Class Warfare a Bust:Gallup 75% of voters don't care Romeny's rich

Matthew, that is a start but a very weak one. Give us a solid documented definition of Marxism and then show us, if possible, that the dems (or the pubs) are running Marxist parties here in America.



They force people to take only what another man can as that’s what they consider “fair”. They force everyone to be equal no matter their ability as some people would be rich and some poor within such a society. The Marxist wants to tax, so the government can give out the goods to the people as a Marxist society is like Cuba. Not the people controlling their own lives.

The Marxist fail as it takes from the rich and gives it to the poor. Pretty soon it runs out and everyone is forced to be poor. It doesn't work as it goes against human nature to want to be better and it just doesn't make "more" goods to sustain its self. Capitalism works as it is a cycle of demanders and suppliers that plays into human nature to want to buy a good(product) and to make that good. We need to think of a better system of helping people, but as long as you push Marxism. That will never occur.

One that takes from Capitalism and somehow makes it more fair for the middle and helps the poor to move upwards. Helps as it shouldn't be given to them.

Can you show me where I'm off? I wish to learn. Also wouldn't the republicans and democrats by transferring wealth from one class to another be "Marxism" or some evolved form of it. Tax powers(middle class) paying for food stamps, welfare and section 8 for the poor.

"Marxism is an economic and social system based upon the political and economic theories of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. While it would take veritably volumes to explain the full implications and ramifications of the Marxist social and economic ideology, Marxism is summed up in the Encarta Reference Library as “a theory in which class struggle is a central element in the analysis of social change in Western societies.” Marxism is the antithesis of capitalism which is defined by Encarta as “an economic system based on the private ownership of the means of production and distribution of goods, characterized by a free competitive market and motivation by profit.” Marxism is the system of socialism of which the dominant feature is public ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange." What is Marxism

Marxism uses Socialism to transfer from one class to another.
 
Last edited:
The class war is over. The rich won.
6a00d83452403c69e20133eca1fa97970b-pi
 
The government=public sector. So that would mean that the government controls the means of production and who gets what. Right?
 
Marxists etc want violent revolution to overthrow capitalism and put all production in the hands of the gov't. You people are MORONS. Getting everyone health care and cutting costs, getting the bloated rich to pay 4% more in taxes is capitalism at its best, Beckbots.
 
Socialism is ALWAYS democratic and works for social justice, marxism is NEVER democratic and is extinct, you ignorant chumps of the greedy rich.
 
We've seen it sourced a million times, what you need is a 2x4 to the back of the head LOL
 
'tea parties are for little girls with imaginary friends and for JoeBs with fervent imagination.' The GOP will have far less TPM influence next year than last year. Your exceptions prove my rule.


]

The TEA Party will actually become MORE powerful after Romney loses. Because the first thing they are going to say after we look at a mostly Blue Map in November is "Romney lost because he wasn't a REAL conservative!"

Can you actually name one teabagger office holder who got defeated in the primaries by moderate Republicans?

Now, yeah, a few of them will go down in November like Joe Walsh (Good Riddance). But that's because Democrats will knock them out.

The thing is, when you have to rely on the oppossition party to get rid of your more insane members, you really don't have control...

And big fonts and comments about little girls doesn't change that reality.
 
Does a Marxist nation have a government? Does a Marxist nation have taxes?
 
Being rich used to be a good thing before Barry Hussein's mini socialist revolution. FDR was arguably the richest president in history and lefties love his legacy. JFK came from a line of pop-culture new money from rum-running and Hollywood decadence and the left called it "Camelot". Today we have a former dope dealing community activists in the White House and left tells us to tighten our belts and sooner or later we will all be working for the peoples republic if we don't elect a capitalist dog.

Let us also not forget that all of our Founding Fathers were wealthy and prosperous. In their day, that was something to be admired and made one a respected member of the community. It's only now that we think we should have as President someone who can't even manage his own life successfully.
 
wonder why Cons were so obsessed with John kerry for being rich and with his money and his and teresa heinz's tax returns?

but the liberals weren't but they are now,, so can you explain that? or knot?

Are we seriously going to compare Romney to a guy who got all his money by being a poodle for rich women? Kerry's wealth got no respect because he was a gigolo.
 
Horseshit.

Hey, you don't believe me, beleive Mike Huckabee..


"
Four years ago, Mike Huckabee contrasted his style as a candidate with that of Mitt Romney’s style: “I want to be a president who reminds you of the guy you work with, not the guy who laid you off.” It was a sharp quip because it hit close to home: Romney’s private-sector background involving laying off a lot of American workers.

The former Massachusetts governor has two broad flaws as a presidential candidate. The first is that he’s a craven, cowardly flip-flopper who shifts with the winds and demonstrates a practical allergy to principled stands. The second has to do with Romney’s record on jobs — specifically, how abysmal it is.

That's one of your guys...

It's still horseshit.

Who the hell would vote for any of their co-workers to be President?

And when the hell did we become welded to the stupid shit Huckabee spouts? In case you lefties haven't noticed, we REJECTED HIM, so I'm fairly sure that negates any obligation on the part of conservatives to treat his words as gospel.
 
Which economic class has more today than it had five years ago?
What does the answer to that question say about capitalism and democracy?

"After five years of crisis - with no end in sight - it's time to evaluate what happened, why and what needs to be done. One key cause of this crisis is the class structure of capitalist enterprises.

"I stress that because most treatments miss it. By class structure, I mean enterprises' internal organization pitting workers against corporate boards of directors and major shareholders.

"Those boards seek first to maximize corporate profits and growth.

"That means maximizing the difference between the value they get from workers' labor and the value of the wages paid to workers. Those boards also decide how to use that difference ('surplus value') to secure the corporation's reproduction and growth.

"The major shareholders and the directors they select make all basic corporate decisions: what, how and where to produce and how to spend the surplus value (on executive pay hikes and bonuses, outsourcing production, buying politicians etc.)

"Workers (the majority) live with the results of decisions made by a tiny minority (shareholders and directors).

"Workers are excluded from participating in those decisions: a lesson in capitalist democracy."

After Five Years: Report Card on Crisis Capitalism

Truth-out.org? Seriously?

From their "About Us" section:

Our Mission
Truthout works to spark action by revealing systemic injustice and providing a platform for transformative ideas, through in-depth investigative reporting and critical analysis. With a powerful, independent voice, we will spur the revolution in consciousness and inspire the direct action that is necessary to save the planet and humanity.


Yeah, this is TOTALLY a group I'm going to listen to. :lol:

Shut. The Hell. Up.
 
Let us not forget that Cecilie1200 speaks wildly. Paul Revere, Samuel Adams, Patrick Henry, and others were not wealthy.

Let us remember that she knows not what 'socialism' or a 'mini socialist revolution' means.

She's a loon.


Being rich used to be a good thing before Barry Hussein's mini socialist revolution. FDR was arguably the richest president in history and lefties love his legacy. JFK came from a line of pop-culture new money from rum-running and Hollywood decadence and the left called it "Camelot". Today we have a former dope dealing community activists in the White House and left tells us to tighten our belts and sooner or later we will all be working for the peoples republic if we don't elect a capitalist dog.

Let us also not forget that all of our Founding Fathers were wealthy and prosperous. In their day, that was something to be admired and made one a respected member of the community. It's only now that we think we should have as President someone who can't even manage his own life successfully.
 
Unkobarf has messed up again with the formatting. Simply go to #156 above and see what he has done.

Note: barf has not edited his post above at this time.
 

Forum List

Back
Top