Who should own and control the means of production?

[shintao]

My man I share your pain.

Why can't these stupid motherfuckers understand that it is their responsibility to keep you healthy, that they owe you a living.

Long Live the Vaterland.

Heil Hitler.

.

Your hearing must be going dude, because I never asked anyone for anything I didn't earn. Contrary, you are looking pretty ignorant right now muff-mouth, and no you can't suck my cock even though you asked. So take your Hitler & shove him up your ass where he will be close to your gerbil ranch, puke.

Reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeally?

So why are you a liberal?

.

Because I am a humanitarian and hate seeing my fellow man (not foreigners) suffer needlessly for a state of mind.

Let me ask you, if you could end poverty and homelessness, have National Health Care, and gasoline for $2.00 a gallon, would you do it?

 

[shintao]

Of the points that I made which, if any, do you actually doubt to be true? Everything I said in that post seemed self evident.

Obviously not. The very same reason socialism fails is the reason one effect of capitalism is wealth disparity. Because invariably you are not going to get everyone in the system to take responsibility for themselves. In socialism it results in the collapse of the system. In capitalism it creates wealth disparity among those who set and reach the goal of attaining wealth and those that don't have that goal.

I don't understand why you class warfare types don't get it. How is it that you expect people to have a certain SoL or level of wealth of those same people don't make that a goal?

Have you actually analyzed what you are saying that would lead to a collapse? Because I have, and I think you are wrong. The Euro-socialists do not think like American capitalists do. They have drive & work ethic & take pride in what they do as part of the whole. Everybody works in the socialist system, either in the communities or on the job. People don't lay on the couch with a remote control & worry about the house payment. Socialists have prepared a safety-net to put people back to work. Capitalists here won't spend the money, and prefer paying people to sit on their ass.

So study that facet up Bernie, just to be informed in your thinking.

 

[daveman]

Let me ask you, if you could end poverty and homelessness, have National Health Care, and gasoline for $2.00 a gallon, would you do it?

Liberalism can't do those things.

 

[Lasher]

We're calling for sociopolitical parity and a decent standard of living, you idiot.

That's all most of us have ever called for.

But that doesn't fit into the right wing paradyne. Either you're with their nonsense or your a commie rat bastard.

Is a paradyne anything like a paradigm?

 

[Lasher]

People seem to have bazaar notions

I prefer the swap meet, myself.

Hahahaha! Good one!

 

[shintao]

Let me ask you, if you could end poverty and homelessness, have National Health Care, and gasoline for $2.00 a gallon, would you do it?

Liberalism can't do those things.

That wasn't a responsive answer to the question.

 

[Intense]

Let me ask you, if you could end poverty and homelessness, have National Health Care, and gasoline for $2.00 a gallon, would you do it?

Liberalism can't do those things.

That wasn't a responsive answer to the question.

I wouldn't condone something with no knowledge of the means by which it was accomplished.

 

[daveman]

Let me ask you, if you could end poverty and homelessness, have National Health Care, and gasoline for $2.00 a gallon, would you do it?

Liberalism can't do those things.

That wasn't a responsive answer to the question.

But it was accurate.

 

[Lasher]

Your hearing must be going dude, because I never asked anyone for anything I didn't earn. Contrary, you are looking pretty ignorant right now muff-mouth, and no you can't suck my cock even though you asked. So take your Hitler & shove him up your ass where he will be close to your gerbil ranch, puke.

Reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeally?

So why are you a liberal?

.

Because I am a humanitarian and hate seeing my fellow man (not foreigners) suffer needlessly for a state of mind.

Let me ask you, if you could end poverty and homelessness, have National Health Care, and gasoline for $2.00 a gallon, would you do it?

Because YOU hate seeing YOUR "fellow man" suffer, you think everyone should support that philosophy? That seems pretty illogical to me. Why should anyone be FORCED to give his property to a total stranger, no matter what the reason for the need?

Yes, if I could do those things without depriving other people of their property and freedom, I would be glad to do so.

 

[Lasher]

Of the points that I made which, if any, do you actually doubt to be true? Everything I said in that post seemed self evident.

Obviously not. The very same reason socialism fails is the reason one effect of capitalism is wealth disparity. Because invariably you are not going to get everyone in the system to take responsibility for themselves. In socialism it results in the collapse of the system. In capitalism it creates wealth disparity among those who set and reach the goal of attaining wealth and those that don't have that goal.

I don't understand why you class warfare types don't get it. How is it that you expect people to have a certain SoL or level of wealth of those same people don't make that a goal?

Have you actually analyzed what you are saying that would lead to a collapse? Because I have, and I think you are wrong. The Euro-socialists do not think like American capitalists do. They have drive & work ethic & take pride in what they do as part of the whole. Everybody works in the socialist system, either in the communities or on the job. People don't lay on the couch with a remote control & worry about the house payment. Socialists have prepared a safety-net to put people back to work. Capitalists here won't spend the money, and prefer paying people to sit on their ass.

So study that facet up Bernie, just to be informed in your thinking.

So, due to the fact that we in America have parasites who lie on their couches and take our money, we should adopt a system that has always failed? Capitalism doesn't preclude kicking those leeches off welfare and letting them sink or swim by their own efforts. We should let them starve if they won't do anything for themselves.

 

[shintao]

Liberalism can't do those things.

That wasn't a responsive answer to the question.

I wouldn't condone something with no knowledge of the means by which it was accomplished.

If it was torture, murder and rape, would that be ok?

 

[shintao]

Liberalism can't do those things.

That wasn't a responsive answer to the question.

But it was accurate.

You could get a half-point, but reduced by 1/2 leaving you a 1/4, seeing as Liberalism could do it. Socialism is the correct means, but still not the correct response. HINT: Yes, or NO.

 

[daveman]

That wasn't a responsive answer to the question.

But it was accurate.

You could get a half-point, but reduced by 1/2 leaving you a 1/4, seeing as Liberalism could do it. Socialism is the correct means, but still not the correct response. HINT: Yes, or NO.

Liberalism couldn't do it. Socialism couldn't do it.

 

[shintao]

But it was accurate.

You could get a half-point, but reduced by 1/2 leaving you a 1/4, seeing as Liberalism could do it. Socialism is the correct means, but still not the correct response. HINT: Yes, or NO.

Liberalism couldn't do it. Socialism couldn't do it.

And you know that because?

 

[daveman]

You could get a half-point, but reduced by 1/2 leaving you a 1/4, seeing as Liberalism could do it. Socialism is the correct means, but still not the correct response. HINT: Yes, or NO.

Liberalism couldn't do it. Socialism couldn't do it.

And you know that because?

History.

 

[shintao]

Liberalism couldn't do it. Socialism couldn't do it.

And you know that because?

History.

And what in history tells you can't do it?

 

[Intense]

That wasn't a responsive answer to the question.

I wouldn't condone something with no knowledge of the means by which it was accomplished.

If it was torture, murder and rape, would that be ok?

The general answer is no. There are terms and definitions we are not in agreement with though. There is circumstance and specific application. I cannot imagine what purpose Rape would serve. Maybe you can clarify your point.

If I was standing on a Subway Platform with Hitler at #:00 AM, knowing by killing him I would save many lives, I would consider murder. I don't know how that would play out though in the end.

Torture, definitions vary, there are things I would not do and want no part of, but I'm sure there are things I would condone, out of necessity, in a critical circumstance, that you would not, and vice versa.

If Someone had information about a bomb say in NYC over the holiday's and it was confirmed, I'd put him on a Six Flag's Roller-coaster blind folded with one of those zapper dog collars around his neck, if it meant foiling the plan. Hell yeah. Permanent damage no. There are lines that you should not cross.

 

[daveman]

And you know that because?

History.

And what in history tells you can't do it?

The fact that no socialist or liberal society has ever been able to do any of that.

Now surprise me. DON'T respond with "But that's because the right people have never been in charge! When WE'RE running it, it'll work great!"

 

[shintao]

I wouldn't condone something with no knowledge of the means by which it was accomplished.

If it was torture, murder and rape, would that be ok?

The general answer is no. There are terms and definitions we are not in agreement with though. There is circumstance and specific application. I cannot imagine what purpose Rape would serve. Maybe you can clarify your point.

If I was standing on a Subway Platform with Hitler at #:00 AM, knowing by killing him I would save many lives, I would consider murder. I don't know how that would play out though in the end.

Torture, definitions vary, there are things I would not do and want no part of, but I'm sure there are things I would condone, out of necessity, in a critical circumstance, that you would not, and vice versa.

If Someone had information about a bomb say in NYC over the holiday's and it was confirmed, I'd put him on a Six Flag's Roller-coaster blind folded with one of those zapper dog collars around his neck, if it meant foiling the plan. Hell yeah. Permanent damage no. There are lines that you should not cross.

Well surely you can form an answer in your head. Or are you guy stopped at the green light with traffic backed up two miles, while you contemplate stepping on the gas pedal?

 

[shintao]

History.

And what in history tells you can't do it?

The fact that no socialist or liberal society has ever been able to do any of that.

Now surprise me. DON'T respond with "But that's because the right people have never been in charge! When WE'RE running it, it'll work great!"

Really? Hitler did it. Was he socialist or a facist?

Chavez did it. Was he Democratic Socialist or a facist?

Hmm, Obviously you are wrong. Whatever you want to call private enterprise in America, they can't do it, and the Socialist have to help them out. http://venezuelanalysis.com/news/1375