The blueprint for prosperity

[Rogo]

What does that even mean? I'm sorry, but your responses are borderline incoherent.

I'll translate:

Commie commie commie.....commie.

You realize I'm a communist, right?

 

[danielpalos]

solving for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment in a market friendly manner benefits everyone, including our Posterity.

You're a goddamn commie. Die in a fire.

ad hominems are nothing but fallacy.

 

[danielpalos]

Government is socialism. The power to do any Thing, is socialism. Capitalism has to accomplish it, voluntarily.

What makes you think the government is socialism?

According to socialists like Karl Marx and Mikhail Bakunin, socialism is a classless and stateless society where the workers collectively run and own the means of production—meaning there is no government. Do you think they are wrong? If so, why?

The power to do any Thing, is socialism. Capitalism has to accomplish it, voluntarily.

That doesn't answer my question. I agree that socialism allows for free association, but I don't understand how the existence of a government permits such an association to exist—or is even necessary in order for socialism to exist.

Also, what do you mean when you say "Capitalism has to accomplish it, voluntarily"?

That is capitalism; voluntary social transactions that result in mutually beneficial trade.

Social-ism defines Government; we have a Constitution.

What does that even mean? I'm sorry, but your responses are borderline incoherent.

Social-ism defines Government; we have a Constitution.

 

[P@triot]

• Corporations were prohibited from making any political contributions, direct or indirect.13

Astounding stupidity....even by your standards. That doesn’t even remotely have anything to do with their business. It doesn’t dictate what they produce, how much they produce, how they produce it, who they must sell to, etc. It has absolutely nothing to do with their business. Epic fail.

 

[P@triot]

• Corporations were prohibited from making charitable or civic donations outside of their specific purposes.14

Astounding stupidity....even by your standards. That doesn’t even remotely have anything to do with their business. It doesn’t dictate what they produce, how much they produce, how they produce it, who they must sell to, etc. It has absolutely nothing to do with their business. Epic fail.

 

[P@triot]

Social-ism defines Government; we have a Constitution.

Socialism is an economic system. Government is a political system. You are a very special kind of stupid.

 

[xband]

Social-ism defines Government; we have a Constitution.

Socialism is an economic system. Government is a political system. You are a very special kind of stupid.

Socialism is a failed economic system just to put in my two cents worth.

 

[P@triot]

It is important to understand that tens of thousands of entrepreneurs did business in the early colonies and continue to do so today without being incorporated—the proverbial butcher, baker, and candlestick maker.

It is equally important to understand that you didn’t have a single bullet point that even remotely approached “socialism” or impacted how a business ran their business.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

• Corporations were prohibited from making charitable or civic donations outside of their specific purposes.14

Astounding stupidity....even by your standards. That doesn’t even remotely have anything to do with their business. It doesn’t dictate what they produce, how much they produce, how they produce it, who they must sell to, etc. It has absolutely nothing to do with their business. Epic fail.

No, you are astoundingly stupid, the regulations were actually much harsher for Corporations back in the day.

Actually it's not until AFTER FDR that we start to see a lot of looser regulations of the free market, AKA Laissez Faire Capitalism.

This is EXACTLY the opposite of what you've stated.

 

[P@triot]

That is capitalism; voluntary social transactions that result in mutually beneficial trade. Social-ism defines Government; we have a Constitution.

What does that even mean? I'm sorry, but your responses are borderline incoherent.

We have been dealing with that for months now, Rogo. DP thinks if he just throws a bunch of words together he can dupe people into thinking he knows what he is talking about. Clearly it is not working - but he is still too stupid to figure that out and abandon that very immature strategy.

 

[P@triot]

• Corporations were prohibited from making charitable or civic donations outside of their specific purposes.14

Astounding stupidity....even by your standards. That doesn’t even remotely have anything to do with their business. It doesn’t dictate what they produce, how much they produce, how they produce it, who they must sell to, etc. It has absolutely nothing to do with their business. Epic fail.

No, you are astoundingly stupid, the regulations were actually much harsher for Corporations back in the day.

Prove it, stupid. Don’t give us a comical “law” from Wisconsin stating they couldn’t donate to charity.

 

[Rogo]

Social-ism defines Government; we have a Constitution.

Socialism is an economic system. Government is a political system. You are a very special kind of stupid.

You can't really separate the economic from the political as they're interdependent. Also, if we're talking about socialism, socialism is an end to both the political and the economic as definable characteristics of society.

 

[P@triot]

You can't really separate the economic from the political

Um...yes...you can. That’s why they have separate classifications for them.

They are completely and totally independent of each other. It’s indisputable. If they weren’t, then every nation would have the same political and economic system.

 

[danielpalos]

Social-ism defines Government; we have a Constitution.

Socialism is an economic system. Government is a political system. You are a very special kind of stupid.

Social-ism is about Government. Government is established by our Constitutions.

The Power to do a Thing is Socialism.

Capitalism must be voluntary and includes no Government.

 

[danielpalos]

That is capitalism; voluntary social transactions that result in mutually beneficial trade. Social-ism defines Government; we have a Constitution.

What does that even mean? I'm sorry, but your responses are borderline incoherent.

We have been dealing with that for months now, Rogo. DP thinks if he just throws a bunch of words together he can dupe people into thinking he knows what he is talking about. Clearly it is not working - but he is still too stupid to figure that out and abandon that very immature strategy.

words matter, even in the vacuum of right wing special pleading.

 

[P@triot]

You realize I'm a communist, right?

You realize that is an awful indictment on you, right? Communism is responsible for the worst atrocities in the history of the world. It says a lot about you that you would devote yourself to something like that.

 

[P@triot]

words matter,

Yes they do. “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”. Words matter.

 

[danielpalos]

words matter,

Yes they do. “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”. Words matter.

Yes, especially when it is about the security of a free State and not the whole and entire concept of natural rights.

 

[P@triot]

Social-ism is about Government.

Socialism is an economic system, snowflake. Government is exclusively political.

(Words matter, stupid)

 

[Rogo]

You can't really separate the economic from the political

Um...yes...you can. That’s why they have separate classifications for them.

They are completely and totally independent of each other. It’s indisputable. If they weren’t, then every nation would have the same political and economic system.

Linguistic distinction is not the same as material distinction.

Also, I don't see how such a notion is "indisputable" considering even lesser political theorists like Milton Friedman agree that those two spheres of society are inseparable.

The last sentence of your statement is illogical. How is it that if the two were interdependent—which they are—every nation would have the same political and economic system?