Green New Deal

[Thinker101]

the Green Big Deal is technologically impossible, unimaginably costly and a socialist fever dream that would ultimately cost Democrats moderate seats across the country.

I think this will be a piñata that Republicans will continue to hit and use to their advantage in the 2020 elections. It’s a policy piñata

These MOON BATS are patting each other on the back an kicking each other in the ass at the same time. Looks like a Skit from " the 230 some stooges. F%#@ing amazing!

Humor is a great tool for GOP propagandists--goes great with the fact that it's all garbage. She never said she was for paying people who were unwilling to work or all that ridiculous train stuff... The dupes will never know hahaha of course. Who cares about truth evidence courtrooms or journalism anyway....

Yup, you mean like SNL, Bill Maher, Jon Stewart, and Stephen Colbert...oh, wait.

Dumbass.

 

[baileyn45]

No kidding. Solar is great but it just isn't viable Neither is wind.

If neither were viable, they wouldn’t be building solar and wind farms and renewable energy labor wouldn’t be the fastest growing job market.

Renewable Energy Record Set in U.S.

You'll note that the article points to the private sector pushing this along. It's what many of us have said for years, keep the govt out of it. They'll just screw it up.

 

[Flopper]

Nationalizing institutions does not meant the countries economic system is socialism. The US has nationalized private posts, railroads, telephone companies, and electric power companies and has instituted price controls. That does make the US a socialist country.

The German Workers Party was renamed to the National Socialist German Workers' Party in order to gain support of the trade unions which Hitler hated and later destroyed.

Nazism is traditionally held to be an extreme right-wing ideology, the party’s conspicuous use of the term “socialist”, which refers to a political system normally plotted on the far-left end of the ideological spectrum has long been a source of confusion. The assumption that because the word “socialist” appeared in the party’s name and socialist words and ideas popped up in the writings and speeches of top Nazis then they must have been actual socialists is naive and does not match the facts.

This is very good post.

Socialism inevitably leads to taking control of means of production by nationalization, because that is purpose of socialism. Although it's true that US throughout the history used nationalization of properties and businesses, it did it with different reasons.

During WWI, all US railroads were operated (not owned) by Railroad Administration as a wartime measure and were return to private control after war. The same happened with telephone systems that were under control of US government for about a year. Amtrak was created for the purpose of relieving privately own railroads of legal obligation to provide passenger service that was not profitable.

You said that German Worker Party changed name to gain support of trade unions. If that is only reason, and if they were not socialists, there wouldn't be a reason to keep "socialist" in their name after they had full control of the government beyond 1933.

Despite having declared, at various times, “I am a socialist,” “We are socialists,” and similar avowals, on a personal level, Hitler displayed little regard for the actual tenets of socialism, or, for that matter, socialists themselves. In order to prepare the country for the struggle he saw to coming, he nationalized much of the country's institutions but also leaving much of industry in private hands. He left in place capitalism when it served his needs. Hitler upheld ownership of private property, individual entrepreneurship, and economic competition, and disapproved of trade unions and workers’ interference in the freedom of owners and managers to run their concerns. Capitalism was, therefore, left in place. Hitler was certainly no socialist; a fascist, a right wing nationalist, and a dictator, yes.

You claim that Hitler kept ownership of private properties and companies in private hands. It sure appeared that way, but the German government, not the owners, exercised powers of ownership by deciding what is to be produced, in what quantities, how, and what were the prices of the products, and wages of the workers producing it. Most of the owners of those properties and companies were part of the German government, not by choice, but by necessity of their own survival.

You're overlooking another aspect of socialism, where common good comes before private good, and that individual exists as the means required by the state, in other words, individual is own by the state, and therefore individual's property as well. Just as it happened in Germany, it happened in every socialist country, since October revolution is Russia, until Venezuela, with the exactly the same outcome.

Germany rode to power under the guise of socialism but in truth it was fascism. The key tenants of socialism never really existed. There certainly was no classless society. Private ownership was never abolished. Entrepreneurship was encouraged. State owned industries were privatized after Hitler took power and trade unions were smashed. As the country moved closer to war, the Nazi government developed a partnerships with leading German business interests, who supported the goals of the regime and its war effort in exchange for advantageous contracts, subsidies, and the suppression of the trade union movement. Cartels and monopolies were encourage by the government in exchange for millions of marks transferred to the Reich by major industrialists in 1933. Hitler promised huge profits to the cartels in exchange for their support. Had the Nazis won the war, the group of 30 industrialist that had pledged their support would have been fabulously wealthy instead of being persecuted as war criminals.

Nazism like fascism were both far-right forms of government which was characterized by extreme nationalism, racial discrimination, promotion of violence and war, and an unapologetic hatred for socialism. The major commonality between Socialism, Communism, Nazism, and Fascism is government control. Government control is not the defining factor in any of the above eco-political systems.

Had Hitler understood anything about economic theory and that communism was just a subset of socialism, he would have thought twice about renaming of the party. However, once the party was renamed and he came to power, there was far too much invested in the Nazi trademark to rename the party again.

 

[Ambivalent1]

Nationalizing institutions does not meant the countries economic system is socialism. The US has nationalized private posts, railroads, telephone companies, and electric power companies and has instituted price controls. That does make the US a socialist country.

The German Workers Party was renamed to the National Socialist German Workers' Party in order to gain support of the trade unions which Hitler hated and later destroyed.

Nazism is traditionally held to be an extreme right-wing ideology, the party’s conspicuous use of the term “socialist”, which refers to a political system normally plotted on the far-left end of the ideological spectrum has long been a source of confusion. The assumption that because the word “socialist” appeared in the party’s name and socialist words and ideas popped up in the writings and speeches of top Nazis then they must have been actual socialists is naive and does not match the facts.

This is very good post.

Socialism inevitably leads to taking control of means of production by nationalization, because that is purpose of socialism. Although it's true that US throughout the history used nationalization of properties and businesses, it did it with different reasons.

During WWI, all US railroads were operated (not owned) by Railroad Administration as a wartime measure and were return to private control after war. The same happened with telephone systems that were under control of US government for about a year. Amtrak was created for the purpose of relieving privately own railroads of legal obligation to provide passenger service that was not profitable.

You said that German Worker Party changed name to gain support of trade unions. If that is only reason, and if they were not socialists, there wouldn't be a reason to keep "socialist" in their name after they had full control of the government beyond 1933.

Despite having declared, at various times, “I am a socialist,” “We are socialists,” and similar avowals, on a personal level, Hitler displayed little regard for the actual tenets of socialism, or, for that matter, socialists themselves. In order to prepare the country for the struggle he saw to coming, he nationalized much of the country's institutions but also leaving much of industry in private hands. He left in place capitalism when it served his needs. Hitler upheld ownership of private property, individual entrepreneurship, and economic competition, and disapproved of trade unions and workers’ interference in the freedom of owners and managers to run their concerns. Capitalism was, therefore, left in place. Hitler was certainly no socialist; a fascist, a right wing nationalist, and a dictator, yes.

You claim that Hitler kept ownership of private properties and companies in private hands. It sure appeared that way, but the German government, not the owners, exercised powers of ownership by deciding what is to be produced, in what quantities, how, and what were the prices of the products, and wages of the workers producing it. Most of the owners of those properties and companies were part of the German government, not by choice, but by necessity of their own survival.

You're overlooking another aspect of socialism, where common good comes before private good, and that individual exists as the means required by the state, in other words, individual is own by the state, and therefore individual's property as well. Just as it happened in Germany, it happened in every socialist country, since October revolution is Russia, until Venezuela, with the exactly the same outcome.

Germany rode to power under the guise of socialism but in truth it was fascism. The key tenants of socialism never really existed. There certainly was no classless society. Private ownership was never abolished. Entrepreneurship was encouraged. State owned industries were privatized after Hitler took power and trade unions were smashed. As the country moved closer to war, the Nazi government developed a partnerships with leading German business interests, who supported the goals of the regime and its war effort in exchange for advantageous contracts, subsidies, and the suppression of the trade union movement. Cartels and monopolies were encourage by the government in exchange for millions of marks transferred to the Reich by major industrialists in 1933. Hitler promised huge profits to the cartels in exchange for their support. Had the Nazis won the war, the group of 30 industrialist that had pledged their support would have been fabulously wealthy instead of being persecuted as war criminals.

Nazism like fascism were both far-right forms of government which was characterized by extreme nationalism, racial discrimination, promotion of violence and war, and an unapologetic hatred for socialism. The major commonality between Socialism, Communism, Nazism, and Fascism is government control. Government control is not the defining factor in any of the above eco-political systems.

Had Hitler understood anything about economic theory and that communism was just a subset of socialism, he would have thought twice about renaming of the party. However, once the party was renamed and he came to power, there was far too much invested in the Nazi trademark to rename the party again.

LOL, you're boxed into the binary paradigm.
Here, let me help.
What is this?

 

[RealDave]

Whzst the fuck does yiour stupid post have to do with mine?

Corn loses a percentage of its yield on every day the temps are above 90/95%.

I guess you don't look at the future or don't have any kids.

So you think we should have let the building industry continue with asbestos in our homes & lead paint.

Because, OMG OMG capitalism is about freedom. To you assfucks it is the freedom to sicken & kill people

Idiot, you seek Communism. Glowbull warming is just a story told to the really fucking stupid.

You know I had some dumbfuck last week try and convince me that the polar vortex is caused by glowbull warming? Seriously, this shit for brains moron was so fucking stupid that he didn't even grasp the basis of his own religion, that carbon dioxide "traps heat (as if it dissipates into space ) like a blanket making Gaia warm, which angers her so she punishes us." I asked this drooling retard how trapping heat causes cold? His answer? "Well it just does, you hate science."

Oh wait, that retard was YOU, wasn't it? That's right...

See, you scumbags have been pushing Communism for 150 years. You think you've found a new angle with your Gaia worship idiocy, but it's still the same old Marxism wrapped in a new package.

Such a pile of ignorance from a dumbass who claims to have a PhD.

No one has been pushing Communism.

 

[RealDave]

No kidding. Solar is great but it just isn't viable Neither is wind.

If neither were viable, they wouldn’t be building solar and wind farms and renewable energy labor wouldn’t be the fastest growing job market.

Renewable Energy Record Set in U.S.

You'd probably find that with any industry heavily subsidized by the government.

Most" look it up.

 

[Flopper]

I recently heard how those batteries lose a lot of power in the winter time in single digit temperatures or below. You'd be charging those things 24/7.

A business associate of mine owns an all electric Tesla with the long range battery system. They drove to Panama City, from Tallahassee to the new PC Airport. Parked and flew out of town for a week. They came back, late at night, and walked to the car. Nothing. It wouldn't move. Without any charge for that period of time, plus running all the on-board computers the batteries had run down to nothing. Of course a simply jump start wasn't possible so it had to be towed on a flat-bed. Yep, I can't wait to have one of those in my garage!

Yep, their time is coming but it's not here yet. Kind of slow getting anywhere. They were invented, the all electric car, over 100 years ago.

Whether an electric is practical depends how you drive. My neighbor has a Volt. He drives it to work daily, about 5 miles and drives it to the grocery store, restaurants, and friends in our area and charges it about once a week. I have a 4wd drive SUV that we pull a camper in summer and drive to my son's cabin in the mountains in winter. An electric would not work for these applications. It just depends on how you going to use it.

In the early days of autos, gasoline-fueled vehicles had limited use compared to electric cars and carriages with the lack good roads and gas stations. However with the expansion of infrastructures and advances in technology gasoline powered vehicles became the standard. With extended range batteries and more charging stations, electric cars may well become the the standard for autos in the future while fossil fuel remains the choice for trucks and commercial vehicles.

 

[francoHFW]

Funny how all the journalists and law enforcement in the world agree with me, and only brainwashed tools agree with you or Liars. You don't know the GOP is a disaster and the lying disgrace, but you know every detail of imaginary phony scandals that don't go anywhere in the real world. How is Hillary doing in prison LOL idiot? And no that is not a conspiracy either LOL...

You can't think independently franco, you can't. It's a dark little box in your head that you can't escape. Our system is a disgrace son, all of it. To claim the entire world agrees with you shows that you have no real self esteem and you need the affirmation of others to truly feel good about "you'.

Google any newspaper in the world not owned by Rupert Murdoch the scumbag, and you will find that none of them agree with your dumbass brainwashed idiocy. American rich people do not pay enough in taxes and we do not invest in America or Americans, and none of your phony scandals about the clintons or Obama or the FBI make it to the real world anywhere, you incredibly brainwashed fool. Perfect chump of the greedy idiot GOP rich thieves.

More with the need for affirmation. I feel sorry for you. You're a very lonely man.

You are a conspiracy nut job and fantasist like most GOP voters these days. Whatever you do don't change the channel or read a newspaper or use your computer for information child, you might find out something factual LOL.

You can't shake me and you're getting desperate. I don't read newspapers and I don't watch ANY of the MSM son. 6 corps own 90% of the media. Again, nothing you type speaks to an education. You are living a fantasy life on this board and pretending to be something you aren't . You are lonely, sad, and lost. Dupe, Derp, rube. It's all you have.

You are a brainwashed functional moron and perfect chump of the greedy idiot Rich GOP who have wrecked the middle class and our infrastructure all to save the rich from paying their fair share.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I recently heard how those batteries lose a lot of power in the winter time in single digit temperatures or below. You'd be charging those things 24/7.

A business associate of mine owns an all electric Tesla with the long range battery system. They drove to Panama City, from Tallahassee to the new PC Airport. Parked and flew out of town for a week. They came back, late at night, and walked to the car. Nothing. It wouldn't move. Without any charge for that period of time, plus running all the on-board computers the batteries had run down to nothing. Of course a simply jump start wasn't possible so it had to be towed on a flat-bed. Yep, I can't wait to have one of those in my garage!

Yep, their time is coming but it's not here yet. Kind of slow getting anywhere. They were invented, the all electric car, over 100 years ago.

Whether an electric is practical depends how you drive. My neighbor has a Volt. He drives it to work daily, about 5 miles and drives it to the grocery store, restaurants, and friends in our area and charges it about once a week. I have a 4wd drive SUV that we pull a camper in summer and drive to my son's cabin in the mountains in winter. An electric would not work for these applications. It just depends on how you going to use it.

In the early days of autos, gasoline-fueled vehicles had limited use compared to electric cars and carriages with the lack good roads and gas stations. However with the expansion of infrastructures and advances in technology gasoline powered vehicles became the standard. With extended range batteries and more charging stations, electric cars may well become the the standard for autos in the future while fossil fuel remains the choice for trucks and commercial vehicles.

That may be true, but government should not be pushing it. It has to come at it's own time. The government didn't have to subsidize cable television or cell phones because everybody wanted those things. The same should hold true for electric cars. Wait until there is a demand for them---don't try to create one.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

No kidding. Solar is great but it just isn't viable Neither is wind.

If neither were viable, they wouldn’t be building solar and wind farms and renewable energy labor wouldn’t be the fastest growing job market.

Renewable Energy Record Set in U.S.

You'd probably find that with any industry heavily subsidized by the government.

Most" look it up.

What Ronald Reagan said years ago still holds true today: If you want less of something, tax it. If you want more of something, subsidize it.

 

[francoHFW]

Funny how all the journalists and law enforcement in the world agree with me, and only brainwashed tools agree with you or Liars. You don't know the GOP is a disaster and the lying disgrace, but you know every detail of imaginary phony scandals that don't go anywhere in the real world. How is Hillary doing in prison LOL idiot? And no that is not a conspiracy either LOL...

You can't think independently franco, you can't. It's a dark little box in your head that you can't escape. Our system is a disgrace son, all of it. To claim the entire world agrees with you shows that you have no real self esteem and you need the affirmation of others to truly feel good about "you'.

Google any newspaper in the world not owned by Rupert Murdoch the scumbag, and you will find that none of them agree with your dumbass brainwashed idiocy. American rich people do not pay enough in taxes and we do not invest in America or Americans, and none of your phony scandals about the clintons or Obama or the FBI make it to the real world anywhere, you incredibly brainwashed fool. Perfect chump of the greedy idiot GOP rich thieves.

More with the need for affirmation. I feel sorry for you. You're a very lonely man.

You are a conspiracy nut job and fantasist like most GOP voters these days. Whatever you do don't change the channel or read a newspaper or use your computer for information child, you might find out something factual LOL.

You can't shake me and you're getting desperate. I don't read newspapers and I don't watch ANY of the MSM son. 6 corps own 90% of the media. Again, nothing you type speaks to an education. You are living a fantasy life on this board and pretending to be something you aren't . You are lonely, sad, and lost. Dupe, Derp, rube. It's all you have.

I am not typing I hate typing I am talking here. LOL. I am slumming here. I have also written a book and you people are perfect brainwashed functional idiots so people in the future can understand how we got so screwed up...

 

[Obejoekenobe]

No kidding. Solar is great but it just isn't viable Neither is wind.

If neither were viable, they wouldn’t be building solar and wind farms and renewable energy labor wouldn’t be the fastest growing job market.

Renewable Energy Record Set in U.S.

You'd probably find that with any industry heavily subsidized by the government.

Still doesn’t negate the benefits, or viability, of clean renewable energy. Government also subsidizes the oil industry.

Energy subsidies - Wikipedia

 

[Ame®icano]

the Green New Deal is THE NEW COMMUNIST MANIFESTO is what it is!

There’s this new wave of Democrats that make Pelosi look moderate and I never thought I’d see that day

Watermelon.

 

[francoHFW]

I recently heard how those batteries lose a lot of power in the winter time in single digit temperatures or below. You'd be charging those things 24/7.

A business associate of mine owns an all electric Tesla with the long range battery system. They drove to Panama City, from Tallahassee to the new PC Airport. Parked and flew out of town for a week. They came back, late at night, and walked to the car. Nothing. It wouldn't move. Without any charge for that period of time, plus running all the on-board computers the batteries had run down to nothing. Of course a simply jump start wasn't possible so it had to be towed on a flat-bed. Yep, I can't wait to have one of those in my garage!

Yep, their time is coming but it's not here yet. Kind of slow getting anywhere. They were invented, the all electric car, over 100 years ago.

Whether an electric is practical depends how you drive. My neighbor has a Volt. He drives it to work daily, about 5 miles and drives it to the grocery store, restaurants, and friends in our area and charges it about once a week. I have a 4wd drive SUV that we pull a camper in summer and drive to my son's cabin in the mountains in winter. An electric would not work for these applications. It just depends on how you going to use it.

In the early days of autos, gasoline-fueled vehicles had limited use compared to electric cars and carriages with the lack good roads and gas stations. However with the expansion of infrastructures and advances in technology gasoline powered vehicles became the standard. With extended range batteries and more charging stations, electric cars may well become the the standard for autos in the future while fossil fuel remains the choice for trucks and commercial vehicles.

That may be true, but government should not be pushing it. It has to come at it's own time. The government didn't have to subsidize cable television or cell phones because everybody wanted those things. The same should hold true for electric cars. Wait until there is a demand for them---don't try to create one.

And watch us get even further behind other developed countries. Same deal with solar and wind, thank God Obama got behind those gave people tax breaks for putting them in. You know, like ocasio Cortez wants to do, at least before your brainwashers got a hold of the thing LOL

 

[Obejoekenobe]

No kidding. Solar is great but it just isn't viable Neither is wind.

If neither were viable, they wouldn’t be building solar and wind farms and renewable energy labor wouldn’t be the fastest growing job market.

Renewable Energy Record Set in U.S.

You'll note that the article points to the private sector pushing this along. It's what many of us have said for years, keep the govt out of it. They'll just screw it up.

Has government screwed up the oil industry with subsidies?

The renewable industry has expanded with government subsidies. Same as the oil industry.

Talk to Ray from Cleveland.

 

[francoHFW]

the Green New Deal is THE NEW COMMUNIST MANIFESTO is what it is!

There’s this new wave of Democrats that make Pelosi look moderate and I never thought I’d see that day

Watermelon.

Of course it has nothing to do with Communism, just intelligent policies to fight global warming and pollution. Of course if you are stupid enough to deny global warming, you are a waste of time anyway and space....

 

[Flopper]

Nationalizing institutions does not meant the countries economic system is socialism. The US has nationalized private posts, railroads, telephone companies, and electric power companies and has instituted price controls. That does make the US a socialist country.

The German Workers Party was renamed to the National Socialist German Workers' Party in order to gain support of the trade unions which Hitler hated and later destroyed.

Nazism is traditionally held to be an extreme right-wing ideology, the party’s conspicuous use of the term “socialist”, which refers to a political system normally plotted on the far-left end of the ideological spectrum has long been a source of confusion. The assumption that because the word “socialist” appeared in the party’s name and socialist words and ideas popped up in the writings and speeches of top Nazis then they must have been actual socialists is naive and does not match the facts.

This is very good post.

Socialism inevitably leads to taking control of means of production by nationalization, because that is purpose of socialism. Although it's true that US throughout the history used nationalization of properties and businesses, it did it with different reasons.

During WWI, all US railroads were operated (not owned) by Railroad Administration as a wartime measure and were return to private control after war. The same happened with telephone systems that were under control of US government for about a year. Amtrak was created for the purpose of relieving privately own railroads of legal obligation to provide passenger service that was not profitable.

You said that German Worker Party changed name to gain support of trade unions. If that is only reason, and if they were not socialists, there wouldn't be a reason to keep "socialist" in their name after they had full control of the government beyond 1933.

Despite having declared, at various times, “I am a socialist,” “We are socialists,” and similar avowals, on a personal level, Hitler displayed little regard for the actual tenets of socialism, or, for that matter, socialists themselves. In order to prepare the country for the struggle he saw to coming, he nationalized much of the country's institutions but also leaving much of industry in private hands. He left in place capitalism when it served his needs. Hitler upheld ownership of private property, individual entrepreneurship, and economic competition, and disapproved of trade unions and workers’ interference in the freedom of owners and managers to run their concerns. Capitalism was, therefore, left in place. Hitler was certainly no socialist; a fascist, a right wing nationalist, and a dictator, yes.

You claim that Hitler kept ownership of private properties and companies in private hands. It sure appeared that way, but the German government, not the owners, exercised powers of ownership by deciding what is to be produced, in what quantities, how, and what were the prices of the products, and wages of the workers producing it. Most of the owners of those properties and companies were part of the German government, not by choice, but by necessity of their own survival.

You're overlooking another aspect of socialism, where common good comes before private good, and that individual exists as the means required by the state, in other words, individual is own by the state, and therefore individual's property as well. Just as it happened in Germany, it happened in every socialist country, since October revolution is Russia, until Venezuela, with the exactly the same outcome.

Germany rode to power under the guise of socialism but in truth it was fascism. The key tenants of socialism never really existed. There certainly was no classless society. Private ownership was never abolished. Entrepreneurship was encouraged. State owned industries were privatized after Hitler took power and trade unions were smashed. As the country moved closer to war, the Nazi government developed a partnerships with leading German business interests, who supported the goals of the regime and its war effort in exchange for advantageous contracts, subsidies, and the suppression of the trade union movement. Cartels and monopolies were encourage by the government in exchange for millions of marks transferred to the Reich by major industrialists in 1933. Hitler promised huge profits to the cartels in exchange for their support. Had the Nazis won the war, the group of 30 industrialist that had pledged their support would have been fabulously wealthy instead of being persecuted as war criminals.

Nazism like fascism were both far-right forms of government which was characterized by extreme nationalism, racial discrimination, promotion of violence and war, and an unapologetic hatred for socialism. The major commonality between Socialism, Communism, Nazism, and Fascism is government control. Government control is not the defining factor in any of the above eco-political systems.

Had Hitler understood anything about economic theory and that communism was just a subset of socialism, he would have thought twice about renaming of the party. However, once the party was renamed and he came to power, there was far too much invested in the Nazi trademark to rename the party again.

LOL, you're boxed into the binary paradigm.
Here, let me help.
What is this?

View attachment 245211

I'm sure you're trying to say something.

 

[Ambivalent1]

Nationalizing institutions does not meant the countries economic system is socialism. The US has nationalized private posts, railroads, telephone companies, and electric power companies and has instituted price controls. That does make the US a socialist country.

The German Workers Party was renamed to the National Socialist German Workers' Party in order to gain support of the trade unions which Hitler hated and later destroyed.

Nazism is traditionally held to be an extreme right-wing ideology, the party’s conspicuous use of the term “socialist”, which refers to a political system normally plotted on the far-left end of the ideological spectrum has long been a source of confusion. The assumption that because the word “socialist” appeared in the party’s name and socialist words and ideas popped up in the writings and speeches of top Nazis then they must have been actual socialists is naive and does not match the facts.

This is very good post.

Socialism inevitably leads to taking control of means of production by nationalization, because that is purpose of socialism. Although it's true that US throughout the history used nationalization of properties and businesses, it did it with different reasons.

During WWI, all US railroads were operated (not owned) by Railroad Administration as a wartime measure and were return to private control after war. The same happened with telephone systems that were under control of US government for about a year. Amtrak was created for the purpose of relieving privately own railroads of legal obligation to provide passenger service that was not profitable.

You said that German Worker Party changed name to gain support of trade unions. If that is only reason, and if they were not socialists, there wouldn't be a reason to keep "socialist" in their name after they had full control of the government beyond 1933.

Despite having declared, at various times, “I am a socialist,” “We are socialists,” and similar avowals, on a personal level, Hitler displayed little regard for the actual tenets of socialism, or, for that matter, socialists themselves. In order to prepare the country for the struggle he saw to coming, he nationalized much of the country's institutions but also leaving much of industry in private hands. He left in place capitalism when it served his needs. Hitler upheld ownership of private property, individual entrepreneurship, and economic competition, and disapproved of trade unions and workers’ interference in the freedom of owners and managers to run their concerns. Capitalism was, therefore, left in place. Hitler was certainly no socialist; a fascist, a right wing nationalist, and a dictator, yes.

You claim that Hitler kept ownership of private properties and companies in private hands. It sure appeared that way, but the German government, not the owners, exercised powers of ownership by deciding what is to be produced, in what quantities, how, and what were the prices of the products, and wages of the workers producing it. Most of the owners of those properties and companies were part of the German government, not by choice, but by necessity of their own survival.

You're overlooking another aspect of socialism, where common good comes before private good, and that individual exists as the means required by the state, in other words, individual is own by the state, and therefore individual's property as well. Just as it happened in Germany, it happened in every socialist country, since October revolution is Russia, until Venezuela, with the exactly the same outcome.

Germany rode to power under the guise of socialism but in truth it was fascism. The key tenants of socialism never really existed. There certainly was no classless society. Private ownership was never abolished. Entrepreneurship was encouraged. State owned industries were privatized after Hitler took power and trade unions were smashed. As the country moved closer to war, the Nazi government developed a partnerships with leading German business interests, who supported the goals of the regime and its war effort in exchange for advantageous contracts, subsidies, and the suppression of the trade union movement. Cartels and monopolies were encourage by the government in exchange for millions of marks transferred to the Reich by major industrialists in 1933. Hitler promised huge profits to the cartels in exchange for their support. Had the Nazis won the war, the group of 30 industrialist that had pledged their support would have been fabulously wealthy instead of being persecuted as war criminals.

Nazism like fascism were both far-right forms of government which was characterized by extreme nationalism, racial discrimination, promotion of violence and war, and an unapologetic hatred for socialism. The major commonality between Socialism, Communism, Nazism, and Fascism is government control. Government control is not the defining factor in any of the above eco-political systems.

Had Hitler understood anything about economic theory and that communism was just a subset of socialism, he would have thought twice about renaming of the party. However, once the party was renamed and he came to power, there was far too much invested in the Nazi trademark to rename the party again.

LOL, you're boxed into the binary paradigm.
Here, let me help.
What is this?

View attachment 245211

I'm sure you're trying to say something.

I'm sure your pride and partisanship will never let you out of that box.

 

[francoHFW]

the Green Big Deal is technologically impossible, unimaginably costly and a socialist fever dream that would ultimately cost Democrats moderate seats across the country.

I think this will be a piñata that Republicans will continue to hit and use to their advantage in the 2020 elections. It’s a policy piñata

These MOON BATS are patting each other on the back an kicking each other in the ass at the same time. Looks like a Skit from " the 230 some stooges. F%#@ing amazing!

Humor is a great tool for GOP propagandists--goes great with the fact that it's all garbage. She never said she was for paying people who were unwilling to work or all that ridiculous train stuff... The dupes will never know hahaha of course. Who cares about truth evidence courtrooms or journalism anyway....

Yup, you mean like SNL, Bill Maher, Jon Stewart, and Stephen Colbert...oh, wait.

Dumbass.

They are comedians but they deal in fact, much more than you ever hear, super duper.

 

[Ame®icano]

Nationalizing institutions does not meant the countries economic system is socialism. The US has nationalized private posts, railroads, telephone companies, and electric power companies and has instituted price controls. That does make the US a socialist country.

The German Workers Party was renamed to the National Socialist German Workers' Party in order to gain support of the trade unions which Hitler hated and later destroyed.

Nazism is traditionally held to be an extreme right-wing ideology, the party’s conspicuous use of the term “socialist”, which refers to a political system normally plotted on the far-left end of the ideological spectrum has long been a source of confusion. The assumption that because the word “socialist” appeared in the party’s name and socialist words and ideas popped up in the writings and speeches of top Nazis then they must have been actual socialists is naive and does not match the facts.

This is very good post.

Socialism inevitably leads to taking control of means of production by nationalization, because that is purpose of socialism. Although it's true that US throughout the history used nationalization of properties and businesses, it did it with different reasons.

During WWI, all US railroads were operated (not owned) by Railroad Administration as a wartime measure and were return to private control after war. The same happened with telephone systems that were under control of US government for about a year. Amtrak was created for the purpose of relieving privately own railroads of legal obligation to provide passenger service that was not profitable.

You said that German Worker Party changed name to gain support of trade unions. If that is only reason, and if they were not socialists, there wouldn't be a reason to keep "socialist" in their name after they had full control of the government beyond 1933.

Despite having declared, at various times, “I am a socialist,” “We are socialists,” and similar avowals, on a personal level, Hitler displayed little regard for the actual tenets of socialism, or, for that matter, socialists themselves. In order to prepare the country for the struggle he saw to coming, he nationalized much of the country's institutions but also leaving much of industry in private hands. He left in place capitalism when it served his needs. Hitler upheld ownership of private property, individual entrepreneurship, and economic competition, and disapproved of trade unions and workers’ interference in the freedom of owners and managers to run their concerns. Capitalism was, therefore, left in place. Hitler was certainly no socialist; a fascist, a right wing nationalist, and a dictator, yes.

You claim that Hitler kept ownership of private properties and companies in private hands. It sure appeared that way, but the German government, not the owners, exercised powers of ownership by deciding what is to be produced, in what quantities, how, and what were the prices of the products, and wages of the workers producing it. Most of the owners of those properties and companies were part of the German government, not by choice, but by necessity of their own survival.

You're overlooking another aspect of socialism, where common good comes before private good, and that individual exists as the means required by the state, in other words, individual is own by the state, and therefore individual's property as well. Just as it happened in Germany, it happened in every socialist country, since October revolution is Russia, until Venezuela, with the exactly the same outcome.

Germany rode to power under the guise of socialism but in truth it was fascism. The key tenants of socialism never really existed. There certainly was no classless society. Private ownership was never abolished. Entrepreneurship was encouraged. State owned industries were privatized after Hitler took power and trade unions were smashed. As the country moved closer to war, the Nazi government developed a partnerships with leading German business interests, who supported the goals of the regime and its war effort in exchange for advantageous contracts, subsidies, and the suppression of the trade union movement. Cartels and monopolies were encourage by the government in exchange for millions of marks transferred to the Reich by major industrialists in 1933. Hitler promised huge profits to the cartels in exchange for their support. Had the Nazis won the war, the group of 30 industrialist that had pledged their support would have been fabulously wealthy instead of being persecuted as war criminals.

Nazism like fascism were both far-right forms of government which was characterized by extreme nationalism, racial discrimination, promotion of violence and war, and an unapologetic hatred for socialism. The major commonality between Socialism, Communism, Nazism, and Fascism is government control. Government control is not the defining factor in any of the above eco-political systems.

Had Hitler understood anything about economic theory and that communism was just a subset of socialism, he would have thought twice about renaming of the party. However, once the party was renamed and he came to power, there was far too much invested in the Nazi trademark to rename the party again.

And that is where you're wrong. National socialism is still a socialism. What takes it apart from communism is "national" part. Yes, Hitler hated communists, but not because he was far right, but because they were "globalists" of that time.

National socialism, vs. international socialism/communism.

Hitler's Germany or Stalin's Russia/USSR/eastern block? In either case, the government economic plan was supreme law of the land, and like in every socialist state it ends up with enormous inflation, black market, shortages of essential products, long waiting lines, etc. Read NSDAP party program, than read the Communist manifesto. I also recommend to read the Constitution of USSR or any other former eastern block country. The end goal of every socialist is to achieve full socialism. All he needed is war victory, and that's the only thing that stop him from getting it. On the other hand, Russians won, you know where they ended.