Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Yes, you are a moron as this post has just made very clear. The Middle Class in the US is very large. Government policy helped in some cases but harmed in others. Like all extremists you ignore the bad to further your argument. You're just as bad as every con you rail against.
Got it, you'll stick with ad hominems versus addressing ANY points with fact based assertions. Shocking
You're the master of ad-homs nit wit. 90% of the BS you spew is ad-hom. Address real facts, use real history or simply shut the hell up. You're nothing more than a propagandist when you do that, and to be honest I rarely see you engage in anything more than bomb throwing. You ignore real facts, and real history all the time.
Got it, you'll bring your usual BS ad hominems. Shocking
Perhaps you MIGHT bring SOME facts sometimes Bubba? IF left up to conservatives, the US would look like any other 3rd world nation, you know the policies the US followed to create the worlds largest middle class WERE mainly progressive right?
Following conservative economic theory creates 3rd world nations, a few very wealthy and LOTS of poor working 60+ hour weeks!
Poverty is a normal condition of human beings, It's been a common characteristic ever since the emergence of civilizations, DEMOCRAT PROGRESSIVE capitalism allows for creation of the vast majority of the middle class, with most of that thanks to PROGRESSIVE GOV'T POLICY!
View attachment 39268
Socialism brings mass murder and serfdom. Progressives were falling all over themselves to show how much they loved Fascism. We get it. You love fascism too. Fortunately most of the people here are smarter than you and have rejected that particular type of government.
And progressives loved the bolsheviks too! It was OK for them to murder a few hundred thousand because they were doing the work that needed to be done!
You're nothing but another in a long line of assholes who wish to rule the world by killing all of those who disagree with you.
"Progressives generally greeted the 1917 Bolshevik revolution in Russia with great enthusiasm, embracing it as a worthy effort to create a socialist utopia. In the 1920s and 1930s, a host of credulous progressive journalists traveled to Russia to chronicle the the revolution's afterglow, so as to inform Americans about the historic significance of what was transpiring there. According to author Jonah Goldberg: “Most liberals saw the Bolsheviks as a popular and progressive movement.... Nearly the entire liberal elite, including much of FDR's Brain Trust, made the pilgrimage to Moscow to take admiring notes on the Soviet experiment.”
- H. G. Wells, one of the most influential progressives of the 20th century, said in 1932 that progressives must become “liberal fascists” and “enlightened Nazis.” Regarding totalitarianism, he stated: “I have never been able to escape altogether from its relentless logic.” Calling for a “‘Phoenix Rebirth’ of Liberalism” under the umbrella of “Liberal Fascism,” Wells said: “I am asking for a Liberal Fascisti, for enlightened Nazis.”
- The poet Wallace Stevens pronounced himself “pro-Mussolini personally.”
- The eminent historian Charles Beard wrote of Mussolini’s efforts: “Beyond question, an amazing experiment is being made [in Italy], an experiment in reconciling individualism and socialism.”
- Muckraking journalists almost universally admired Mussolini. Lincoln Steffens, for one, said that Italian fascism made Western democracy, by comparison, look like a system run by “petty persons with petty purposes.” Mussolini, Steffens proclaimed reverently, had been “formed” by God “out of the rib of Italy.”
- McClure’s Magazine founder Samuel McClure, an important figure in the muckraking movement, described Italian fascism as “a great step forward and the first new ideal in government since the founding of the American Republic.”
- After having vistited Italy and interviewed Mussolini in 1926, the American humorist Will Rogers, who was informally dubbed “Ambassador-at-Large of the United States” by the National Press Club, said of the fascist dictator: “I’m pretty high on that bird.” “Dictator form of government is the greatest form of government,” Rogers wrote, “that is, if you have the right dictator.”
- Reporter Ida Tarbell was deeply impressed by Mussolini's attitudes regarding labor, affectionately dubbing him “a despot with a dimple.”
- NAACP co-founder W. E. B. DuBois saw National Socialism as a worthy model for economic organization. The establishment of the Nazi dictatorship in Germany, he wrote, had been “absolutely necessary to get the state in order.” In 1937 DuBois stated: “there is today, in some respects, more democracy in Germany than there has been in years past.”
- FDR adviser Rexford Guy Tugwell said of Italian fascism: “It's the cleanest, neatest, most efficiently operating piece of social machinery I've ever seen. It makes me envious.”
- New Republic editor George Soule, who avidly supported FDR, noted approvingly that the Roosevelt administration was “trying out the economics of fascism.”
- Playwright George Bernard Shaw hailed Stalin, Hitler, and Mussolini as the world’s great “progressive” leaders because they “did things,” unlike the leaders of those “putrefying corpses” called parliamentary democracies.
One key contributor to this pro-Bolshevik genre was the communist journalist John Reed, author of Ten Days that Shook the World. Reed dismissed concerns about the Red Terror and the mass murder of non-Bolshevists by praising the killers of “this treacherous gang.” Said Reed: “To the wall with them! I say I have learned one mighty expressive word: ‘raztrellyat’ [sic] (execute by shooting).”
"Similarly, the intellectual E.A. Ross excused the Bolsheviks' violent campaign of terror on the theory that they did not kill all that many people. (Estimates of the number of deaths by execution range from 50,000 to 200,000.)"
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/viewSubCategory.asp?id=1222
Got it, without false premises, distortions and lies, what would the right EVER have Bubba?
Conservative Ideology requires either ignorance, stupidity, denial or
psychopathology….& maybe all of the above
Okay, let's use the word "socialism," which is somewhat ambiguous.
But we can keep it simple.
Socialism - We're all in this boat together, we should help each other.
Conservatism - Every man for himself!
Got it, you'll stick with ad hominems versus addressing ANY points with fact based assertions. Shocking
You're the master of ad-homs nit wit. 90% of the BS you spew is ad-hom. Address real facts, use real history or simply shut the hell up. You're nothing more than a propagandist when you do that, and to be honest I rarely see you engage in anything more than bomb throwing. You ignore real facts, and real history all the time.
Got it, you'll bring your usual BS ad hominems. Shocking
Perhaps you MIGHT bring SOME facts sometimes Bubba? IF left up to conservatives, the US would look like any other 3rd world nation, you know the policies the US followed to create the worlds largest middle class WERE mainly progressive right?
Following conservative economic theory creates 3rd world nations, a few very wealthy and LOTS of poor working 60+ hour weeks!
Poverty is a normal condition of human beings, It's been a common characteristic ever since the emergence of civilizations, DEMOCRAT PROGRESSIVE capitalism allows for creation of the vast majority of the middle class, with most of that thanks to PROGRESSIVE GOV'T POLICY!
View attachment 39268
Socialism brings mass murder and serfdom. Progressives were falling all over themselves to show how much they loved Fascism. We get it. You love fascism too. Fortunately most of the people here are smarter than you and have rejected that particular type of government.
And progressives loved the bolsheviks too! It was OK for them to murder a few hundred thousand because they were doing the work that needed to be done!
You're nothing but another in a long line of assholes who wish to rule the world by killing all of those who disagree with you.
"Progressives generally greeted the 1917 Bolshevik revolution in Russia with great enthusiasm, embracing it as a worthy effort to create a socialist utopia. In the 1920s and 1930s, a host of credulous progressive journalists traveled to Russia to chronicle the the revolution's afterglow, so as to inform Americans about the historic significance of what was transpiring there. According to author Jonah Goldberg: “Most liberals saw the Bolsheviks as a popular and progressive movement.... Nearly the entire liberal elite, including much of FDR's Brain Trust, made the pilgrimage to Moscow to take admiring notes on the Soviet experiment.”
- H. G. Wells, one of the most influential progressives of the 20th century, said in 1932 that progressives must become “liberal fascists” and “enlightened Nazis.” Regarding totalitarianism, he stated: “I have never been able to escape altogether from its relentless logic.” Calling for a “‘Phoenix Rebirth’ of Liberalism” under the umbrella of “Liberal Fascism,” Wells said: “I am asking for a Liberal Fascisti, for enlightened Nazis.”
- The poet Wallace Stevens pronounced himself “pro-Mussolini personally.”
- The eminent historian Charles Beard wrote of Mussolini’s efforts: “Beyond question, an amazing experiment is being made [in Italy], an experiment in reconciling individualism and socialism.”
- Muckraking journalists almost universally admired Mussolini. Lincoln Steffens, for one, said that Italian fascism made Western democracy, by comparison, look like a system run by “petty persons with petty purposes.” Mussolini, Steffens proclaimed reverently, had been “formed” by God “out of the rib of Italy.”
- McClure’s Magazine founder Samuel McClure, an important figure in the muckraking movement, described Italian fascism as “a great step forward and the first new ideal in government since the founding of the American Republic.”
- After having vistited Italy and interviewed Mussolini in 1926, the American humorist Will Rogers, who was informally dubbed “Ambassador-at-Large of the United States” by the National Press Club, said of the fascist dictator: “I’m pretty high on that bird.” “Dictator form of government is the greatest form of government,” Rogers wrote, “that is, if you have the right dictator.”
- Reporter Ida Tarbell was deeply impressed by Mussolini's attitudes regarding labor, affectionately dubbing him “a despot with a dimple.”
- NAACP co-founder W. E. B. DuBois saw National Socialism as a worthy model for economic organization. The establishment of the Nazi dictatorship in Germany, he wrote, had been “absolutely necessary to get the state in order.” In 1937 DuBois stated: “there is today, in some respects, more democracy in Germany than there has been in years past.”
- FDR adviser Rexford Guy Tugwell said of Italian fascism: “It's the cleanest, neatest, most efficiently operating piece of social machinery I've ever seen. It makes me envious.”
- New Republic editor George Soule, who avidly supported FDR, noted approvingly that the Roosevelt administration was “trying out the economics of fascism.”
- Playwright George Bernard Shaw hailed Stalin, Hitler, and Mussolini as the world’s great “progressive” leaders because they “did things,” unlike the leaders of those “putrefying corpses” called parliamentary democracies.
One key contributor to this pro-Bolshevik genre was the communist journalist John Reed, author of Ten Days that Shook the World. Reed dismissed concerns about the Red Terror and the mass murder of non-Bolshevists by praising the killers of “this treacherous gang.” Said Reed: “To the wall with them! I say I have learned one mighty expressive word: ‘raztrellyat’ [sic] (execute by shooting).”
"Similarly, the intellectual E.A. Ross excused the Bolsheviks' violent campaign of terror on the theory that they did not kill all that many people. (Estimates of the number of deaths by execution range from 50,000 to 200,000.)"
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/viewSubCategory.asp?id=1222
Got it, without false premises, distortions and lies, what would the right EVER have Bubba?
Conservative Ideology requires either ignorance, stupidity, denial or
psychopathology….& maybe all of the above
Okay, let's use the word "socialism," which is somewhat ambiguous.
But we can keep it simple.
Socialism - We're all in this boat together, we should help each other.
Conservatism - Every man for himself!
You are hilariously one dimensional. I prefer these statements about socialism...
You're the master of ad-homs nit wit. 90% of the BS you spew is ad-hom. Address real facts, use real history or simply shut the hell up. You're nothing more than a propagandist when you do that, and to be honest I rarely see you engage in anything more than bomb throwing. You ignore real facts, and real history all the time.
Got it, you'll bring your usual BS ad hominems. Shocking
Perhaps you MIGHT bring SOME facts sometimes Bubba? IF left up to conservatives, the US would look like any other 3rd world nation, you know the policies the US followed to create the worlds largest middle class WERE mainly progressive right?
Following conservative economic theory creates 3rd world nations, a few very wealthy and LOTS of poor working 60+ hour weeks!
Poverty is a normal condition of human beings, It's been a common characteristic ever since the emergence of civilizations, DEMOCRAT PROGRESSIVE capitalism allows for creation of the vast majority of the middle class, with most of that thanks to PROGRESSIVE GOV'T POLICY!
View attachment 39268
Socialism brings mass murder and serfdom. Progressives were falling all over themselves to show how much they loved Fascism. We get it. You love fascism too. Fortunately most of the people here are smarter than you and have rejected that particular type of government.
And progressives loved the bolsheviks too! It was OK for them to murder a few hundred thousand because they were doing the work that needed to be done!
You're nothing but another in a long line of assholes who wish to rule the world by killing all of those who disagree with you.
"Progressives generally greeted the 1917 Bolshevik revolution in Russia with great enthusiasm, embracing it as a worthy effort to create a socialist utopia. In the 1920s and 1930s, a host of credulous progressive journalists traveled to Russia to chronicle the the revolution's afterglow, so as to inform Americans about the historic significance of what was transpiring there. According to author Jonah Goldberg: “Most liberals saw the Bolsheviks as a popular and progressive movement.... Nearly the entire liberal elite, including much of FDR's Brain Trust, made the pilgrimage to Moscow to take admiring notes on the Soviet experiment.”
- H. G. Wells, one of the most influential progressives of the 20th century, said in 1932 that progressives must become “liberal fascists” and “enlightened Nazis.” Regarding totalitarianism, he stated: “I have never been able to escape altogether from its relentless logic.” Calling for a “‘Phoenix Rebirth’ of Liberalism” under the umbrella of “Liberal Fascism,” Wells said: “I am asking for a Liberal Fascisti, for enlightened Nazis.”
- The poet Wallace Stevens pronounced himself “pro-Mussolini personally.”
- The eminent historian Charles Beard wrote of Mussolini’s efforts: “Beyond question, an amazing experiment is being made [in Italy], an experiment in reconciling individualism and socialism.”
- Muckraking journalists almost universally admired Mussolini. Lincoln Steffens, for one, said that Italian fascism made Western democracy, by comparison, look like a system run by “petty persons with petty purposes.” Mussolini, Steffens proclaimed reverently, had been “formed” by God “out of the rib of Italy.”
- McClure’s Magazine founder Samuel McClure, an important figure in the muckraking movement, described Italian fascism as “a great step forward and the first new ideal in government since the founding of the American Republic.”
- After having vistited Italy and interviewed Mussolini in 1926, the American humorist Will Rogers, who was informally dubbed “Ambassador-at-Large of the United States” by the National Press Club, said of the fascist dictator: “I’m pretty high on that bird.” “Dictator form of government is the greatest form of government,” Rogers wrote, “that is, if you have the right dictator.”
- Reporter Ida Tarbell was deeply impressed by Mussolini's attitudes regarding labor, affectionately dubbing him “a despot with a dimple.”
- NAACP co-founder W. E. B. DuBois saw National Socialism as a worthy model for economic organization. The establishment of the Nazi dictatorship in Germany, he wrote, had been “absolutely necessary to get the state in order.” In 1937 DuBois stated: “there is today, in some respects, more democracy in Germany than there has been in years past.”
- FDR adviser Rexford Guy Tugwell said of Italian fascism: “It's the cleanest, neatest, most efficiently operating piece of social machinery I've ever seen. It makes me envious.”
- New Republic editor George Soule, who avidly supported FDR, noted approvingly that the Roosevelt administration was “trying out the economics of fascism.”
- Playwright George Bernard Shaw hailed Stalin, Hitler, and Mussolini as the world’s great “progressive” leaders because they “did things,” unlike the leaders of those “putrefying corpses” called parliamentary democracies.
One key contributor to this pro-Bolshevik genre was the communist journalist John Reed, author of Ten Days that Shook the World. Reed dismissed concerns about the Red Terror and the mass murder of non-Bolshevists by praising the killers of “this treacherous gang.” Said Reed: “To the wall with them! I say I have learned one mighty expressive word: ‘raztrellyat’ [sic] (execute by shooting).”
"Similarly, the intellectual E.A. Ross excused the Bolsheviks' violent campaign of terror on the theory that they did not kill all that many people. (Estimates of the number of deaths by execution range from 50,000 to 200,000.)"
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/viewSubCategory.asp?id=1222
Got it, without false premises, distortions and lies, what would the right EVER have Bubba?
Conservative Ideology requires either ignorance, stupidity, denial or
psychopathology….& maybe all of the above
Okay, let's use the word "socialism," which is somewhat ambiguous.
But we can keep it simple.
Socialism - We're all in this boat together, we should help each other.
Conservatism - Every man for himself!
You are hilariously one dimensional. I prefer these statements about socialism...
THIS guy said all that????
Winston Churchill was a Bolshevik
Long before many of today’s frothing right-wing demagogues were born, American conservatives came to idolize Winston Churchill, the late Tory prime minister whose wartime leadership of the British people transformed into the living symbol of democracy armed. That reputation was cemented by his legendary Missouri speech in 1946 warning of the “Iron Curtain” drawn by the Soviet Communists across Eastern Europe. Indeed, journalists and bloggers on the right admire the old warhorse so much that he has even outpolled Ronald Reagan as their “Man of the Century.”
Yet by the standards of the present moment, as these same conservatives mobilize against health care reform to “stop socialism,” that same great man was actually a raving Bolshevik. For among his most enduring legacies was the founding and sustenance of the system that became the National Health Service. Arguably as much as any other British politician, it was Churchill who established “socialized medicine.”
Winston Churchill was a Bolshevik - Salon.com
"Our policy is to create a national health service in order to ensure that everybody in the country, irrespective of means, age, sex, or occupation, shall have equal opportunities to benefit from the best and most up-to-date medical and allied services available.”
Winston Churchill, Bolshevik
Yeah, sure he was. Get a clue dude.
Obama doesn't want to let millions more illegals come here?
Obama didn't sign an executive amnesty? LOL!
Maybe Obamacare can help you with that brain damage?
Like I said, without false premises, distortions and lies, what would right wingers EVER have?
"Obama doesn't want to let millions more illegals come here?"
There is the LIE
"Obama didn't sign an executive amnesty? "
Thee is the distortion
What else do you morons have Bubba?
Obama is doing nothing to prevent millions of illegals from coming here and reducing wages for Americans.
He hates poor Americans and if you support him, you do too.
Oh yes, another meme from the right, and a half-truth at that. Who hires the "millions of illegals"? Obama, the Federal Government? No, not them, it's small businesses, individually owned businesses and some industries. Most likely those who vote for Republicans, since it's all about profit and not ever about, "Country First!".
No, not them, it's small businesses, individually owned businesses and some industries. Most likely those who vote for Republicans, since it's all about profit and not ever about, "Country First!".
That's good to know. So Obama could stick it to Republican business owners while raising the wages of low-skilled Americans, just by sealing the border and kicking out the illegals.
After more than 6 years, he has failed to do that.
Is it because he's stupid, or does he just hate poor Americans?
Obama doesn't want to let millions more illegals come here?
Obama didn't sign an executive amnesty? LOL!
Maybe Obamacare can help you with that brain damage?
Like I said, without false premises, distortions and lies, what would right wingers EVER have?
"Obama doesn't want to let millions more illegals come here?"
There is the LIE
"Obama didn't sign an executive amnesty? "
Thee is the distortion
What else do you morons have Bubba?
Obama is doing nothing to prevent millions of illegals from coming here and reducing wages for Americans.
He hates poor Americans and if you support him, you do too.
Oh yes, another meme from the right, and a half-truth at that. Who hires the "millions of illegals"? Obama, the Federal Government? No, not them, it's small businesses, individually owned businesses and some industries. Most likely those who vote for Republicans, since it's all about profit and not ever about, "Country First!".
No, not them, it's small businesses, individually owned businesses and some industries. Most likely those who vote for Republicans, since it's all about profit and not ever about, "Country First!".
That's good to know. So Obama could stick it to Republican business owners while raising the wages of low-skilled Americans, just by sealing the border and kicking out the illegals.
After more than 6 years, he has failed to do that.
Is it because he's stupid, or does he just hate poor Americans?
Nice effort, inaccurate and deceitful; sadly for you, your spin won't turn. Our nation is a nation of laws. That means, to kick "out illegals" would require they be found and detained, something state governments and local governments can't afford, and the Congress wouldn't fund.
Even if this could be accomplished, the defendants (D.) have the right of due process, which requires an administrative law judge, and many would need to be appointed and paid; the D. would also need council and if they could not afford an attorney, one would be appointed (and paid by the taxpayer) to represent them; then we would need as many US Attorneys as there are AL Judges, also paid by the taxpayer, and space purchased by the taxpayer in local jails, prisons or camps for detention. Detained persons need medical attention, food, clothing and a myriad of other needs and services.
What say you Mr. Taxpayer, are you willing to pay a surtax for the years it would take to accomplish this tax, or is it easier and cheaper to attack Obama as stupid for not doing what you want.
Obama doesn't want to let millions more illegals come here?
Obama didn't sign an executive amnesty? LOL!
Maybe Obamacare can help you with that brain damage?
Like I said, without false premises, distortions and lies, what would right wingers EVER have?
"Obama doesn't want to let millions more illegals come here?"
There is the LIE
"Obama didn't sign an executive amnesty? "
Thee is the distortion
What else do you morons have Bubba?
Obama is doing nothing to prevent millions of illegals from coming here and reducing wages for Americans.
He hates poor Americans and if you support him, you do too.
Oh yes, another meme from the right, and a half-truth at that. Who hires the "millions of illegals"? Obama, the Federal Government? No, not them, it's small businesses, individually owned businesses and some industries. Most likely those who vote for Republicans, since it's all about profit and not ever about, "Country First!".
No, not them, it's small businesses, individually owned businesses and some industries. Most likely those who vote for Republicans, since it's all about profit and not ever about, "Country First!".
That's good to know. So Obama could stick it to Republican business owners while raising the wages of low-skilled Americans, just by sealing the border and kicking out the illegals.
After more than 6 years, he has failed to do that.
Is it because he's stupid, or does he just hate poor Americans?
Nice effort, inaccurate and deceitful; sadly for you, your spin won't turn. Our nation is a nation of laws. That means, to kick "out illegals" would require they be found and detained, something state governments and local governments can't afford, and the Congress wouldn't fund.
Even if this could be accomplished, the defendants (D.) have the right of due process, which requires an administrative law judge, and many would need to be appointed and paid; the D. would also need council and if they could not afford an attorney, one would be appointed (and paid by the taxpayer) to represent them; then we would need as many US Attorneys as there are AL Judges, also paid by the taxpayer, and space purchased by the taxpayer in local jails, prisons or camps for detention. Detained persons need medical attention, food, clothing and a myriad of other needs and services.
What say you Mr. Taxpayer, are you willing to pay a surtax for the years it would take to accomplish this tax, or is it easier and cheaper to attack Obama as stupid for not doing what you want.
Like I said, without false premises, distortions and lies, what would right wingers EVER have?
"Obama doesn't want to let millions more illegals come here?"
There is the LIE
"Obama didn't sign an executive amnesty? "
Thee is the distortion
What else do you morons have Bubba?
Obama is doing nothing to prevent millions of illegals from coming here and reducing wages for Americans.
He hates poor Americans and if you support him, you do too.
Oh yes, another meme from the right, and a half-truth at that. Who hires the "millions of illegals"? Obama, the Federal Government? No, not them, it's small businesses, individually owned businesses and some industries. Most likely those who vote for Republicans, since it's all about profit and not ever about, "Country First!".
No, not them, it's small businesses, individually owned businesses and some industries. Most likely those who vote for Republicans, since it's all about profit and not ever about, "Country First!".
That's good to know. So Obama could stick it to Republican business owners while raising the wages of low-skilled Americans, just by sealing the border and kicking out the illegals.
After more than 6 years, he has failed to do that.
Is it because he's stupid, or does he just hate poor Americans?
Nice effort, inaccurate and deceitful; sadly for you, your spin won't turn. Our nation is a nation of laws. That means, to kick "out illegals" would require they be found and detained, something state governments and local governments can't afford, and the Congress wouldn't fund.
Even if this could be accomplished, the defendants (D.) have the right of due process, which requires an administrative law judge, and many would need to be appointed and paid; the D. would also need council and if they could not afford an attorney, one would be appointed (and paid by the taxpayer) to represent them; then we would need as many US Attorneys as there are AL Judges, also paid by the taxpayer, and space purchased by the taxpayer in local jails, prisons or camps for detention. Detained persons need medical attention, food, clothing and a myriad of other needs and services.
What say you Mr. Taxpayer, are you willing to pay a surtax for the years it would take to accomplish this tax, or is it easier and cheaper to attack Obama as stupid for not doing what you want.
Bullshit. This country can afford to find them and kick them out. It would save billions in the process. You're either ignorant of the facts or a liar. Based on your prior history I'll go with the latter.
Got it, you'll bring your usual BS ad hominems. Shocking
Perhaps you MIGHT bring SOME facts sometimes Bubba? IF left up to conservatives, the US would look like any other 3rd world nation, you know the policies the US followed to create the worlds largest middle class WERE mainly progressive right?
Following conservative economic theory creates 3rd world nations, a few very wealthy and LOTS of poor working 60+ hour weeks!
Poverty is a normal condition of human beings, It's been a common characteristic ever since the emergence of civilizations, DEMOCRAT PROGRESSIVE capitalism allows for creation of the vast majority of the middle class, with most of that thanks to PROGRESSIVE GOV'T POLICY!
View attachment 39268
Socialism brings mass murder and serfdom. Progressives were falling all over themselves to show how much they loved Fascism. We get it. You love fascism too. Fortunately most of the people here are smarter than you and have rejected that particular type of government.
And progressives loved the bolsheviks too! It was OK for them to murder a few hundred thousand because they were doing the work that needed to be done!
You're nothing but another in a long line of assholes who wish to rule the world by killing all of those who disagree with you.
"Progressives generally greeted the 1917 Bolshevik revolution in Russia with great enthusiasm, embracing it as a worthy effort to create a socialist utopia. In the 1920s and 1930s, a host of credulous progressive journalists traveled to Russia to chronicle the the revolution's afterglow, so as to inform Americans about the historic significance of what was transpiring there. According to author Jonah Goldberg: “Most liberals saw the Bolsheviks as a popular and progressive movement.... Nearly the entire liberal elite, including much of FDR's Brain Trust, made the pilgrimage to Moscow to take admiring notes on the Soviet experiment.”
- H. G. Wells, one of the most influential progressives of the 20th century, said in 1932 that progressives must become “liberal fascists” and “enlightened Nazis.” Regarding totalitarianism, he stated: “I have never been able to escape altogether from its relentless logic.” Calling for a “‘Phoenix Rebirth’ of Liberalism” under the umbrella of “Liberal Fascism,” Wells said: “I am asking for a Liberal Fascisti, for enlightened Nazis.”
- The poet Wallace Stevens pronounced himself “pro-Mussolini personally.”
- The eminent historian Charles Beard wrote of Mussolini’s efforts: “Beyond question, an amazing experiment is being made [in Italy], an experiment in reconciling individualism and socialism.”
- Muckraking journalists almost universally admired Mussolini. Lincoln Steffens, for one, said that Italian fascism made Western democracy, by comparison, look like a system run by “petty persons with petty purposes.” Mussolini, Steffens proclaimed reverently, had been “formed” by God “out of the rib of Italy.”
- McClure’s Magazine founder Samuel McClure, an important figure in the muckraking movement, described Italian fascism as “a great step forward and the first new ideal in government since the founding of the American Republic.”
- After having vistited Italy and interviewed Mussolini in 1926, the American humorist Will Rogers, who was informally dubbed “Ambassador-at-Large of the United States” by the National Press Club, said of the fascist dictator: “I’m pretty high on that bird.” “Dictator form of government is the greatest form of government,” Rogers wrote, “that is, if you have the right dictator.”
- Reporter Ida Tarbell was deeply impressed by Mussolini's attitudes regarding labor, affectionately dubbing him “a despot with a dimple.”
- NAACP co-founder W. E. B. DuBois saw National Socialism as a worthy model for economic organization. The establishment of the Nazi dictatorship in Germany, he wrote, had been “absolutely necessary to get the state in order.” In 1937 DuBois stated: “there is today, in some respects, more democracy in Germany than there has been in years past.”
- FDR adviser Rexford Guy Tugwell said of Italian fascism: “It's the cleanest, neatest, most efficiently operating piece of social machinery I've ever seen. It makes me envious.”
- New Republic editor George Soule, who avidly supported FDR, noted approvingly that the Roosevelt administration was “trying out the economics of fascism.”
- Playwright George Bernard Shaw hailed Stalin, Hitler, and Mussolini as the world’s great “progressive” leaders because they “did things,” unlike the leaders of those “putrefying corpses” called parliamentary democracies.
One key contributor to this pro-Bolshevik genre was the communist journalist John Reed, author of Ten Days that Shook the World. Reed dismissed concerns about the Red Terror and the mass murder of non-Bolshevists by praising the killers of “this treacherous gang.” Said Reed: “To the wall with them! I say I have learned one mighty expressive word: ‘raztrellyat’ [sic] (execute by shooting).”
"Similarly, the intellectual E.A. Ross excused the Bolsheviks' violent campaign of terror on the theory that they did not kill all that many people. (Estimates of the number of deaths by execution range from 50,000 to 200,000.)"
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/viewSubCategory.asp?id=1222
Got it, without false premises, distortions and lies, what would the right EVER have Bubba?
Conservative Ideology requires either ignorance, stupidity, denial or
psychopathology….& maybe all of the above
Okay, let's use the word "socialism," which is somewhat ambiguous.
But we can keep it simple.
Socialism - We're all in this boat together, we should help each other.
Conservatism - Every man for himself!
You are hilariously one dimensional. I prefer these statements about socialism...
THIS guy said all that????
Winston Churchill was a Bolshevik
Long before many of today’s frothing right-wing demagogues were born, American conservatives came to idolize Winston Churchill, the late Tory prime minister whose wartime leadership of the British people transformed into the living symbol of democracy armed. That reputation was cemented by his legendary Missouri speech in 1946 warning of the “Iron Curtain” drawn by the Soviet Communists across Eastern Europe. Indeed, journalists and bloggers on the right admire the old warhorse so much that he has even outpolled Ronald Reagan as their “Man of the Century.”
Yet by the standards of the present moment, as these same conservatives mobilize against health care reform to “stop socialism,” that same great man was actually a raving Bolshevik. For among his most enduring legacies was the founding and sustenance of the system that became the National Health Service. Arguably as much as any other British politician, it was Churchill who established “socialized medicine.”
Winston Churchill was a Bolshevik - Salon.com
"Our policy is to create a national health service in order to ensure that everybody in the country, irrespective of means, age, sex, or occupation, shall have equal opportunities to benefit from the best and most up-to-date medical and allied services available.”
Winston Churchill, Bolshevik
Like I said, without false premises, distortions and lies, what would right wingers EVER have?
"Obama doesn't want to let millions more illegals come here?"
There is the LIE
"Obama didn't sign an executive amnesty? "
Thee is the distortion
What else do you morons have Bubba?
Obama is doing nothing to prevent millions of illegals from coming here and reducing wages for Americans.
He hates poor Americans and if you support him, you do too.
Oh yes, another meme from the right, and a half-truth at that. Who hires the "millions of illegals"? Obama, the Federal Government? No, not them, it's small businesses, individually owned businesses and some industries. Most likely those who vote for Republicans, since it's all about profit and not ever about, "Country First!".
No, not them, it's small businesses, individually owned businesses and some industries. Most likely those who vote for Republicans, since it's all about profit and not ever about, "Country First!".
That's good to know. So Obama could stick it to Republican business owners while raising the wages of low-skilled Americans, just by sealing the border and kicking out the illegals.
After more than 6 years, he has failed to do that.
Is it because he's stupid, or does he just hate poor Americans?
Nice effort, inaccurate and deceitful; sadly for you, your spin won't turn. Our nation is a nation of laws. That means, to kick "out illegals" would require they be found and detained, something state governments and local governments can't afford, and the Congress wouldn't fund.
Even if this could be accomplished, the defendants (D.) have the right of due process, which requires an administrative law judge, and many would need to be appointed and paid; the D. would also need council and if they could not afford an attorney, one would be appointed (and paid by the taxpayer) to represent them; then we would need as many US Attorneys as there are AL Judges, also paid by the taxpayer, and space purchased by the taxpayer in local jails, prisons or camps for detention. Detained persons need medical attention, food, clothing and a myriad of other needs and services.
What say you Mr. Taxpayer, are you willing to pay a surtax for the years it would take to accomplish this tax, or is it easier and cheaper to attack Obama as stupid for not doing what you want.
Or, we could kick them out faster and cheaper.
Like I said, without false premises, distortions and lies, what would right wingers EVER have?
"Obama doesn't want to let millions more illegals come here?"
There is the LIE
"Obama didn't sign an executive amnesty? "
Thee is the distortion
What else do you morons have Bubba?
Obama is doing nothing to prevent millions of illegals from coming here and reducing wages for Americans.
He hates poor Americans and if you support him, you do too.
Oh yes, another meme from the right, and a half-truth at that. Who hires the "millions of illegals"? Obama, the Federal Government? No, not them, it's small businesses, individually owned businesses and some industries. Most likely those who vote for Republicans, since it's all about profit and not ever about, "Country First!".
No, not them, it's small businesses, individually owned businesses and some industries. Most likely those who vote for Republicans, since it's all about profit and not ever about, "Country First!".
That's good to know. So Obama could stick it to Republican business owners while raising the wages of low-skilled Americans, just by sealing the border and kicking out the illegals.
After more than 6 years, he has failed to do that.
Is it because he's stupid, or does he just hate poor Americans?
Nice effort, inaccurate and deceitful; sadly for you, your spin won't turn. Our nation is a nation of laws. That means, to kick "out illegals" would require they be found and detained, something state governments and local governments can't afford, and the Congress wouldn't fund.
Even if this could be accomplished, the defendants (D.) have the right of due process, which requires an administrative law judge, and many would need to be appointed and paid; the D. would also need council and if they could not afford an attorney, one would be appointed (and paid by the taxpayer) to represent them; then we would need as many US Attorneys as there are AL Judges, also paid by the taxpayer, and space purchased by the taxpayer in local jails, prisons or camps for detention. Detained persons need medical attention, food, clothing and a myriad of other needs and services.
What say you Mr. Taxpayer, are you willing to pay a surtax for the years it would take to accomplish this tax, or is it easier and cheaper to attack Obama as stupid for not doing what you want.
Or, we could kick them out faster and cheaper.
Obama is doing nothing to prevent millions of illegals from coming here and reducing wages for Americans.
He hates poor Americans and if you support him, you do too.
Oh yes, another meme from the right, and a half-truth at that. Who hires the "millions of illegals"? Obama, the Federal Government? No, not them, it's small businesses, individually owned businesses and some industries. Most likely those who vote for Republicans, since it's all about profit and not ever about, "Country First!".
No, not them, it's small businesses, individually owned businesses and some industries. Most likely those who vote for Republicans, since it's all about profit and not ever about, "Country First!".
That's good to know. So Obama could stick it to Republican business owners while raising the wages of low-skilled Americans, just by sealing the border and kicking out the illegals.
After more than 6 years, he has failed to do that.
Is it because he's stupid, or does he just hate poor Americans?
Nice effort, inaccurate and deceitful; sadly for you, your spin won't turn. Our nation is a nation of laws. That means, to kick "out illegals" would require they be found and detained, something state governments and local governments can't afford, and the Congress wouldn't fund.
Even if this could be accomplished, the defendants (D.) have the right of due process, which requires an administrative law judge, and many would need to be appointed and paid; the D. would also need council and if they could not afford an attorney, one would be appointed (and paid by the taxpayer) to represent them; then we would need as many US Attorneys as there are AL Judges, also paid by the taxpayer, and space purchased by the taxpayer in local jails, prisons or camps for detention. Detained persons need medical attention, food, clothing and a myriad of other needs and services.
What say you Mr. Taxpayer, are you willing to pay a surtax for the years it would take to accomplish this tax, or is it easier and cheaper to attack Obama as stupid for not doing what you want.
Or, we could kick them out faster and cheaper.
Weird how the GOP Congress, who had control most of the past 20+ years, hasn't figured out how to do it right? lol
Obama is doing nothing to prevent millions of illegals from coming here and reducing wages for Americans.
He hates poor Americans and if you support him, you do too.
Oh yes, another meme from the right, and a half-truth at that. Who hires the "millions of illegals"? Obama, the Federal Government? No, not them, it's small businesses, individually owned businesses and some industries. Most likely those who vote for Republicans, since it's all about profit and not ever about, "Country First!".
No, not them, it's small businesses, individually owned businesses and some industries. Most likely those who vote for Republicans, since it's all about profit and not ever about, "Country First!".
That's good to know. So Obama could stick it to Republican business owners while raising the wages of low-skilled Americans, just by sealing the border and kicking out the illegals.
After more than 6 years, he has failed to do that.
Is it because he's stupid, or does he just hate poor Americans?
Nice effort, inaccurate and deceitful; sadly for you, your spin won't turn. Our nation is a nation of laws. That means, to kick "out illegals" would require they be found and detained, something state governments and local governments can't afford, and the Congress wouldn't fund.
Even if this could be accomplished, the defendants (D.) have the right of due process, which requires an administrative law judge, and many would need to be appointed and paid; the D. would also need council and if they could not afford an attorney, one would be appointed (and paid by the taxpayer) to represent them; then we would need as many US Attorneys as there are AL Judges, also paid by the taxpayer, and space purchased by the taxpayer in local jails, prisons or camps for detention. Detained persons need medical attention, food, clothing and a myriad of other needs and services.
What say you Mr. Taxpayer, are you willing to pay a surtax for the years it would take to accomplish this tax, or is it easier and cheaper to attack Obama as stupid for not doing what you want.
Or, we could kick them out faster and cheaper.
Gee, maybe a better Idea Herr Todd, we could establish camps and use them as slave labor, or as Guinea pigs for research.
Well then, I guess all of congress was into "conspiracy theorizing" back in 1954. Because this is when it was researched and revealed that this is how the system was operating. Read the congressional report if you don't like the truth. Krugman works for one of the CFR bought and owned papers, of course he is going to parrot derogatory partisan bullshit.He advocates for higher taxes, and does everything he can in order to minimize his own taxes. He wants higher estate taxes but plans to escape estate taxes.
Typical liberal hypocrite.
Yeah, calling for a higher INCOME tax burden is horribly greedy right? No he doesn't plan on "escaping estate taxes", he plans on giving it to charity to better effect the world, not just the US!
Hypocrite? Better check what it means Bubba
These rich mother fuckers don't give to "charities." They give to tax-exempt charitable, "foundations." If you are a political scientist and you research and study the social engineering aspect of these foundations, you would understand that these foundations have a more profound affect on the nation and the world than even the various governments of the earth. Ever hear of the older foundations like the Rockefeller foundation, the Carnegie Foundation or the foundation with close ties to the CIA and the Obama administration, the FORD FOUNDATION? Charity my ass. He's busy throwing in with other global elites. Probably giving to the Gates foundation I imagine. That one is all about eugenics and depopulation. Creepy, evil MOFO that Buffet is.
More right wing BS. Shocking
Dodd Report to the Reece Committee on Foundations - 1954 - Robber Baron Hijacking of the USA
Dodd Report to the Reece Committee on Foundations - 1954 - Robber Baron Hijacking of the USA Christopher Dodd Free Download Streaming Internet Archive
It isn't about "left" or "right" politics, it is about being sovereign free men and women on the land our forefathers conceived a new ideal, that being freedom. Not a new form of oppression.
What I don't think you understand is that, what you want, is already being achieved. All this "wealth gap?" Is the wealth gap between the rulers of a bureaucratic communist State, and the people. EVERYONE will be equally poor, except the leaders. The more the wealth gap grows, the more they WILL socialize health care, education, car production, distribution, etc. the more they achieve their goals.
THAT IS WHAT YOU WANT. The final move will just be to change the name of what we have, it is all just cosmetics. In the end, the same folks will still be running the show.
Will it make you happy if we just do away with the labels now? Or do you want to make small communities having farmers markets illegal? Is that how much you disdain the free market?
THESE ARE THE FACTS. FACE 'EM BUDDY.
More right wing BS. Shocking
United States House Select Committee to Investigate Tax-Exempt Foundations and Comparable Organizations
This article is about the 1952-1954 investigation into non-profits. For the 80s and 90s report on the People's Republic of China's covert operations within the United States, see Cox Report.
The Select Committee to Investigate Tax-Exempt Foundations and Comparable Organizations was an investigative committee of the United States House of Representatives between 1952 and 1954. The committee was originally created by House Resolution 561 during the 82nd Congress. The committee investigated the use of funds by tax-exempt organizations (non-profit organizations) to see if they were being used to support communism
The committee's two Democrats, Wayne L. Hays and Gracie Pfost, refused to sign the final report. The Hays-Pfost minority report charged that the foundations "have been indicted and convicted under procedures which can only be characterized as barbaric." The minority accused Chairman Reece and the committee staff of a "deep-seated antagonism toward foundations" which might "well be characterized as pathological."
According to the minority report: The majority and committee staff were guilty of "an evil disregard of fundamental American guarantees." Anti-foundation witnesses were heard in full and their testimony published but the hearings were concluded as soon as pro-foundation witnesses began to present their case.
Reece said the foundations would be permitted to file statements and thereby get "a fair opportunity to put their best foot forward at the same time that they escaped the embarrassment of cross-examination." The committee staff, however, apparently "deliberately ignored" the statements in preparing the report. Judging by a pro-foundation witness allowed to testify, Dr. Pendleton Herring, Social Science Research Council president whose testimony was cut off "midway," public testimony "was far from embarrassing" and was "the one certain way that [those] accused by the staff...could destroy the deadly inferences, innuendoes and charges." By contrast, the committee gave 3 days to the testimony of San Francisco attorney Aaron Sargent, whose political and economic thinking could be judged by his charge that the U.S. "income tax was part of a plot by Fabian Socialists operating from England to pave the way for socialism in this country."
lol
United States House Select Committee to Investigate Tax-Exempt Foundations and Comparable Organizations - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
fkking ruight wing morons!!!
The best and greatest argument against the burgoise society otherwise known as capitalism is the moral argument. I just keep mentioning wealth gap or how it is unfair and people are so outraged that they rush to shut it down. Despite the fact that real communist societies have their own wealth gap between between favoured bureaucrats, chosen individuals and everyone else I just keep telling people how unjust the capatalism system is. I really don't care if nothing else has ever worked in the history of the world or how every other unfree economy was riddled with corruption and had appointed aristocracies to rule over the peasants. I just keep beating this drum to death just so I can shut it down.
We have to decide which kind of capitalism we want- plutocratic capitalism where all the money is concentrated in the hands of 1% of the population, leaving the rest in debt or poverty, or democratic capitalism, where economic growth is created by as much of the population as possible
The conservatives have favored plutocratic capitalism, the belief in supply side economics, that the rich are the job creators but those jobs have to pay the smallest wages possible with no benefits in order to increase profits at the top end, that they should receive favorable treatment like low taxation and little oversight and regulation
Liberals favor democratic capitalism, where the profits are created by a consumer middle class who are paid wages that are sufficient, that the wealth of capitalism is spread and passed from hand to hand, that a welfare state is created for the working force so when there is an economic downturn or a personal disaster or emergency that member of the workforce is not expendable and their families will survive, and in their elder years they will have a pension and healthcare, alleviating that burden on their younger family members in the work force
In the last thirty years the conservative view came back into vogue and the results have been a huge jump in the wealth of a few with the deterioration of the middle class
Now the conservatives are going for the middle class jugular with their agenda of cutting the social safety net
The waste of trillions on social welfare programs designed to motivate people to do better brought to you by the Democrats.The wealth gap then:
Poor people walk where they need to go on dirty, dusty roads, lucky to have shoes.
Rich people ride in horse-drawn carriages.
The wealth gap now:
Poor people drive their 2001 Ford Focus hither and thither.
Rich people drive their 2016 Lamborghini to and fro.
This dramatic decrease in the wealth gap brought to you by Capitalism.
Really?
The inequality gap, brought to you by conservative policy (can you say trickle down???)
Well then, I guess all of congress was into "conspiracy theorizing" back in 1954. Because this is when it was researched and revealed that this is how the system was operating. Read the congressional report if you don't like the truth. Krugman works for one of the CFR bought and owned papers, of course he is going to parrot derogatory partisan bullshit.Yeah, calling for a higher INCOME tax burden is horribly greedy right? No he doesn't plan on "escaping estate taxes", he plans on giving it to charity to better effect the world, not just the US!
Hypocrite? Better check what it means Bubba
These rich mother fuckers don't give to "charities." They give to tax-exempt charitable, "foundations." If you are a political scientist and you research and study the social engineering aspect of these foundations, you would understand that these foundations have a more profound affect on the nation and the world than even the various governments of the earth. Ever hear of the older foundations like the Rockefeller foundation, the Carnegie Foundation or the foundation with close ties to the CIA and the Obama administration, the FORD FOUNDATION? Charity my ass. He's busy throwing in with other global elites. Probably giving to the Gates foundation I imagine. That one is all about eugenics and depopulation. Creepy, evil MOFO that Buffet is.
More right wing BS. Shocking
Dodd Report to the Reece Committee on Foundations - 1954 - Robber Baron Hijacking of the USA
Dodd Report to the Reece Committee on Foundations - 1954 - Robber Baron Hijacking of the USA Christopher Dodd Free Download Streaming Internet Archive
It isn't about "left" or "right" politics, it is about being sovereign free men and women on the land our forefathers conceived a new ideal, that being freedom. Not a new form of oppression.
What I don't think you understand is that, what you want, is already being achieved. All this "wealth gap?" Is the wealth gap between the rulers of a bureaucratic communist State, and the people. EVERYONE will be equally poor, except the leaders. The more the wealth gap grows, the more they WILL socialize health care, education, car production, distribution, etc. the more they achieve their goals.
THAT IS WHAT YOU WANT. The final move will just be to change the name of what we have, it is all just cosmetics. In the end, the same folks will still be running the show.
Will it make you happy if we just do away with the labels now? Or do you want to make small communities having farmers markets illegal? Is that how much you disdain the free market?
THESE ARE THE FACTS. FACE 'EM BUDDY.
United States House Select Committee to Investigate Tax-Exempt Foundations and Comparable Organizations
This article is about the 1952-1954 investigation into non-profits. For the 80s and 90s report on the People's Republic of China's covert operations within the United States, see Cox Report.
The Select Committee to Investigate Tax-Exempt Foundations and Comparable Organizations was an investigative committee of the United States House of Representatives between 1952 and 1954. The committee was originally created by House Resolution 561 during the 82nd Congress. The committee investigated the use of funds by tax-exempt organizations (non-profit organizations) to see if they were being used to support communism
The committee's two Democrats, Wayne L. Hays and Gracie Pfost, refused to sign the final report. The Hays-Pfost minority report charged that the foundations "have been indicted and convicted under procedures which can only be characterized as barbaric." The minority accused Chairman Reece and the committee staff of a "deep-seated antagonism toward foundations" which might "well be characterized as pathological."
According to the minority report: The majority and committee staff were guilty of "an evil disregard of fundamental American guarantees." Anti-foundation witnesses were heard in full and their testimony published but the hearings were concluded as soon as pro-foundation witnesses began to present their case.
Reece said the foundations would be permitted to file statements and thereby get "a fair opportunity to put their best foot forward at the same time that they escaped the embarrassment of cross-examination." The committee staff, however, apparently "deliberately ignored" the statements in preparing the report. Judging by a pro-foundation witness allowed to testify, Dr. Pendleton Herring, Social Science Research Council president whose testimony was cut off "midway," public testimony "was far from embarrassing" and was "the one certain way that [those] accused by the staff...could destroy the deadly inferences, innuendoes and charges." By contrast, the committee gave 3 days to the testimony of San Francisco attorney Aaron Sargent, whose political and economic thinking could be judged by his charge that the U.S. "income tax was part of a plot by Fabian Socialists operating from England to pave the way for socialism in this country."
lol
United States House Select Committee to Investigate Tax-Exempt Foundations and Comparable Organizations - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
fkking ruight wing morons!!!
IOW, Even Wikipedia backs up what I have wrote. You look it up, and wiki spins it like, oh, gee, yeah, foundations HAVE an inordinate affect on American government and culture. . . but. . . but. . . the committee didn't give foundations minions enough time to tell them why turning Americans from individualists to socialists is a good thing.
You don't get it. YOU have been the victim of foundation work. From the schools, to the media you listen to, to the resources you actively use, you are the product of foundation thinking. That is the point. You just don't see it. Your whole post has just agreed with me. Thank you very much.
You know what I find just a TAD ironic? YOU GO TO A FOUNDATION, for your information about how foundations are controlling our culture, our thinking and our freedom. I noticed in that stub, unlike many in Wikipedia, the "Criticisms," were poorly referenced, and a few of the seven References were inaccessible. IOW, you swallowed secondary info from a foundation ABOUT foundations. It could just be made UP! Could you be more obtuse?
You must not know me very well, b/c most posters 'round these parts will tell you I am fiercely independent. Only partisans go looking for BS to support their own POV. You had some good points at the beginning of this thread, but you became highly partisan as soon as you wanted to paint all the founding fathers as a monolithic bunch that all agree with each other on everything. They didn't. The only thing I am sure they would agree on is that you are being a cad.
Well, looky there. Another 'pick yourself up by your bootstraps' tale. How quaint.
The best and greatest argument against the burgoise society otherwise known as capitalism is the moral argument. I just keep mentioning wealth gap or how it is unfair and people are so outraged that they rush to shut it down. Despite the fact that real communist societies have their own wealth gap between between favoured bureaucrats, chosen individuals and everyone else I just keep telling people how unjust the capatalism system is. I really don't care if nothing else has ever worked in the history of the world or how every other unfree economy was riddled with corruption and had appointed aristocracies to rule over the peasants. I just keep beating this drum to death just so I can shut it down.
We have to decide which kind of capitalism we want- plutocratic capitalism where all the money is concentrated in the hands of 1% of the population, leaving the rest in debt or poverty, or democratic capitalism, where economic growth is created by as much of the population as possible
The conservatives have favored plutocratic capitalism, the belief in supply side economics, that the rich are the job creators but those jobs have to pay the smallest wages possible with no benefits in order to increase profits at the top end, that they should receive favorable treatment like low taxation and little oversight and regulation
Liberals favor democratic capitalism, where the profits are created by a consumer middle class who are paid wages that are sufficient, that the wealth of capitalism is spread and passed from hand to hand, that a welfare state is created for the working force so when there is an economic downturn or a personal disaster or emergency that member of the workforce is not expendable and their families will survive, and in their elder years they will have a pension and healthcare, alleviating that burden on their younger family members in the work force
In the last thirty years the conservative view came back into vogue and the results have been a huge jump in the wealth of a few with the deterioration of the middle class
Now the conservatives are going for the middle class jugular with their agenda of cutting the social safety net
I can blow that shit out of the water. I'm not in the 1% which, according to you, means I must be in debt or poverty. My debt to income ratio is less than 10% asshole and that's because I have just a few short years left on my house. No credit cards and no other loans. I pay cash for everything or I don't buy it. There are plenty like me. Guess your either/or scenario is only what you want to believe.
Most Liberals in this country favor democratic socialism where those who, because they don't have what someone else has, are provided it by taxing those the democratic socialists think have too much. That you favor social welfare handouts instead of you picking up the tab personally where you see the need when it occurs proves you're a socialist. A capitalist would help those he sees in need, do it privately, and move on without trying to get credit because he thinks getting the government to force it from someone he believes has too much means the same thing as if he did it privately with his own money.
In the last 50 years, we've tried it your way by handing people someone else's money through things like the war on poverty. Poverty then and poverty now is basically the same percentage. Then difference is the wasted trillions of dollars in a so called "investment". Investments return money not break even if they are good investments. If someone said you invest our life savings and in 50 years you'll get back exactly what you invested, would you do it? If you would, you're a retard. If you wouldn't, why should the rest of us be willing to do it again when the results are what they are?
The waste of trillions on social welfare programs
The waste of trillions on social welfare programs designed to motivate people to do better brought to you by the Democrats.The wealth gap then:
Poor people walk where they need to go on dirty, dusty roads, lucky to have shoes.
Rich people ride in horse-drawn carriages.
The wealth gap now:
Poor people drive their 2001 Ford Focus hither and thither.
Rich people drive their 2016 Lamborghini to and fro.
This dramatic decrease in the wealth gap brought to you by Capitalism.
Really?
The inequality gap, brought to you by conservative policy (can you say trickle down???)
Poverty percentage then and now the same.
