Why Socialism would be very difficult to adopt in the U.S.

Yep, the meanings and applications of various words change over time, socialism isn't what it used to be, it is now applied differently. The red scare still affects the idiots though.

What you mean is that commie scumbags like you are trying to change socialism's image by lying about it.
Socialism is always democratic, communism NEVER. Try and figure that out, hater dupe.
Communism and social are always voted in. And the only way to get rid of it is war.
Where was communism ever voted in?

What difference does that make? When has anyone ever voted to allow the state to confiscate their property? It will never happen, which means socialism can never be adopted by a majority vote.
 
Yep, the meanings and applications of various words change over time, socialism isn't what it used to be, it is now applied differently. The red scare still affects the idiots though.

What you mean is that commie scumbags like you are trying to change socialism's image by lying about it.
Socialism is always democratic, communism NEVER. Try and figure that out, hater dupe.
Communism and social are always voted in. And the only way to get rid of it is war.
Where was communism ever voted in?
Germany and Venezuela right off the top.
 
Yep, the meanings and applications of various words change over time, socialism isn't what it used to be, it is now applied differently. The red scare still affects the idiots though.

What you mean is that commie scumbags like you are trying to change socialism's image by lying about it.
Socialism is always democratic, communism NEVER. Try and figure that out, hater dupe.
Communism and social are always voted in. And the only way to get rid of it is war.
Where was communism ever voted in?

What difference does that make? When has anyone ever voted to allow the state to confiscate their property? It will never happen, which means socialism can never be adopted by a majority vote.
So you admit communism was never voted in. Err, people are perfectly fine with taxes, it's how every country works. Damn socialists.
 
Of course, there are many reasons why socialism is an anathema for many Americans....mostly in the right wing political sphere.

First, we are a nation that spews the rhetoric that we "love peace", but the reality is that we are neo-colonists (the euphemistic term for regime changers) we spend an inordinate amount of tax dollars on defense/offense (just listen to Carly Fiorina's speeches) and any country that has succeeded with socialism seldom indulges in war.

Second, we are so multicultural and multi-ethnical that most middle class (and poorer class) white skinned folks openly state, "I will NEVER be willing to give my hard earned money to those mooching darkies.)

But most of all, we could never easily become "socialists" (although many morons on the right think that Obama has already made us such)...because the term is hugely misunderstood by the uneducated masses who would willingly pay huge amounts of money to some private entity for a particular service, and bitch and moan when taxed by the federal government for that same service.

Well the US seems increasingly like a place where ANYTHING is difficult to implement. You want to get a toilet in the White House, you're going to have to spend billions and have many different groups having input sessions, then everyone needs to get over their aggression by swearing at everyone else, then people will block it all and in the end it'll fail.

Viva los EEUU.
 
The bolded is where you fail. If someone is willing to pay for something they want the government has no business taxing everyone to provide that service. You can't have everything you want in life and expect someone else to share the cost. If you want it pay for it. If you don't want it or decide it's not worth it then you shouldn't be taxed to provide it.

Socialism should be impossible to sell to any thinking person. It's proven to fail every time.

Your response confirms the uneducated masses' quip.......

Here's an example.....although I am a vegetarian, my taxes help subsidize the beef industry (and the feed and the water, etc. to sustain that industry)....All so that McDonald can sell you a whopper for .99 instead of the true cost of about $14.00. Socialism ALREADY exists.
 
Yep, the meanings and applications of various words change over time, socialism isn't what it used to be, it is now applied differently. The red scare still affects the idiots though.

What you mean is that commie scumbags like you are trying to change socialism's image by lying about it.
Socialism is always democratic, communism NEVER. Try and figure that out, hater dupe.
Communism and social are always voted in. And the only way to get rid of it is war.
Where was communism ever voted in?
Germany and Venezuela right off the top.
Germany? Hitler was a fascist who invaded the Soviet Union and killed socialists after he took power. Hugo Chavez is a socialist, not communist. Venezuela is lacking gulags.
 
Yep, the meanings and applications of various words change over time, socialism isn't what it used to be, it is now applied differently. The red scare still affects the idiots though.

What you mean is that commie scumbags like you are trying to change socialism's image by lying about it.
Socialism is always democratic, communism NEVER. Try and figure that out, hater dupe.

Communism is socialism, dumbass. Your claim is bullshit propaganda.

The closer you get to pure socialism, the closer you get to the police state. That's the only distinction between what you call "socialism" and communism. The former is just a half-assed attempt at socialism. If they were really trying they would be herding people into Gulags and executing economic traitors for sabotaging the latest 5 year plan.
And THERE is the reason socialism has a hard time here. The loudmouth RW whackjobs don't know what it is lol. Totally brainwashed on bs.
 
Of course, there are many reasons why socialism is an anathema for many Americans....mostly in the right wing political sphere.

First, we are a nation that spews the rhetoric that we "love peace", but the reality is that we are neo-colonists (the euphemistic term for regime changers) we spend an inordinate amount of tax dollars on defense/offense (just listen to Carly Fiorina's speeches) and any country that has succeeded with socialism seldom indulges in war.

Second, we are so multicultural and multi-ethnical that most middle class (and poorer class) white skinned folks openly state, "I will NEVER be willing to give my hard earned money to those mooching darkies.)

But most of all, we could never easily become "socialists" (although many morons on the right think that Obama has already made us such)...because the term is hugely misunderstood by the uneducated masses who would willingly pay huge amounts of money to some private entity for a particular service, and bitch and moan when taxed by the federal government for that same service.
The bolded is where you fail. If someone is willing to pay for something they want the government has no business taxing everyone to provide that service. You can't have everything you want in life and expect someone else to share the cost. If you want it pay for it. If you don't want it or decide it's not worth it then you shouldn't be taxed to provide it.

Socialism should be impossible to sell to any thinking person. It's proven to fail every time.
That's communism ferchrissake.
What in the hell are you talking about? What is communism?
Google is your friend.
English and concise statementss are my friends. What am I supposed to Google? Stupid shit Franco says translated to conversational english?
 
You know why socialism will not be "adopted", dumbass? It is because it would contravene the U.S. Constitution and, therefore, be fucking illegal.

Put the fucking bong down, asshole!!!!!
 
What you mean is that commie scumbags like you are trying to change socialism's image by lying about it.
Socialism is always democratic, communism NEVER. Try and figure that out, hater dupe.
Communism and social are always voted in. And the only way to get rid of it is war.
Where was communism ever voted in?

What difference does that make? When has anyone ever voted to allow the state to confiscate their property? It will never happen, which means socialism can never be adopted by a majority vote.
So you admit communism was never voted in. Err, people are perfectly fine with taxes, it's how every country works. Damn socialists.

Communism is socialism, numskull, and what you call "socialism" is more accurately called the welfare state.
 
Yep, the meanings and applications of various words change over time, socialism isn't what it used to be, it is now applied differently. The red scare still affects the idiots though.

What you mean is that commie scumbags like you are trying to change socialism's image by lying about it.
Socialism is always democratic, communism NEVER. Try and figure that out, hater dupe.
Communism and social are always voted in. And the only way to get rid of it is war.
Socialism always voted in, communism never.
 
A better solution would be for everyone to fund their own parks, don't you think? Having everyone get into everyone else's pocket only makes the politicians happy.


Does that mean that when you no longer have kids that attend school, that you should no longer pay the property tax allocation that goes toward funding those schools?
 
Yep, the meanings and applications of various words change over time, socialism isn't what it used to be, it is now applied differently. The red scare still affects the idiots though.

What you mean is that commie scumbags like you are trying to change socialism's image by lying about it.
Socialism is always democratic, communism NEVER. Try and figure that out, hater dupe.
Communism and social are always voted in. And the only way to get rid of it is war.
Socialism always voted in, communism never.

It's never been voted in. All that's ever been voted on is the welfare state. Socialism requires the government to confiscate all productive enterprises, and that's when the shooting always starts.
 
Socialist ideals help the middle class prosper.

Wrong. Socialism is keeping the middle class down.

They why do socialist countries like Canada, the Netherlands, Germany, Switzerland, Sweden, Finland, Norway, etc., have such thriving middle classes? Social democracy is the most successful form of government and produces societies with better income for all. People are happier, healthier, better educated, and they live longer than Americans.

Without a thriving middle class, there is no one to purchase the goods and services the corporations are selling, and every year the American middle class is losing ground, as more and more wealth gets funneled upwards.
 
The bolded is where you fail. If someone is willing to pay for something they want the government has no business taxing everyone to provide that service. You can't have everything you want in life and expect someone else to share the cost. If you want it pay for it. If you don't want it or decide it's not worth it then you shouldn't be taxed to provide it.

Socialism should be impossible to sell to any thinking person. It's proven to fail every time.

Your response confirms the uneducated masses' quip.......

Here's an example.....although I am a vegetarian, my taxes help subsidize the beef industry (and the feed and the water, etc. to sustain that industry)....All so that McDonald can sell you a whopper for .99 instead of the true cost of about $14.00. Socialism ALREADY exists.
So you're on my side then. You shouldn't be paying taxes to lower the cost (subsidize) something you don't want. Socialism is screwing you to the tune of several million hamburgers a year. Then again my taxes are subsidizing your veggie soup but it all become a giant cluster of shit that we should just eliminate. If carrots get to expensive you can't have any. If beef ribs get too expensive I can find something else to eat as well. Pay market price for your own choices.
 
A better solution would be for everyone to fund their own parks, don't you think? Having everyone get into everyone else's pocket only makes the politicians happy.


Does that mean that when you no longer have kids that attend school, that you should no longer pay the property tax allocation that goes toward funding those schools?

It means you should never pay the property tax allocation, and you should pay the cost of educating your kids yourself.
 

Forum List

Back
Top