One day the economy will get much worse and only socialism will save it

[francoHFW]

I don't think Billy is talking about a socialist gov't country like Cuba, N Korea, and Venezuela, I think he means a socialist democracy like Denmark or Sweden. The problem is that most of those places aren't doing so hot these days, with sky-high taxes and so many Muslim immigrants from Africa and the ME. Yeah, it's great to have all that free stuff, but EVERYBODY pays for it, not just the rich guys and big corps. For starters, everybody pays a VAT when they buy stuff, somewhere around 20%.

Their median wage is higher AFTER taxes than the median wage here.

Then why don't they have the ability to buy homes as easily as we can? Why are they limited to staying in the family homestead? Italy is another socialist paradise and a friend of ours is the first one in her family to be able to buy a house in fifty years. She lived like a pauper for twenty years to be able to do it. In Japan they have multi generational mortgages to make it even possible for a family to buy a home.

Me thinks you need to read something other than your myopic socialist rag to get a better view of the real world.

This is purely a guess, but I think in most European countries the family home is passed down from one generation to the next, grandma and grandpa live there with the family until they die. And they just don't have the space that we do to build new housing developments. And you don't see a lot of grass, they plant flowers or stuff to eat.

Been awhile since I was there (30 years), but the price of a lot of stuff like food and clothing and gas is a lot higher than here.

In tourist areas LOL...

 

[task0778]

I don't think Billy is talking about a socialist gov't country like Cuba, N Korea, and Venezuela, I think he means a socialist democracy like Denmark or Sweden. The problem is that most of those places aren't doing so hot these days, with sky-high taxes and so many Muslim immigrants from Africa and the ME. Yeah, it's great to have all that free stuff, but EVERYBODY pays for it, not just the rich guys and big corps. For starters, everybody pays a VAT when they buy stuff, somewhere around 20%.

Their median wage is higher AFTER taxes than the median wage here.

Then why don't they have the ability to buy homes as easily as we can? Why are they limited to staying in the family homestead? Italy is another socialist paradise and a friend of ours is the first one in her family to be able to buy a house in fifty years. She lived like a pauper for twenty years to be able to do it. In Japan they have multi generational mortgages to make it even possible for a family to buy a home.

Me thinks you need to read something other than your myopic socialist rag to get a better view of the real world.

This is purely a guess, but I think in most European countries the family home is passed down from one generation to the next, grandma and grandpa live there with the family until they die. And they just don't have the space that we do to build new housing developments. And you don't see a lot of grass, they plant flowers or stuff to eat.

Been awhile since I was there (30 years), but the price of a lot of stuff like food and clothing and gas is a lot higher than here.

In tourist areas LOL...

No, man, everywhere. I used to live there.

 

[francoHFW]

1) Automation: it would come with an economic cost to any business, but the cost would pail in comparison to the benefit of securing jobs for future generations. I think you underestimate how big of a problem this issue is. Today's business people don't give a damn about securing jobs for future generations. They care about making money right now, today. And if they don't, they go out of business if they can't make up the higher costs of labor that your socialist policies are going to cost them, AND you're going to curb or take away their ability to automate, computerize, or innovate, and that ain't a good thing for future generations either. And not only that, you're really going to hurt startups and investments in business expansion.
Trillions a year? No. I am not suggesting we replace the income people have now. I am talking about it being a supplement to only those who NEED it most.
Okay, but now you're not talking about UBI anymore, you're talking about something else and I don't know what that is.
2) Productivity among workers and profits are at an all time high. They can afford a raise, they just choose not to.
I don't think you fully appreciate the thin line between profit and loss in so many small businesses and franchises in this country. You're making some off-the-cuff assumptions here without really knowing what the actual impact would be. And here again you're going to seriously impact business startups and expansion when you start mandating wages and prices.
3) Do you know how much we spend per year on defense? We can definitely afford it. The overall cost would save us money. We spend more per capita on healthcare than most developed nations do. What're you going to do, shelve the entire defense industry? The latest Defense Appropriations bill is for about $675 billion, how much of that are you going to slash? Good luck convincing Repubs and Dems alike how much you're going to cut the money going to their states.
And healthcare? Wait, aren't you the guy that wants the public option? Didn't I mention the VA in my last post, do you realize how fucked up that is? I doubt there are too many other countries around the world who are really happy with their gov't run HC system. And the cost is catastrophic, didn't I mention the failure of the HC systems in Vermont and ow other states have turned it down? There's a reason for that you know.
4) Climate change is real whether you like it or not. But not as real as you think, whether you like it or not either. How much money are you going to spend on this?

Of course these solutions aren’t cheap, but we can afford them. Part of that process will be closing loopholes and deductions because the EFFECTIVE, not official, tax rate is too low for corporations

No shit, your solutions are very expensive. You say we can afford them but I say no way in hell. And the effective tax rate for US corps is pretty much in line with every other industrialized country, is it not? And that ain't going to cut it dude, you aren't going to get enough revenue to even come close to doing what you want to do. I remember when Bernie Sanders was running for Prez, he came out with a lot of these ideas and put some numbers up too. Which I thought was pretty brave on his part, and he got shot down big time and not just by the Right either.

Sure, go to the American people and tell them you're going to cut defense by what, 50%? Then go to Congress and tell them which bases and programs you're going to cut to get down by 50%, let's see how far you get. Then let's see your numbers for the public option, I assume you're going to tell those of us on Medicare/Medicaid that we won't have that anymore. You might have a bit of resistance there I think. Then tell me what your idea is for UBI that isn't going to be universal, who gets what. And then try to sell the American people on how much you want to spend on Climate Change; I don't think you're going to find many Dems lining up behind you for all that.

Having said all that, I commend you for putting all this out there for us to shoot at. You put some time and thought into it, bravo!

The important thing to do is to tax the rich... Right now they pay less percentage-wise than much of the middle class... That is insane. Good vacations minimum wage living wage paid parental leave cost nothing. Cheap college and and training and infrastructure cost money. You dupes will take it up the ass forever I guess LOL arrrrgggghhhh

I take it that you like to spend other peoples money, huh? Once that money is gone they'll be coming after yours, Frankie.
Be careful what you wish for.

Bulshit... They do just fine in Europe etcetera with taxing the rich... You idiots in the GOP, there has always progressive income taxes and for good reason. The rich are ridiculously bloated, we have the worst inequality and upward Mobility of any modern country, and you obsess over fake scandals and character assassination. Who needs evidence?

In Europe they tax everybody. As in EVERYBODY, you know what a VAT tax is? Most European countries pay 20-25% vat tax and then they pay income tax on top of that, on every freakin' penny they earn. None of this bottom 50% don't pay anything stuff.

They pay about 9% for free health care we pay 18%... The roads don't suck and destroy your suspension. In France you get 6 week vacations after a year. At any rate I don't want us to be Europe just get more benefits than this. The 60s and 70s were a hell of a lot better than this GOP mess.

Demise of the American Middle Class In Numbers.

Over the past 35 years the American dream has gradually disappeared. The process was slow, so most people didn’t notice. They just worked a few more hours, borrowed a little more and cut back on non-essentials. But looking at the numbers and comparing them over long time periods, it is obvious that things have changed drastically. Here are the details:

1. WORKERS PRODUCE MORE BUT THE GAINS GO TO BUSINESS.

Over the past 63 years worker productivity has grown by 2.0% per year.

But after 1980, workers received a smaller share every year. Labor’s share of income (1992 = 100%):

1950 = 101%
1960 = 105%
1970 = 105%
1980 = 105% – Reagan
1990 = 100%
2000 = 96%
2007 = 92%

A 13% drop since 1980

2. THE TOP 10% GET A LARGER SHARE.

Share of National Income going to Top 10%:

1950 = 35%
1960 = 34%
1970 = 34%
1980 = 34% – Reagan
1990 = 40%
2000 = 47%
2007 = 50%

An increase of 16% since Reagan.

3. WORKERS COMPENSATED FOR THE LOSS OF INCOME BY SPENDING THEIR SAVINGS.

The savings Rose up to Reagan and fell during and after.

1950 = 6.0%
1960 = 7.0%
1970 = 8.5%
1980 = 10.0% – Reagan
1982 = 11.2% – Peak
1990 = 7.0%
2000 = 2.0%
2006 = -1.1% (Negative = withdrawing from savings)

A 12.3% drop after Reagan.

4. WORKERS ALSO BORROWED TO MAKE UP FOR THE LOSS.

Household Debt as percentage of GDP:

1965 = 46%
1970 = 45%
1980 = 50% – Reagan
1990 = 61%
2000 = 69%
2007 = 95%

A 45% increase after 1980.

5. SO THE GAP BETWEEN THE RICHEST AND THE POOREST HAS GROWN.

Gap Between the Share of Capital Income earned by the top 1%
and the bottom 80%:

1980 = 10%
2003 = 56%

A 5.6 times increase.

6. AND THE AMERICAN DREAM IS GONE.

The Probably of Moving Up from the Bottom 40% to the Top 40%:

1945 = 12%
1958 = 6%
1990 = 3%
2000 = 2%

A 10% Decrease.

Links:

1 = ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/pf/totalf1.txt
1 = https://www.clevelandfed.org/Research/PolicyDis/No7Nov04.pdf
1 = Clipboard01.jpg (image)
2 – http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/blog/09/04/27/CongratulationstoEmmanuelSaez/
3 = http://www.demos.org/inequality/images/charts/uspersonalsaving_thumb.gif
3 = U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA)
4 = Federated Prudent Bear Fund (A): Overview
4 = The Fed - Financial Accounts of the United States - Z.1 - Current Release
5/6 = 15 Mind-Blowing Facts About Wealth And Inequality In America

Overview = http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2010062415/reagan-revolution-home-roost-charts

 

[MaryL]

How will republican policy address automation replacing human jobs?

How will republican policy address wages becoming more and more behind on the rising cost of living nationwide?

How will republican policy address rising drug prices and high deductible health insurance plans?

How will republican policy mitigate problems like drought and other natural disasters that are only getting worse because of climate change?

How will republican policy fix our crumbling infrastructure?

Only socialist policy can improve all of these things.

Great thread, great questions. I don't understand bringing up health care insurance has to do with this, though. Robots , AI will eventually dominate the cheap labor market. Kinda like illegal alien cheap labor. But more insidious. This will lead to massive unemployment. And then we add to that, the collapse of the environment due to global warming, inevitably leads to crop failures, mass starvation and wars...I am not Nostradamus. But all that is more than likely to happen given the facts. I am over sixty, my life is nearly done. I pity you kids.

 

[francoHFW]

1) Automation: it would come with an economic cost to any business, but the cost would pail in comparison to the benefit of securing jobs for future generations. I think you underestimate how big of a problem this issue is. Today's business people don't give a damn about securing jobs for future generations. They care about making money right now, today. And if they don't, they go out of business if they can't make up the higher costs of labor that your socialist policies are going to cost them, AND you're going to curb or take away their ability to automate, computerize, or innovate, and that ain't a good thing for future generations either. And not only that, you're really going to hurt startups and investments in business expansion.
Trillions a year? No. I am not suggesting we replace the income people have now. I am talking about it being a supplement to only those who NEED it most.
Okay, but now you're not talking about UBI anymore, you're talking about something else and I don't know what that is.
2) Productivity among workers and profits are at an all time high. They can afford a raise, they just choose not to.
I don't think you fully appreciate the thin line between profit and loss in so many small businesses and franchises in this country. You're making some off-the-cuff assumptions here without really knowing what the actual impact would be. And here again you're going to seriously impact business startups and expansion when you start mandating wages and prices.
3) Do you know how much we spend per year on defense? We can definitely afford it. The overall cost would save us money. We spend more per capita on healthcare than most developed nations do. What're you going to do, shelve the entire defense industry? The latest Defense Appropriations bill is for about $675 billion, how much of that are you going to slash? Good luck convincing Repubs and Dems alike how much you're going to cut the money going to their states.
And healthcare? Wait, aren't you the guy that wants the public option? Didn't I mention the VA in my last post, do you realize how fucked up that is? I doubt there are too many other countries around the world who are really happy with their gov't run HC system. And the cost is catastrophic, didn't I mention the failure of the HC systems in Vermont and ow other states have turned it down? There's a reason for that you know.
4) Climate change is real whether you like it or not. But not as real as you think, whether you like it or not either. How much money are you going to spend on this?

Of course these solutions aren’t cheap, but we can afford them. Part of that process will be closing loopholes and deductions because the EFFECTIVE, not official, tax rate is too low for corporations

No shit, your solutions are very expensive. You say we can afford them but I say no way in hell. And the effective tax rate for US corps is pretty much in line with every other industrialized country, is it not? And that ain't going to cut it dude, you aren't going to get enough revenue to even come close to doing what you want to do. I remember when Bernie Sanders was running for Prez, he came out with a lot of these ideas and put some numbers up too. Which I thought was pretty brave on his part, and he got shot down big time and not just by the Right either.

Sure, go to the American people and tell them you're going to cut defense by what, 50%? Then go to Congress and tell them which bases and programs you're going to cut to get down by 50%, let's see how far you get. Then let's see your numbers for the public option, I assume you're going to tell those of us on Medicare/Medicaid that we won't have that anymore. You might have a bit of resistance there I think. Then tell me what your idea is for UBI that isn't going to be universal, who gets what. And then try to sell the American people on how much you want to spend on Climate Change; I don't think you're going to find many Dems lining up behind you for all that.

Having said all that, I commend you for putting all this out there for us to shoot at. You put some time and thought into it, bravo!

The important thing to do is to tax the rich... Right now they pay less percentage-wise than much of the middle class... That is insane. Good vacations minimum wage living wage paid parental leave cost nothing. Cheap college and and training and infrastructure cost money. You dupes will take it up the ass forever I guess LOL arrrrgggghhhh

I take it that you like to spend other peoples money, huh? Once that money is gone they'll be coming after yours, Frankie.
Be careful what you wish for.

Bulshit... They do just fine in Europe etcetera with taxing the rich... You idiots in the GOP, there has always progressive income taxes and for good reason. The rich are ridiculously bloated, we have the worst inequality and upward Mobility of any modern country, and you obsess over fake scandals and character assassination. Who needs evidence?

In Europe they tax everybody. As in EVERYBODY, you know what a VAT tax is? Most European countries pay 20-25% vat tax and then they pay income tax on top of that, on every freakin' penny they earn. None of this bottom 50% don't pay anything stuff.

I can't believe you think Democrats would Cut Medicare and Medicaid... You are absolutely brainwashed beyond belief... We want to cut de fence by 10% not 50 fear-mongering SuperDuper....

 

[francoHFW]

I don't think Billy is talking about a socialist gov't country like Cuba, N Korea, and Venezuela, I think he means a socialist democracy like Denmark or Sweden. The problem is that most of those places aren't doing so hot these days, with sky-high taxes and so many Muslim immigrants from Africa and the ME. Yeah, it's great to have all that free stuff, but EVERYBODY pays for it, not just the rich guys and big corps. For starters, everybody pays a VAT when they buy stuff, somewhere around 20%.

Their median wage is higher AFTER taxes than the median wage here.

Then why don't they have the ability to buy homes as easily as we can? Why are they limited to staying in the family homestead? Italy is another socialist paradise and a friend of ours is the first one in her family to be able to buy a house in fifty years. She lived like a pauper for twenty years to be able to do it. In Japan they have multi generational mortgages to make it even possible for a family to buy a home.

Me thinks you need to read something other than your myopic socialist rag to get a better view of the real world.

This is purely a guess, but I think in most European countries the family home is passed down from one generation to the next, grandma and grandpa live there with the family until they die. And they just don't have the space that we do to build new housing developments. And you don't see a lot of grass, they plant flowers or stuff to eat.

Been awhile since I was there (30 years), but the price of a lot of stuff like food and clothing and gas is a lot higher than here.

In tourist areas LOL...

No, man, everywhere. I used to live there.

So did I Spain is cheaper than here. Paris is expensive but go out in country cheap.

 

[francoHFW]

How will republican policy address automation replacing human jobs?

How will republican policy address wages becoming more and more behind on the rising cost of living nationwide?

How will republican policy address rising drug prices and high deductible health insurance plans?

How will republican policy mitigate problems like drought and other natural disasters that are only getting worse because of climate change?

How will republican policy fix our crumbling infrastructure?

Only socialist policy can improve all of these things.

Great thread, great questions. I don't understand bringing up health care insurance has to do with this, though. Robots , AI will eventually dominate the cheap labor market. Kinda like illegal alien cheap labor. But more insidious. This will lead to massive unemployment. And then we add to that, the collapse of the environment due to global warming, inevitably leads to crop failures, mass starvation and wars...I am not Nostradamus. But all that is more than likely to happen given the facts. I am over sixty, my life is nearly done. I pity you kids.

Everything is going to be fine when the Democrats get in... Too many damn people though... Not Not in Western New York thankthank you very much. But the GOP is squeezing regular people for 35 years now.

Demise of the American Middle Class In Numbers.

Over the past 35 years the American dream has gradually disappeared. The process was slow, so most people didn’t notice. They just worked a few more hours, borrowed a little more and cut back on non-essentials. But looking at the numbers and comparing them over long time periods, it is obvious that things have changed drastically. Here are the details:

1. WORKERS PRODUCE MORE BUT THE GAINS GO TO BUSINESS.

Over the past 63 years worker productivity has grown by 2.0% per year.

But after 1980, workers received a smaller share every year. Labor’s share of income (1992 = 100%):

1950 = 101%
1960 = 105%
1970 = 105%
1980 = 105% – Reagan
1990 = 100%
2000 = 96%
2007 = 92%

A 13% drop since 1980

2. THE TOP 10% GET A LARGER SHARE.

Share of National Income going to Top 10%:

1950 = 35%
1960 = 34%
1970 = 34%
1980 = 34% – Reagan
1990 = 40%
2000 = 47%
2007 = 50%

An increase of 16% since Reagan.

3. WORKERS COMPENSATED FOR THE LOSS OF INCOME BY SPENDING THEIR SAVINGS.

The savings Rose up to Reagan and fell during and after.

1950 = 6.0%
1960 = 7.0%
1970 = 8.5%
1980 = 10.0% – Reagan
1982 = 11.2% – Peak
1990 = 7.0%
2000 = 2.0%
2006 = -1.1% (Negative = withdrawing from savings)

A 12.3% drop after Reagan.

4. WORKERS ALSO BORROWED TO MAKE UP FOR THE LOSS.

Household Debt as percentage of GDP:

1965 = 46%
1970 = 45%
1980 = 50% – Reagan
1990 = 61%
2000 = 69%
2007 = 95%

A 45% increase after 1980.

5. SO THE GAP BETWEEN THE RICHEST AND THE POOREST HAS GROWN.

Gap Between the Share of Capital Income earned by the top 1%
and the bottom 80%:

1980 = 10%
2003 = 56%

A 5.6 times increase.

6. AND THE AMERICAN DREAM IS GONE.

The Probably of Moving Up from the Bottom 40% to the Top 40%:

1945 = 12%
1958 = 6%
1990 = 3%
2000 = 2%

A 10% Decrease.

Links:

1 = ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/pf/totalf1.txt
1 = https://www.clevelandfed.org/Research/PolicyDis/No7Nov04.pdf
1 = Clipboard01.jpg (image)
2 – http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/blog/09/04/27/CongratulationstoEmmanuelSaez/
3 = http://www.demos.org/inequality/images/charts/uspersonalsaving_thumb.gif
3 = U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA)
4 = Federated Prudent Bear Fund (A): Overview
4 = The Fed - Financial Accounts of the United States - Z.1 - Current Release
5/6 = 15 Mind-Blowing Facts About Wealth And Inequality In America

Overview = http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2010062415/reagan-revolution-home-roost-charts

 

[francoHFW]

How will republican policy address automation replacing human jobs?

How will republican policy address wages becoming more and more behind on the rising cost of living nationwide?

How will republican policy address rising drug prices and high deductible health insurance plans?

How will republican policy mitigate problems like drought and other natural disasters that are only getting worse because of climate change?

How will republican policy fix our crumbling infrastructure?

Only socialist policy can improve all of these things.

Great thread, great questions. I don't understand bringing up health care insurance has to do with this, though. Robots , AI will eventually dominate the cheap labor market. Kinda like illegal alien cheap labor. But more insidious. This will lead to massive unemployment. And then we add to that, the collapse of the environment due to global warming, inevitably leads to crop failures, mass starvation and wars...I am not Nostradamus. But all that is more than likely to happen given the facts. I am over sixty, my life is nearly done. I pity you kids.

Driverless taxis are coming we can start drinking like we did back in the 70s again LOL those were the good old days and before that. But look add what the Republicans have done the last 35 years... Same tax rates give away to the rich.

Demise of the American Middle Class In Numbers.

Over the past 35 years the American dream has gradually disappeared. The process was slow, so most people didn’t notice. They just worked a few more hours, borrowed a little more and cut back on non-essentials. But looking at the numbers and comparing them over long time periods, it is obvious that things have changed drastically. Here are the details:

1. WORKERS PRODUCE MORE BUT THE GAINS GO TO BUSINESS.

Over the past 63 years worker productivity has grown by 2.0% per year.

But after 1980, workers received a smaller share every year. Labor’s share of income (1992 = 100%):

1950 = 101%
1960 = 105%
1970 = 105%
1980 = 105% – Reagan
1990 = 100%
2000 = 96%
2007 = 92%

A 13% drop since 1980

2. THE TOP 10% GET A LARGER SHARE.

Share of National Income going to Top 10%:

1950 = 35%
1960 = 34%
1970 = 34%
1980 = 34% – Reagan
1990 = 40%
2000 = 47%
2007 = 50%

An increase of 16% since Reagan.

3. WORKERS COMPENSATED FOR THE LOSS OF INCOME BY SPENDING THEIR SAVINGS.

The savings Rose up to Reagan and fell during and after.

1950 = 6.0%
1960 = 7.0%
1970 = 8.5%
1980 = 10.0% – Reagan
1982 = 11.2% – Peak
1990 = 7.0%
2000 = 2.0%
2006 = -1.1% (Negative = withdrawing from savings)

A 12.3% drop after Reagan.

4. WORKERS ALSO BORROWED TO MAKE UP FOR THE LOSS.

Household Debt as percentage of GDP:

1965 = 46%
1970 = 45%
1980 = 50% – Reagan
1990 = 61%
2000 = 69%
2007 = 95%

A 45% increase after 1980.

5. SO THE GAP BETWEEN THE RICHEST AND THE POOREST HAS GROWN.

Gap Between the Share of Capital Income earned by the top 1%
and the bottom 80%:

1980 = 10%
2003 = 56%

A 5.6 times increase.

6. AND THE AMERICAN DREAM IS GONE.

The Probably of Moving Up from the Bottom 40% to the Top 40%:

1945 = 12%
1958 = 6%
1990 = 3%
2000 = 2%

A 10% Decrease.

Links:

1 = ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/pf/totalf1.txt
1 = https://www.clevelandfed.org/Research/PolicyDis/No7Nov04.pdf
1 = Clipboard01.jpg (image)
2 – http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/blog/09/04/27/CongratulationstoEmmanuelSaez/
3 = http://www.demos.org/inequality/images/charts/uspersonalsaving_thumb.gif
3 = U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA)
4 = Federated Prudent Bear Fund (A): Overview
4 = The Fed - Financial Accounts of the United States - Z.1 - Current Release
5/6 = 15 Mind-Blowing Facts About Wealth And Inequality In America

Overview = http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2010062415/reagan-revolution-home-roost-charts

 

[TheDude]

How will republican policy address automation replacing human jobs?

How will republican policy address wages becoming more and more behind on the rising cost of living nationwide?

How will republican policy address rising drug prices and high deductible health insurance plans?

How will republican policy mitigate problems like drought and other natural disasters that are only getting worse because of climate change?

How will republican policy fix our crumbling infrastructure?

Only socialist policy can improve all of these things.

ow will republican policy address automation replacing human jobs? Open the gates to immigrants like a liberal, because we're short-sighted dumb fucks too?

How will republican policy address wages becoming more and more behind on the rising cost of living nationwide? Open the gates to immigrants like a liberal, because we're short-sighted dumb fucks too? Add we're going to increase entitlements to expand the economy (cough).

How will republican policy address rising drug prices and high deductible health insurance plans? Couldn't tell you. Obama got it wrong too, though I can say my premiums have GONE DOWN on Trump's watch while the deductibles remained unchanged.

How will republican policy mitigate problems like drought and other natural disasters that are only getting worse because of climate change? Ha ha ha ha ha haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!

How will republican policy fix our crumbling infrastructure? Tax revenue and capital improments.

Only socialist policy can improve all of these things. Worked so well under Obama, so GREAT POINT. I say we elect Bernie Sanders. He'd set you into the right position, bent over.

 

[SavannahMann]

How will republican policy address automation replacing human jobs?

How will republican policy address wages becoming more and more behind on the rising cost of living nationwide?

How will republican policy address rising drug prices and high deductible health insurance plans?

How will republican policy mitigate problems like drought and other natural disasters that are only getting worse because of climate change?

How will republican policy fix our crumbling infrastructure?

Only socialist policy can improve all of these things.

/——/ Maybe Socialism can save Cuba, North Korea and Venezuela—— oh wait. Never mind.

It’s not my fault you don’t understand the different types of socialism.

The main problem with socialism is that it is based upon a flawed premise. It is impossible to make things fair so everyone crosses the finish line together.

Socialism also detests merit based accomplishments. You denounce the CEO’s extravagant salary. But look at every example in history. A bad CEO will destroy a company, while a good one will save it and make it stronger. The bad one destroys dozens or even thousands of jobs. The good one saves those jobs.

But take it to any endeavor. A Private can lose a battle from a mistake, maybe. The circumstances have to be pretty unusual for it to happen. A General Who makes a mistake can lose the war. It is for this reason that Generals and Admirals are confirmed by Congress. We are trying to make sure the Military CEO is worthy of the position.

If you doubt this then visit your local AMC dealer. Or check out the fine offerings from Austin Automobile. Hop a flight via Pan Am. Or check out the new offerings from Sylvania electronic. A bad CEO is death to not just the name of the company, but everyone employed by that company. Not just in America, but around the world.

So how much is a good CEO worth? Lee Iacocca turned Dodge around. Now it is reasonably strong. Mercedes Benz had a bad CEO and lost market share. His argument that the cars were made too well did not resonate with the customers. That CEO was out before the company went down.

Doctors, Lawyers, Engineers. Really good ones are worth the money aren’t they?

 

[Cellblock2429]

I don't know WHERE you fucking knuckleheads get the idea those Countries are socialist.

They are NOT. They are about as far away from socialist as it gets.

For one thing, Norway is known as The KINGDOM of Norway and is a Parliamentary Constitutional Monarchy.

Denmark is a Constitutional Monarchy. They have a King.

Both are Welfare States. And that's okay with me. If they want to commit social suicide, I'm down with that

But they are NOT socialist. Not even close

You people are too stupid to have a rational discussion with.

Here’s what you aren’t getting about the basic definition of socialism: it’s any institution funded and owned by the people. Therefore, EVERY government is socialist.

Sooo, you don't even know what socialism is, do you? Every gov't is socialist? Really? Let's drill down a little bit, which particular type of socialism do you advocate for, that you say is going to fix all those problems you listed in the OP? And where in the world does it exist?

Socialism could mean a system with programs funded by the people but entirely owned by the government, or in a social democratic system, the people fund it, but the programs are designed to provide basic services to the people such as healthcare and education. Every nation therefore has some extent of socialism including the US.

Paying for things you don’t own is called rental...

... or divorce.

B*******. Why are we the only modern country without Healthcare daycare living wage good infrastructure good vacations paid parental leave, super super GOP dupe.

/——-/ Great news libtard, we have healthcare. I know because I went to the doctor on Friday and he gave me an Rx. I feel better already. And we have daycare because my grandkids go all year long. And my wife and I have a living wage because we went to college, got skills and found well paying jobs. The infrastructure is just fine. All kinds of improvements to the Long Island Expressway, Belt Parkway And LIRR underway now. We have a great vacation planned to the Bahamas in August and a week to Vegas in two weeks. My daughter had paid leave when she gave birth. Now that you have everything you were asking for can you please stop whining and pursue the American Dream, super duper Libtard?

 

[Toro]

How will republican policy address automation replacing human jobs?

How will republican policy address wages becoming more and more behind on the rising cost of living nationwide?

How will republican policy address rising drug prices and high deductible health insurance plans?

How will republican policy mitigate problems like drought and other natural disasters that are only getting worse because of climate change?

How will republican policy fix our crumbling infrastructure?

Only socialist policy can improve all of these things.

/——/ Maybe Socialism can save Cuba, North Korea and Venezuela—— oh wait. Never mind.

It’s not my fault you don’t understand the different types of socialism.

The main problem with socialism is that it is based upon a flawed premise. It is impossible to make things fair so everyone crosses the finish line together.

Socialism also detests merit based accomplishments. You denounce the CEO’s extravagant salary. But look at every example in history. A bad CEO will destroy a company, while a good one will save it and make it stronger. The bad one destroys dozens or even thousands of jobs. The good one saves those jobs.

But take it to any endeavor. A Private can lose a battle from a mistake, maybe. The circumstances have to be pretty unusual for it to happen. A General Who makes a mistake can lose the war. It is for this reason that Generals and Admirals are confirmed by Congress. We are trying to make sure the Military CEO is worthy of the position.

If you doubt this then visit your local AMC dealer. Or check out the fine offerings from Austin Automobile. Hop a flight via Pan Am. Or check out the new offerings from Sylvania electronic. A bad CEO is death to not just the name of the company, but everyone employed by that company. Not just in America, but around the world.

So how much is a good CEO worth? Lee Iacocca turned Dodge around. Now it is reasonably strong. Mercedes Benz had a bad CEO and lost market share. His argument that the cars were made too well did not resonate with the customers. That CEO was out before the company went down.

Doctors, Lawyers, Engineers. Really good ones are worth the money aren’t they?

FYI There is no correlation between CEO compensation and financial or stock performance of a company. There have been a few studies making this conclusion.

 

[Mac1958]

Just out of morbid curiosity...

What, specifically, is meant by "socialism", in this particular thread?
.

 

[Crixus]

How will republican policy address automation replacing human jobs?

How will republican policy address wages becoming more and more behind on the rising cost of living nationwide?

How will republican policy address rising drug prices and high deductible health insurance plans?

How will republican policy mitigate problems like drought and other natural disasters that are only getting worse because of climate change?

How will republican policy fix our crumbling infrastructure?

Only socialist policy can improve all of these things.

1. Not the governments job to worry about that.


2. My wages are fine. If one doesn’t like their wages Then they can quit McDonalds and get a better job.


3. Don’t know, but Bammer never addressed that either. All he did was make it harder for people to get the drugs they need, and to see a Dr. which Bammercare also made more expencive.


4. Just earth day bull shit. But since you bring it up, I see that you listen to Rush.


5. 8 years of the token negro and it still crumbles? Remember, when you point one finger, you got three fingers pointing right back at ya.



You can show any instance where socialism helped in any of these. You only got wood over the Mexican socialist who wine a primary. Let’s see how she does in November, but if socialism is so great, why aren’t you living in Cuba?

 

[bripat9643]

I don't think Billy is talking about a socialist gov't country like Cuba, N Korea, and Venezuela, I think he means a socialist democracy like Denmark or Sweden. The problem is that most of those places aren't doing so hot these days, with sky-high taxes and so many Muslim immigrants from Africa and the ME. Yeah, it's great to have all that free stuff, but EVERYBODY pays for it, not just the rich guys and big corps. For starters, everybody pays a VAT when they buy stuff, somewhere around 20%.

Their median wage is higher AFTER taxes than the median wage here.

ROFL! Whose median wage? Certainly not Germany's, France's or Britain's.

 

[SavannahMann]

How will republican policy address automation replacing human jobs?

How will republican policy address wages becoming more and more behind on the rising cost of living nationwide?

How will republican policy address rising drug prices and high deductible health insurance plans?

How will republican policy mitigate problems like drought and other natural disasters that are only getting worse because of climate change?

How will republican policy fix our crumbling infrastructure?

Only socialist policy can improve all of these things.

/——/ Maybe Socialism can save Cuba, North Korea and Venezuela—— oh wait. Never mind.

It’s not my fault you don’t understand the different types of socialism.

The main problem with socialism is that it is based upon a flawed premise. It is impossible to make things fair so everyone crosses the finish line together.

Socialism also detests merit based accomplishments. You denounce the CEO’s extravagant salary. But look at every example in history. A bad CEO will destroy a company, while a good one will save it and make it stronger. The bad one destroys dozens or even thousands of jobs. The good one saves those jobs.

But take it to any endeavor. A Private can lose a battle from a mistake, maybe. The circumstances have to be pretty unusual for it to happen. A General Who makes a mistake can lose the war. It is for this reason that Generals and Admirals are confirmed by Congress. We are trying to make sure the Military CEO is worthy of the position.

If you doubt this then visit your local AMC dealer. Or check out the fine offerings from Austin Automobile. Hop a flight via Pan Am. Or check out the new offerings from Sylvania electronic. A bad CEO is death to not just the name of the company, but everyone employed by that company. Not just in America, but around the world.

So how much is a good CEO worth? Lee Iacocca turned Dodge around. Now it is reasonably strong. Mercedes Benz had a bad CEO and lost market share. His argument that the cars were made too well did not resonate with the customers. That CEO was out before the company went down.

Doctors, Lawyers, Engineers. Really good ones are worth the money aren’t they?

FYI There is no correlation between CEO compensation and financial or stock performance of a company. There have been a few studies making this conclusion.

I wasn’t talking about stock performance. I was talking about the effect on the company a good leader can have.

Don’t you think that the employees of Enron wish they had a different person in charge? One who was worried about the company more than the stock or financial performance numbers?

There are lots of examples in history. Companies with a CEO who wasn’t able to do the best for the company, and it died. Look at history, a bad general will cost you the war. In 1890 the Germans walked all over the French, because the French wanted to fight the wrong war. They were wiped out at Sedan, and forced to surrender. In 1914, they had a General that they loved. Papa Joffre. Joffre ignored warnings of a huge right wing coming through Belgium, and barely managed to avoid defeat thanks to a mistake by a German General.

Admiral Rozhestvensky lost the battle of Tsushima despite having a much larger fleet to work with. Bad decisions can cost everything.

Hughes Aircraft is now wholly owned and operated by McDonald Douglas. They were wiped out. Grumman Aircraft who supplied the Navy for generations and built the Lunar Lander, is basically in the Drone business now. Look for them to go Bankrupt any day now.

A damned good plane was the Beaver. That company is gone. DeHaviland is history despite making very good aircraft.

Sometimes a company goes kaput despite making no bad decisions, but often you can point to a decision that comes back to bite them in the ass. IBM PC’s are history. Now, they are just called PC’s because after deciding that nobody would want a computer in their home, IBM rushed out and built one with off the shelf parts, and instead of writing their own software, used off the shelf software too. Then anyone and everyone could do it. Gateway built good system, but they’re pretty much gone. HP and Compac have merged.

SeaLand, the American shipping company, changed corporate direction about once a year, until Maersk came in and took them over. That was the last American shipping company by the way. Bad decisions wiped out the company.

You have a heart attack. You need open heart surgery. Which surgeon do you want? I’d want the best one I could get. The best one in the city, or region. It might cost more, but isn’t it worth it?

We’ve seen the walkway bridge collapse in Florida that killed some motorists. I bet the University wishes they had gone with better Engineers and Construction people. I bet the low bid is suddenly not such a hot idea.

When the plane engine fails, you want the best pilot you can get, well trained, and experienced up front. The two pilots that Payne Stewart had went to the book to find out what to do when the cabin pressure alarm went off. They were dead hours before the plane ran out of fuel and crashed. You shouldn’t have needed the book to tell you to put on the fucking Oxygen mask and get to a lower altitude.

The Air France flight, the pilot screwed up and put the damned plane in the Atlantic. He pancaked in from 35000 feet. He pulled back on the stick and left it there for minutes. I bet the relatives wish that someone had put a little more money into his training.

 

[Cellblock2429]

Just out of morbid curiosity...

What, specifically, is meant by "socialism", in this particular thread?
.

/-----/ Socialism = Gimme me your stuff now.

 

[Mac1958]

Just out of morbid curiosity... What, specifically, is meant by "socialism", in this particular thread?

/-----/ Socialism = Gimme me your stuff now.

Okay, well, thanks. That's about as deep as it usually gets here.
.

 

[SSGT Bags]

How will republican policy address automation replacing human jobs?

How will republican policy address wages becoming more and more behind on the rising cost of living nationwide?

How will republican policy address rising drug prices and high deductible health insurance plans?

How will republican policy mitigate problems like drought and other natural disasters that are only getting worse because of climate change?

How will republican policy fix our crumbling infrastructure?

Only socialist policy can improve all of these things.

Offer up the problems, but just like all Lefties, they have no solutions.

 

[Cellblock2429]

Just out of morbid curiosity... What, specifically, is meant by "socialism", in this particular thread?

/-----/ Socialism = Gimme me your stuff now.

Okay, well, thanks. That's about as deep as it usually gets here.
.

/----/ Sorry if my definition was too concise. Here's a more detailed explanation. Please let me know if you need further clarification. No need to thank me. I'm here to help.
Definition of socialism. 1 : any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods. 2 a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property. 3: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done
Socialism | Definition of Socialism by Merriam-Webster