"The Economist" Lies about Socialism

Started by Dantev2

This political chat room is for you to sound off about any political ideology and discuss current political topics. Everyone is welcome, yes, even conservatives, but keep in mind, the nature of the No Holds Barred political chat forum platform can be friendly to trolling. It is your responsibility to address this wisely. Forum Rules

Next
23 replies to this topic Sticky this thread

Dantev2's Photo
Posted by Dantev2
  1,128 18 May 2017, 10:14 pm

Dantev2    
   

Posts: 599
Independent Independent political affiliation
Politics: N/A
Money: 1,127.97

Log in or register to remove this ad..

The Economist should rename themselves "The Bourgeois"

http://www.economist.com/node/21563260

Verghese Kurien, father of India’s “white revolution”, died on September 9th, aged 90

MILK, and butter for that matter, are sacred substances in Hindu India. They make up daily offerings, and milk washes the feet of household gods. Newly married couples compete to fish for the ring in a bowl of milk. The god Krishna, as a child, stole butter from the household crocks. Within the primordial Ocean of Milk lay the nectar of immortality.

Verghese Kurien had no reverence for it particularly, nor for the cattle that produced it. He was born a Christian, became an atheist, ate beef, and liked a drink—but not milk. In fact, he actively disliked it. He never meant to go into dairying, either. The government pushed him into it when he went, as a gifted student, for a metallurgy scholarship, and ended up answering a trick question about pasteurisation. (“Er…something to do with milk?”) To fulfill the scholarship conditions he went to work in the run-down Government Research Creamery in dust-filled Anand in Gujarat, where the machinery kept breaking down: hating the place, hating the life, hating that ever-curdling white stuff.

All the more ironic, then, that he was the man who revolutionised milk production in India, transforming the country from a milk-deficient place to the world’s largest producer (with 17% of the global total), and along the way drawing millions of rural farmers out of poverty. Ironic, yes; but not, to him, surprising. Few others had his tenacity, his drive, his sheer bloody-mindedness, to get government ministers and foot-dragging babus to yield to his ideas. No village panchayat, no landowner, no grasping corporatist, stood for long in his way. One minister of agriculture tried to remove him from the National Dairy Development Board, of which he was founder-chairman for 33 years; instead, the minister lost his own job. The saying in Delhi was, “Don’t touch Kurien.” Once engaged in a knuckle-banging argument, he never gave in; and he never gave in, of course, because he was right.

It had all started in Anand, where, lonely and living in an empty garage, he started to befriend local farmers. (He understood Gujarati perfectly, he said, though he, a Keralite, chose not to speak it.) The farmers, struggling to get a fair price for their milk against the middlemen working for the Polson Dairy, had started a small co-operative. In 1949 Mr Kurien took charge of it, insisting—as only he could—that they bought a pasteurising machine for 60,000 rupees. The investment paid off; the milk could now reach Mumbai without spoiling; and the co-op idea grew apace. Farmers from other districts came to admire, and set up their own. Many of these were landless labourers, whose only asset was their cow or buffalo; some were women, who thereby gained a little independence. In 2012 these tiny milk producers were getting the equivalent of 29 rupees a litre, three-quarters of the price paid for a pouch of full-cream milk by customers in Chennai or Kolkata.


...

“Socialism” never described what he was doing. This was democracy: producers running everything themselves, the selling, the processing and, most of all, the marketing. Empowerment of the rural poor was his real aim, and milk merely the best tool available. He avoided national politics, staying in small, dull Anand for years, even when his Amul brand of milk products had become the biggest food brand in the country, with the plump, polka-dotted Amul girl, bread and delicious butter in hand, cracking her jokes from hoardings all over India’s cities. In Anand he was king, and liked it that way. At his house, he received prime ministers; at his Institute of Rural Management he forbade the students to hang out their washing or sit on the grass. His dairies, meanwhile, taught poor farmers to value cleanliness, discipline and hard work.


Well, this is glib coming from a capitalist magazine, but it's worth asking what the Economist defines as "aktzul s0zializm?" Is it Venezuela, where property is still held privately? Greece and Spain, where the nation is indebted to foreign capitalist entities and foreign leeches who are swooping in to buy up the property? Is it when the government provides entitlements and services to "undeserving" people?

Please entertain me, mortal fools of liberalforum.net
5
I made a sig. Hopefully you enjoy it.
Log in or register to remove this ad..

User avatar
Posted by Cannonpointer
  12,471 18 May 2017, 11:17 pm

Cannonpointer Sacred Cow Tipper
User avatar
98% Macho Man
98% Macho Man

Posts: 67,027
Location: St. Pete, Baby!
Insurrectionist Insurrectionist political affiliation
Politics: Insurrectionist
Money: 12,470.60



Dantev2 » 18 May 2017 10:14 pm wrote:
The Economist should rename themselves "The Bourgeois"

http://www.economist.com/node/21563260

Well, this is glib coming from a capitalist magazine, but it's worth asking what the Economist defines as "aktzul s0zializm?" Is it Venezuela, where property is still held privately? Greece and Spain, where the nation is indebted to foreign capitalist entities and foreign leeches who are swooping in to buy up the property? Is it when the government provides entitlements and services to "undeserving" people?

Please entertain me, mortal fools of liberalforum.net
To the bathroomers, any government which has one regulation we don't have is "soshulist." Unless, of course, they have low taxes and run their social programs through government participation in the market (ownership of the means of production by the people). THIS, they insist, is capitalism. :die:

You have to remember that these are folks who think pussy is shaped like a carrot, and there are "time outs" on heterosexuality in roadside bathrooms. :die:
0
Only the weakest ideas must be protected from debate, and only religions declare people heretics.

Humanity's law of the jungle: survival of the tribe
Money is a theory until spent - then a value statement


When your map disputes the territory, it's your map that is wrong.
Where there's much sizzle, expect little steak
Honesty is intentional - lies are the lazy way out


Nostalgia is a crime against what happened
You cannot betray me - only yourself, to me


Termin8tor's Photo
Posted by Termin8tor
  8,584 18 May 2017, 11:27 pm

Termin8tor       
      

Posts: 7,297
Conservative Conservative political affiliation
Politics: Conservative
Money: 8,583.55

Dantev2 » 18 May 2017 10:14 pm wrote:
Well, this is glib coming from a capitalist magazine, but it's worth asking what the Economist defines as "aktzul s0zializm?" Is it Venezuela, where property is still held privately? Greece and Spain, where the nation is indebted to foreign capitalist entities and foreign leeches who are swooping in to buy up the property? Is it when the government provides entitlements and services to "undeserving" people?

Please entertain me, mortal fools of liberalforum.net


Another leftist moonbat bleats in outrage that there has never been real Socialism! :huh:

"But if we tried it, it would work!" they bleat pathetically.

You people are dumber than freaking rocks. :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Socialism turned Cuba, the richest country in the hemisphere decades ago other than the US and maybe Argentina, into a desperately poor museum from the 1950's.
0

Termin8tor's Photo
Posted by Termin8tor
  8,584 18 May 2017, 11:32 pm

Termin8tor       
      

Posts: 7,297
Conservative Conservative political affiliation
Politics: Conservative
Money: 8,583.55

Cannonpointer » 18 May 2017 11:17 pm wrote:
To the bathroomers, any government which has one regulation we don't have is "soshulist." Unless, of course, they have low taxes and run their social programs through government participation in the market (ownership of the means of production by the people). THIS, they insist, is capitalism. :die:

You have to remember that these are folks who think pussy is shaped like a carrot, and there are "time outs" on heterosexuality in roadside bathrooms. :die:


Wow, bring up anything related to Economics, and this psycho starts babbling lunacy. :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
0

User avatar
Posted by Str8tEdge
  36,683 19 May 2017, 12:26 am

Str8tEdge User avatar
Emperor of the Pheasants
Emperor of the Pheasants

Posts: 31,321
Libertarian Libertarian political affiliation
Politics: Libertarian
Gender: Male
Money: 36,683.37

Dantev2 » 18 May 2017 10:14 pm wrote:
The Economist should rename themselves "The Bourgeois"

http://www.economist.com/node/21563260

Verghese Kurien, father of India’s “white revolution”, died on September 9th, aged 90

MILK, and butter for that matter, are sacred substances in Hindu India. They make up daily offerings, and milk washes the feet of household gods. Newly married couples compete to fish for the ring in a bowl of milk. The god Krishna, as a child, stole butter from the household crocks. Within the primordial Ocean of Milk lay the nectar of immortality.

Verghese Kurien had no reverence for it particularly, nor for the cattle that produced it. He was born a Christian, became an atheist, ate beef, and liked a drink—but not milk. In fact, he actively disliked it. He never meant to go into dairying, either. The government pushed him into it when he went, as a gifted student, for a metallurgy scholarship, and ended up answering a trick question about pasteurisation. (“Er…something to do with milk?”) To fulfill the scholarship conditions he went to work in the run-down Government Research Creamery in dust-filled Anand in Gujarat, where the machinery kept breaking down: hating the place, hating the life, hating that ever-curdling white stuff.

All the more ironic, then, that he was the man who revolutionised milk production in India, transforming the country from a milk-deficient place to the world’s largest producer (with 17% of the global total), and along the way drawing millions of rural farmers out of poverty. Ironic, yes; but not, to him, surprising. Few others had his tenacity, his drive, his sheer bloody-mindedness, to get government ministers and foot-dragging babus to yield to his ideas. No village panchayat, no landowner, no grasping corporatist, stood for long in his way. One minister of agriculture tried to remove him from the National Dairy Development Board, of which he was founder-chairman for 33 years; instead, the minister lost his own job. The saying in Delhi was, “Don’t touch Kurien.” Once engaged in a knuckle-banging argument, he never gave in; and he never gave in, of course, because he was right.

It had all started in Anand, where, lonely and living in an empty garage, he started to befriend local farmers. (He understood Gujarati perfectly, he said, though he, a Keralite, chose not to speak it.) The farmers, struggling to get a fair price for their milk against the middlemen working for the Polson Dairy, had started a small co-operative. In 1949 Mr Kurien took charge of it, insisting—as only he could—that they bought a pasteurising machine for 60,000 rupees. The investment paid off; the milk could now reach Mumbai without spoiling; and the co-op idea grew apace. Farmers from other districts came to admire, and set up their own. Many of these were landless labourers, whose only asset was their cow or buffalo; some were women, who thereby gained a little independence. In 2012 these tiny milk producers were getting the equivalent of 29 rupees a litre, three-quarters of the price paid for a pouch of full-cream milk by customers in Chennai or Kolkata.


...

“Socialism” never described what he was doing. This was democracy: producers running everything themselves, the selling, the processing and, most of all, the marketing. Empowerment of the rural poor was his real aim, and milk merely the best tool available. He avoided national politics, staying in small, dull Anand for years, even when his Amul brand of milk products had become the biggest food brand in the country, with the plump, polka-dotted Amul girl, bread and delicious butter in hand, cracking her jokes from hoardings all over India’s cities. In Anand he was king, and liked it that way. At his house, he received prime ministers; at his Institute of Rural Management he forbade the students to hang out their washing or sit on the grass. His dairies, meanwhile, taught poor farmers to value cleanliness, discipline and hard work.


Well, this is glib coming from a capitalist magazine, but it's worth asking what the Economist defines as "aktzul s0zializm?" Is it Venezuela, where property is still held privately? Greece and Spain, where the nation is indebted to foreign capitalist entities and foreign leeches who are swooping in to buy up the property? Is it when the government provides entitlements and services to "undeserving" people?

Please entertain me, mortal fools of liberalforum.net


Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea are the last bastions of socialism as we know it. The rest died out with the Soviet Union. Your philosophy and economic system is a HUGE, COLOSSAL FAILURE. So much so it's NEVER EVER coming back.

You'll just have to settle for "social democracy" where the government allows amoral, valueless losers like yourself, vote to confiscate other people's earnings. :LOL: :LOL: :LOL: :LOL:
0
Rebel » 01 May 2015 10:03 am wrote:
Hey, liar, have you heard the news? Multiple charges against six racist white pigs in the death of a 25-year old black man they illegally arrested and subsequently assaulted while in their custody. To sum up the Attorney General's decision - BAZINGA!!
May those racist white pigs receive their due justice in prison.

Dantev2's Photo
Posted by Dantev2
  1,128 19 May 2017, 12:54 am

Dantev2    
   

Posts: 599
Independent Independent political affiliation
Politics: N/A
Money: 1,127.97

Cannonpointer » 18 May 2017 11:17 pm wrote:
To the bathroomers, any government which has one regulation we don't have is "soshulist." Unless, of course, they have low taxes and run their social programs through government participation in the market (ownership of the means of production by the people). THIS, they insist, is capitalism. :die:

You have to remember that these are folks who think pussy is shaped like a carrot, and there are "time outs" on heterosexuality in roadside bathrooms. :die:


lmao

Another leftist moonbat bleats in outrage
that there has never been real Socialism!

:huh:
"But if we tried it, it would work!"
they bleat pathetically.

You people are dumber than freaking rocks. :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Socialism turned Cuba, the richest country in the hemisphere decades ago other than the US and maybe Argentina, into a desperately poor museum from the 1950's.



The example posted by The Economist, which they admitted was a great success, IS socialism you idiot. An authoritarian dictatorship that nationalizes property while facing decades of embargoes/sabotage/assassination attempts isn't.

What would happen to the USA economy if its corporations, farmers, etc. weren't allowed to do trade (or extremely limited trade outside its borders) for a year or two? Don't strain yourself.
0
I made a sig. Hopefully you enjoy it.

Dantev2's Photo
Posted by Dantev2
  1,128 19 May 2017, 1:00 am

Dantev2    
   

Posts: 599
Independent Independent political affiliation
Politics: N/A
Money: 1,127.97


Image

ESPN attempts to shame Cuba for poverty, idiocy backfires LOL

http://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-new ... es-w201187
1
I made a sig. Hopefully you enjoy it.

Termin8tor's Photo
Posted by Termin8tor
  8,584 19 May 2017, 9:26 am

Termin8tor       
      

Posts: 7,297
Conservative Conservative political affiliation
Politics: Conservative
Money: 8,583.55

Dantev2 » 19 May 2017 1:00 am wrote:
Image

ESPN attempts to shame Cuba for poverty, idiocy backfires LOL

http://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-new ... es-w201187


Hey Dim, they have a lot more Socialism in Detroit than they do Capitalism.

Why are the suburbs rather prosperous, but Detroit an utter disaster?

They have eyes, but will not see. :blink:
0

User avatar
Posted by Cannonpointer
  12,471 19 May 2017, 9:36 am

Cannonpointer Sacred Cow Tipper
User avatar
98% Macho Man
98% Macho Man

Posts: 67,027
Location: St. Pete, Baby!
Insurrectionist Insurrectionist political affiliation
Politics: Insurrectionist
Money: 12,470.60



Dantev2 » 19 May 2017 12:54 am wrote:
lmao


The example posted by The Economist, which they admitted was a great success, IS socialism you idiot. An authoritarian dictatorship that nationalizes property while facing decades of embargoes/sabotage/assassination attempts isn't.

What would happen to the USA economy if its corporations, farmers, etc. weren't allowed to do trade (or extremely limited trade outside its borders) for a year or two? Don't strain yourself.
Uh oh. You really screwed the pooch.

He's gonna hit ya with the BIG RED LETTERS and call you a psycho.

Don't say I didn't warn you.
0
Only the weakest ideas must be protected from debate, and only religions declare people heretics.

Humanity's law of the jungle: survival of the tribe
Money is a theory until spent - then a value statement


When your map disputes the territory, it's your map that is wrong.
Where there's much sizzle, expect little steak
Honesty is intentional - lies are the lazy way out


Nostalgia is a crime against what happened
You cannot betray me - only yourself, to me


User avatar
Posted by Cannonpointer
  12,471 19 May 2017, 9:37 am

Cannonpointer Sacred Cow Tipper
User avatar
98% Macho Man
98% Macho Man

Posts: 67,027
Location: St. Pete, Baby!
Insurrectionist Insurrectionist political affiliation
Politics: Insurrectionist
Money: 12,470.60



Termin8tor » 19 May 2017 9:26 am wrote:

Hey Dim, they have a lot more Socialism in Detroit than they do Capitalism.

Why are the suburbs rather prosperous, but Detroit an utter disaster?
Um, because the surrounding suburbs are get all of the perks of living in a big city and pay none of he costs, dipshit? :faint:

In other words, ape, the surrounding suburbs have socialized their costs and privatized their taxes. All THEY have to spend on is parks and security. The mass transit, airport, stadiums, symphony, museums - that's all handled by the big city they don't share a tax base with, maroon.
0
Only the weakest ideas must be protected from debate, and only religions declare people heretics.

Humanity's law of the jungle: survival of the tribe
Money is a theory until spent - then a value statement


When your map disputes the territory, it's your map that is wrong.
Where there's much sizzle, expect little steak
Honesty is intentional - lies are the lazy way out


Nostalgia is a crime against what happened
You cannot betray me - only yourself, to me


Termin8tor's Photo
Posted by Termin8tor
  8,584 19 May 2017, 9:49 am

Termin8tor       
      

Posts: 7,297
Conservative Conservative political affiliation
Politics: Conservative
Money: 8,583.55

Cannonpointer » 19 May 2017 9:37 am wrote:
Termin8tor » 19 May 2017 9:26 am wrote:
Hey Dim, they have a lot more Socialism in Detroit than they do Capitalism.

Why are the suburbs rather prosperous, but Detroit an utter disaster?

They have eyes, but will not see. :blink:


Um, because the surrounding suburbs are get all of the perks of living in a big city and pay none of he costs, dipshit? :faint:

In other words, ape, the surrounding suburbs have socialized their costs and privatized their taxes. All THEY have to spend on is parks and security. The mass transit, airport, stadiums, symphony, museums - that's all handled by the big city they don't share a tax base with, maroon.


In other words, Detroit is considerably Socialist, and people in the 'burbs enjoy a little bit of it.

Thanks for admitting that. :)

But what has happened in Detroit goes far, far, far beyond museums, parks, etc. It's a monument to Big Government, deeply involved in micro-managing its citizens' lives with a massively bloated public sector work force.
Arguably the worst thing that happened to Detroit was Welfare and its degradation of citizens' behavior.

And not to confuse you with reality, but if the Public Sector doesn't get involved in stadiums, museums, etc. the private sector will at far lower cost.
0

Dantev2's Photo
Posted by Dantev2
  1,128 19 May 2017, 2:08 pm

Dantev2    
   

Posts: 599
Independent Independent political affiliation
Politics: N/A
Money: 1,127.97

Termin8tor » 19 May 2017 9:26 am wrote:

Hey Dim, they have a lot more Socialism in Detroit than they do Capitalism.

Why are the suburbs rather prosperous, but Detroit an utter disaster?

They have eyes, but will not see. :blink:


You are describing the failure of center-left LIBERAL (reformist) policies in tandem with the globalized capitalist system, there is nothing "socialist" about Detroit or anywhere in America for that matter.

Socialists do not want a welfare state, they want worker-control and democracy over all productive property (capital). It was LENIN himself who said, "He who does not work, neither shall he eat."



Are the major corporations in Detroit privately owned and operated, or controlled by the workers?

Does Detroit have a massive network of co-operatives and worker-owned companies, or top-down hierarchical businesses that are beholden to shareholders?

Are the corporations working toward maximizing profit, or are they producing goods to advance social welfare?



These are all characteristics of CAPITALISM. The welfare state is just patchwork to appease the masses with bread and circus so when the next crisis comes, people don't take to the streets and threaten profits when they lose their jobs.
0
I made a sig. Hopefully you enjoy it.

Dantev2's Photo
Posted by Dantev2
  1,128 19 May 2017, 2:20 pm

Dantev2    
   

Posts: 599
Independent Independent political affiliation
Politics: N/A
Money: 1,127.97

Prager "University," a reactionary think-tank, argued that socialism "failed" in Venezuela WHILE UNSUSPECTINGLY ADMITTING VENEZUELA ISN'T SOCIALIST.

You can't make this shit up.

Jump to 4:20~

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_cont ... CUq0V-3mgo


Transcript: "There are only 2 classes in Venezuela: the poor and the super-rich. The income inequality is absolutely staggering. While most of the country is starving, the government-connected mega rich..."

Why would a "socialist" country have "staggering" income inequality? Do you people even logic?????!!

Or maybe...just maybe...countries and political parties that call themselves "socialist" OFTEN TIMES AREN'T SOCIALIST AT ALL? Does this simple thought ever manifest inside your inept brain?
Last edited by Dantev2 on 19 May 2017, 2:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
0
I made a sig. Hopefully you enjoy it.

User avatar
Posted by nuckin futz
  21,338 19 May 2017, 2:20 pm

nuckin futz User avatar
      
      

Posts: 16,537
Independent Independent political affiliation
Politics: Independent
Money: 21,337.96

Termin8tor » 18 May 2017 11:27 pm wrote:

Another leftist moonbat bleats in outrage that there has never been real Socialism! :huh:

"But if we tried it, it would work!" they bleat pathetically.

You people are dumber than freaking rocks. :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Socialism turned Cuba, the richest country in the hemisphere decades ago other than the US and maybe Argentina, into a desperately poor museum from the 1950's.


FASCSISM ruined Argentina! The Peron regime!

And Cuba has always been poor, except when Batista and the Mafia ran it! :loco:
0

As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron. --H.L. Mencken,
Image

Dantev2's Photo
Posted by Dantev2
  1,128 19 May 2017, 2:27 pm

Dantev2    
   

Posts: 599
Independent Independent political affiliation
Politics: N/A
Money: 1,127.97

nuckin futz » 19 May 2017 2:20 pm wrote:

FASCSISM ruined Argentina! The Peron regime!

And Cuba has always been poor, except when Batista and the Mafia ran it! :loco:


Batista and the Mafia made Cuba "rich" by turning the country into the prostitute/whore of the American rich/bourgeoisie. The entire island economy existed to serve the rich criminals who needed an outlet for their sins (gambling, drugs, alcohol, sex, etc.)


It's no different from the Swiss/Bermudan tax havens - store all the rich people's money (or desires, in the case of Cuba), and you get a NICE CUT!
0
I made a sig. Hopefully you enjoy it.

Termin8tor's Photo
Posted by Termin8tor
  8,584 19 May 2017, 2:33 pm

Termin8tor       
      

Posts: 7,297
Conservative Conservative political affiliation
Politics: Conservative
Money: 8,583.55

Dantev2 » 19 May 2017 2:08 pm wrote:
[quoteTermin8tor » 19 May 2017 9:26 am wrote:]Hey Dim, they have a lot more Socialism in Detroit than they do Capitalism.
Why are the suburbs rather prosperous, but Detroit an utter disaster?
They have eyes, but will not see. :blink:


You are describing the failure of center-left LIBERAL (reformist) policies in tandem with the globalized capitalist system, there is nothing "socialist" about Detroit or anywhere in America for that matter.

Socialists do not want a welfare state, they want worker-control and democracy over all productive property (capital). It was LENIN himself who said, "He who does not work, neither shall he eat."[/quote]

They are free to buy productive capital, i.e. companies, Dim, and sometimes do, usually with poor result, if they have to run it.

So what's your complaint? That the companies weren't taken from the actual owners and given to them?

Are the major corporations in Detroit privately owned and operated, or controlled by the workers?
Does Detroit have a massive network of co-operatives and worker-owned companies, or top-down hierarchical businesses that are beholden to shareholders?


They easily could have been. Why didn't the workers buy their own companies?
Instead, coddled, thuggish, overpaid auto unions drove their own companies into bankruptcy.

Are the corporations working toward maximizing profit, or are they producing goods to advance social welfare?


Here's a hint, Dim. Corporations have a legal "fiduciary responsibility" to the shareholders, the owners, not to society at large.

These are all characteristics of CAPITALISM. The welfare state is just patchwork to appease the masses with bread and circus so when the next crisis comes, people don't take to the streets and threaten profits when they lose their jobs.


Detroit's problems go far, far, far beyond just the auto companies. Liberal-left Socialistic politicians have destroyed the city with high taxation, vast over-regulation, a huge public workforce and a huge Welfare State.

That's not very Capitalist, Dim.

"Patchwork?" You have absolutely no idea how massive the Welfare Industrial Complex is.
0

TonySplacci's Photo
Posted by TonySplacci
  14,161 19 May 2017, 3:34 pm

TonySplacci       
      

Posts: 14,577
Independent Independent political affiliation
Politics: N/A
Money: 14,161.37

Detroit happened bec wealthy fucks socialized their costs and avoided taxes. They looted and left.
0
Image

User avatar
Posted by deezer shoove
  10,711 19 May 2017, 9:35 pm

deezer shoove Bangalore Torpedo
User avatar
      
      

Posts: 9,347
Location: 3rd in line (human centipede). Light warm breeze very near anus.
Independent Independent political affiliation
Politics: N/A
Gender: Other
Money: 10,710.69



Dantev2 » 19 May 2017 12:54 am wrote:
Cannonpointer » 18 May 2017 11:17 pm wrote:
To the bathroomers, any government which has one regulation we don't have is "soshulist." Unless, of course, they have low taxes and run their social programs through government participation in the market (ownership of the means of production by the people). THIS, they insist, is capitalism. :die:

You have to remember that these are folks who think pussy is shaped like a carrot, and there are "time outs" on heterosexuality in roadside bathrooms. :die:


lmao

Another leftist moonbat bleats in outrage
that there has never been real Socialism!

:huh:
"But if we tried it, it would work!"
they bleat pathetically.

You people are dumber than freaking rocks. :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Socialism turned Cuba, the richest country in the hemisphere decades ago other than the US and maybe Argentina, into a desperately poor museum from the 1950's.



The example posted by The Economist, which they admitted was a great success, IS socialism you idiot. An authoritarian dictatorship that nationalizes property while facing decades of embargoes/sabotage/assassination attempts isn't.

What would happen to the USA economy if its corporations, farmers, etc. weren't allowed to do trade (or extremely limited trade outside its borders) for a year or two? Don't strain yourself.


Do you guys look deep into other's eyes as you jerk each other off? :wave:
0


Please
seat yourself.

Image

Dantev2's Photo
Posted by Dantev2
  1,128 21 May 2017, 6:48 pm

Dantev2    
   

Posts: 599
Independent Independent political affiliation
Politics: N/A
Money: 1,127.97

Termin8tor » 19 May 2017 2:33 pm wrote:

They are free to buy productive capital, i.e. companies, Dim, and sometimes do, usually with poor result, if they have to run it.

So what's your complaint? That the companies weren't taken from the actual owners and given to them?

They easily could have been. Why didn't the workers buy their own companies?
Instead, coddled, thuggish, overpaid auto unions drove their own companies into bankruptcy.

Here's a hint, Dim. Corporations have a legal "fiduciary responsibility" to the shareholders, the owners, not to society at large.

Detroit's problems go far, far, far beyond just the auto companies. Liberal-left Socialistic politicians have destroyed the city with high taxation, vast over-regulation, a huge public workforce and a huge Welfare State.

That's not very Capitalist, Dim.

"Patchwork?" You have absolutely no idea how massive the Welfare Industrial Complex is.


The workers didn't buy up the company because, surprise, the vast majority of workers prefer social democracy instead of full-fledged socialism. Capitalism with strong regulations, a progressive tax structure, and resilient unions. They don't want to take control over productive property themselves and run the corporation.

Not to mention "buying out the company" doesn't change the overall structure of the capitalist system, it would still be based on wage labor, commodity markets, and profit maximization.

Thanks for ADMITTING the system is capitalist with your statement about fidicuary obligation, it's hilarious when people unwittingly contradict themselves by denying the obvious ("Detroit wasn't capitalist, but the BIG 3 had a legal responsibility to maximize profits!")

Please don't talk to me about the bloated welfare state, o ye military worshipper. I don't support handouts, I want a system where everyone, except those who are unable to, can support themselves and the benefits of technology distributed equitably. For this to happen, the capitalist system must be eradicated.

You're like the 70 yr old geezer barely surviving off SS benefits with a broken back telling the young how important "hard work" is. Did you sell lies and propaganda as your primary job or business? I would wager so.
0
I made a sig. Hopefully you enjoy it.

Dantev2's Photo
Posted by Dantev2
  1,128 21 May 2017, 6:59 pm

Dantev2    
   

Posts: 599
Independent Independent political affiliation
Politics: N/A
Money: 1,127.97

Oh god, you're using tax rates and level of state workers as the litmus test for "SOSHULIZM." That's laughable.

Is New York, the center of finance, with its high taxes and state workers, socialist?

Is the SF Bay Area, the center of IT, with its high taxes and state workers, socialist?

I mean how retarded do you have to be to think an environment that actively coddles property owners and the rich is socialist, based on a few arbitrary metrics? LOL

Go ahead and use that talking point, you're not selling that shit to anyone with even slightly higher-than-average intellect. In your case that would be a good thing, since the majority of da peepul are idiots.
0
I made a sig. Hopefully you enjoy it.


Next

Return to No Holds Barred Political Forum

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 0 guests

Who has visited this topic