Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
What has capitalism accomplished without Government?See, folks. THIS is how you identify and USE a fallacy to discredit an argument. NOT ONCE did he mention the obvious Appeal to Accomplishment. Rather, he identified the weakness and pointed out the logical flaw.That's bull. A doctor can be a great doctor and not be able to run a business. Would you want a surgeon cutting into you to be worrying about payroll, insurance, equipment maintenance etc. I sure as hell wouldn't and I wouldn't care if the Doctor flunked accounting as long as he was the best diagnostician or surgeon around
I could argue that Churchill never would have had a political career if not for WWII but he was an excellent war time leader
But that in no way means he was wrong about socialism
The wrong way:
"Appeal to Accomplishment. Ha Ha. I win."
Learn from it, people. (I'm looking at YOU DAN!!!)
Talk is what the right wing is best at, not actual and valid arguments. I probably just need to dumb it down some more.Well, you should be a government spy....because if you can keep state secrets like you keep your "valid" arguments a secret, no amount of torture will crack you. You're a fucking vault.I am not the troll; I have valid arguments.
want to create a definition?You wrongly assume that if something is not Capitalism, it's automatically Socialism.It must since it is not Capitalism; and Capitalists "cannot own government".
.
I must be a federalist because the republicans resort to too much fallacy.And if you're not a Democrat, you MUST be a Republican, right?What is Government? It cannot be Capitalism and must be a form of Socialism. Look it up in a dictionary.
When did your definition show up? The McCarthy era.Socialism as a term has been in use for centuries.socialism had to be dumbed down for the right wing. the left doesn't get their understanding of concepts from dictionaries, only words.political Jargon from a dictionary is not any actual understanding of Socialism as concept. Besides, if you really want to quibble, it is about social-ism.
So now you call definitions of words jargon
do you know what jargon means?
jar·gon1
Dictionary result for jargon
/ˈjärɡən/
noun
- special words or expressions that are used by a particular profession or group and are difficult for others to understand.
I'm not the one making up definitions here, you are
We get our understanding of Concepts, from Encyclopedias, not Dictionaries.
And where do the people who write encyclopedias get the definitions of the words they use?
When did it show up with that term, in dictionaries.
The McCarthy era?
Here's another word to look up
etymology
See, folks. THIS is how you identify and USE a fallacy to discredit an argument. NOT ONCE did he mention the obvious Appeal to Accomplishment. Rather, he identified the weakness and pointed out the logical flaw.That's bull. A doctor can be a great doctor and not be able to run a business. Would you want a surgeon cutting into you to be worrying about payroll, insurance, equipment maintenance etc. I sure as hell wouldn't and I wouldn't care if the Doctor flunked accounting as long as he was the best diagnostician or surgeon around
I could argue that Churchill never would have had a political career if not for WWII but he was an excellent war time leader
But that in no way means he was wrong about socialism
The wrong way:
"Appeal to Accomplishment. Ha Ha. I win."
Learn from it, people. (I'm looking at YOU DAN!!!)
Bingo! Nobody talks about it. It’s the dirty little secret that they keep quiet to dupe dysfunctional morons such as yourself.Nobody talks about socialism being communism-- totalitarianism that owns all business and industry,
When did your definition show up? The McCarthy era.Socialism as a term has been in use for centuries.socialism had to be dumbed down for the right wing. the left doesn't get their understanding of concepts from dictionaries, only words.So now you call definitions of words jargon
do you know what jargon means?
jar·gon1
Dictionary result for jargon
/ˈjärɡən/
noun
- special words or expressions that are used by a particular profession or group and are difficult for others to understand.
I'm not the one making up definitions here, you are
We get our understanding of Concepts, from Encyclopedias, not Dictionaries.
And where do the people who write encyclopedias get the definitions of the words they use?
When did it show up with that term, in dictionaries.
The McCarthy era?
Here's another word to look up
etymology
lol. it is political-science jargon.Political jargon provides that one definition for simplicity.And yet socialism has but one definition in the dictionary not 150I did a college class some time ago and if I remember correctly there were over 150 types of socialism and only one type led to Communism. That one was Scientific Socialism. but that one type was used by so many as a fear word to scare the population, and it worked as conservatives intended.
The dictionary definition is not jargon
you need to look up the word jargon
lol. it is political-science jargon.Political jargon provides that one definition for simplicity.And yet socialism has but one definition in the dictionary not 150I did a college class some time ago and if I remember correctly there were over 150 types of socialism and only one type led to Communism. That one was Scientific Socialism. but that one type was used by so many as a fear word to scare the population, and it worked as conservatives intended.
The dictionary definition is not jargon
you need to look up the word jargon
Yes, it is. They teach that in political science.lol. it is political-science jargon.Political jargon provides that one definition for simplicity.And yet socialism has but one definition in the dictionary not 150I did a college class some time ago and if I remember correctly there were over 150 types of socialism and only one type led to Communism. That one was Scientific Socialism. but that one type was used by so many as a fear word to scare the population, and it worked as conservatives intended.
The dictionary definition is not jargon
you need to look up the word jargon
No it's not
jar·gon1
Dictionary result for jargon
/ˈjärɡən/
noun
Socialism is not a word specific to any profession or group
- special words or expressions that are used by a particular profession or group and are difficult for others to understand.
Law has its own jargon as does engineering, computer science etc which consist of terms that people outside those fields are not familiar with.
Funny I never took Poli Sci and I doubt you ever did.Yes, it is. They teach that in political science.lol. it is political-science jargon.Political jargon provides that one definition for simplicity.And yet socialism has but one definition in the dictionary not 150
The dictionary definition is not jargon
you need to look up the word jargon
No it's not
jar·gon1
Dictionary result for jargon
/ˈjärɡən/
noun
Socialism is not a word specific to any profession or group
- special words or expressions that are used by a particular profession or group and are difficult for others to understand.
Law has its own jargon as does engineering, computer science etc which consist of terms that people outside those fields are not familiar with.
The pilgrims practiced socialism.Funny I never tool Poli Sci and I doubt you ever did.Yes, it is. They teach that in political science.lol. it is political-science jargon.Political jargon provides that one definition for simplicity.
The dictionary definition is not jargon
you need to look up the word jargon
No it's not
jar·gon1
Dictionary result for jargon
/ˈjärɡən/
noun
Socialism is not a word specific to any profession or group
- special words or expressions that are used by a particular profession or group and are difficult for others to understand.
Law has its own jargon as does engineering, computer science etc which consist of terms that people outside those fields are not familiar with.
We studied socialism in history class
Ask them how well capitalism was doing in 1929.
View attachment 245504 View attachment 245506 View attachment 245505
To the extent that capitalism’s problems – inequality, instability (cycles/crises), etc. – stem in part from its production relationships, reforms focused exclusively on regulating or supplanting markets will not succeed in solving them. For example, Keynesian monetary policies (focused on raising or lowering the quantity of money in circulation and, correspondingly, interest rates) do not touch the employer-employee relationship, however much their variations redistribute wealth, regulate markets, or displace markets in favor of state-administered investment decisions. Likewise, Keynesian fiscal policies (raising or lowering taxes and government spending) do not address the employer-employee relationship.
Keynesian policies also never ended the cyclical instability of capitalism. The New Deal and European social democracy left capitalism in place in both state and private units (enterprises) of production notwithstanding their massive reform agendas and programs. They thereby left capitalist employers facing the incentives and receiving the resources (profits) to evade, weaken and eventually dissolve most of those programs.
It is far better not to distribute wealth unequally in the first place than to re-distribute it after to undo the inequality. For example, FDR proposed in 1944 that the government establish a maximum income alongside a minimum wage; that is one among the various ways inequality could be limited and thereby redistribution avoided. Efforts to redistribute encounter evasions, oppositions, and failures that compound the effects of unequal distribution itself. Social peace and cohesion are the victims of redistribution sooner or later. Reforming markets while leaving the relations/organization of capitalist production unchanged is like redistribution. Just as redistribution schemes fail to solve the problems rooted in distribution, market-focused reforms fail to solve the problems rooted in production.
Since 2008, capitalism has showed us all yet again its deep and unsolved problems of cyclical instability, deepening inequality and the injustices they both entail. Their persistence mirrors that of the capitalist organization of production. To successfully confront and solve the problems of economic cycles, income and wealth inequality, and so on, we need to go beyond the capitalist employer-employee system of production. The democratization of enterprises – transitioning from employer-employee hierarchies to worker cooperatives – is a key way available here and now to realize the change we need.
Worker coops democratically decide the distribution of income (wages, bonuses, benefits, profit shares, etc.) among their members. No small group of owners and the boards of directors they choose would, as in capitalist corporations, make such decisions. Thus, for example, it would be far less likely that a few individuals in a worker coop would earn millions while most others could not afford to send children to college. A democratic worker coop decision on the distribution of enterprise income would be far less unequal than what typifies capitalist enterprises. A socialism for the 21st century could and should include the transition from a capitalist to a worker-coop-based economic system as central to its commitments to less inequality and less social conflict over redistribution.
Capitalism Is Not the “Market System”
Nope...you're thinking of the Indians who fed them and helped them survive when they could not do so themselves. And as usual, Socialism turned out to be a disaster...the Indians were killed off or conquered, lost their land, and forced to live on desolate reservations.The pilgrims practiced socialism.
The pilgrims practiced socialism.Funny I never tool Poli Sci and I doubt you ever did.Yes, it is. They teach that in political science.lol. it is political-science jargon.The dictionary definition is not jargon
you need to look up the word jargon
No it's not
jar·gon1
Dictionary result for jargon
/ˈjärɡən/
noun
Socialism is not a word specific to any profession or group
- special words or expressions that are used by a particular profession or group and are difficult for others to understand.
Law has its own jargon as does engineering, computer science etc which consist of terms that people outside those fields are not familiar with.
We studied socialism in history class
Ask them how well capitalism was doing in 1929.
View attachment 245504 View attachment 245506 View attachment 245505
To the extent that capitalism’s problems – inequality, instability (cycles/crises), etc. – stem in part from its production relationships, reforms focused exclusively on regulating or supplanting markets will not succeed in solving them. For example, Keynesian monetary policies (focused on raising or lowering the quantity of money in circulation and, correspondingly, interest rates) do not touch the employer-employee relationship, however much their variations redistribute wealth, regulate markets, or displace markets in favor of state-administered investment decisions. Likewise, Keynesian fiscal policies (raising or lowering taxes and government spending) do not address the employer-employee relationship.
Keynesian policies also never ended the cyclical instability of capitalism. The New Deal and European social democracy left capitalism in place in both state and private units (enterprises) of production notwithstanding their massive reform agendas and programs. They thereby left capitalist employers facing the incentives and receiving the resources (profits) to evade, weaken and eventually dissolve most of those programs.
It is far better not to distribute wealth unequally in the first place than to re-distribute it after to undo the inequality. For example, FDR proposed in 1944 that the government establish a maximum income alongside a minimum wage; that is one among the various ways inequality could be limited and thereby redistribution avoided. Efforts to redistribute encounter evasions, oppositions, and failures that compound the effects of unequal distribution itself. Social peace and cohesion are the victims of redistribution sooner or later. Reforming markets while leaving the relations/organization of capitalist production unchanged is like redistribution. Just as redistribution schemes fail to solve the problems rooted in distribution, market-focused reforms fail to solve the problems rooted in production.
Since 2008, capitalism has showed us all yet again its deep and unsolved problems of cyclical instability, deepening inequality and the injustices they both entail. Their persistence mirrors that of the capitalist organization of production. To successfully confront and solve the problems of economic cycles, income and wealth inequality, and so on, we need to go beyond the capitalist employer-employee system of production. The democratization of enterprises – transitioning from employer-employee hierarchies to worker cooperatives – is a key way available here and now to realize the change we need.
Worker coops democratically decide the distribution of income (wages, bonuses, benefits, profit shares, etc.) among their members. No small group of owners and the boards of directors they choose would, as in capitalist corporations, make such decisions. Thus, for example, it would be far less likely that a few individuals in a worker coop would earn millions while most others could not afford to send children to college. A democratic worker coop decision on the distribution of enterprise income would be far less unequal than what typifies capitalist enterprises. A socialism for the 21st century could and should include the transition from a capitalist to a worker-coop-based economic system as central to its commitments to less inequality and less social conflict over redistribution.
Capitalism Is Not the “Market System”
That was one period in time.......socialism is worse than that ALL the time
The pilgrims practiced socialism.Funny I never tool Poli Sci and I doubt you ever did.Yes, it is. They teach that in political science.lol. it is political-science jargon.
No it's not
jar·gon1
Dictionary result for jargon
/ˈjärɡən/
noun
Socialism is not a word specific to any profession or group
- special words or expressions that are used by a particular profession or group and are difficult for others to understand.
Law has its own jargon as does engineering, computer science etc which consist of terms that people outside those fields are not familiar with.
We studied socialism in history class
More like communism.
As I see it communism can work on a small scale
Libertarian-ism cam also work on a small scale
Republics such as ours can work on a much larger scale
Socialism (the real definition not yours) can indeed be implemented on a large scale but the result is an immovable bureaucracy that grinds the people under the boot heels of big government and if you thin there won't be an ultra elite population under socialism you are wrong
