History Is Clear: Socialism Isn't the Cure. So Why Do Millennials Like It?

[jc456]

The answer is clear, but the Right doesn't like it. Or, more likely, they won't understand it.

It's the fact that capitalism has been so damaged and distorted that more people are open to other ideas.

And there ya go.
.

Try going outside the US and see how socialized countries are compared to the US.

The US is nirvana compared to the hell holes Leftists want the US to become more like. That is why immigrants start in places like Argentina and work their way all up through South America and into Central America and don't stop will they have crossed the US border.

Meanwhile, we are to be convinced by the Left that these same immigrants that keep pouring across the border are put in Nazi concentration camps, yet they keep coming anyway?

Bunch of BS!

Trumpsters are thinking Venezuela and South America. Everyone else is thinking Canada, Germany and Australia.

So you're misinformed.
.

Or not, just not fooled

 

[jc456]

Very true
It is labor that is creating he revenue
They receive only a fraction in return

Labor does not create revenue. A capitalist who knows how to manage labor is who creates the revenue. The capitalist pays a fraction to the laborer, fractions to overhead, fractions to taxes, and a fraction for himself.

It is labor who creates something of value (wealth)
Capitalists just move money around

Labor would be worthless without somebody giving them the labor and paying them for it. Go find someplace and dig a hole for no reason. You will labor, but you won't create any wealth.

If you make stock investments, and profit very well, you are the one who created that wealth. It was your money, you took the risks, you called the shots, you will pay the taxes on that wealth. It is not your stock brokers wealth, it's yours. He only did the work you hired him for and you both agreed on the set wage for that work. He or she is not entitled to a dime more regardless how much profit you made.

You can't say the stock broker created the wealth because without him, you could have never made the investment, therefore he's entitled to half of your profit.

The wealthy** would not be so without laborers. I suppose you were watching Fox and Friends this morning, and must get your ideological rhetoric from similar sources.

**People like trump and other children and grandchildren of the wealthy, excepted.

I

And those laborers received money for their effort, healthcare, pensions. How come you ignore that? Oh, oh, they also invest in the business to hire more Americans with the same rewards! And you bash them. You’re merely ignorant

 

[Wry Catcher]

what's the population of those three countries combined?

This is a pretty legit question, and the answer is that the three of them combined are about the same population as Florida.

But there's a better example of a system that has limited socialism, and you're probably standing in it. We are a capitalist society, obviously, but we also have:

- Social Security
- Medicaid and Medicare
- VA Health Care
- The GI Bill
- All of the military, for that matter
- Cops and fire fighters
- Secret Service and Border Patrol
- Public defenders
- Trash collection, sewers, and landfills
- Crash-free airports
- Roads, bridges, and trains- Public transportation
- Public prisons
- Public libraries and museums
- Public parks and zoos
- Public schools, colleges, and universities
- Pell Grants and government scholarships
- The US Postal Service
- The National Weather Service
- The Peace Corps
- Agriculture and energy subsidies
- Decent food, clean air, clean water
- The CDC
- OSHA
- FEMA
- Snow removal
- Streetlights
- Streets

And a lot more. All of these are examples of socialist programs within our capitalist society.

Thank you, what I'd like to add is this: The GOP, if it gets its way, wants to privatize most, if not all of your bullet points.

Why do you need government for those?

A question ^^^ based on ignorance. It appears this questioner is completely ignorant of the problems which occurred under the Article of Confederation.

Tell me

You've never ever heard of the Article of Confederation?

You must have grown up in Alabama.

 

[jc456]

I see.


- YOU accuse US of wanting "SOCIALISM" (in the extreme sense of the word)
- we explain to you that we don't want SOCIALISM like venezuela or china
- we then say "we like limited socialism like in Norway, where they have a MIX of capitalism and some socialist programs (cheap/affordable health care and education)
- you then shout "THERE IS NO SUCH THING as LIMITED SOCIALISM!"

even though we can all see Norway and Sweden and Denmark on our globes....

you are truly insane

Good thing you have a microscope

what's the population of those three countries combined?

This is a pretty legit question, and the answer is that the three of them combined are about the same population as Florida.

But there's a better example of a system that has limited socialism, and you're probably standing in it. We are a capitalist society, obviously, but we also have:

- Social Security
- Medicaid and Medicare
- VA Health Care
- The GI Bill
- All of the military, for that matter
- Cops and fire fighters
- Secret Service and Border Patrol
- Public defenders
- Trash collection, sewers, and landfills
- Crash-free airports
- Roads, bridges, and trains- Public transportation
- Public prisons
- Public libraries and museums
- Public parks and zoos
- Public schools, colleges, and universities
- Pell Grants and government scholarships
- The US Postal Service
- The National Weather Service
- The Peace Corps
- Agriculture and energy subsidies
- Decent food, clean air, clean water
- The CDC
- OSHA
- FEMA
- Snow removal
- Streetlights
- Streets

And a lot more. All of these are examples of socialist programs within our capitalist society.

Social Security is a Ponzi scheme. The population will pay for security, healthcare, police, fire, and local government to get us roads . That’s not socialism, that’s money pooled for basic life.

First of all, your list only covers about a quarter of mine.

But more to the point, we all put our money into a pot, and then that money is used to pay for all of these goods and services that benefit us all. That is the core of democratic socialism, and it has been going on for your whole life.

Case in point: Ever see one of these? This is a cast iron fire company plaque from the 19th century. Back then, you had to pay a fire company (literally, a company) to cover your house, and they would give you one of these plaques to put beside your front door. If your house caught on fire, and if you didn't have a plaque, they would literally stand by and watch your house burn to ashes. That was what fire protection looked like when it was unchecked capitalism. Eventually, cities started creating public fire departments, paid by public funds, and it was so much cheaper and more effective that the only place you see these plaques any more are in antique shops.

My point: You don't need to be afraid of socialist elements in our gloriously capitalistic society. They're good for us. The word is not inherently evil.

Once it went to the public funds, it was misspent, and the seeds were planted for negligence

 

[jc456]

This is a pretty legit question, and the answer is that the three of them combined are about the same population as Florida.

But there's a better example of a system that has limited socialism, and you're probably standing in it. We are a capitalist society, obviously, but we also have:

- Social Security
- Medicaid and Medicare
- VA Health Care
- The GI Bill
- All of the military, for that matter
- Cops and fire fighters
- Secret Service and Border Patrol
- Public defenders
- Trash collection, sewers, and landfills
- Crash-free airports
- Roads, bridges, and trains- Public transportation
- Public prisons
- Public libraries and museums
- Public parks and zoos
- Public schools, colleges, and universities
- Pell Grants and government scholarships
- The US Postal Service
- The National Weather Service
- The Peace Corps
- Agriculture and energy subsidies
- Decent food, clean air, clean water
- The CDC
- OSHA
- FEMA
- Snow removal
- Streetlights
- Streets

And a lot more. All of these are examples of socialist programs within our capitalist society.

Thank you, what I'd like to add is this: The GOP, if it gets its way, wants to privatize most, if not all of your bullet points.

Why do you need government for those?

A question ^^^ based on ignorance. It appears this questioner is completely ignorant of the problems which occurred under the Article of Confederation.

Tell me

You've never ever heard of the Article of Confederation?

You must have grown up in Alabama.

So you can’t explain yourself

 

[Wry Catcher]

Very true
It is labor that is creating he revenue
They receive only a fraction in return

Labor does not create revenue. A capitalist who knows how to manage labor is who creates the revenue. The capitalist pays a fraction to the laborer, fractions to overhead, fractions to taxes, and a fraction for himself.

It is labor who creates something of value (wealth)
Capitalists just move money around

Labor would be worthless without somebody giving them the labor and paying them for it. Go find someplace and dig a hole for no reason. You will labor, but you won't create any wealth.

If you make stock investments, and profit very well, you are the one who created that wealth. It was your money, you took the risks, you called the shots, you will pay the taxes on that wealth. It is not your stock brokers wealth, it's yours. He only did the work you hired him for and you both agreed on the set wage for that work. He or she is not entitled to a dime more regardless how much profit you made.

You can't say the stock broker created the wealth because without him, you could have never made the investment, therefore he's entitled to half of your profit.

The wealthy** would not be so without laborers. I suppose you were watching Fox and Friends this morning, and must get your ideological rhetoric from similar sources.

**People like trump and other children and grandchildren of the wealthy, excepted.

I

And those laborers received money for their effort, healthcare, pensions. How come you ignore that? Oh, oh, they also invest in the business to hire more Americans with the same rewards! And you bash them. You’re merely ignorant

How come you ignore the fact that labor has been under attack by conservatives?

 

[jc456]

Labor does not create revenue. A capitalist who knows how to manage labor is who creates the revenue. The capitalist pays a fraction to the laborer, fractions to overhead, fractions to taxes, and a fraction for himself.

It is labor who creates something of value (wealth)
Capitalists just move money around

Labor would be worthless without somebody giving them the labor and paying them for it. Go find someplace and dig a hole for no reason. You will labor, but you won't create any wealth.

If you make stock investments, and profit very well, you are the one who created that wealth. It was your money, you took the risks, you called the shots, you will pay the taxes on that wealth. It is not your stock brokers wealth, it's yours. He only did the work you hired him for and you both agreed on the set wage for that work. He or she is not entitled to a dime more regardless how much profit you made.

You can't say the stock broker created the wealth because without him, you could have never made the investment, therefore he's entitled to half of your profit.

The wealthy** would not be so without laborers. I suppose you were watching Fox and Friends this morning, and must get your ideological rhetoric from similar sources.

**People like trump and other children and grandchildren of the wealthy, excepted.

I

And those laborers received money for their effort, healthcare, pensions. How come you ignore that? Oh, oh, they also invest in the business to hire more Americans with the same rewards! And you bash them. You’re merely ignorant

How come you ignore the fact that labor has been under attack by conservatives?

Where?

 

[Wry Catcher]

Thank you, what I'd like to add is this: The GOP, if it gets its way, wants to privatize most, if not all of your bullet points.

Why do you need government for those?

A question ^^^ based on ignorance. It appears this questioner is completely ignorant of the problems which occurred under the Article of Confederation.

Tell me

You've never ever heard of the Article of Confederation?

You must have grown up in Alabama.

So you can’t explain yourself

Ask yourself why the founders needed to establish the Constitutional Convention, then if you're curious watch this:

We pay federal taxes and give more power to the federal government than we do the state because the Articles of Confederation failed miserably as the first constitution. Learn the strengths and weaknesses of the Articles of Confederation here.

Articles of Confederation: Strengths & Weaknesses - Video & Lesson Transcript | Study.com

 

[jasonnfree]

It is labor who creates something of value (wealth)
Capitalists just move money around

Labor would be worthless without somebody giving them the labor and paying them for it. Go find someplace and dig a hole for no reason. You will labor, but you won't create any wealth.

If you make stock investments, and profit very well, you are the one who created that wealth. It was your money, you took the risks, you called the shots, you will pay the taxes on that wealth. It is not your stock brokers wealth, it's yours. He only did the work you hired him for and you both agreed on the set wage for that work. He or she is not entitled to a dime more regardless how much profit you made.

You can't say the stock broker created the wealth because without him, you could have never made the investment, therefore he's entitled to half of your profit.

The wealthy** would not be so without laborers. I suppose you were watching Fox and Friends this morning, and must get your ideological rhetoric from similar sources.

**People like trump and other children and grandchildren of the wealthy, excepted.

I

And those laborers received money for their effort, healthcare, pensions. How come you ignore that? Oh, oh, they also invest in the business to hire more Americans with the same rewards! And you bash them. You’re merely ignorant

How come you ignore the fact that labor has been under attack by conservatives?

Where?

Here's one link about labor under attack by conservatives with Reagan's firing of the Air traffic controllers which helped break the unions. Also Gorsuch's ruling that a trucker should stay with his load even if he freezes to death. Totally profit first, not human lives. Also a link to that .

For 60 Years, This Powerful Conservative Group Has Worked to Crush Labor

When Neil Gorsuch put corporate interests over a man freezing to death

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Labor would be worthless without somebody giving them the labor and paying them for it. Go find someplace and dig a hole for no reason. You will labor, but you won't create any wealth.

If you make stock investments, and profit very well, you are the one who created that wealth. It was your money, you took the risks, you called the shots, you will pay the taxes on that wealth. It is not your stock brokers wealth, it's yours. He only did the work you hired him for and you both agreed on the set wage for that work. He or she is not entitled to a dime more regardless how much profit you made.

You can't say the stock broker created the wealth because without him, you could have never made the investment, therefore he's entitled to half of your profit.

The wealthy** would not be so without laborers. I suppose you were watching Fox and Friends this morning, and must get your ideological rhetoric from similar sources.

**People like trump and other children and grandchildren of the wealthy, excepted.

I

And those laborers received money for their effort, healthcare, pensions. How come you ignore that? Oh, oh, they also invest in the business to hire more Americans with the same rewards! And you bash them. You’re merely ignorant

How come you ignore the fact that labor has been under attack by conservatives?

Where?

Here's one link about labor under attack by conservatives with Reagan's firing of the Air traffic controllers which helped break the unions. Also Gorsuch's ruling that a trucker should stay with his load even if he freezes to death. Totally profit first, not human lives. Also a link to that .

For 60 Years, This Powerful Conservative Group Has Worked to Crush Labor

When Neil Gorsuch put corporate interests over a man freezing to death

Your first link is about 30 pages long, so I stopped at the first few paragraphs that said "secret meeting."

As to your second link, it's as phony as a three dollar bill. In the first place, trucks can't idle thanks to your precious global warming people who forced industry to have trucks shut down after 5 minutes of idling. He should have sued the environmental Nazi's instead.

Secondly, to stop the truck from shutting down, all you have to do is kick the accelerator to increase the RPM's past idle position for one second, so there was no chance of him freezing. Sounds to me like he just got lazy and decided to go to his sleeper instead of just staying warm in the cab. It did not go into any details about "muddled information" of the next fuel stop. You shouldn't wait until you are just about out of fuel before you seek the next station. You should be fueled up long before that.

Just from reading your link, it seems that what we have here is nothing but a stupid lazy driver. If I was even close to running out of fuel, I would go on my smart phone and seek places to get fuel, even if I had to pay for it myself and get reimbursed later by the company.

 

[jc456]

Labor would be worthless without somebody giving them the labor and paying them for it. Go find someplace and dig a hole for no reason. You will labor, but you won't create any wealth.

If you make stock investments, and profit very well, you are the one who created that wealth. It was your money, you took the risks, you called the shots, you will pay the taxes on that wealth. It is not your stock brokers wealth, it's yours. He only did the work you hired him for and you both agreed on the set wage for that work. He or she is not entitled to a dime more regardless how much profit you made.

You can't say the stock broker created the wealth because without him, you could have never made the investment, therefore he's entitled to half of your profit.

The wealthy** would not be so without laborers. I suppose you were watching Fox and Friends this morning, and must get your ideological rhetoric from similar sources.

**People like trump and other children and grandchildren of the wealthy, excepted.

I

And those laborers received money for their effort, healthcare, pensions. How come you ignore that? Oh, oh, they also invest in the business to hire more Americans with the same rewards! And you bash them. You’re merely ignorant

How come you ignore the fact that labor has been under attack by conservatives?

Where?

Here's one link about labor under attack by conservatives with Reagan's firing of the Air traffic controllers which helped break the unions. Also Gorsuch's ruling that a trucker should stay with his load even if he freezes to death. Totally profit first, not human lives. Also a link to that .

For 60 Years, This Powerful Conservative Group Has Worked to Crush Labor

When Neil Gorsuch put corporate interests over a man freezing to death

Reagan killed the union, laborers still labored

 

[rightwinger]

Every generation have ideals they become interested in trying, like socialism - regardless of what history teaches about the outcomes. There will be a day when these younger generations are in the majority and will have it their way. Conservatives will only be able to hold it off for so long. When it comes, God help us all.

I just hope I'm not alive to see a socialist America.

I was watching videos from an online college course online and a professor from Russia was saying Marx had said in order for Socialism to work first you needed Capitalism. He said the reason other countries have not been as successful implementing Socialism is they rushed into it to quickly. They first needed to be like the United States and be a Capitalistic economy for many generations before they could progress to Socialism. Marx had warned first you needed Capitalism before you can progress to Socialism.

The United States would be different from other countries because our government has been a form of Capitalism for a very long time. When we change our Government to a socialist one our nation will flourish, because we are doing the necessary first steps Marx said needed to be done in order for Socialism to work.

We already are a hybrid of Capitalism/ Socialism. We just need to get more Socialist and less Capitalistic. Good steps would be expanding Obamacare or Medicare for all, a Wealth Tax, higher unemployment benefits, more money given out for food stamps, more opportunity for low-income housing given out by the government.

So why is it Socialism needs capitalism but capitalism doesn't need Socialism?

How about this: We need capitalism, but we don't need Socialism. If it's not broke, don't fix it.

Capitalism needs Socialism

Unchecked Capitalism without regard for the well being of the masses leads to revolution.

Look at France, Russia, Cuba

 

[jc456]

Why do you need government for those?

A question ^^^ based on ignorance. It appears this questioner is completely ignorant of the problems which occurred under the Article of Confederation.

Tell me

You've never ever heard of the Article of Confederation?

You must have grown up in Alabama.

So you can’t explain yourself

Ask yourself why the founders needed to establish the Constitutional Convention, then if you're curious watch this:

We pay federal taxes and give more power to the federal government than we do the state because the Articles of Confederation failed miserably as the first constitution. Learn the strengths and weaknesses of the Articles of Confederation here.

Articles of Confederation: Strengths & Weaknesses - Video & Lesson Transcript | Study.com

No

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Every generation have ideals they become interested in trying, like socialism - regardless of what history teaches about the outcomes. There will be a day when these younger generations are in the majority and will have it their way. Conservatives will only be able to hold it off for so long. When it comes, God help us all.

I just hope I'm not alive to see a socialist America.

I was watching videos from an online college course online and a professor from Russia was saying Marx had said in order for Socialism to work first you needed Capitalism. He said the reason other countries have not been as successful implementing Socialism is they rushed into it to quickly. They first needed to be like the United States and be a Capitalistic economy for many generations before they could progress to Socialism. Marx had warned first you needed Capitalism before you can progress to Socialism.

The United States would be different from other countries because our government has been a form of Capitalism for a very long time. When we change our Government to a socialist one our nation will flourish, because we are doing the necessary first steps Marx said needed to be done in order for Socialism to work.

We already are a hybrid of Capitalism/ Socialism. We just need to get more Socialist and less Capitalistic. Good steps would be expanding Obamacare or Medicare for all, a Wealth Tax, higher unemployment benefits, more money given out for food stamps, more opportunity for low-income housing given out by the government.

So why is it Socialism needs capitalism but capitalism doesn't need Socialism?

How about this: We need capitalism, but we don't need Socialism. If it's not broke, don't fix it.

Capitalism needs Socialism

Unchecked Capitalism without regard for the well being of the masses leads to revolution.

Look at France, Russia, Cuba

Capitalism does not need socialism, neither does our country. It's just making everybody lazy and irresponsible, not to mention government dependent.

 

[DBA]

is capitalism perfect? no its not
but its the most prosperous and freedom granting economic system out there
capitalism has brought more out of poverty then all other economic systems combined
those are the facts that you commie liberals refuse to acknowledge

I'm a capitalist. Capitalism requires controlling mechanisms to function properly. Without them, the resulting inequalities make it a prime target for those who push socialism.

Those are the facts that you ignorant, brainwashed Trumpsters refuse to acknowledge.
.

You are a dope. Nobody is saying we shouldn't have any regulations. Democrats want regulations that are stifling growth. Pretty simple really.

 

[anynameyouwish]

O

I see.


- YOU accuse US of wanting "SOCIALISM" (in the extreme sense of the word)
- we explain to you that we don't want SOCIALISM like venezuela or china
- we then say "we like limited socialism like in Norway, where they have a MIX of capitalism and some socialist programs (cheap/affordable health care and education)
- you then shout "THERE IS NO SUCH THING as LIMITED SOCIALISM!"

even though we can all see Norway and Sweden and Denmark on our globes....

you are truly insane

Good thing you have a microscope

what's the population of those three countries combined?

This is a pretty legit question, and the answer is that the three of them combined are about the same population as Florida.

But there's a better example of a system that has limited socialism, and you're probably standing in it. We are a capitalist society, obviously, but we also have:

- Social Security
- Medicaid and Medicare
- VA Health Care
- The GI Bill
- All of the military, for that matter
- Cops and fire fighters
- Secret Service and Border Patrol
- Public defenders
- Trash collection, sewers, and landfills
- Crash-free airports
- Roads, bridges, and trains- Public transportation
- Public prisons
- Public libraries and museums
- Public parks and zoos
- Public schools, colleges, and universities
- Pell Grants and government scholarships
- The US Postal Service
- The National Weather Service
- The Peace Corps
- Agriculture and energy subsidies
- Decent food, clean air, clean water
- The CDC
- OSHA
- FEMA
- Snow removal
- Streetlights
- Streets

And a lot more. All of these are examples of socialist programs within our capitalist society.

Social Security is a Ponzi scheme. The population will pay for security, healthcare, police, fire, and local government to get us roads . That’s not socialism, that’s money pooled for basic life.

Oh, and the population will also give money to charity to care for the needy. Not governmen.

I read Friday that peloser pulled 2.4 billion from Social security to cover costs for her impeachment hoax t

"Oh, and the population will also give money to charity to care for the needy. Not governmen."


sure


white conservative christians will gladly give to charities

as long as those charities don't include gays, muslims, atheists, feminists, liberals, democrats

 

[DBA]

Every generation have ideals they become interested in trying, like socialism - regardless of what history teaches about the outcomes. There will be a day when these younger generations are in the majority and will have it their way. Conservatives will only be able to hold it off for so long. When it comes, God help us all.

I just hope I'm not alive to see a socialist America.

I was watching videos from an online college course online and a professor from Russia was saying Marx had said in order for Socialism to work first you needed Capitalism. He said the reason other countries have not been as successful implementing Socialism is they rushed into it to quickly. They first needed to be like the United States and be a Capitalistic economy for many generations before they could progress to Socialism. Marx had warned first you needed Capitalism before you can progress to Socialism.

The United States would be different from other countries because our government has been a form of Capitalism for a very long time. When we change our Government to a socialist one our nation will flourish, because we are doing the necessary first steps Marx said needed to be done in order for Socialism to work.

We already are a hybrid of Capitalism/ Socialism. We just need to get more Socialist and less Capitalistic. Good steps would be expanding Obamacare or Medicare for all, a Wealth Tax, higher unemployment benefits, more money given out for food stamps, more opportunity for low-income housing given out by the government.

So why is it Socialism needs capitalism but capitalism doesn't need Socialism?

How about this: We need capitalism, but we don't need Socialism. If it's not broke, don't fix it.

Capitalism needs Socialism

Unchecked Capitalism without regard for the well being of the masses leads to revolution.

Look at France, Russia, Cuba

There are plenty of checks in place in the US.

 

[Wyatt earp]

O

Good thing you have a microscope

what's the population of those three countries combined?

This is a pretty legit question, and the answer is that the three of them combined are about the same population as Florida.

But there's a better example of a system that has limited socialism, and you're probably standing in it. We are a capitalist society, obviously, but we also have:

- Social Security
- Medicaid and Medicare
- VA Health Care
- The GI Bill
- All of the military, for that matter
- Cops and fire fighters
- Secret Service and Border Patrol
- Public defenders
- Trash collection, sewers, and landfills
- Crash-free airports
- Roads, bridges, and trains- Public transportation
- Public prisons
- Public libraries and museums
- Public parks and zoos
- Public schools, colleges, and universities
- Pell Grants and government scholarships
- The US Postal Service
- The National Weather Service
- The Peace Corps
- Agriculture and energy subsidies
- Decent food, clean air, clean water
- The CDC
- OSHA
- FEMA
- Snow removal
- Streetlights
- Streets

And a lot more. All of these are examples of socialist programs within our capitalist society.

Social Security is a Ponzi scheme. The population will pay for security, healthcare, police, fire, and local government to get us roads . That’s not socialism, that’s money pooled for basic life.

Oh, and the population will also give money to charity to care for the needy. Not governmen.

I read Friday that peloser pulled 2.4 billion from Social security to cover costs for her impeachment hoax t

"Oh, and the population will also give money to charity to care for the needy. Not governmen."


sure


white conservative christians will gladly give to charities

as long as those charities don't include gays, muslims, atheists, feminists, liberals, democrats

Huh?

If you need help just ask..


.

 

[DBA]

O

Good thing you have a microscope

what's the population of those three countries combined?

This is a pretty legit question, and the answer is that the three of them combined are about the same population as Florida.

But there's a better example of a system that has limited socialism, and you're probably standing in it. We are a capitalist society, obviously, but we also have:

- Social Security
- Medicaid and Medicare
- VA Health Care
- The GI Bill
- All of the military, for that matter
- Cops and fire fighters
- Secret Service and Border Patrol
- Public defenders
- Trash collection, sewers, and landfills
- Crash-free airports
- Roads, bridges, and trains- Public transportation
- Public prisons
- Public libraries and museums
- Public parks and zoos
- Public schools, colleges, and universities
- Pell Grants and government scholarships
- The US Postal Service
- The National Weather Service
- The Peace Corps
- Agriculture and energy subsidies
- Decent food, clean air, clean water
- The CDC
- OSHA
- FEMA
- Snow removal
- Streetlights
- Streets

And a lot more. All of these are examples of socialist programs within our capitalist society.

Social Security is a Ponzi scheme. The population will pay for security, healthcare, police, fire, and local government to get us roads . That’s not socialism, that’s money pooled for basic life.

Oh, and the population will also give money to charity to care for the needy. Not governmen.

I read Friday that peloser pulled 2.4 billion from Social security to cover costs for her impeachment hoax t

"Oh, and the population will also give money to charity to care for the needy. Not governmen."


sure


white conservative christians will gladly give to charities

as long as those charities don't include gays, muslims, atheists, feminists, liberals, democrats

Why don't gays, muslims, atheists, feminists, liberals and democrats support their causes to a greater extent? Why do they rely on the government, which is in part funded by Christians, to support their causes?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

O

Good thing you have a microscope

what's the population of those three countries combined?

This is a pretty legit question, and the answer is that the three of them combined are about the same population as Florida.

But there's a better example of a system that has limited socialism, and you're probably standing in it. We are a capitalist society, obviously, but we also have:

- Social Security
- Medicaid and Medicare
- VA Health Care
- The GI Bill
- All of the military, for that matter
- Cops and fire fighters
- Secret Service and Border Patrol
- Public defenders
- Trash collection, sewers, and landfills
- Crash-free airports
- Roads, bridges, and trains- Public transportation
- Public prisons
- Public libraries and museums
- Public parks and zoos
- Public schools, colleges, and universities
- Pell Grants and government scholarships
- The US Postal Service
- The National Weather Service
- The Peace Corps
- Agriculture and energy subsidies
- Decent food, clean air, clean water
- The CDC
- OSHA
- FEMA
- Snow removal
- Streetlights
- Streets

And a lot more. All of these are examples of socialist programs within our capitalist society.

Social Security is a Ponzi scheme. The population will pay for security, healthcare, police, fire, and local government to get us roads . That’s not socialism, that’s money pooled for basic life.

Oh, and the population will also give money to charity to care for the needy. Not governmen.

I read Friday that peloser pulled 2.4 billion from Social security to cover costs for her impeachment hoax t

"Oh, and the population will also give money to charity to care for the needy. Not governmen."


sure


white conservative christians will gladly give to charities

as long as those charities don't include gays, muslims, atheists, feminists, liberals, democrats

Where We Work