Debates
16 Oct 21
16 Oct 21
@jimm619 saidIn socialism the workers must at least partly control the means of production or profit from it. None of those countries you listed do that. They are not socialist countries, except maybe Germany in a limited way.
.Socialism seems to work pretty well in many countries
Denmark, Netherlands, Sweden, Norway, Spain, Portugal, India, South Korea---there are many more. Even, France, England and Germany have many socialist programs...How are we able to put a man on the moon, yet allow poor children to suffer with teeth rotting in their head for want of dental care? Someone please explain, to me, how it is
that tiny, poor Cuba has a lower infant mortality rate than the good ol' USA?
16 Oct 21
@averagejoe1 said"Now hold on. First, please note that Bernie, after saying to everyone that he is a "Democratic Socialist", does not tell us What That Means."
Now hold on. First, please note that Bernie, after saying to everyone that he is a "Democratic Socialist", does not tell us What That Means. Maybe you can tell us, so we can all debate the same thing. One thing we have to agree on...he wants the govt to give away things for free, which, in itself, is a tenet of Socialism..,....its Biggest Tenet.
Further, all medical ...[text shortened]... e has said that capitalism is incompatible with Freedom and Equality. Can you explain that as well?
He assumes he is talking to educated people
"Maybe you can tell us, so we can all debate the same thing."
Or maybe you ca educate yourself and not put the burden on someone else. Since you are such a fan of not being a dependent loser.
"He has said that capitalism is incompatible with Freedom and Equality."
When. In what context. No, i am not going to google what is most likely a fabrication based on your ramblings.
16 Oct 21
I had a look at the differences between socialism and democratic socialism
https://www.diffen.com/difference/Democratic_Socialism_vs_Socialism
So people can continue the debate with the facts in hand.
One can also use diffen.com to read up on the difference between socialism and communism.
There seems to be considerable ignorance amongst some on the right in this regard.
This just a Coles Notes description...... but should be of help to most.
16 Oct 21
@shavixmir saidWhich ones? The old ones, the ones in place for a long time like fire station, police, Military, ER, roads, public schools, erc are perfectly fine, as you say..
Democratic socialism is not socialism.
And you arguing that Bernie is a socialist because he claims to be a democratic socialist is completely moronic.
That being said, some of the policies Bernie advances are indeed socialist.
And that is perfectly fine.
What other policies would you say Bernie has lined up that might be unconscionable? Please name each and we can vote any are unconscionable. So far, we agree on fire stations, military, roads, etc.
Cool discussion.
- Joined
- 27 Sep 06
- Moves
- 251103
@metal-brain said..............You didn't read marauder's post....
In socialism the workers must at least partly control the means of production or profit from it. None of those countries you listed do that. They are not socialist countries, except maybe Germany in a limited way.
You are talking about Marxism
There is a difference......I'll wager if you
google socialist countries you'll most of the ones I mentioned.
Wait, I'll do it for you.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_socialist_states
Yup, Less Than AverageJoe, you're wrong AGAIN, as usual.
@jimm619 saidCan a country be considered socialist if 3/4 to 90% of the nation's wealth is generated by traditional private businesses? That is true in the Nordic countries mentioned.
..............You didn't read marauder's post....
You are talking about Marxism
There is a difference......I'll wager if you
google socialist countries you'll most of the ones I mentioned.
Wait, I'll do it for you.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_socialist_states
Yup, Less Than AverageJoe, you're wrong AGAIN, as usual.
- Joined
- 27 Sep 06
- Moves
- 251103
17 Oct 21
@no1marauder said....You are correct, as usual.
Can a country be considered socialist if 3/4 to 90% of the nation's wealth is generated by traditional private businesses? That is true in the Nordic countries mentioned.
Upon further research I discovered that The Nordic brand of Socialism
is a peculiar mix of free market/high taxes/socialism.
And they cannot be called pure socialist countries
I even sent AJ a clarification.
17 Oct 21
@jimm619 saidSocialism is one of the most misused word there is. There are all sorts of different definitions of it. The only thing consistent about the definition of socialism is the inconsistency.
..............You didn't read marauder's post....
You are talking about Marxism
There is a difference......I'll wager if you
google socialist countries you'll most of the ones I mentioned.
Wait, I'll do it for you.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_socialist_states
Yup, Less Than AverageJoe, you're wrong AGAIN, as usual.
People used to call FDR a socialist. Do the history books say FDR was the USA's first socialist president? Did he turn the USA into a socialist country? Should my country be called the United Socialist States of America?
FDR was a capitalist who gave the people social programs as a compromise to avoid a socialist revolution. Back then a lot of people were socialists and communists. People had to work hard for the crumbs they were given. There was no minimum wage. A lot of capitalists didn't care about human life and well being. Socialism was popular back then. FDR gave people the alternative to socialism, not socialism. Something most capitalists could live with.
@metal-brain saidSee Above. “”...is the inconsistency ..,AND Free Stuff. “””. Why do liberals never speak to this, head on. ?
Socialism is one of the most misused word there is. There are all sorts of different definitions of it. The only thing consistent about the definition of socialism is the inconsistency.
It’s not too late, please do it now. The free stuff. When is it, literally and figuratively, just too much??
And just so we are all on same page, let us stipulate that Dems are proposing Free College For People Illegally Invaders Of The USA. No other country does that.
17 Oct 21
@averagejoe1 saidBecause we don't care if you're outraged about the People getting necessary goods and services at public expense. The entire purpose of an organized society is mutual aid and protection, not providing an opportunity for a few to enrich themselves while others starve or die from preventable diseases.
See Above. “”...is the inconsistency ..,AND Free Stuff. “””. Why do liberals never speak to this, head on. ?
It’s not too late, please do it now. The free stuff. When is it, literally and figuratively just too much??
17 Oct 21
@jimm619 saidThe Nordic brand of Socialism is, by all definitions of socialism, more socialistic than the USA. We all certainly agree. So, the big question, how much more socialistic, beyond fire stations, roads and police, etc, should the USA be? Certainly not like the Nords, as we are 330,000,000, made up of Many Many cultures.
....You are correct, as usual.
Upon further research I discovered that The Nordic brand of Socialism
is a peculiar mix of free market/high taxes/socialism.
And they cannot be called pure socialist countries
I even sent AJ a clarification.
17 Oct 21
@no1marauder saidSettle down man.
Because we don't care if you're outraged about the People getting necessary goods and services at public expense. The entire purpose of an organized society is mutual aid and protection, not providing an opportunity for a few to enrich themselves while others starve or die from preventable diseases.
Anyway, how bout this, I’ll read u tomorrow. If college is free for your 5 kids, and I have none, is that a net-negative to me, a taxpayer. These 5 kids will support you with their wealth 25 years from now. I will toil many years longer than will you. A bitch, isn’t it. For me.
If my neighbor gets to have kids and able to work cause of free child care, he is getting free support from the govt. I don’t have kids, but to be able to work , I need to get 8 miles from my house. No bus, no train. Should govt buy me a car?
There is no difference, as both scenarios are for the same result....a man to be able to work.
Why will you not respond clearly with your differing viewpoint, or agree with me that it is unfair on its face?
Please. Why, Suzianne will think me the laughingstock !,
17 Oct 21
@no1marauder [i]said. The entire purpose of an organized society is mutual aid and protection, not providing an opportunity for a few to enrich themselves while others starve or die from preventable diseases.This sentence, it’s meaning, the concept, the logic, the smoke and mirrors, is absolutely absurd. Marxist, through and through.
17 Oct 21
@averagejoe1 saidWealthy people get free stuff too. Some people call it corporate welfare. The stimulus money the FRS created out of nothing and created this inflation largely went to the wealthy. The poor got some stimulus checks, but that was just to give us a cut so we didn't complain as much.
See Above. “”...is the inconsistency ..,AND Free Stuff. “””. Why do liberals never speak to this, head on. ?
It’s not too late, please do it now. The free stuff. When is it, literally and figuratively, just too much??
And just so we are all on same page, let us stipulate that Dems are proposing Free College For People Illegally Invaders Of The USA. No other country does that.
The wealthy people mostly got free money and we are paying for it with the inflation tax. They own stocks so they are largely insulated from the inflation. Inflation disproportionately hurts the poor.
You could say inflation is the weapon of choice for class warfare.
17 Oct 21
@averagejoe1 saidYour "everybody is a Marxist who doesn't agree with me" routine is mindless and idiotic.
This sentence, it’s meaning, the concept, the logic, the smoke and mirrors, is absolutely absurd. Marxist, through and through.
The concept given predates Marx by centuries and was most notably expressed by John Locke, who you probably never heard of but who was a major intellectual influence of the Founders of the US.