations, anti-competative practice prohibitions, labor laws, safety regulations, preserve natural resources that it would otherwise consume in their entirity, create central banks to limit economic instability.
> 
> Its entirely possible to pick and choose what aspects of each system you want to use. And to mitigate the costs.
Click to expand...

you havent said what kind of capitalism your talking about,, governemnt ran capitalism or free market capitalism??

cause all the problem youre describing is due to government control and not the supply and demand that controls a true free market system,, and those same problems exist in anything ran by government ,,


----------



## Unkotare

If you want to drain the _Stupid_ out of an empty-headed "I took an intro pol/sci course once" liberal, stick him in a communist country (yes, even if in name only) for a few years.


----------



## daveman

22orchards said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> communism is better than capitalism.
> debate me using facts and not ad hominems.
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone who makes that claim isn't interested in facts.
> 
> Run along now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> so you can't debate me?
Click to expand...

You're not interested in debate.  You want instant, unquestioning agreement and support.

You won't get that from anyone connected to reality.


----------



## daveman

22orchards said:


> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> 
> This has has to be a joke, Communism collapsed like dark matter on itself because all things being equal: It was overrun with demagogues. Like the American Democratic party  supporting race riots and the BLM.
> 
> 
> 
> no country has existed under communism. stop using ad hominems. they make your argument look weaker than it is because you have to employ the use of pathos in a decidedly logos-fueled debate.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> did you forget communism is a form of capitalism???,,, just a smaller group of people keep the profits,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> communism exists under the idea that there is no capital, no money, no class, no private property, and that the people own the means of production.
Click to expand...

It always -- ALWAYS -- fails, because like all leftist Utopian schemes, it doesn't take human nature into account.


----------



## daveman

22orchards said:


> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> 
> Communism is well meaning, I get it. Really, communism is the political equivalent of the perpetual  motion machine, it sounds nice but never works in actuality.
> 
> 
> 
> it could work in reality. it just requires the people to work hard to maintain a society. capitalism the equivalent of taking all easy classes in high school, sure they're all easy and really hard to mess up, but it won't last you very long in the real world. communism is like ap courses. they're far harder, but if you can maintain it, you'll be far happier in the long run.
Click to expand...

You may have a point.  People in mass graves never complain.


----------



## daveman

22orchards said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> communism is better than capitalism.
> debate me using facts and not ad hominems.
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone who makes that claim isn't interested in facts.
> 
> Run along now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> so you can't debate me?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, I can't, but not for the reason you imagine.
> 
> Make your case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> you go first since you're so adamant about embarrassing yourself.
Click to expand...

Impossible.  I'm not a Communist.


----------



## daveman

22orchards said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Erinwltr said:
> 
> 
> 
> US Constitution does not make any mention about "communism is better than capitalism."  So, debate your soiled, stained paintez that your mother is going to wash tomorrow morning.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Constitution of the United States - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the idea is that communism would work better than the constitution and i couldn't really find another place to post this. also quit using ad hominems, they make your point look invalid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> the constitution has lasted 230yr,,, no communist country has made it 75 yrs,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no communist country has ever existed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> OH I forgot youre not that educated,,,
> 
> wait a minute,,, how can you say its better of its never existed before???
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> because the idea of communism is still well explored. by that mentality, innovation is impossible and should be ridiculed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Under Communism, innovation is impossible.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no it isn't. you're neglecting the idea that maybe people want to learn about stuff for more than just money.
Click to expand...

Innovation is not rewarded under Communism.  Why put forth any extra effort when you're not recognized for it?


----------



## Zorro!

Unkotare said:


> If you want to drain the _Stupid_ out of an empty-headed "I took an intro pol/sci course once" liberal, stick him in a communist country (yes, even if in name only) for a few years.


I understand that point of view, and for the most part I think it's accurate, but I know a guy who is Bernie progressive married to a North Vietnamese, proud communist, and her work ethic, honesty, thrift, ethic of hardworking productivity would stand up against anyone, and it's tied to her culture, which has high trust for their government, fierce loyalty to country and nationality with vast interconnected families that no one would dream of bringing shame to.  Communism is a good fit for them, but frankly, with those characteristics so deeply embedded into their society, I wonder if maybe any system would work.  They just have a number of inherent characteristics that are associated with a successful society. 

It's funny as her husband is always in debt, struggles with remaining employed, doesn't have a pattern of meeting his needs with enough left over to save and invest.  His governmental solutions are all about providing for the shiftless when she thinks that if they are able bodied they should get jobs or endure the consequences.  She doesn't view what we call Socialism/Communism as representative of her communist society at all.  There, I think that irresponsible slackards, especially if they engage in crime, might find a judge ordering the bailiff to take the guy out back and delivering a redemptive caning.


----------



## LuckyDuck

22orchards said:


> communism is better than capitalism.
> debate me using facts and not ad hominems.


Communism came about as a result of the then emerging "industrial age."  For example, Karl Marx was born in 1818 and died in 1885.  His thinking, as was that of Vladimir Lenin, et cetera, was formed by the experiences of workers in an era where they basically had two choices:  Don't work and starve or, work and be treated like a dog and just make enough to keep you breathing and working.  There were no labor laws back then.  No worker protection.  BUT...that was the way it was in the early Industrial Age.  
As times changed, so to did the influence of workers.  Unions were created to ensure rights for the employees.  Safety programs were enacted for workers (think Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)). Monopolies were broken up to ensure more opportunity for individuals and groups to succeed in their own ventures.  Larger firms were able to have health insurance coverage for employees, via mutual contributions from both the corporations and their employees.  In many areas, minimum wages were established.  Maternity leave was provided in larger firms that could afford it.  On and on the improvements have occurring.  
As for the idea of the workers getting the companies profits, that's where a line has to be drawn.  Ask yourself, who takes all the financial risk with the company?  The owner/president.  he/she/or whatever you want to call it, is the one that pays for the following:  The land upon which the company sits, the building in which the work is conducted, the utilities to keep the machinery/lights/water/etc. moving along, the permits, the insurance coverage against natural and manmade disasters, along with insurance to cover the costs of employee injuries and of course, city, county, state and federal taxes.  There is of course, the obligatory reimbursement to the banks that helped fund the enterprise and last, paying the employees.  The owner incurs literally>>>>ALL the risks.  The most the employee risks, is the loss of his/her/its job, which he/she/it can get in another company.  The employer loses literally everything.  Thus, the profits should go to the employer, rather than some person that may just be stuffing an eraser in the end of a pencil along some assembly line.  
If you look at the Communist nations there's a big problem that hasn't been overcome in relation to productivity and that's "innovation."  The lack of financial incentive for independent thinkers and for the Communist run companies, "stifles innovation."  To that end, they are consistently trying to "steal" western technology, which has the free-market capitalist method of instilling innovation for someone to achieve success and live better.
One thing I continually hear from the left in the street is the chant..."Income Equality!"  Yet, if you ask them...."Income Equality" with what or who? they can't answer and just repeat the lame mantra..."Income Equality."  Does the poorly or high school educated, burger flipper get the same income as a neurosurgeon?  I think not!  That would negate anyone from wanting to waste 11 years of their life to become a neurosurgeon, when all they have to do, is mow a few lawns or wipe down tables to get the same income as the burger flipper.  
Is the idea pertaining to women making the same income as men, as they claim not to?  A study found that incomes did differ, but only because the women were putting in less hours on the job than men.  They had what they perceived were important "outside" issues that precluded them from putting in 60 or more hours on the job, namely children.  The companies didn't issue them kids and therefore aren't responsible for their private life choices.  If you can't put in as many hours as the men, you don't get the same pay.  If however, you do put in the same amount of time on the job, have an equal position and work just as hard as your male counterpart, then yes, you should be paid equally.


----------



## Erinwltr

daveman said:


> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Erinwltr said:
> 
> 
> 
> US Constitution does not make any mention about "communism is better than capitalism."  So, debate your soiled, stained paintez that your mother is going to wash tomorrow morning.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Constitution of the United States - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the idea is that communism would work better than the constitution and i couldn't really find another place to post this. also quit using ad hominems, they make your point look invalid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> the constitution has lasted 230yr,,, no communist country has made it 75 yrs,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no communist country has ever existed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> OH I forgot youre not that educated,,,
> 
> wait a minute,,, how can you say its better of its never existed before???
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> because the idea of communism is still well explored. by that mentality, innovation is impossible and should be ridiculed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Under Communism, innovation is impossible.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no it isn't. you're neglecting the idea that maybe people want to learn about stuff for more than just money.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Innovation is not rewarded under Communism.  Why put forth any extra effort when you're not recognized for it?
Click to expand...

And what did your innovative effort today contribute to you paycheck?


----------



## Erinwltr

LuckyDuck said:


> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> communism is better than capitalism.
> debate me using facts and not ad hominems.
> 
> 
> 
> Communism came about as a result of the then emerging "industrial age."  For example, Karl Marx was born in 1818 and died in 1885.  His thinking, as was that of Vladimir Lenin, et cetera, was formed by the experiences of workers in an era where they basically had two choices:  Don't work and starve or, work and be treated like a dog and just make enough to keep you breathing and working.  There were no labor laws back then.  No worker protection.  BUT...that was the way it was in the early Industrial Age.
> As times changed, so to did the influence of workers.  Unions were created to ensure rights for the employees.  Safety programs were enacted for workers (think Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)). Monopolies were broken up to ensure more opportunity for individuals and groups to succeed in their own ventures.  Larger firms were able to have health insurance coverage for employees, via mutual contributions from both the corporations and their employees.  In many areas, minimum wages were established.  Maternity leave was provided in larger firms that could afford it.  On and on the improvements have occurring.
> As for the idea of the workers getting the companies profits, that's where a line has to be drawn.  Ask yourself, who takes all the financial risk with the company?  The owner/president.  he/she/or whatever you want to call it, is the one that pays for the following:  The land upon which the company sits, the building in which the work is conducted, the utilities to keep the machinery/lights/water/etc. moving along, the permits, the insurance coverage against natural and manmade disasters, along with insurance to cover the costs of employee injuries and of course, city, county, state and federal taxes.  There is of course, the obligatory reimbursement to the banks that helped fund the enterprise and last, paying the employees.  The owner incurs literally>>>>ALL the risks.  The most the employee risks, is the loss of his/her/its job, which he/she/it can get in another company.  The employer loses literally everything.  Thus, the profits should go to the employer, rather than some person that may just be stuffing an eraser in the end of a pencil along some assembly line.
> If you look at the Communist nations there's a big problem that hasn't been overcome in relation to productivity and that's "innovation."  The lack of financial incentive for independent thinkers and for the Communist run companies, "stifles innovation."  To that end, they are consistently trying to "steal" western technology, which has the free-market capitalist method of instilling innovation for someone to achieve success and live better.
> One thing I continually hear from the left in the street is the chant..."Income Equality!"  Yet, if you ask them...."Income Equality" with what or who? they can't answer and just repeat the lame mantra..."Income Equality."  Does the poorly or high school educated, burger flipper get the same income as a neurosurgeon?  I think not!  That would negate anyone from wanting to waste 11 years of their life to become a neurosurgeon, when all they have to do, is mow a few lawns or wipe down tables to get the same income as the burger flipper.
> Is the idea pertaining to women making the same income as men, as they claim not to?  A study found that incomes did differ, but only because the women were putting in less hours on the job than men.  They had what they perceived were important "outside" issues that precluded them from putting in 60 or more hours on the job, namely children.  The companies didn't issue them kids and therefore aren't responsible for their private life choices.  If you can't put in as many hours as the men, you don't get the same pay.  If however, you do put in the same amount of time on the job, have an equal position and work just as hard as your male counterpart, then yes, you should be paid equally.
Click to expand...

Wall of Words.


----------



## daveman

Erinwltr said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Erinwltr said:
> 
> 
> 
> US Constitution does not make any mention about "communism is better than capitalism."  So, debate your soiled, stained paintez that your mother is going to wash tomorrow morning.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Constitution of the United States - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the idea is that communism would work better than the constitution and i couldn't really find another place to post this. also quit using ad hominems, they make your point look invalid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> the constitution has lasted 230yr,,, no communist country has made it 75 yrs,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no communist country has ever existed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> OH I forgot youre not that educated,,,
> 
> wait a minute,,, how can you say its better of its never existed before???
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> because the idea of communism is still well explored. by that mentality, innovation is impossible and should be ridiculed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Under Communism, innovation is impossible.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no it isn't. you're neglecting the idea that maybe people want to learn about stuff for more than just money.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Innovation is not rewarded under Communism.  Why put forth any extra effort when you're not recognized for it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And what did your innovative effort today contribute to you paycheck?
Click to expand...

Around 30 bucks an hour plus bennies.  Try it!  It's fun!


----------



## Zorro!

Skylar said:


> verker said:
> 
> 
> 
> Socialism, social and economic doctrine that calls for public rather than private ownership or control of property private ownership and natural resources. According to the socialist view, individuals do not live or work in isolation but live in cooperation with one another. Furthermore, everything that people produce is in some sense a social product, and everyone who contributes to the production of a good is entitled to a share in it. Society as a whole, therefore, should own or at least control property for the benefit of all its members.
> 
> This conviction puts socialism in opposition to capitalism, which is based on private ownership of the means of production and allows individual choices in a free market to determine how goods and services are distributed. Socialists complain that capitalism necessarily leads to unfair and exploitative concentrations of wealth and power in the hands of the relative few who emerge victorious from free-market competition—people who then use their wealth and power to reinforce their dominance in society. Because such people are rich, they may choose where and how to live, and their choices in turn limit the options of the poor. As a result, terms such as _individual freedom_ and _equality of opportunity_ may be meaningful for capitalists but can only ring hollow for working people, who must do the capitalists’ bidding if they are to survive. As socialists see it, true freedom and true equality require social control of the resources that provide the basis for prosperity in any society. Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels made this point in Manifesto_ of the Communist Party _(1848) when they proclaimed that in a socialist society “the condition for the free development of each is the free development of all.”
> 
> This fundamental conviction nevertheless leaves room for socialists to disagree among themselves with regard to two key points. The first concerns the extent and the kind of property that society should own or control. Some socialists have thought that almost everything except personal items such as clothing should be public property; this is true, for example, of the society envisioned by the English humanist Sir Thomas More in his _Utopia_ (1516). Other socialists, however, have been willing to accept or even welcome private ownership of farms, shops, and other small or medium-sized businesses.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Its entirely possible to have a hybrid system. For all the claims among conservatives that 'socialism doesn't work', tenets of socialism work fine. For example....single payer healthcare. Almost every industrialized nation on the planet has some form of it. And its leans heavily toward socialism. Public schools, national parks, national banks, labor laws, environmental protections.....all skew the same way.
> 
> Capitalism, when restrained and mitigated in a hybrid system, is a powerful engine of commerce.  But left to its own devices, it becomes wildly unstable, environmentally destructive, horrifically exploitative, anti-competitive and monopolistic. A stronger central government tempered by more socialistic tenets can mitigate these tendencies.
> 
> And yes, we can absolutely pick and choose what we want. There is no requirement that if we have ANY socialist leaning institutions, all institutions must be. As demonstrated by robust hybrid economies around the world with both free markets....and single payer healthcare and public education.
Click to expand...

It's clear to me that that we could agree on some political goals and work cooperatively on them. There are things that you want to see accomplished because of your social justice views that I want to see accomplished due to the greater securing of individual fundamental rights.  

Sometimes what we agree on can be more important than what we disagree on.


----------



## Erinwltr

daveman said:


> Erinwltr said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Erinwltr said:
> 
> 
> 
> US Constitution does not make any mention about "communism is better than capitalism."  So, debate your soiled, stained paintez that your mother is going to wash tomorrow morning.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Constitution of the United States - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the idea is that communism would work better than the constitution and i couldn't really find another place to post this. also quit using ad hominems, they make your point look invalid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> the constitution has lasted 230yr,,, no communist country has made it 75 yrs,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no communist country has ever existed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> OH I forgot youre not that educated,,,
> 
> wait a minute,,, how can you say its better of its never existed before???
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> because the idea of communism is still well explored. by that mentality, innovation is impossible and should be ridiculed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Under Communism, innovation is impossible.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no it isn't. you're neglecting the idea that maybe people want to learn about stuff for more than just money.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Innovation is not rewarded under Communism.  Why put forth any extra effort when you're not recognized for it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And what did your innovative effort today contribute to you paycheck?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Around 30 bucks an hour plus bennies.  Try it!  It's fun!
Click to expand...

You're underpaid.  30.00 bucks.  A good-O- Union might do you some good.


----------



## Zorro!

Erinwltr said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Erinwltr said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Erinwltr said:
> 
> 
> 
> US Constitution does not make any mention about "communism is better than capitalism."  So, debate your soiled, stained paintez that your mother is going to wash tomorrow morning.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Constitution of the United States - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the idea is that communism would work better than the constitution and i couldn't really find another place to post this. also quit using ad hominems, they make your point look invalid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> the constitution has lasted 230yr,,, no communist country has made it 75 yrs,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no communist country has ever existed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> OH I forgot youre not that educated,,,
> 
> wait a minute,,, how can you say its better of its never existed before???
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> because the idea of communism is still well explored. by that mentality, innovation is impossible and should be ridiculed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Under Communism, innovation is impossible.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no it isn't. you're neglecting the idea that maybe people want to learn about stuff for more than just money.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Innovation is not rewarded under Communism.  Why put forth any extra effort when you're not recognized for it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And what did your innovative effort today contribute to you paycheck?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Around 30 bucks an hour plus bennies.  Try it!  It's fun!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You're underpaid.  30.00 bucks.  A good-O- Union might do you some good.
Click to expand...

No one has to apologize for honest work.  That works out to $60,000 a year, a solid middle class income.









						Are you in the middle class?
					

See where you fit in the distribution of Americans by income tier and metro area. ...




					www.pewresearch.org


----------



## Erinwltr

Zorro! said:


> Erinwltr said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Erinwltr said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Erinwltr said:
> 
> 
> 
> US Constitution does not make any mention about "communism is better than capitalism."  So, debate your soiled, stained paintez that your mother is going to wash tomorrow morning.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Constitution of the United States - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the idea is that communism would work better than the constitution and i couldn't really find another place to post this. also quit using ad hominems, they make your point look invalid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> the constitution has lasted 230yr,,, no communist country has made it 75 yrs,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no communist country has ever existed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> OH I forgot youre not that educated,,,
> 
> wait a minute,,, how can you say its better of its never existed before???
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> because the idea of communism is still well explored. by that mentality, innovation is impossible and should be ridiculed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Under Communism, innovation is impossible.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no it isn't. you're neglecting the idea that maybe people want to learn about stuff for more than just money.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Innovation is not rewarded under Communism.  Why put forth any extra effort when you're not recognized for it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And what did your innovative effort today contribute to you paycheck?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Around 30 bucks an hour plus bennies.  Try it!  It's fun!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You're underpaid.  30.00 bucks.  A good-O- Union might do you some good.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No one has to apologize for honest work.  That works out to $60,000 a year, a solid middle class income.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you in the middle class?
> 
> 
> See where you fit in the distribution of Americans by income tier and metro area. ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.pewresearch.org
Click to expand...

No one is apologizing.  60K a year is respectable.  Net.  Do the math.


----------



## daveman

Erinwltr said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Erinwltr said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Erinwltr said:
> 
> 
> 
> US Constitution does not make any mention about "communism is better than capitalism."  So, debate your soiled, stained paintez that your mother is going to wash tomorrow morning.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Constitution of the United States - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the idea is that communism would work better than the constitution and i couldn't really find another place to post this. also quit using ad hominems, they make your point look invalid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> the constitution has lasted 230yr,,, no communist country has made it 75 yrs,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no communist country has ever existed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> OH I forgot youre not that educated,,,
> 
> wait a minute,,, how can you say its better of its never existed before???
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> because the idea of communism is still well explored. by that mentality, innovation is impossible and should be ridiculed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Under Communism, innovation is impossible.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no it isn't. you're neglecting the idea that maybe people want to learn about stuff for more than just money.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Innovation is not rewarded under Communism.  Why put forth any extra effort when you're not recognized for it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And what did your innovative effort today contribute to you paycheck?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Around 30 bucks an hour plus bennies.  Try it!  It's fun!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You're underpaid.  30.00 bucks.  A good-O- Union might do you some good.
Click to expand...

Not interested.  I've been in 2 unions before.  They were fucking useless.  I got nothing for the dues I paid.


----------



## daveman

Erinwltr said:


> Zorro! said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Erinwltr said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Erinwltr said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Erinwltr said:
> 
> 
> 
> US Constitution does not make any mention about "communism is better than capitalism."  So, debate your soiled, stained paintez that your mother is going to wash tomorrow morning.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Constitution of the United States - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the idea is that communism would work better than the constitution and i couldn't really find another place to post this. also quit using ad hominems, they make your point look invalid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> the constitution has lasted 230yr,,, no communist country has made it 75 yrs,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no communist country has ever existed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> OH I forgot youre not that educated,,,
> 
> wait a minute,,, how can you say its better of its never existed before???
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> because the idea of communism is still well explored. by that mentality, innovation is impossible and should be ridiculed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Under Communism, innovation is impossible.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no it isn't. you're neglecting the idea that maybe people want to learn about stuff for more than just money.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Innovation is not rewarded under Communism.  Why put forth any extra effort when you're not recognized for it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And what did your innovative effort today contribute to you paycheck?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Around 30 bucks an hour plus bennies.  Try it!  It's fun!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You're underpaid.  30.00 bucks.  A good-O- Union might do you some good.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No one has to apologize for honest work.  That works out to $60,000 a year, a solid middle class income.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you in the middle class?
> 
> 
> See where you fit in the distribution of Americans by income tier and metro area. ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.pewresearch.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No one is apologizing.  60K a year is respectable.  Net.  Do the math.
Click to expand...

I also have a pension from the USAF.  I'm doing okay.  Your approval is neither sought nor required.


----------



## Erinwltr

daveman said:


> Erinwltr said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Zorro! said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Erinwltr said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Erinwltr said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Erinwltr said:
> 
> 
> 
> US Constitution does not make any mention about "communism is better than capitalism."  So, debate your soiled, stained paintez that your mother is going to wash tomorrow morning.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Constitution of the United States - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the idea is that communism would work better than the constitution and i couldn't really find another place to post this. also quit using ad hominems, they make your point look invalid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> the constitution has lasted 230yr,,, no communist country has made it 75 yrs,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no communist country has ever existed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> OH I forgot youre not that educated,,,
> 
> wait a minute,,, how can you say its better of its never existed before???
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> because the idea of communism is still well explored. by that mentality, innovation is impossible and should be ridiculed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Under Communism, innovation is impossible.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no it isn't. you're neglecting the idea that maybe people want to learn about stuff for more than just money.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Innovation is not rewarded under Communism.  Why put forth any extra effort when you're not recognized for it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And what did your innovative effort today contribute to you paycheck?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Around 30 bucks an hour plus bennies.  Try it!  It's fun!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You're underpaid.  30.00 bucks.  A good-O- Union might do you some good.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No one has to apologize for honest work.  That works out to $60,000 a year, a solid middle class income.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you in the middle class?
> 
> 
> See where you fit in the distribution of Americans by income tier and metro area. ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.pewresearch.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No one is apologizing.  60K a year is respectable.  Net.  Do the math.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I also have a pension from the USAF.  I'm doing okay.  Your approval is neither sought nor required.
Click to expand...

I already posted no one is apologizing and you comment that  "approval is neither sought nor required."   
Enjoy your retirement money.  I'm happy for ya.


----------



## RobbinBobbin

omg lol
CENTRISM IS THE BEST (sorry for caps)


----------



## justinacolmena

RobbinBobbin said:


> omg lol
> CENTRISM IS THE BEST (sorry for caps)


In some respects, the question of communism vs. capitalism is the same as that of extraversion vs introversion.





__





						The Myers & Briggs Foundation  - Extraversion or Introversion
					

The Myers & Briggs Foundation -  - Extraversion or Introversion



					www.myersbriggs.org
				




Communism is a form of "extraversion" whereas capitalism is "introversion." People do need both. Common space to socialize, but also private property to be alone or in private with immediate family and loved ones.


----------



## daveman

Erinwltr said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Erinwltr said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Zorro! said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Erinwltr said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Erinwltr said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Erinwltr said:
> 
> 
> 
> US Constitution does not make any mention about "communism is better than capitalism."  So, debate your soiled, stained paintez that your mother is going to wash tomorrow morning.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Constitution of the United States - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the idea is that communism would work better than the constitution and i couldn't really find another place to post this. also quit using ad hominems, they make your point look invalid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> the constitution has lasted 230yr,,, no communist country has made it 75 yrs,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no communist country has ever existed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> OH I forgot youre not that educated,,,
> 
> wait a minute,,, how can you say its better of its never existed before???
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> because the idea of communism is still well explored. by that mentality, innovation is impossible and should be ridiculed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Under Communism, innovation is impossible.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no it isn't. you're neglecting the idea that maybe people want to learn about stuff for more than just money.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Innovation is not rewarded under Communism.  Why put forth any extra effort when you're not recognized for it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And what did your innovative effort today contribute to you paycheck?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Around 30 bucks an hour plus bennies.  Try it!  It's fun!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You're underpaid.  30.00 bucks.  A good-O- Union might do you some good.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No one has to apologize for honest work.  That works out to $60,000 a year, a solid middle class income.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you in the middle class?
> 
> 
> See where you fit in the distribution of Americans by income tier and metro area. ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.pewresearch.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No one is apologizing.  60K a year is respectable.  Net.  Do the math.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I also have a pension from the USAF.  I'm doing okay.  Your approval is neither sought nor required.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I already posted no one is apologizing and you comment that  "approval is neither sought nor required."
> Enjoy your retirement money.  I'm happy for ya.
Click to expand...

Thanks.  All done without union interference.


----------



## RobbinBobbin

They are partly the same. The question is: how many freedom people have!? I think it's the most important and not only in social field! Economical freedom is also required!


----------



## justinacolmena

RobbinBobbin said:


> They are partly the same. The question is: how many freedom people have!? I think it's the most important and not only in social field! Economical freedom is also required!


Right. The "problem" with free markets is that they require eternal vigilance.

Markets aren't free today. For example, I'm not a doctor, and doctoral degrees are not available for purchase on the free market. But if a damned doctor, in the everlasting damnation of his soul, decides I shouldn't be allowed to purchase a firearm, then he's going to have me "served" with a diagnosis, and every damned cop, every damned lawyer, and every damned judge in that eternally damned district of corrupt laws and self-serving administration of damnable perversions of justice is going to _enforce_ a presumed medical diagosis against me as I were a common criminal.


----------



## danielpalos

22orchards said:


> communism is better than capitalism.
> debate me using facts and not ad hominems.


All it takes is social morals for free to achieve a Commune of Heaven on Earth.


----------



## Pellinore

Has anyone mentioned yet that Communism is a system of government, while capitalism is a system of economy?


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe

progressive hunter said:


> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> communism is better than capitalism.
> debate me using facts and not ad hominems.
> 
> 
> 
> if you dont accept communism they kill you,,,
> 
> thats a historic fact,,,
Click to expand...


Communism has failed 100% of the time.  That's an historic fact.


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe

MaryL said:


> This has has to be a joke, Communism collapsed like dark matter on itself because all things being equal: It was overrun with demagogues. Like the American Democratic party  supporting race riots and the BLM.



Communism requires everyone to think alike.  There's no way that can work.


----------



## Soupnazi630

22orchards said:


> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> 
> This has has to be a joke, Communism collapsed like dark matter on itself because all things being equal: It was overrun with demagogues. Like the American Democratic party  supporting race riots and the BLM.
> 
> 
> 
> no country has existed under communism. stop using ad hominems. they make your argument look weaker than it is because you have to employ the use of pathos in a decidedly logos-fueled debate.
Click to expand...

Wrong.

Many nations have existed under commmunism. All failed and all were slave states.

Communism is worse than capitalism because communism is byu design slavery on a world wide scale. 

Capitalism is thje opposite. The facts are that communism increases poverty and capitalism decreases it.


----------



## Soupnazi630

22orchards said:


> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Erinwltr said:
> 
> 
> 
> US Constitution does not make any mention about "communism is better than capitalism."  So, debate your soiled, stained paintez that your mother is going to wash tomorrow morning.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Constitution of the United States - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the idea is that communism would work better than the constitution and i couldn't really find another place to post this. also quit using ad hominems, they make your point look invalid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> the constitution has lasted 230yr,,, no communist country has made it 75 yrs,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no communist country has ever existed.
Click to expand...


Many have and all were evil


----------



## Soupnazi630

22orchards said:


> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MaryL said:
> 
> 
> 
> This has has to be a joke, Communism collapsed like dark matter on itself because all things being equal: It was overrun with demagogues. Like the American Democratic party  supporting race riots and the BLM.
> 
> 
> 
> no country has existed under communism. stop using ad hominems. they make your argument look weaker than it is because you have to employ the use of pathos in a decidedly logos-fueled debate.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> did you forget communism is a form of capitalism???,,, just a smaller group of people keep the profits,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> communism exists under the idea that there is no capital, no money, no class, no private property, and that the people own the means of production.
Click to expand...

Which is slavery


----------



## Soupnazi630

22orchards said:


> MisterBeale said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> stalin wasn't communist, neither was lennin. if you want some reading material but don't wanna pay for it, check out the wikipedia articles on marxism-lenninism, communism, stalinism, etc. they offer a lot of insight.
Click to expand...

Lenin and Stalin were communists,

You have poor comprehension of communism


----------



## GMCGeneral

22orchards said:


> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Erinwltr said:
> 
> 
> 
> US Constitution does not make any mention about "communism is better than capitalism."  So, debate your soiled, stained paintez that your mother is going to wash tomorrow morning.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Constitution of the United States - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the idea is that communism would work better than the constitution and i couldn't really find another place to post this. also quit using ad hominems, they make your point look invalid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> the constitution has lasted 230yr,,, no communist country has made it 75 yrs,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no communist country has ever existed.
Click to expand...

Let's just slice and dice this bullshit, shall we?  USSR, China, Cuba, Venezuela, Vietnam, N. Korea, Zimbabwe, shall I continue? All Communist shitholes.


----------



## progressive hunter

GMCGeneral said:


> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Erinwltr said:
> 
> 
> 
> US Constitution does not make any mention about "communism is better than capitalism."  So, debate your soiled, stained paintez that your mother is going to wash tomorrow morning.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Constitution of the United States - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the idea is that communism would work better than the constitution and i couldn't really find another place to post this. also quit using ad hominems, they make your point look invalid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> the constitution has lasted 230yr,,, no communist country has made it 75 yrs,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no communist country has ever existed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Let's just slice and dice this bullshit, shall we?  USSR, China, Cuba, Venezuela, Vietnam, N. Korea, Zimbabwe, shall I continue? All Communist shitholes.
Click to expand...

they exist under the guise of communism when they are actually  capitalist states ran by tyrants that keep all the profits for themselves and allow the people to keep just enough to survive,,

its a common misunderstanding so dont feel bad about it,,


----------



## GMCGeneral

progressive hunter said:


> GMCGeneral said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Erinwltr said:
> 
> 
> 
> US Constitution does not make any mention about "communism is better than capitalism."  So, debate your soiled, stained paintez that your mother is going to wash tomorrow morning.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Constitution of the United States - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the idea is that communism would work better than the constitution and i couldn't really find another place to post this. also quit using ad hominems, they make your point look invalid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> the constitution has lasted 230yr,,, no communist country has made it 75 yrs,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no communist country has ever existed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Let's just slice and dice this bullshit, shall we?  USSR, China, Cuba, Venezuela, Vietnam, N. Korea, Zimbabwe, shall I continue? All Communist shitholes.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> they exist under the guise of communism when they are actually  capitalist states ran by tyrants that keep all the profits for themselves and allow the people to keep just enough to survive,,
> 
> its a common misunderstanding so dont feel bad about it,,
Click to expand...

Nope. Those shitholes are the very essence of Communism.


----------



## progressive hunter

GMCGeneral said:


> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> GMCGeneral said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22orchards said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Erinwltr said:
> 
> 
> 
> US Constitution does not make any mention about "communism is better than capitalism."  So, debate your soiled, stained paintez that your mother is going to wash tomorrow morning.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Constitution of the United States - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the idea is that communism would work better than the constitution and i couldn't really find another place to post this. also quit using ad hominems, they make your point look invalid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> the constitution has lasted 230yr,,, no communist country has made it 75 yrs,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no communist country has ever existed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Let's just slice and dice this bullshit, shall we?  USSR, China, Cuba, Venezuela, Vietnam, N. Korea, Zimbabwe, shall I continue? All Communist shitholes.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> they exist under the guise of communism when they are actually  capitalist states ran by tyrants that keep all the profits for themselves and allow the people to keep just enough to survive,,
> 
> its a common misunderstanding so dont feel bad about it,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nope. Those shitholes are the very essence of Communism.
Click to expand...

wrong again,,,

instead of going off of emotion how about you think about it rationally??

if it were real communism all the people would be of equal wealth and status,, and that isnt the case,,

what they are is the worst of government controlled capitalism and not free market capitalism,,


----------

