Next time you hear someone criticizing socialism...

[P@triot]

What kind of lousy management for "US" are the Capitalists creating...by outsourcing to China...?

Capitalists don’t “outsource” to China. The left-wing socialists assholes who make doing business in America too expensive (taxes, regulations, labor unions, etc.) force capitalists to outsource.

Unions have seen a massive decline, and at that time Outsourcing saw a massive spike.

Ignorant fuck stick...taxes increased under Obama as did regulations. And there hasn’t been a “massive” decline in unions. The UAW and the SEIU are as powerful as ever.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

What kind of lousy management for "US" are the Capitalists creating...by outsourcing to China...?

Capitalists don’t “outsource” to China. The left-wing socialists assholes who make doing business in America too expensive (taxes, regulations, labor unions, etc.) force capitalists to outsource.

Unions have seen a massive decline, and at that time Outsourcing saw a massive spike.

Just goes to show how full of cr@p the Capitalist arguments are.

World finally caught up after WWII, the American Unions thought their gravy train would last forever.



View attachment 265810

Mostly just Europe caught up to the USA, and they have even more Unions than the USA.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Lousy management does that; we have a Social Constitution.

And since that has been you excuse for the socialist nations (which have a 100% failure rate), you’ve proven that socialism creates “lousy management”.

nothing but rhetoric; you understand nothing with that line of reasoning. capitalism

You actually proved that “line of reasoning” by crying “lousy management” in 100% of the cases where socialism failed. You proved that socialism creates “lousy management”.

Government is socialism.

the problem for the right wing, is that Government solves All problems.

You don't even Know what it means.

.

 

[2aguy]

Here’s the reply you’ll get : “that’s not socialism “. As much as Cons talk about the democrats socialism, none of them can you an example of it .

By definition it wasn't

do you know the definition of socialism?

I do . The real definition , not the bastardize version Cons use aka “anything the gov does that helps people”.

“anything the gov does that helps people”

No...that definition is the fake one you guys use to hide actual socialism, and the over 100 million innocent men, women and children killed under it..... socialism under the Germans, Russians, Cubans, Vietnamese, Chinese.........didn't help people, it murdered them...

 

[Wyatt earp]

What kind of lousy management for "US" are the Capitalists creating...by outsourcing to China...?

Capitalists don’t “outsource” to China. The left-wing socialists assholes who make doing business in America too expensive (taxes, regulations, labor unions, etc.) force capitalists to outsource.

Unions have seen a massive decline, and at that time Outsourcing saw a massive spike.

Just goes to show how full of cr@p the Capitalist arguments are.

World finally caught up after WWII, the American Unions thought their gravy train would last forever.



View attachment 265810

Mostly just Europe caught up to the USA, and they have even more Unions than the USA.

A huge difference in Europe style Unions and American ones...


Guess which one works with the companies and which ones don't?
.


And oh please did you see Asia after WWII ? If it wasn't for American Mr. Deming Japan would still be in the dark ages.


.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

What kind of lousy management for "US" are the Capitalists creating...by outsourcing to China...?

Capitalists don’t “outsource” to China. The left-wing socialists assholes who make doing business in America too expensive (taxes, regulations, labor unions, etc.) force capitalists to outsource.

Unions have seen a massive decline, and at that time Outsourcing saw a massive spike.

Ignorant fuck stick...taxes increased under Obama as did regulations. And there hasn’t been a “massive” decline in unions. The UAW and the SEIU are as powerful as ever.

The real wages were actually higher before Unions went down the tubes.
Coincidence?

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

What kind of lousy management for "US" are the Capitalists creating...by outsourcing to China...?

Capitalists don’t “outsource” to China. The left-wing socialists assholes who make doing business in America too expensive (taxes, regulations, labor unions, etc.) force capitalists to outsource.

Unions have seen a massive decline, and at that time Outsourcing saw a massive spike.

Just goes to show how full of cr@p the Capitalist arguments are.

World finally caught up after WWII, the American Unions thought their gravy train would last forever.



View attachment 265810

Mostly just Europe caught up to the USA, and they have even more Unions than the USA.

A huge difference in Europe style Unions and American ones...


Guess which one works with the companies and which ones don't?
.


And oh please did you see Asia after WWII ? If it wasn't for American Mr. Deming Japan would still be in the dark ages.


.

And a lack of Unions in Mexico, totally worked out well for Mexico.

Workers in Mexico just won the right to organize real labor unions. Trump helped.

 

[regent]

Got any idea of how types if socialism there are in the world today? Do all types lead to communism?

That’s literally has idiotic as saying “do you know how many different types of outer space there are”. Space is space. And socialism is socialism. There isn’t different “types”, genius.

So you are unable to list the socialist programs that Marx did not like?

 

[P@triot]

So you are unable to list the socialist programs that Marx did not like?

Karl Marx isn't the arbiter of all things socialism, sweetie. Just because he didn't like something doesn't make it any less or more socialist. Good grief.

 

[P@triot]

The next time you hear someone criticizing socialism...congratulate them for not being ignornate/uneducated/uninformed about the horrors of socialism.

He Grew Up Under Socialism. Now He's Urging Young People to Reject It.

 

[regent]

So you are unable to list the socialist programs that Marx did not like?

Karl Marx isn't the arbiter of all things socialism, sweetie. Just because he didn't like something doesn't make it any less or more socialist. Good grief.

So did Marx adore "Christian Socialism?

 

[elektra]

Got any idea of how types if socialism there are in the world today? Do all types lead to communism?

There is one type of Socialism, and no, they all do not lead to Russian Government control. Communism is the USSR's political government of decades past.

 

[P@triot]

The next time you hear someone criticizing socialism...congratulate them for not being ignornate/uneducated/uninformed about the horrors of socialism.

“These are cowardly, pampered whiners who have reaped all the benefits of a free, capitalistic society but have taken it all for granted and are now offended by it. I doubt any of these spoiled malcontents ever had to support themselves, let alone a family,” writes Drew Page.

Socialism is disgusting and it ends in poverty and misery.

We Hear You: What Do American Socialists Want?

 

[easyt65]

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”

....better yet, ask them why SOCIALIST Democrats have been assaulting the Constitution, Rule of Law, and citizen's Constitutional Rights of Right to Privacy (illegal spying), Right to Free Speech (calling for making criticizing / making fun of Democrats illegal), Right to assemble (call to ban Trump rallies), and their attempt to erase our borders, eliminating the sovereignty of this nation established by the signing of the Constitution...

 

[the other mike]

....better yet, ask them why SOCIALIST Democrats have been assaulting the Constitution, Rule of Law, and citizen's Constitutional Rights of Right to Privacy (illegal spying), Right to Free Speech (calling for making criticizing / making fun of Democrats illegal), Right to assemble (call to ban Trump rallies), and their attempt to erase our borders, eliminating the sovereignty of this nation established by the signing of the Constitution...

Yeah the shadow government is all Democrats. lol

 

[P@triot]

The next time you hear someone criticizing socialism...congratulate them for not being ignornate/uneducated/uninformed about the horrors of socialism.

“Capitalism has lifted more people out of poverty than any other economic system.” Even China, though still officially communist and socialist, has had to adopt more of the principles characteristic of capitalism to lift large numbers of people from poverty.

Socialism is disgusting and it ends in poverty and misery.

This Group Is Educating Young Americans About the Ills of Socialism

 

[the other mike]

Socialism is disgusting and it ends in poverty and misery.

This Group Is Educating Young Americans About the Ills of Socialism

It's so bad it's never an option thanks to Uncle Sam.

 

[the other mike]

There isn’t a nation in the Western Hemisphere that hasn’t at one time or another found itself caught in the far-reaching tentacles of US imperialism.
The History - and Hypocrisy - of US Meddling in Venezuela

 

[P@triot]

There isn’t a nation in the Western Hemisphere that hasn’t at one time or another found itself caught in the far-reaching tentacles of US imperialism.
The History - and Hypocrisy - of US Meddling in Venezuela

Look at the mindless minion buying into the socialist propaganda...

 

[the other mike]

Look at the ......... the socialist propaganda...

Facts are propaganda ? Who wrote your history book genius ?

There isn’t a nation in the Western Hemisphere that hasn’t at one time or another found itself caught in the far-reaching tentacles of US imperialism. Venezuela is certainly no exception. Washington has been meddling in its internal affairs since the 19th century and it continues to do so to this very day, when the specter of yet another US-backed coup, or even a direct American military intervention, looms larger by the day.

A Long History of Meddling

During most of the 20th century, US interference in Venezuela was mostly about oil, but that wasn’t always the case in earlier times. Washington’s involvement in the 1895 boundary dispute between Venezuela and Britain was a key event in the emergence of the United States as a world power as the Grover Cleveland administration, invoking the Monroe Doctrine prohibition against European colonization of the Americas, successfully sided with Venezuela. The Cleveland administration, which noted that “today the United States is practically sovereign on this continent,” issued thinly veiled threats of war against Britain, which eventually acquiesced to US demands.

Later, during the Dutch-Venezuelan crisis of 1908, the US Navy helped Venezuelan Vice President Juan Vicente Gómez seize power in a coup. Gómez, known as “The Catfish,” would rule the country either directly or through puppet presidents, until his death in 1935. His regime was one of inconceivably medieval brutality. His enforcers were fond of shackling political prisoners in grillos, leg irons that rendered many victims permanently disabled — and those were the “lucky” ones. The unlucky ones were hanged to death by meathooks through their throats or testicles.

Gómez was fantastically corrupt. He was believed to be worth a staggering $200 million, or more than $3.6 billion today, at the time of his death. However, he endeared himself to Washington and Wall Street by granting highly lucrative concessions to foreign oil companies including Standard Oil (ExxonMobil today) and Royal Dutch Shell. Rómulo Betancourt, who served two presidential terms in the mid-20th century and is considered the founding father of modern democratic Venezuela, wrote that Gómez “was the instrument of foreign control of the Venezuelan economy, the ally and servant of powerful outside interests.”

The exploitation of Venezuela’s tremendous petroleum resources has been the constant objective of US policy and action toward the South American state for over a century. This meant backing the viciously repressive dictator Marcos Pérez Jiménez (1948-1958), whose regime forces subjected political prisoners to tortures every bit as horrific as those committed during the Gómez era. Jiménez was as generous to transnational corporations as he was cruel to his own people. The United States, which cared about the former far more than the latter, counted the despot as a close ally, even awarding him the military Legion of Merit “for exceptionally meritorious conduct in the performance of outstanding services and achievements” and providing his dreaded Directorate of National Security (DSN) with invaluable assistance as it imprisoned, tortured and murdered thousands of innocent Venezuelans.

A few years after Venezuela shifted to democracy in 1958, most other South American nations began falling under the iron-fisted rule of US-backed military dictatorships. The military and security forces of these repressive coup regimes were often trained by the United States, at the US Army School of the Americas and elsewhere, in kidnapping, torture, assassination and democracy suppression. As US-backed death squads trained from US-authored torture manuals murdered, tortured and terrorized innocent men, women and children from Central America to Argentina, Venezuelans enjoyed decades of peace and prosperity. However, the US never stopped meddling in Venezuela’s affairs, and after the free and fair election of Hugo Chávez in 1998 and the subsequent launch of the Bolivarian Revolution, US meddling would reach levels that would shock the conscience of the world.

Bolivarian Backlash

The Bolivarian Revolution, a series of economic and social reforms that dramatically reduced poverty and illiteracy while greatly improving health and other living conditions for millions of Venezuelans, drew worldwide acclaim. The reforms, which included nationalizing key components of the nation’s economy as part of an agenda of socialist uplift, made Chávez a hero to millions of people and the enemy of Venezuela’s oligarchs. The exportation of the Bolivarian Revolution, which included forging stronger, more peaceful inter-American relations and even the provision of free home heating oil for hundreds of thousands of needy people in the United States, made Chávez a marked man in Washington.

The administration of George W. Bush — whom Chávez infamously called “the devil” in a speech before the United Nations — backed a failed military coup against Chávez in 2002. The attempted coup was closely linked to prominent neoconservatives including Elliott Abrams, the disgraced Iran-Contra criminal who played a key role in covering up massacres committed by US-backed death squads in Central America and Otto Reich, a staunch supporter of Cuban exile terrorists who have killed at least hundreds of innocent men, women and children throughout the Americas. Two key coup plotters, Army commander Efraín Vasquez and Gen. Ramirez Poveda, were trained at the US Army School of the Americas. The coup briefly ousted Chávez but loyalist forces and popular support restored his rule 47 hours later.

Barack Obama continued Bush’s policy of demonizing Chávez, whose government he called “authoritarian.” This, despite the fact that former president Jimmy Carter, who won the Nobel Peace Prize for his work at the election-monitoring Carter Center, called Venezuela’s election process “the best in the world.” In 2015, Obama declared Venezuela an “extraordinary threat to national security,” a bewildering assertion considering the country has never started a war in its history. The United States, on the other hand, has intervened in, attacked, invaded or occupied Latin American and Caribbean nations more than 50 times and, as Obama spoke, the US military was busy bombing seven countries in the Middle East, North Africa and South Asia. For decades, successive US administrations have also lavished Venezuela’s neighbor Colombia — which has been condemned for its government and paramilitary death squad massacres and deadly corporate-backed crackdowns on indigenous peoples and workers — with billions upon billions of dollars in military and economic aid.

With Friends Like These…

In an act of breathtaking yet typical US hypocrisy, President Donald Trump in July 2017 announced economic sanctions against Nicolás Maduro, who was elected president following the death of Chávez in 2013. While Maduro vowed to continue the Bolivarian Revolution, the Trump administration threatened to attack Venezuela, citing the “suffering” of its people. Meanwhile, Trump continued previous administrations’ support for some of the world’s worst human rights violators, including the Islamic fundamentalist monarchy of Saudi Arabia — which is waging a war of aggression and starvation in Yemen that has claimed tens of thousands of lives, while severely repressing its own subjects at home — as well as brutal dictators in Bahrain, Ethiopia, Equatorial Guinea, South Sudan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and elsewhere. While bashing Maduro, Trump has heaped praise upon North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un, leader of the world’s most murderous regime, Philippines’ “death squad mayor”-turned president Rodrigo Duterte, China’s “president for life” Xi Jinping, Turkish strongman Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, Vladimir Putin and other unsavories.

Trump’s latest moves, recognizing Venezuela’s illegitimate would-be presidential usurper Juan Guaidó and appointing the neoconservative regime change hawk Elliott Abrams as special envoy, seems designed to sow seeds of subversion and revolt within the country’s government and military. This follows National Security Adviser John Bolton — a key neocon architect and cheerleader for the 2003 invasion of Iraq and who has also advocated regime change in Iran, Venezuela and elsewhere — calling Venezuela, Cuba and Nicaragua a “troika of tyranny,” a hypocritical characterization reminiscent of Bush’s “axis of evil,” and one that utterly ignores the far worse, but far more subservient, regimes backed by the Trump administration.

The United States has almost always opposed — whether by slaughter, spies or sanctions — any government or movement that seeks to freely choose its own political and economic path if it diverges from the corporate capitalist order backed by Washington and Wall Street. It has long sought to crush the boldly defiant Bolivarian Revolution, just as it has crushed countless popular revolutions and movements before. The Maduro regime is far from perfect. But to call Maduro a dictator and to advocate regime change in Caracas while supporting far worse tyrants around the world just because they’re US-friendly is an exercise in the blatant, bloody hypocrisy for which the United States has long been infamous around the planet, especially among its poorer parts and peoples.