Why The Left Loves Socialism

[AntonToo]

I liked being in a socialist organization, the military...

Except the military is not a socialist organization.

Sorry... it's just NOT.

Of course it is - it is centrally controlled organization paid for in entirety by compulsive taxation. How do you get an economic arrangement MORE socialist than that???

And before you start talking about how Constitution provides for it (you rightwingers always do) - DON'T. Socialism and Capitalism is not defined by constitutionality, it is defined by economic structure.

As I said before, I can see where people get this idea. Read that again so you understand me... I can see where you get that idea. Is that computing in your brain? That I actually see and realize how you can think this way and I understand? I think it's important that you realize that before reading further.

Here is why it's NOT socialism: The military in our country is an establishment under an enumerated power of congress. We (self-governing people) gave congress permission to do this as a responsibility of our federal government. So this is not something government did of it's own volition, it is something we agreed to allow our government to do as a necessary responsibility of government. The military system itself is not Socialist because it doesn't serve it's own social needs and purpose, it serves the needs of the country. The military doesn't do what it does for the sake of itself.

Now, one can make the argument that many facets of the military and how it functions are similar to Socialism or are "socialistic" in nature, but that does not mean they are "Socialist" unless you are perverting the definition of Socialism or misunderstanding the relationship between the people and the government they established.

Ok you CLEARLY do not understand what socialism is. It is defined STRICTLY in the economic dimension.

so·cial·ism - a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.

Now tell me, what in your description of military contradicts that definition? It is certainly not the way American community as a whole has indirect input on it.

Tell me, what about millitary is capitalistic?

the military does not produce or distribute economic goods, read your own definnition

Certainly it does produce very important economic service - SECURITY.

 

[NCC1701]

no we were not state command and control ever, now you simply are making shit up

You mean when the Government said what you could eat and what you needed to sell to the Government? My family (both sides) were involved in Agriculture during those times.

One Grandfather owned a Diary. He could use all the milk produced as long as it was separated (separate the milk from the cream). The Cream was sold to the government after it was made into Cheeze or was processed for canning. The Bulls (not the breeders) were castrated to steers. He was allowed the slaughter of ONE of those per year.

My other Grandfather was a Rancher. He was allowed the same number (one) cow slaughtered per year. He also raised Sheep like most ranchers of the time but the Government wasn't interested in Lamb.

Sure does sound like Socialism bordering on Communism to me.

might sound like it to you, but Stalin would have simply owned your farms had you been in Russia, government meddling in markets is not the same as all out communism.

Under Stalin, it was tried where each farmer got X number of acres that was uncontrolled. Sounded good except those free acres out produced the entire hundreds of acres. It was stopped. It was tried again after Stalin died. Didn't work out any better but it stayed until the breakup where the farms reverted back to the farmers. They even tried to get the farmers away from the horse drawn rigs. The Government bought them brand new Tractors with all the fun toys. What did they use the Tractor for? They would drive it into town for supplies and Vodka. Meanwhile, they still used the horse drawn implements to farm.

In order to make communism last longer than a few months, it has to be forced and that is exactly what Lenin and Stalin did. In the US, the term Robber Barons was where the Corporations controlled the Governments both State and Federal. The difference is, it was much easier for the US to move away from it than it was for the USSR.

and you just made my point, at no point were we like the USSR and close to communism since we always had some freedom, all your hand wavy bullshit about corporations aside

No but from time to time, the US has been the other side of that bad penny.

has the gov't meddled and tried to control to some degree? sure

has the government ever just taken over agriculture production? no way, we have always had private ownership and market pricing, even if gov't meddled with that pricing

 

[NCC1701]

Except the military is not a socialist organization.

Sorry... it's just NOT.

Of course it is - it is centrally controlled organization paid for in entirety by compulsive taxation. How do you get an economic arrangement MORE socialist than that???

And before you start talking about how Constitution provides for it (you rightwingers always do) - DON'T. Socialism and Capitalism is not defined by constitutionality, it is defined by economic structure.

As I said before, I can see where people get this idea. Read that again so you understand me... I can see where you get that idea. Is that computing in your brain? That I actually see and realize how you can think this way and I understand? I think it's important that you realize that before reading further.

Here is why it's NOT socialism: The military in our country is an establishment under an enumerated power of congress. We (self-governing people) gave congress permission to do this as a responsibility of our federal government. So this is not something government did of it's own volition, it is something we agreed to allow our government to do as a necessary responsibility of government. The military system itself is not Socialist because it doesn't serve it's own social needs and purpose, it serves the needs of the country. The military doesn't do what it does for the sake of itself.

Now, one can make the argument that many facets of the military and how it functions are similar to Socialism or are "socialistic" in nature, but that does not mean they are "Socialist" unless you are perverting the definition of Socialism or misunderstanding the relationship between the people and the government they established.

Ok you CLEARLY do not understand what socialism is. It is defined STRICTLY in the economic dimension.

so·cial·ism - a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.

Now tell me, what in your description of military contradicts that definition? It is certainly not the way American community as a whole has indirect input on it.

Tell me, what about millitary is capitalistic?

the military does not produce or distribute economic goods, read your own definnition

Certainly it does produce very important economic service - SECURITY.

really? where can I buy some?

 

[danielpalos]

And

Isn't that a rather convenient bit of word salad and mental masturbation. Additionally, americans subsidize the lower pricing of pharmaceuticals available to Canadian nationalized healthcare consumers as the pharmaceutical corporations jack up rates on americans to recover the “losses” the Canadian healthcare system negotiates them down to.

Sorry it was too many words for you to digest, it was only two paragraphs. One of the primary reasons pharmaceutical companies charge high prices is to recoup the cost of research and development of new drugs. These costs are high because we have an impeccable standard that is required for drug approval in America. Again, you are comparing the Rolls Royce with the Chevy.

Oh for fucks sake, look, I've been in boi pahrma for decades. We spend far more these days on marketting than R&D, the industry has globalized as have the regulatory bodies, harmonizing regulations, and the nations that produce the most drugs also soncume the most. What american pharma does now is me too life style drugs like Cialis and patent mining.

Non-prescription medicines, of which the great majority are over-the-counter sales for self-medication, accounted for an additional US$ 33.9 billion of sales in 2000. Adding together the prescription and non-prescription sales gives a global medicines total of just over US$ 316 billion in 2000, which compares reasonably with the calculated 1999 consumption total of US$ 317.6 billion in Table 4.1.

Available data on global medicine sales show a similar pattern of skewness towards high-income countries as do production and consumption data. In 1999, 15% of the world’s population lived in high-income countries, 49% in middle-income and 36% in low-income countries. Once again, the disparity between sales and population is dramatic: at the top end, approximately 15% of the world’s population bought almost 90% of the world’s medicines; at the bottom end, over one-third of the world’s population bought less than 1% of the world’s pharmaceuticals. For the half of the world’s population who live in middle-income countries, their share in total sales accounted for a little over 10% in 2000. Table 4.3 shows a remarkable concentrating trend in the global shares of both individual countries, such as the USA and Japan, and of the top 10 markets as a group, which accounted for 62.4% of global sales in 1976 and 98.7% in 2000. Table 4.3 also shows strong concentration even within the high-income countries. In 2000, over 95% of global sales were concentrated in the top 10 pharmaceutical markets: USA, Japan, France, Germany, UK, Italy, Spain, Canada, Brazil and Mexico. In India, which was in the top 10 in 1985 but not in 2000, sales were estimated to be US$ 3.4 billion in 2000.
The World Medicines Situation: Chapter 4. World pharmaceutical sales and consumption

It ain't like Grandma's blood pressure medication is coming from a Congolese witch doctor if we question the power structure. And again, Canadians get the same drugs americans do at systemically, consistently 1/2-1/3 the price. And american pharma then comes at americans to make up the difference.

Go live in Canada then

Aw, no ammo at all?

It's all about free shit - is it not?

free ammo for well regulated militia!

 

[ding]

Now why would Purple Owl lie, other than that is typical of Marxism/Socialism/Fascism/Liberalism/Progressivism? They even have their own website. I think soon, that there will be a war like the one back in the late 1800's between ideology. Those that believe in God and Guns against those who believe in government and don't like guns. Guess who will win?


Socialist Party USA - Home Just shows how stupid people have to be, to believe that Socialism would be good for them.

Of course socialism always ends the same way, just look at Venezuela.

View attachment 106273

there is also an american nazi party..... why does the right love fascism?

Check the roles on The American Nazi Party. They are full of liberals and Dems.
Same with The KKK. Founded by Dems, populated by Dems, supported by Dems.
Dems are closet racists and bigots who had to go underground after The GOP passed The Civil Rights Act.

they switched sides after the civil rights act everyone knows that.... fascism is right wing as all dictionaries and encyclopedia say and other than not liking to be affiliated with genocide your a fascist

No it is not. Fascism is collectivism. Left wing

nope; fascism is socialism on a national basis. it is right wing.

No. The Left wing are the ones who want big government. Fascism, Nazism, Communism are all big government entities. It is the Left who want more government, bigger government, more controlling government. It is the Left who are radicals.

"Liberalism was inevitably pushed aside by radicalism, radicalism had to surrender to socialism, and socialism could not stand up to communism." Solzhenitsyn

 

[danielpalos]

And

Oh for fucks sake, look, I've been in boi pahrma for decades. We spend far more these days on marketting than R&D, the industry has globalized as have the regulatory bodies, harmonizing regulations, and the nations that produce the most drugs also soncume the most. What american pharma does now is me too life style drugs like Cialis and patent mining.

Non-prescription medicines, of which the great majority are over-the-counter sales for self-medication, accounted for an additional US$ 33.9 billion of sales in 2000. Adding together the prescription and non-prescription sales gives a global medicines total of just over US$ 316 billion in 2000, which compares reasonably with the calculated 1999 consumption total of US$ 317.6 billion in Table 4.1.

Available data on global medicine sales show a similar pattern of skewness towards high-income countries as do production and consumption data. In 1999, 15% of the world’s population lived in high-income countries, 49% in middle-income and 36% in low-income countries. Once again, the disparity between sales and population is dramatic: at the top end, approximately 15% of the world’s population bought almost 90% of the world’s medicines; at the bottom end, over one-third of the world’s population bought less than 1% of the world’s pharmaceuticals. For the half of the world’s population who live in middle-income countries, their share in total sales accounted for a little over 10% in 2000. Table 4.3 shows a remarkable concentrating trend in the global shares of both individual countries, such as the USA and Japan, and of the top 10 markets as a group, which accounted for 62.4% of global sales in 1976 and 98.7% in 2000. Table 4.3 also shows strong concentration even within the high-income countries. In 2000, over 95% of global sales were concentrated in the top 10 pharmaceutical markets: USA, Japan, France, Germany, UK, Italy, Spain, Canada, Brazil and Mexico. In India, which was in the top 10 in 1985 but not in 2000, sales were estimated to be US$ 3.4 billion in 2000.
The World Medicines Situation: Chapter 4. World pharmaceutical sales and consumption

It ain't like Grandma's blood pressure medication is coming from a Congolese witch doctor if we question the power structure. And again, Canadians get the same drugs americans do at systemically, consistently 1/2-1/3 the price. And american pharma then comes at americans to make up the difference.

Go live in Canada then

Aw, no ammo at all?

It's all about free shit - is it not?

Hardly, no.

Ok, free shit that other people pay for...

stop whining about taxes confiscated for our drug war.

 

[AntonToo]

Of course it is - it is centrally controlled organization paid for in entirety by compulsive taxation. How do you get an economic arrangement MORE socialist than that???

And before you start talking about how Constitution provides for it (you rightwingers always do) - DON'T. Socialism and Capitalism is not defined by constitutionality, it is defined by economic structure.

As I said before, I can see where people get this idea. Read that again so you understand me... I can see where you get that idea. Is that computing in your brain? That I actually see and realize how you can think this way and I understand? I think it's important that you realize that before reading further.

Here is why it's NOT socialism: The military in our country is an establishment under an enumerated power of congress. We (self-governing people) gave congress permission to do this as a responsibility of our federal government. So this is not something government did of it's own volition, it is something we agreed to allow our government to do as a necessary responsibility of government. The military system itself is not Socialist because it doesn't serve it's own social needs and purpose, it serves the needs of the country. The military doesn't do what it does for the sake of itself.

Now, one can make the argument that many facets of the military and how it functions are similar to Socialism or are "socialistic" in nature, but that does not mean they are "Socialist" unless you are perverting the definition of Socialism or misunderstanding the relationship between the people and the government they established.

Ok you CLEARLY do not understand what socialism is. It is defined STRICTLY in the economic dimension.

so·cial·ism - a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.

Now tell me, what in your description of military contradicts that definition? It is certainly not the way American community as a whole has indirect input on it.

Tell me, what about millitary is capitalistic?

the military does not produce or distribute economic goods, read your own definnition

Certainly it does produce very important economic service - SECURITY.

really? where can I buy some?

Are you retarded or something?

Here you go:
Blackwater Protection |
Bodyguards & Personal Protection - Entourage Executive Protection/Security

 

[danielpalos]

This OP might be a little wordy

It's also big time silly.

The left loves socialism no more than the right loves anarchy and theocracy.

Your entire economic system screamed out for socialism a few scant years ago, again, and the entire planet witnessed it.

We have the Best form of Socialism in the Entire World.

We also have a Statue of Liberty.

coincidence or conspiracy?

 

[ding]

And

Go live in Canada then

Aw, no ammo at all?

It's all about free shit - is it not?

Hardly, no.

Ok, free shit that other people pay for...

stop whining about taxes confiscated for our drug war.

If only you had social morals for free, lol.

 

[danielpalos]

It's mostly never having lived under real Socialism, maybe it's a form of ignorance

No, Frank, it is you right wing yahoos that got no clue what actual socialism is and keep throwing it around to describe what is going on in America.

they get all of their learning, from dictionaries.

 

[ding]

This OP might be a little wordy

It's also big time silly.

The left loves socialism no more than the right loves anarchy and theocracy.

Your entire economic system screamed out for socialism a few scant years ago, again, and the entire planet witnessed it.

We have the Best form of Socialism in the Entire World.

We also have a Statue of Liberty.

coincidence or conspiracy?

It's not for lack of trying, lol.

 

[danielpalos]

I rather think you're full of shit sir.

Believe what you want to believe, but the fact is I have never paid for insurance and my whole life and I am not about to either.

Good for you. So you have no stake in our system and where it goes.

I'm not a big fan for paying for what "might" happen…

Outstanding!

Insurance is just another word for diminishing return…

only lousy capitalists, say that.

 

[NCC1701]

As I said before, I can see where people get this idea. Read that again so you understand me... I can see where you get that idea. Is that computing in your brain? That I actually see and realize how you can think this way and I understand? I think it's important that you realize that before reading further.

Here is why it's NOT socialism: The military in our country is an establishment under an enumerated power of congress. We (self-governing people) gave congress permission to do this as a responsibility of our federal government. So this is not something government did of it's own volition, it is something we agreed to allow our government to do as a necessary responsibility of government. The military system itself is not Socialist because it doesn't serve it's own social needs and purpose, it serves the needs of the country. The military doesn't do what it does for the sake of itself.

Now, one can make the argument that many facets of the military and how it functions are similar to Socialism or are "socialistic" in nature, but that does not mean they are "Socialist" unless you are perverting the definition of Socialism or misunderstanding the relationship between the people and the government they established.

Ok you CLEARLY do not understand what socialism is. It is defined STRICTLY in the economic dimension.

so·cial·ism - a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.

Now tell me, what in your description of military contradicts that definition? It is certainly not the way American community as a whole has indirect input on it.

Tell me, what about millitary is capitalistic?

the military does not produce or distribute economic goods, read your own definnition

Certainly it does produce very important economic service - SECURITY.

really? where can I buy some?

Are you retarded or something?

Here you go:
Blackwater Protection |
Bodyguards & Personal Protection - Entourage Executive Protection/Security

the military is specifically for foreign military intervention, not my personal bodyguard, so where can I buy some foreign military intervention legally?

 

[danielpalos]

yes, the reason we have dictionary definitions, is because the right wing has lousy reading comprehension.

otherwise, we know that socialism starts with a social contract.

Can you name one nation-state that is "communist or socialist" that does Not have Government. It really is that simple; except to the fantastical, right wing.

You've become a laughing stock in this thread and I feel it's now beneath my dignity to respond to you further. If you happen to stumble upon a rational argument, I may change my mind, but as of now I am going to disregard your posts.

Just projection?

Government Is Social-ism.

Can you name one nation-state that is "communist or socialist" that does Not have Government. It really is that simple; except to the fantastical, right wing.

I don't know of one single Communist country that ever existed longer than about 10 minutes. It's like Democracy, works fine in small numbers but if those numbers grow then you are in serious trouble. The US is NOT a Democracy and never has been. China and the old Soviet Union were NEVER communist governed either.

What about Cuba? The capitalist government of South Africa fell after only a few years of sanctions.

 

[danielpalos]

Yes, that is what social-ism means; groups rights over individual rights.

You are merely, clueless and Causeless.

No, I'm sorry, that's NOT what Socialism is. Again, you prove your ignorance for everyone to see.

Yes, that is, social-ism.

That is a belief of liberalism

the right wing are just a bunch of communists and don't know it; some on the left are trying to be poets, and know it.

i propose new definitions; liberal socialism and national socialism.

 

[AntonToo]

Ok you CLEARLY do not understand what socialism is. It is defined STRICTLY in the economic dimension.

so·cial·ism - a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.

Now tell me, what in your description of military contradicts that definition? It is certainly not the way American community as a whole has indirect input on it.

Tell me, what about millitary is capitalistic?

the military does not produce or distribute economic goods, read your own definnition

Certainly it does produce very important economic service - SECURITY.

really? where can I buy some?

Are you retarded or something?

Here you go:
Blackwater Protection |
Bodyguards & Personal Protection - Entourage Executive Protection/Security

the military is specifically for foreign military intervention, not my personal bodyguard, so where can I buy some foreign military intervention legally?

You need quit this loser argument, you are just making yourself look more and more silly with every post. Blackwater services got contracted by US Government in Iraq and other volatile regions:

US jury convicts Blackwater guards in 2007 killing of Iraqi civilians

Beyond Blackwater
Blackwater, the company in question, rose to worldwide prominence as an outsourced branch of the American army during the occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan.

Capitalist solution to security would be where we the people pay PRIVATE, profit driven companies like Blackwater to do what our millitary does. That doesn't work, which is why we have an army operated as a socialist organization, not driven by bottom line.

 

[ding]

The Left love socialism because socialism appeals to their emotions.

 

[Boss]

The best almost socialist countries would be the Scandinavian countries. You can still own a business like SAAB or a host of others but all transporation like Trains and Airports are owned by the government. So are the schools, public utilities and more. And their education blows ours away.

In those countries, EVERYONE has the RIGHT to a living wage, decent housing, decent job. They even have the right to vacation rubbing elbows with the rich. You want to spend your vacation cruising up and down the Feords, go for it, it's payed for. You want to travel? All of it may not be paid for but you make enough to afford it.

You have a very romanticized view of life in Scandinavia. First of all, you do not have a right to a living wage. Most wages are negotiated by trade unions and that's your wage... doesn't matter how good you are at your job or how hard you work. Certain professions where there is no trade union, you're pretty much on your own because there is no "minimum wage" law. Secondly, the tax rates are extremely high. If you make anywhere near moderate income, you will likely pay more than 50% in taxes. This will be in addition to the VAT tax of about 25% on anything you purchase.

While you are out there enjoying all the "free" stuff you have, which everyone is actually paying for, be very careful because Sweden is the rape capital of the world. In places like Denmark, you can expect to pay about 2% of your wages in "church tax" to fund the national church. I'm sure you atheist liberals would love that concept. Also, there is very little private land ownership because the property tax is astronomical. And IF you should decide to migrate there, you will be required to forfeit all your worldly possessions over £1000 plus meet a host of other requirements in terms of what services you can provide.

The biggest drawback, and the ultimate reason most Socialist nations fail, is the lack of incentive you'll have to succeed. We have no limit to success in our country. Any person is free to pursue any degree of wealth they desire, it's simply a matter of what you want and how much effort you are willing to devote to success. This is frowned upon in Socialist societies as they seek to obtain uniformity and standardization. This essentially kills individual sense of self-accomplishment and productivity becomes largely unimportant. Once the human spirit is killed, the decline in productivity ultimately results in the entire system collapsing because it cannot sustain itself.

This happens every time Socialism is tried. It starts off with the best of intentions and it can work well for years in small isolated countries of 4~5 million with predominately white populations and little immigration. That's why it works well for Vermont. Eventually, however, it fails due to lack of individual liberty.

 

[NCC1701]

the military does not produce or distribute economic goods, read your own definnition

Certainly it does produce very important economic service - SECURITY.

really? where can I buy some?

Are you retarded or something?

Here you go:
Blackwater Protection |
Bodyguards & Personal Protection - Entourage Executive Protection/Security

the military is specifically for foreign military intervention, not my personal bodyguard, so where can I buy some foreign military intervention legally?

You need quit this loser argument, you are just making yourself look more and more silly with every post. Blackwater services get contracted by US Government in Iraq and other volatile regions:

US jury convicts Blackwater guards in 2007 killing of Iraqi civilians

Contracted by the government, I asked if I can do it. If only the government can do it in a foreign country then it is not an economic service. Begging me to stop? lol, I guess that is one way to 'win'

 

[ding]

The Left love socialism because it deifies man.