Socialism = Capitalism plus

Agreed.

Veterans earn their benefits. Unlike the welfare queen Democrat voting block.
Obvious stupid racist code. Republican white people are on welfare just as much as Democratic white people, super duper.
Uh huh. Thing is, I don't believe anyone who is capable of working should be on public assistance. Race and politics are absolutely unimportant.

The Democratic Party has made it a policy for decades of keeping people dependent on government.
Stop blaming the poor for the results of your scumbag GOP policies that have destroyed opportunity the last 35 years. Everyone would rather have a good job.
I'm not blaming the poor. Obviously. Stop parroting your Marxist programming.

I'm blaming Democrats. Obviously, Stop being stupid.
Yep, just because college has quadrupled in cost while pay has remained steady has nothing to do with it. Thanks GOP and silly dupes like you... We had many almost free public universities in till Reagan got a hold of them....
No, that was Johnson.

The Higher Education Act of 1965 (HEA) (Pub.L. 89–329) was legislation signed into United States law on November 8, 1965, as part of President Lyndon Johnson's Great Society domestic agenda. Johnson chose Texas State University (then called "Southwest Texas State College"), his alma mater, as the signing site.[1] The law was intended "to strengthen the educational resources of our colleges and universities and to provide financial assistance for students in postsecondary and higher education". It increased federal money given to universities, created scholarships, gave low-interest loans for students, and established a National Teachers Corps. The "financial assistance for students" is covered in Title IV of the HEA.​

College costs have gone up because the government interferes. From 2011:

It all goes back to two well-intentioned federal goals: first, that a college education should be within the reach of every American, and second, that if students borrow money from the federal government, they should repay it. Most of us would agree that both are noble goals. But the consequences of both have been stunning.

As a result of the first, the money began to flow; over the last 30 years, inflation-adjusted federal financial aid has quadrupled. Total student debt has now reached the $1 trillion mark, more than the credit card debt of every American combined. The federal deficit in the recently ended fiscal year totaled $1.3 trillion; the debt load carried by college grads now stands at more than two thirds of our nation's massive budget shortfall. According to the College Board, over half of all full-time undergrads at public colleges and universities are now full-time borrowers. At private nonprofit schools, a whopping two thirds have loans.

The more money the federal government pumps into financial aid, the more money the colleges charge for tuition. Inflation-adjusted tuition and fees have tripled over those same 30 years while aid quadrupled; the aid is going up faster than the tuition. Thanks to the federal government, massive sums of money are available to pay for massive tuitions.

This has nothing to do with costs. According to Neal McCluskey's research at the Cato Institute, it costs roughly $8,000 a year to educate an undergraduate at an average residential college. Yet the average college bill—including room and board—charged at a private four-year university is $37,000, and $16,000 at a public one. For a long time, college tuition has been rising faster than the inflation rate, which certainly has hurt middle-class families. Colleges can raise tuition with impunity because colleges know they'll get paid no matter what.
Looky there. Government making something worse. Imagine that.
 
The actual definition, dumbfuck
Very mysterious, super duper. According to who what is your source are you talking about classical liberalism?
Classic liberalism IS liberalism. You bedwetters took it over with your lies and manipulation
JFK did? LOL. Classical liberalism appears to be another thing the GOP propaganda machine uses to confuse you poor suckers....
My fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.

-- John F. Kennedy

My fellow undocumented immigrants, ask not what you can do for America, ask what America can do for you.

-- Democrats in 2019

If JFK were alive today, he'd be thrown out of the Democratic Party.
94% of illegals work, they do not vote they do not get welfare the kids go to school that's it, super dupe. 65% pay taxes 35% own homes of the adult males.
You make many claims.

You offer no proof.

Run along.
 
yes they have National ID cards unlike the GOP who love cheap easily bullied labor and brainwashing doops like you. Brainwashed functional moron. All other modern countries have a living wage Healthcare day care paid parental leave 5 week vacations good infrastructure cheap college and training and actually tax the rich more percentage-wise than the rest. They are not brainwashed functional morons like you.
BTW, fifth-columnist fuckface, bandwagon fallacy isn't an argument....So pack your bags and GTFO.
Do you have any argument at all, troll. I have never seen a democratic troll. They are well informed and have arguments, actual facts at their behest. And I'm beginning to agree with Charles de Gaulle that Anglo Americans are idiots, always screwing people over and congratulating themselves for having the English channel and the Atlantic ocean to protect them.... Brexit and Trump are misinformed idiocy... Of course I mean only right wing Anglo Americans imperialist Savage capitalist misinformed twits who hate about 80% of their compatriots.
You have a history degree?

Talk to a lawyer. You have a good case for a malpractice suit against whatever university filled your head with bullshit.
I am very impressed with your opinion LOL. when do you think journalists and law enforcement will catch up with your conspiracy theories?
I'd educate you, but you're ineducable. You're a Marxist.
I am certainly not a marxist. Nobody is -I am for being more like France and everywhere else in the modern world. Marxist means you're for a dictatorship of the proletariat that owns all the production and business. In reality the Democrats are centrist pragmatists while Republicans are right off the flat earth right wing at this point, totally duped by the greedy idiot rich of the GOP. The United States problem is we do not tax the rich enough, it is a flat tax system now. Only propaganda makes this mess possible and crappy cowardly mainstream media.
 
Coercion and bureaucracy are never ever cost effective.

Imagine buying an annual pass (i.e. your license plate) to pay for the streets.

Actually, it is, as capitalism was based on coercion.

A license plate is not an annual pass.
 
Very mysterious, super duper. According to who what is your source are you talking about classical liberalism?
Classic liberalism IS liberalism. You bedwetters took it over with your lies and manipulation
JFK did? LOL. Classical liberalism appears to be another thing the GOP propaganda machine uses to confuse you poor suckers....
My fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.

-- John F. Kennedy

My fellow undocumented immigrants, ask not what you can do for America, ask what America can do for you.

-- Democrats in 2019

If JFK were alive today, he'd be thrown out of the Democratic Party.
94% of illegals work, they do not vote they do not get welfare the kids go to school that's it, super dupe. 65% pay taxes 35% own homes of the adult males.
You make many claims.

You offer no proof.

Run along.
I have proved it many times oh, but it is tough, the links Kum & go with journalism and normal newspapers, whereas your propaganda is never retracted, repeated endlessly etc etc. It was pew research in 2007. Let's see...
 
You are stating that backwards. Without Capitalism and the money it generates, there would be NO Socialism. Socialism just takes. Capitalism provides.

Actually, capitalism requires principles from socialism. Hence, legal systems to validate private property ownership, fiat currencies, etc.
 
Coercion and bureaucracy are never ever cost effective.

Imagine buying an annual pass (i.e. your license plate) to pay for the streets.

Actually, it is, as capitalism was based on coercion.

A license plate is not an annual pass.
Free market capitalism is entirely voluntary as a matte of course...The annual pass model was an example of something that would be voluntary...I can't believe I have to spell this shit out.
 
Free market capitalism is entirely voluntary as a matte of course...The annual pass model was an example of something that would be voluntary...I can't believe I have to spell this shit out.

Yes, but free market capitalism requires regulation via legal systems, fiat currencies, etc.

Also, a license plate is not an annual pass.
 
Free market capitalism is entirely voluntary as a matte of course...The annual pass model was an example of something that would be voluntary...I can't believe I have to spell this shit out.

Yes, but free market capitalism requires regulation via legal systems, fiat currencies, etc.
No it doesn't....Black markets are the best example.


Also, a license plate is not an annual pass.
It was an example, a model, not a reflection on how things presently are, ferchrissakes.
 
You are stating that backwards. Without Capitalism and the money it generates, there would be NO Socialism. Socialism just takes. Capitalism provides.

Actually, capitalism requires principles from socialism. Hence, legal systems to validate private property ownership, fiat currencies, etc.

None of those things are socialism.
 
None of those things are socialism.
Worthless fiat currencies are socialism...A state-enforced monopoly....And, despite wht the poster in question foolishly asserts, they are not necessary in a free market economic model.

I disagree. Yes, fiat money is controlled by the state, but it's not inherently socialistic. There’s an unfortunate tendency to conflate “socialist” with “state controlled”. The truth is that fiat currency has been used on and off throughout history by all sorts of governments to provide exchange media where nothing else was available, to finance government spending, or to assert control over the money supply.
 
I disagree. Yes, fiat money is controlled by the state, but it's not inherently socialistic. There’s an unfortunate tendency to conflate “socialist” with “state controlled”. The truth is that fiat currency has been used on and off throughout history by all sorts of governments to provide exchange media where nothing else was available, to finance government spending, or to assert control over the money supply.
Fiat currencies are all state-run and enforced monopolies....It doesn't get anymore socialistic than that.....So much so that it's plank 5 in Marx's Communist Manifesto.
 
I disagree. Yes, fiat money is controlled by the state, but it's not inherently socialistic. There’s an unfortunate tendency to conflate “socialist” with “state controlled”. The truth is that fiat currency has been used on and off throughout history by all sorts of governments to provide exchange media where nothing else was available, to finance government spending, or to assert control over the money supply.
Fiat currencies are all state-run and enforced monopolies....It doesn't get anymore socialistic than that.

then you don't understand what socialism is. Socialism is a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole. Just because the state controls something does not mean it's socialistic.
 
I disagree. Yes, fiat money is controlled by the state, but it's not inherently socialistic. There’s an unfortunate tendency to conflate “socialist” with “state controlled”. The truth is that fiat currency has been used on and off throughout history by all sorts of governments to provide exchange media where nothing else was available, to finance government spending, or to assert control over the money supply.
Fiat currencies are all state-run and enforced monopolies....It doesn't get anymore socialistic than that.

then you don't understand what socialism is. Socialism is a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole. Just because the state controls something does not mean it's socialistic.
I understand fully what socialism is, and a centrally controlled fiat currency with a central bank and legal tender statutes, are integral parts of it....In fact, a socialistic state couldn't operate without them.

The State has nationalized the means of exchange and exerts total monopoly over it...If that's not socialistic/communistic, what would be?
 
I disagree. Yes, fiat money is controlled by the state, but it's not inherently socialistic. There’s an unfortunate tendency to conflate “socialist” with “state controlled”. The truth is that fiat currency has been used on and off throughout history by all sorts of governments to provide exchange media where nothing else was available, to finance government spending, or to assert control over the money supply.
Fiat currencies are all state-run and enforced monopolies....It doesn't get anymore socialistic than that.

then you don't understand what socialism is. Socialism is a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole. Just because the state controls something does not mean it's socialistic.
I understand fully what socialism is, and a centrally controlled fiat currency with a central bank and legal tender statutes, are integral parts of it....In fact, a socialistic state couldn't operate without them.

The State has nationalized the means of exchange and exerts total monopoly over it...If that's not socialistic/communistic, what would be?

Good grief are you really so obtuse? Regulating money is a function of all governments, no matter the category. When KIngs issued currency with their names on it, did they become socialists? When the Mussolini in Italy issued money, did he stop being a Fascist and become a Socialist?
 
It's about time that cold war dinosaur America of the GOP realizes that the rest of the modern world defines socialism as fair well regulated always democratic capitalism with a good safety net..."we are all socialists now!"--prime minister of Finland when ObamaCare passed... NOT COMMUNISM!!!!!
 
It's about time that cold war dinosaur America of the GOP realizes that the rest of the modern world defines socialism as fair well regulated always democratic capitalism with a good safety net..."we are all socialists now!"--prime minister of Finland when ObamaCare passed... NOT COMMUNISM!!!!!

Why do they use the term socialism if they don't really mean socialism??? Seems like a pretty bad PR move.
 
It's about time that cold war dinosaur America of the GOP realizes that the rest of the modern world defines socialism as fair well regulated always democratic capitalism with a good safety net..."we are all socialists now!"--prime minister of Finland when ObamaCare passed... NOT COMMUNISM!!!!!

Why do they use the term socialism if they don't really mean socialism??? Seems like a pretty bad PR move.
Only anglo-americans conservatives enjoy confusing their dupes with Communism is socialism garbage at this point in the modern world. Everywhere else socialism is democratic socialism, which explains the difference between socialism and communism.
 
It's about time that cold war dinosaur America of the GOP realizes that the rest of the modern world defines socialism as fair well regulated always democratic capitalism with a good safety net..."we are all socialists now!"--prime minister of Finland when ObamaCare passed... NOT COMMUNISM!!!!!

Why do they use the term socialism if they don't really mean socialism??? Seems like a pretty bad PR move.
Only anglo-americans conservatives enjoy confusing their dupes with Communism is socialism garbage at this point in the modern world. Everywhere else socialism is democratic socialism, which explains the difference between socialism and communism.

Yeah. It's all pretty confusing. The dictionary still says socialism means state control over the means of production. You need to start a letter-writing campaign to Webster or something.
 

Forum List

Back
Top