So You Hate Socialism.......

[Vigilante]

 

[Rouge Rover]

1) It's about time those not paying the taxes that fund the military get to paying their fair share.

2) The majority of those taxes are paid through fuel taxes. If you don't use the road, you don't use the fuel.

3) There is no cost for a library card where I live. Local property taxes are the primary funding for the libraries here. If you don't own property on which to pay those taxes, I seriously doubt you're using the libraries funded by them.

4) I have. Since I pay the taxes that fund them, I'm getting what I paid for.

5) FD's are funded by local property taxes. If you don't have property to protect from fire, the fire dept. doesn't need to come to put out what you don't own.

6) Hate to break it to you but the postal service hasn't received direct taxpayer funding in almost 35 years.

7) My entire college funding was through academic and athletic scholarships. They were EARNED. My daughter is in college now and what academic scholarships, all privately funded and awarded, don't pay I pay out of pockets.

Sorry to break it to you, but paying local, state or federal taxes and receiving community services is democratic socialism... I think you don't understand what democratic socialism is.

Probably should have EARNED a better scholarship...

PS Why should you get an athletic scholarship to an academic institution. Why don't you first understand what public education outside the US looks like before you make up your mind.

I will give a short explanation:
I will explain Ireland(I will simplify a bit) but Europe has this in one form or another. At 17/18 kids do a state exams with 6 subjects counting (Maths, English, Foreign Language must count). Each score is given points (100 A, 80 B...).

Six Months before the exams they fill a form of the top 20 courses they would like to do in other of preference.

The exam results come out and the kid gets his results which is then turned into points... Anything above 500 is considered quite good, straight A students are rare with less than a dozen in the country.

The courses are then given on supply and demand. So if everyone applies for law in Dublin (UCD) and there is 50 places, they first 50(highest) are selected and the rest have to go to there next choice on the list...

So three days after your exams the national newspapers publish the points needed for a course and the individual number of every student with the course they are being offered right beside them. Very transparent and very little mistakes.

The government pays all course fees but subsistence is means tested..

Correct me if I've misunderstood you but how does that system take supply and demand into account? If kids want to study a topic but are told they can't then how is supply and demand in play there?

There say 50 places on a course... That is the supply... But for that year that college has 50 places...

The students who want it applym, that is the demand...

The students with the highest points (and do not have the points for course higher in their preference) gets the course... So when we say Law in UCD is 560 points we actually mean the lowest student who got the course got 560 points (4 As, 2 Bs). The might applied for Actuarial Maths as there number 1 which 580 but they failed to get that...

So points are set by supply (number of places) and Demand (the points of applicants)...

I was confused because that's not how supply and demand works in America. Thanks for the explanation.

You are putting supply and demand in only monetary value... Is the goal of the Education system to make the pupils the best they can be...
Students study a lot harder if they know it is there actions and there results that solely affect their placement.

It is supply and demand and I have done enough economics (in college) to know that is it... The demand is driven by the number of points needed for the courseand the supply is the places in particular courses in College.. The American system is distorting the demand by placing financial constraints which just distorts the market.

I was just interested in what you meant by supply and demand. Thank you for your response. I really don't care how you do things in Ireland and do not want to engage in any kind of discussion at all with a European about anything.

 

[Vigilante]

 

[CowboyTed]

Sorry to break it to you, but paying local, state or federal taxes and receiving community services is democratic socialism... I think you don't understand what democratic socialism is.

Probably should have EARNED a better scholarship...

PS Why should you get an athletic scholarship to an academic institution. Why don't you first understand what public education outside the US looks like before you make up your mind.

I will give a short explanation:
I will explain Ireland(I will simplify a bit) but Europe has this in one form or another. At 17/18 kids do a state exams with 6 subjects counting (Maths, English, Foreign Language must count). Each score is given points (100 A, 80 B...).

Six Months before the exams they fill a form of the top 20 courses they would like to do in other of preference.

The exam results come out and the kid gets his results which is then turned into points... Anything above 500 is considered quite good, straight A students are rare with less than a dozen in the country.

The courses are then given on supply and demand. So if everyone applies for law in Dublin (UCD) and there is 50 places, they first 50(highest) are selected and the rest have to go to there next choice on the list...

So three days after your exams the national newspapers publish the points needed for a course and the individual number of every student with the course they are being offered right beside them. Very transparent and very little mistakes.

The government pays all course fees but subsistence is means tested..

Correct me if I've misunderstood you but how does that system take supply and demand into account? If kids want to study a topic but are told they can't then how is supply and demand in play there?

There say 50 places on a course... That is the supply... But for that year that college has 50 places...

The students who want it applym, that is the demand...

The students with the highest points (and do not have the points for course higher in their preference) gets the course... So when we say Law in UCD is 560 points we actually mean the lowest student who got the course got 560 points (4 As, 2 Bs). The might applied for Actuarial Maths as there number 1 which 580 but they failed to get that...

So points are set by supply (number of places) and Demand (the points of applicants)...

I was confused because that's not how supply and demand works in America. Thanks for the explanation.

You are putting supply and demand in only monetary value... Is the goal of the Education system to make the pupils the best they can be...
Students study a lot harder if they know it is there actions and there results that solely affect their placement.

It is supply and demand and I have done enough economics (in college) to know that is it... The demand is driven by the number of points needed for the courseand the supply is the places in particular courses in College.. The American system is distorting the demand by placing financial constraints which just distorts the market.

I was just interested in what you meant by supply and demand. Thank you for your response. I really don't care how you do things in Ireland and do not want to engage in any kind of discussion at all with a European about anything.

Grand so... Better go back to that isolationist world and learn nothing from the outside world... Europeans have often robbed good ideas of the US but it seems even with overwhelming evidence that European Systems are cheaper and producing better results (bang for buck) you would turn away from it...

Is this ideology over common sense...

 

[Mertex]

I never said it did. But, like an accountant, it pays the bills, so when I say the government pays for it, I don't mean that the government is like a person...that earns money and pays for things, and you know that...so quit with the semantics.

We are the government, you said so yourself, so WE are paying for it.

We're saying the same thing, so why do you keep saying it as if I said something different. If I said the government is paying for it, and "WE" are the government, isn't it the same thing? Let it go...........

Problem is, WE don't collectively have enough money to pay for it so WE borrow it from China. WE are currently running a $20 trillion bar tab. Meanwhile, you just keep dreaming up more stupid shit to blow money on!

If Republicans would agree to make corporations pay their fair share....as well as the wealthy, we wouldn't have such a big problem. And, no, it's Trump who is dreaming up stupid shit....like a beautiful wall and deporting 11 million people. Is he going to pay for it out of his pocket? You didn't answer that, the last time I asked.

Why? Well that'd be found in your next quote....

A large portion of that is due to the worthless wars the Republican President started. Funny how all of a sudden conservatives are so concerned with the debt, but when Bush was not even budgeting for the war none of the conservatives complained about all the money being spent. Trump is promising all kinds of things....do you think that he is going to pay for it with his own money?

So... because you are all butt-hurt that George W. Bush invaded your buddy Saddam Hussein, it's a good reason to ignore the national debt and continue to pile on stupid shit for everyone to pay for? You're kind of like the angry wife who catches her husband cheating and runs up all his credit cards and then burns the house down.

Don't be ignorant. Saddam Hussein isn't my buddy....and he wasn't a threat to the US either.....so invading him for the actions of the 9/11 terrorists is plain stupid. You're the typical ignorant Trump supporter, who claims Democrats are wasting money and you believe that Trump is going to build a beautiful wall, deport 11 million people and it isn't going to cost anything.......come out of that coma, why don't ya!

Except that Bush acted with the consent of Congress to enforce UN resolutions with a coalition of willing nations to try and combat threats to our nation from radical Islamic terrorists. You turned it into Vietnam II and ruined his reputation... now you're spending our nation into bankruptcy because you are still mad about it. This has to STOP!

No, Bush/Cheney lied to the country and the world, and told us that Hussein was stockpiling WMDs....he had information contrary to that and conned the CIA to go along with his lies. Congress is not to blame for his idiocy....he and Cheney are. Republican/conservatives who try and cover up for him are now complicit in the whole damn thing....and many lives were lost, for what? Has Iraq gotten better? Of course not...so quit defending that doofus.[/QUOTE]

 

[Mertex]

Liberals don't live in reality, never have and never will.

Bwahahaha.....says the one that supports Trump "who claims that he is going to build a beautiful wall and deport 11 million illegals" and it won't cost us anything! Bwahaha...and also lives in what one calls the Bubba-land Bubble (Faux News).

 

[Camp]

The question of whether Bush's war in Iraqi was wrong or right, necessary or not is a deflection from the real issue. The issue is that he went to war and conducted the war without funding is the pertinent issue. If he had told the country the war would have meant increased taxes the country would have put restrictions on his adventure. Those pallets of cash and nation building and getting stuck in a quagmire stuff would have never happened.

 

[CowboyTed]

The question of whether Bush's war in Iraqi was wrong or right, necessary or not is a deflection from the real issue. The issue is that he went to war and conducted the war without funding is the pertinent issue. If he had told the country the war would have meant increased taxes the country would have put restrictions on his adventure. Those pallets of cash and nation building and getting stuck in a quagmire stuff would have never happened.

Wasn't that lied about as well... I do remember someone saying that the US army would be welcomed as liberators

 

[Boss]

Liberals don't live in reality, never have and never will.

Of course not. They believe government can give us free stuff. Some of them might grasp the concept that someone has to pay for the stuff but it's not them so it doesn't matter... they still think government ought to dole out the free stuff.

And here is the thing... Any resource has to either be sold or rationed. There is no other option. So whenever the resource is turned over to government to distribute it will have to be rationed. We're already seeing it being applied to health care, now they want to apply it to higher education.

These people are a danger to themselves and society in general. They obviously flunked world history and have no idea about Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot or how over 200 million people have died trying to implement the very system they advocate. And you can't even talk to them about it... they shut you out because they've been brainwashed by others.

We always miss the subtleties of the truth when we start assigning beliefs to others. But at the risk of doing just that, I'd say that not all liberals are so unsophisticated. Many of them recognize the contradiction of "free stuff". And they, more accurately, see socialism as a means of taking economic power out of private hands - where it is distributed via voluntary exchange - and putting it under the control of democratic government. They believe government will make better decisions about how to invest our wealth than individuals.

And they, more accurately, see socialism as a means of taking economic power out of private hands - where it is distributed via voluntary exchange - and putting it under the control of democratic government.

Again, resources are either sold or they are rationed. There is no other option. So to put your statement into the simplest of terms, Socialists prefer rationing over free market exchange.

 

[dblack]

Liberals don't live in reality, never have and never will.

Of course not. They believe government can give us free stuff. Some of them might grasp the concept that someone has to pay for the stuff but it's not them so it doesn't matter... they still think government ought to dole out the free stuff.

And here is the thing... Any resource has to either be sold or rationed. There is no other option. So whenever the resource is turned over to government to distribute it will have to be rationed. We're already seeing it being applied to health care, now they want to apply it to higher education.

These people are a danger to themselves and society in general. They obviously flunked world history and have no idea about Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot or how over 200 million people have died trying to implement the very system they advocate. And you can't even talk to them about it... they shut you out because they've been brainwashed by others.

We always miss the subtleties of the truth when we start assigning beliefs to others. But at the risk of doing just that, I'd say that not all liberals are so unsophisticated. Many of them recognize the contradiction of "free stuff". And they, more accurately, see socialism as a means of taking economic power out of private hands - where it is distributed via voluntary exchange - and putting it under the control of democratic government. They believe government will make better decisions about how to invest our wealth than individuals.

And they, more accurately, see socialism as a means of taking economic power out of private hands - where it is distributed via voluntary exchange - and putting it under the control of democratic government.

Again, resources are either sold or they are rationed. There is no other option. So to put your statement into the simplest of terms, Socialists prefer rationing over free market exchange.

Exactly. They believe that authoritarian democratic control over labor and resources will produce better results.

 

[Boss]

Liberals don't live in reality, never have and never will.

Of course not. They believe government can give us free stuff. Some of them might grasp the concept that someone has to pay for the stuff but it's not them so it doesn't matter... they still think government ought to dole out the free stuff.

And here is the thing... Any resource has to either be sold or rationed. There is no other option. So whenever the resource is turned over to government to distribute it will have to be rationed. We're already seeing it being applied to health care, now they want to apply it to higher education.

These people are a danger to themselves and society in general. They obviously flunked world history and have no idea about Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot or how over 200 million people have died trying to implement the very system they advocate. And you can't even talk to them about it... they shut you out because they've been brainwashed by others.

We always miss the subtleties of the truth when we start assigning beliefs to others. But at the risk of doing just that, I'd say that not all liberals are so unsophisticated. Many of them recognize the contradiction of "free stuff". And they, more accurately, see socialism as a means of taking economic power out of private hands - where it is distributed via voluntary exchange - and putting it under the control of democratic government. They believe government will make better decisions about how to invest our wealth than individuals.

And they, more accurately, see socialism as a means of taking economic power out of private hands - where it is distributed via voluntary exchange - and putting it under the control of democratic government.

Again, resources are either sold or they are rationed. There is no other option. So to put your statement into the simplest of terms, Socialists prefer rationing over free market exchange.

Exactly. They believe that authoritarian democratic control over labor and resources will produce better results.

But there is no "democratic" control with government control. You and I don't get to vote on what the government decides to do. Ask those people in Oregon. Ask those people in Flint.

I know we live in a totally spoiled society. We have a hard time dealing with Starbucks running out of creamer.... how are we going to handle government rationing of resources? I'm thinking, not too well when reality sets in. But then, it's too late. This is not something you can just flip a switch and go back to how it used to be.

 

[flacaltenn]

Nobody ever complains about basic govt services. Bullshit like that is why libertarians are basically non-existent.
Hack job of an OP.
How can a socialist(Bernie) support his massive welfare state AND immigration? Even his go to "Denmark" doesn't do immigration like that. Most of them don't. Maybe HE doesn't understand socialism so well..

Libertarians NEVER complain about the enumerated powers of Govt. FULLY support the Constitution.
Most of that list is ENUMERATED powers of the Federal/State govts. That's NOT socialism.. Socialism is class warfare. Villianizing business in order to micro-manage it and DICTATING the light bulbs you can screw in..

 

[Iceweasel]

Liberals don't live in reality, never have and never will.

Bwahahaha.....says the one that supports Trump "who claims that he is going to build a beautiful wall and deport 11 million illegals" and it won't cost us anything! Bwahaha...and also lives in what one calls the Bubba-land Bubble (Faux News).

I've never supported Trump. You need to sober up.

 

[Mertex]

Liberals don't live in reality, never have and never will.

Bwahahaha.....says the one that supports Trump "who claims that he is going to build a beautiful wall and deport 11 million illegals" and it won't cost us anything! Bwahaha...and also lives in what one calls the Bubba-land Bubble (Faux News).

I've never supported Trump. You need to sober up.

Well, excuse me.......you could've fooled me....you sound just like his supporters.....uninformed!

 

[Iceweasel]

Liberals don't live in reality, never have and never will.

Bwahahaha.....says the one that supports Trump "who claims that he is going to build a beautiful wall and deport 11 million illegals" and it won't cost us anything! Bwahaha...and also lives in what one calls the Bubba-land Bubble (Faux News).

I've never supported Trump. You need to sober up.

Well, excuse me.......you could've fooled me....you sound just like his supporters.....uninformed!

You're a piece of shit. You hurl accusations at people and when they correct you, you simply throw more out. Fuck you, asshole, you're the one babbling nonsense.

 

[Mertex]

Liberals don't live in reality, never have and never will.

Bwahahaha.....says the one that supports Trump "who claims that he is going to build a beautiful wall and deport 11 million illegals" and it won't cost us anything! Bwahaha...and also lives in what one calls the Bubba-land Bubble (Faux News).

I've never supported Trump. You need to sober up.

Well, excuse me.......you could've fooled me....you sound just like his supporters.....uninformed!

You're a piece of shit. You hurl accusations at people and when they correct you, you simply throw more out. Fuck you, asshole, you're the one babbling nonsense.

Bwahahaha....the biggest asshole in the Forum couldn't defend his position and just had a serious meltdown......you can't make this shit up!

 

[Iceweasel]

Liberals don't live in reality, never have and never will.

Bwahahaha.....says the one that supports Trump "who claims that he is going to build a beautiful wall and deport 11 million illegals" and it won't cost us anything! Bwahaha...and also lives in what one calls the Bubba-land Bubble (Faux News).

I've never supported Trump. You need to sober up.

Well, excuse me.......you could've fooled me....you sound just like his supporters.....uninformed!

You're a piece of shit. You hurl accusations at people and when they correct you, you simply throw more out. Fuck you, asshole, you're the one babbling nonsense.

Bwahahaha....the biggest asshole in the Forum couldn't defend his position and just had a serious meltdown......you can't make this shit up!

I called you an asshole for reasons. You're a piece of shit and it has nothing to do with me. The fact that you believe you are empowered to influence me adds to your low class persona. I did defend myself, retard. You said I was a Trump supporter and I pointed out the fact that I never supported him. You then launched into another falsehood, now another.

So you've helped validate my original statement, "Liberals don't live in reality, never have and never will."

 

[Boss]

We're saying the same thing, so why do you keep saying it as if I said something different. If I said the government is paying for it, and "WE" are the government, isn't it the same thing? Let it go...........

No, you said the government pays for it and I corrected you, now you admit the government doesn't pay for it and you agree with me that WE pay for it. It matters HOW we pay for it. We can either pay for it through government or through the market. You prefer through the government, I prefer through the market. My way is better because the market can decide what it can bear, what it can afford, if it's worth it or not. Through the government you have rationing because that is the only other way to distribute resources besides the market. You have no choice, you don't get to decide if it's worth it or if you can afford it.

If Republicans would agree to make corporations pay their fair share....as well as the wealthy...

They do pay their fair share. You're not going to "make" them do a damn thing. You will kill jobs and drive wealth overseas. You've been trying this for over 50 years and it has failed. It's Marxist Socialism and it simply doesn't work. Wealthy people don't have to earn incomes and corporations don't pay tax-- their consumers do.

Don't be ignorant. Saddam Hussein isn't my buddy....and he wasn't a threat to the US either.....No, Bush/Cheney lied to the country and the world

Again, what does this have to do with runaway liberal spending and taxing? It's like the analogy I gave earlier-- you're like the angry wife who thinks her husband betrayed her.... you're going to max out the credit cards and burn the fucking house down.

Saddam was your buddy because you defend him every chance you get. He was a threat to the US and people like Hillary Clinton and John Kerry said he was. They also said he had WMDs. Bush/Cheney did not lie, that was PROVEN in three independent investigations, all concluding there was no lie or manipulation of intelligence on part of Bush, Cheney or anyone else. But here we are, 14 years after the fact and you are still defending your buddy Saddam... a man, by the way, who the people of Iraq tried and executed for his crimes against the people.

 

[Mertex]

Bwahahaha.....says the one that supports Trump "who claims that he is going to build a beautiful wall and deport 11 million illegals" and it won't cost us anything! Bwahaha...and also lives in what one calls the Bubba-land Bubble (Faux News).

I've never supported Trump. You need to sober up.

Well, excuse me.......you could've fooled me....you sound just like his supporters.....uninformed!

You're a piece of shit. You hurl accusations at people and when they correct you, you simply throw more out. Fuck you, asshole, you're the one babbling nonsense.

Bwahahaha....the biggest asshole in the Forum couldn't defend his position and just had a serious meltdown......you can't make this shit up!

I called you an asshole for reasons. You're a piece of shit and it has nothing to do with me. The fact that you believe you are empowered to influence me adds to your low class persona. I did defend myself, retard. You said I was a Trump supporter and I pointed out the fact that I never supported him. You then launched into another falsehood, now another.

So you've helped validate my original statement, "Liberals don't live in reality, never have and never will."

You are the asshole, asshole....a liar piece of shit, too. You claim you do not support Trump but you would vote for him over the more intelligent and qualified Democratic candidate if he was the Republican candidate, and since his support has grown and most likely he'll be the "chosen" that is some kind of support, idiot, so go pound sand, you moron.

Your words:

I would hold my nose and vote for Trump, but doubt I will need to. I can't see his support growing.
Jeb Bush is the Least Liked GOP Presidential Candidate

 

[Iceweasel]

I've never supported Trump. You need to sober up.

Well, excuse me.......you could've fooled me....you sound just like his supporters.....uninformed!

You're a piece of shit. You hurl accusations at people and when they correct you, you simply throw more out. Fuck you, asshole, you're the one babbling nonsense.

Bwahahaha....the biggest asshole in the Forum couldn't defend his position and just had a serious meltdown......you can't make this shit up!

I called you an asshole for reasons. You're a piece of shit and it has nothing to do with me. The fact that you believe you are empowered to influence me adds to your low class persona. I did defend myself, retard. You said I was a Trump supporter and I pointed out the fact that I never supported him. You then launched into another falsehood, now another.

So you've helped validate my original statement, "Liberals don't live in reality, never have and never will."

You are the asshole, asshole....a liar piece of shit, too. You claim you do not support Trump but you would vote for him over the more intelligent and qualified Democratic candidate if he was the Republican candidate, and since his support has grown and most likely he'll be the "chosen" that is some kind of support, idiot, so go pound sand, you moron.

Your words:

I would hold my nose and vote for Trump, but doubt I will need to. I can't see his support growing.
Jeb Bush is the Least Liked GOP Presidential Candidate

Digging you hole doesn't help. I called you out for false claims so you quickly threw two more out there. Now you're trying to save face by changing the conversation to the general election. If he ends up being the nominee I'll vote for him, that doesn't mean I'm a supporter, in fact it indicates otherwise.

You're not too bright, highly unethical and malicious, you hammered the point home. Yep, you're definitely a liberal.