How to sell me on socialism.

[EdwardBaiamonte]

..but it is fair to make sure that the mega rich pay taxes honestly

.

they already pay way too much. Top 1% pay 44% of all taxes, bottom 50% nothing!!
notice how you were brainwashed by the MSM

That sounds about right when the top 1% have at least 40% of the wealth.

an income tax is not a wealth tax. Sorry to rock your world,

 

[idb]

..but it is fair to make sure that the mega rich pay taxes honestly

.

they already pay way too much. Top 1% pay 44% of all taxes, bottom 50% nothing!!
notice how you were brainwashed by the MSM

That sounds about right when the top 1% have at least 40% of the wealth.

an income tax is not a wealth tax. Sorry to rock your world,

So?
Presumably the money was earned at some point.

 

[fncceo]

You want to get me to support the idea of socialism? Here's how you do it.

The essential idea is that everyone has the same as everyone else, there are no rich and no poor.

1. The rich, like Gates, the Clintons, Warren Buffet, Al Gore, Michael Moore, Cher, Meryl Streep, and also the Koch Brothers, all of them must give up their riches.

2. The government controls the means of production, everyone gets paid the same.

3. The law of the land is that you must work. Unless it is medically impossible for you to do so, you have to have a job. Severe penalties for those who do not. You can and will get fired if you do not work to standards, and severe penalties for that as well.

4. As production and GDP increases, everyone gets raises.

The problem with socialism as Crazy Bernie and Hollywood and the DNC want is that they have no intention of giving up their riches. The rest of us little people will, but they won't. It will fail as it always has.

In action.

 

[PredFan]

You want to get me to support the idea of socialism? Here's how you do it.

The essential idea is that everyone has the same as everyone else, there are no rich and no poor.

1. The rich, like Gates, the Clintons, Warren Buffet, Al Gore, Michael Moore, Cher, Meryl Streep, and also the Koch Brothers, all of them must give up their riches.

2. The government controls the means of production, everyone gets paid the same.

3. The law of the land is that you must work. Unless it is medically impossible for you to do so, you have to have a job. Severe penalties for those who do not. You can and will get fired if you do not work to standards, and severe penalties for that as well.

4. As production and GDP increases, everyone gets raises.

The problem with socialism as Crazy Bernie and Hollywood and the DNC want is that they have no intention of giving up their riches. The rest of us little people will, but they won't. It will fail as it always has.

Bernie went way too far with his free everything...but it is fair to make sure that the mega rich pay taxes honestly

The meals on wheels , and kids school lunch cuts really pisses me of..

The rich already pay more than their fair share of taxes. But that's another thread.

 

[PredFan]

You want to get me to support the idea of socialism? Here's how you do it.

The essential idea is that everyone has the same as everyone else, there are no rich and no poor.

1. The rich, like Gates, the Clintons, Warren Buffet, Al Gore, Michael Moore, Cher, Meryl Streep, and also the Koch Brothers, all of them must give up their riches.

2. The government controls the means of production, everyone gets paid the same.

3. The law of the land is that you must work. Unless it is medically impossible for you to do so, you have to have a job. Severe penalties for those who do not. You can and will get fired if you do not work to standards, and severe penalties for that as well.

4. As production and GDP increases, everyone gets raises.

The problem with socialism as Crazy Bernie and Hollywood and the DNC want is that they have no intention of giving up their riches. The rest of us little people will, but they won't. It will fail as it always has.

Bernie went way too far with his free everything...but it is fair to make sure that the mega rich pay taxes honestly

The meals on wheels , and kids school lunch cuts really pisses me of..

Where in the Constitution does it say the Federal Government should be paying for any of these things?

It doesn't. I never said otherwise.

 

[PredFan]

You want to get me to support the idea of socialism? Here's how you do it.

The essential idea is that everyone has the same as everyone else, there are no rich and no poor.

1. The rich, like Gates, the Clintons, Warren Buffet, Al Gore, Michael Moore, Cher, Meryl Streep, and also the Koch Brothers, all of them must give up their riches.

2. The government controls the means of production, everyone gets paid the same.

3. The law of the land is that you must work. Unless it is medically impossible for you to do so, you have to have a job. Severe penalties for those who do not. You can and will get fired if you do not work to standards, and severe penalties for that as well.

4. As production and GDP increases, everyone gets raises.

The problem with socialism as Crazy Bernie and Hollywood and the DNC want is that they have no intention of giving up their riches. The rest of us little people will, but they won't. It will fail as it always has.

Dear PredFan
The way to "sell" it is similar to Christianity:
1. practice it yourself
2. fund the charity programs yourself
3. demonstrate it works so well that
other people CHOOSE to join, participate and contribute FREELY
4. GROW the program naturally where
participation and development is by FREE CHOICE not coercion
5. WHAT A CONCEPT, Right?
a. People *choosing* to join and follow a belief
by free will instead of being forced by govt? What? No way!
Is that like, religious freedom or some "foreign" concept??
b. Programs growing to serve more and more people
because they are proven to work, just like other
nonprofits or businesses that EARN and maintain good service reputations.

Is that the opposite of FAITH based?
Isn't it the liberals who insist that things be proven BEFORE
demanding that people follow and fund them?
What is this? This sounds like the right to choose.
Can you really expect that to work in a free society?

That is how to start it, but that isn't how you sell the idea to me. I want guarantees that what always happens in socialist societies doesn't happen here.

 

[PredFan]

You want to get me to support the idea of socialism? Here's how you do it.

The essential idea is that everyone has the same as everyone else, there are no rich and no poor.

1. The rich, like Gates, the Clintons, Warren Buffet, Al Gore, Michael Moore, Cher, Meryl Streep, and also the Koch Brothers, all of them must give up their riches.

2. The government controls the means of production, everyone gets paid the same.

3. The law of the land is that you must work. Unless it is medically impossible for you to do so, you have to have a job. Severe penalties for those who do not. You can and will get fired if you do not work to standards, and severe penalties for that as well.

4. As production and GDP increases, everyone gets raises.

The problem with socialism as Crazy Bernie and Hollywood and the DNC want is that they have no intention of giving up their riches. The rest of us little people will, but they won't. It will fail as it always has.

Why would anybody try to sell you on anything? You've already made it clear that you're a tinfoil hat loon, and you mind is closed, and you only accept right wing rhetoric. Think what you want. Your beliefs don't matter.

Feel free then to fuck off of this thread.

 

[PredFan]

You want to get me to support the idea of socialism? Here's how you do it.

The essential idea is that everyone has the same as everyone else, there are no rich and no poor.

1. The rich, like Gates, the Clintons, Warren Buffet, Al Gore, Michael Moore, Cher, Meryl Streep, and also the Koch Brothers, all of them must give up their riches.

2. The government controls the means of production, everyone gets paid the same.

3. The law of the land is that you must work. Unless it is medically impossible for you to do so, you have to have a job. Severe penalties for those who do not. You can and will get fired if you do not work to standards, and severe penalties for that as well.

4. As production and GDP increases, everyone gets raises.

The problem with socialism as Crazy Bernie and Hollywood and the DNC want is that they have no intention of giving up their riches. The rest of us little people will, but they won't. It will fail as it always has.

Who has tried to "sell" you on supporting the idea of socialism?

Do you believe that regulating an essentially capitalist system (such as ours) with certain well-conceived socialist policies and programs is the same as transitioning to total and complete categorical Socialism such as existed in the USSR, Red China, Cuba, et al?

Do you understand what socialism is? Do you know why and how it comes into being? Do you understand why the very idea of the U.S. adopting a socialist system is utterly absurd?

Give some thought to those nations which have adopted socialist systems; Russia (and its satellites), China, Cuba and a few smaller, less significant countries. What did they all have in common? The answer is complete social and economic collapse, usually subsequent to the ruinous effect of a major war or civil upheaval. So with this in mind, why do you suppose the United States of America, the richest and most powerful Nation in the world, would choose to discard the elements of its success and assume a position among the social failures of modern history? The simple answer to this question is the U.S. has absolutely no need to do so.

Any ideas you have to the contrary have been surreptitiously deposited in your mind by the super-rich who have good cause to fear and despise the implementation of socialist policies which benefit the ninety-nine percent of Americans while (justly) penalizing the one percent of pathologically greedy money hoarders who have severely damaged our economy and our social order with their ceaseless attempts to transform America into a two-class system -- the super-rich and the dependent poor.

No one has tried to sell me on it, nor am I advocating it. I'm just throwing that out there. I don't advocate it for many reasons.
My requirements for socialism in America could go a long way to prevent the faults of that economic system. Therefor, the idiots such as Sanders, and Hollywood would never go along with it.

 

[emilynghiem]

You want to get me to support the idea of socialism? Here's how you do it.

The essential idea is that everyone has the same as everyone else, there are no rich and no poor.

1. The rich, like Gates, the Clintons, Warren Buffet, Al Gore, Michael Moore, Cher, Meryl Streep, and also the Koch Brothers, all of them must give up their riches.

2. The government controls the means of production, everyone gets paid the same.

3. The law of the land is that you must work. Unless it is medically impossible for you to do so, you have to have a job. Severe penalties for those who do not. You can and will get fired if you do not work to standards, and severe penalties for that as well.

4. As production and GDP increases, everyone gets raises.

The problem with socialism as Crazy Bernie and Hollywood and the DNC want is that they have no intention of giving up their riches. The rest of us little people will, but they won't. It will fail as it always has.

Dear PredFan
The way to "sell" it is similar to Christianity:
1. practice it yourself
2. fund the charity programs yourself
3. demonstrate it works so well that
other people CHOOSE to join, participate and contribute FREELY
4. GROW the program naturally where
participation and development is by FREE CHOICE not coercion
5. WHAT A CONCEPT, Right?
a. People *choosing* to join and follow a belief
by free will instead of being forced by govt? What? No way!
Is that like, religious freedom or some "foreign" concept??
b. Programs growing to serve more and more people
because they are proven to work, just like other
nonprofits or businesses that EARN and maintain good service reputations.

Is that the opposite of FAITH based?
Isn't it the liberals who insist that things be proven BEFORE
demanding that people follow and fund them?
What is this? This sounds like the right to choose.
Can you really expect that to work in a free society?

That is how to start it, but that isn't how you sell the idea to me. I want guarantees that what always happens in socialist societies doesn't happen here.

Hi PredFan
Again, compared to any other kind of belief system.
It works if the people make it work.

How do we know Corporations are going to use their
"personhood" for benefit and not for abusing or skirting laws?

What guarantee do we have that ANY large collective
group, whether political nonprofit or religious, don't abuse their numbers?

Can we guarantee Red Cross is going to use their donations properly?
That Christians here in America don't "co conspire" on a crusade
like people denounce the Klan for, or doomsday cults as the showdown
in Waco? How do we know priests aren't hiding behind their
robes and "religious policies" to abuse innocent victims
as in the LDS, JW and Catholic cases of abuse?

It prevents abuses IF people RESPECT the consent and civil/Constitutional
rights of others IN ADDITION to their OWN beliefs
(whether practicing Christianity, Islam, Socialism,
Atheism, Buddhism, LGBT values, etc.); if we RESPECT "due process" and "right to petition to redress grievances" (instead of oppressing and skirting justice)
then we can "check" people or groups against abuses.

We need to teach that POLITICAL BELIEFS and PARTIES should respect the Constitutional rights and equal beliefs of others. Then ANY group or system
can be made to work, and not be abused to violate rights or due process of individuals.

If not, we ARE opening the door and rewarding such abuses of power!

And the BEST way to teach respect for Constitutional equal protection
of beliefs and principles, is to PRACTICE it.

We can't help if OTHER people or groups abuse their rights and freedoms to abridge those of others. (We can protest and petition but it's up to individuals to change their own behavior while we can only control our own.)

But we CAN help it if WE go around ENFORCING equal free exercise
of beliefs, or "denying or disparaging" the equal freedom and beliefs of other people and groups.

That starts with us. We the people.
As much as we enforce and respect the laws, we can better exercise authority to ensure that others do the same!

That's how Christianity is practiced, by example.
And Constitutionalism as well.

 

[PredFan]

You want to get me to support the idea of socialism? Here's how you do it.

The essential idea is that everyone has the same as everyone else, there are no rich and no poor.

1. The rich, like Gates, the Clintons, Warren Buffet, Al Gore, Michael Moore, Cher, Meryl Streep, and also the Koch Brothers, all of them must give up their riches.

2. The government controls the means of production, everyone gets paid the same.

3. The law of the land is that you must work. Unless it is medically impossible for you to do so, you have to have a job. Severe penalties for those who do not. You can and will get fired if you do not work to standards, and severe penalties for that as well.

4. As production and GDP increases, everyone gets raises.

The problem with socialism as Crazy Bernie and Hollywood and the DNC want is that they have no intention of giving up their riches. The rest of us little people will, but they won't. It will fail as it always has.

Dear PredFan
The way to "sell" it is similar to Christianity:
1. practice it yourself
2. fund the charity programs yourself
3. demonstrate it works so well that
other people CHOOSE to join, participate and contribute FREELY
4. GROW the program naturally where
participation and development is by FREE CHOICE not coercion
5. WHAT A CONCEPT, Right?
a. People *choosing* to join and follow a belief
by free will instead of being forced by govt? What? No way!
Is that like, religious freedom or some "foreign" concept??
b. Programs growing to serve more and more people
because they are proven to work, just like other
nonprofits or businesses that EARN and maintain good service reputations.

Is that the opposite of FAITH based?
Isn't it the liberals who insist that things be proven BEFORE
demanding that people follow and fund them?
What is this? This sounds like the right to choose.
Can you really expect that to work in a free society?

That is how to start it, but that isn't how you sell the idea to me. I want guarantees that what always happens in socialist societies doesn't happen here.

Hi PredFan
Again, compared to any other kind of belief system.
It works if the people make it work.

How do we know Corporations are going to use their
"personhood" for benefit and not for abusing or skirting laws?

What guarantee do we have that ANY large collective
group, whether political nonprofit or religious, don't abuse their numbers?

Can we guarantee Red Cross is going to use their donations properly?
That Christians here in America don't "co conspire" on a crusade
like people denounce the Klan for, or doomsday cults as the showdown
in Waco? How do we know priests aren't hiding behind their
robes and "religious policies" to abuse innocent victims
as in the LDS, JW and Catholic cases of abuse?

It prevents abuses IF people RESPECT the consent and civil/Constitutional
rights of others IN ADDITION to their OWN beliefs
(whether practicing Christianity, Islam, Socialism,
Atheism, Buddhism, LGBT values, etc.); if we RESPECT "due process" and "right to petition to redress grievances" (instead of oppressing and skirting justice)
then we can "check" people or groups against abuses.

We need to teach that POLITICAL BELIEFS and PARTIES should respect the Constitutional rights and equal beliefs of others. Then ANY group or system
can be made to work, and not be abused to violate rights or due process of individuals.

If not, we ARE opening the door and rewarding such abuses of power!

And the BEST way to teach respect for Constitutional equal protection
of beliefs and principles, is to PRACTICE it.

We can't help if OTHER people or groups abuse their rights and freedoms to abridge those of others. (We can protest and petition but it's up to individuals to change their own behavior while we can only control our own.)

But we CAN help it if WE go around ENFORCING equal free exercise
of beliefs, or "denying or disparaging" the equal freedom and beliefs of other people and groups.

That starts with us. We the people.
As much as we enforce and respect the laws, we can better exercise authority to ensure that others do the same!

That's how Christianity is practiced, by example.
And Constitutionalism as well.

I'm not arguing for socialism.

 

[MikeK]

The rich already pay more than their fair share of taxes. But that's another thread.

That would depend entirely on whose opinion of what their "fair share" is.

In my opinion there should be a law against personal accumulation of wealth in excess of twenty million dollars, with any excess of that amount being subject to seizure by the IRS.

 

[PredFan]

The rich already pay more than their fair share of taxes. But that's another thread.

That would depend entirely on whose opinion of what their "fair share" is.

In my opinion there should be a law against personal accumulation of wealth in excess of twenty million dollars, with any excess of that amount being subject to seizure by the IRS.

Thank god you aren't in charge.

 

[MikeK]

The rich already pay more than their fair share of taxes. But that's another thread.

That would depend entirely on whose opinion of what their "fair share" is.

In my opinion there should be a law against personal accumulation of wealth in excess of twenty million dollars, with any excess of that amount being subject to seizure by the IRS.

Thank god you aren't in charge.

Why?

I'm genuinely interested in knowing what it is you don't like about my proposal to restrict the accumulation of excessive wealth.

Do you believe that greed, not money, is the root of most evil?

 

[PredFan]

The rich already pay more than their fair share of taxes. But that's another thread.

That would depend entirely on whose opinion of what their "fair share" is.

In my opinion there should be a law against personal accumulation of wealth in excess of twenty million dollars, with any excess of that amount being subject to seizure by the IRS.

Thank god you aren't in charge.

Why?

I'm genuinely interested in knowing what it is you don't like about my proposal to restrict the accumulation of excessive wealth.

Do you believe that greed, not money, is the root of most evil?

This is a free country, or, it should be. I'm against any kind of restrictions on liberty such as you propose.

 

[MikeK]

This is a free country, or, it should be. I'm against any kind of restrictions on liberty such as you propose.

Are you opposed to highway speed restrictions, too?

Or do you believe some restrictions are necessary for the ultimate benefit of the whole society? If so, would you care to discuss my proposed restriction on the accumulation of wealth?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

In my opinion there should be a law against personal accumulation of wealth in excess of twenty million dollars, with any excess of that amount being subject to seizure by the IRS.

1) totally stupid of course since the promise of great wealth encourages people to do great things like cure cancer and invent self-driving cars.

2) liberals are totally stupid and so think if one man has $10 million it makes other men worse off rather than better off. They lack the IQ to know its not a zero sum game.

 

[PredFan]

This is a free country, or, it should be. I'm against any kind of restrictions on liberty such as you propose.

Are you opposed to highway speed restrictions, too?

Or do you believe some restrictions are necessary for the ultimate benefit of the whole society? If so, would you care to discuss my proposed restriction on the accumulation of wealth?

Highway speed limits are not a restriction on rights.

 

[PredFan]

In my opinion there should be a law against personal accumulation of wealth in excess of twenty million dollars, with any excess of that amount being subject to seizure by the IRS.

1) totally stupid of course since the promise of great wealth encourages people to do great things like cure cancer and invent self-driving cars.

2) liberals are totally stupid and so think if one man has $10 million it makes other men worse off rather than better off. They lack the IQ to know its not a zero sum game.

They suffer from the erroneous belief that wealth is finite, that if one person has wealth, another cannot.

 

[MikeK]

1) totally stupid of course since the promise of great wealth encourages people to do great things like cure cancer and invent self-driving cars.

If you truly believe greed is the impetus behind great intellectual endeavor it is you who is stupid.

2)liberals are totally stupid and so think if one man has $10 million it makes other men worse off rather than better off. They lack the IQ to know its not a zero sum game.

This topic is really over your head.

 

[MikeK]

Highway speed limits are not a restriction on rights.

When the first automobiles were marketed those who bought one had a perfect right to drive it as fast as they wished to -- mainly because those early cars couldn't go that fast, anyway (15 mph). But as engine performance and transmission designs improved, speed levels increased and collisions were more common so it became necessary to restrict that right. Thus we no longer have the right to drive our cars as fast as we'd like to.

Sometimes it becomes necessary to restrict certain individual rights for the overall benefit of society.