Socialism works until you run out of other people's money.[W:954]

[AngryOldGuy]

 

[head of joaquin]

wow, I never knew that I was a tea party person, oh even attended any meetings.

actually you provided noting at all, because you made no afford to do anything.

Yeah, it's funny how many tea partiers don't realize how tea party they are.

It's like schizophrenia: the only people who don't know they have it are the ones who do.

 

[Master PO]

Yeah, it's funny how many tea partiers don't realize how tea party they are.

It's like schizophrenia: the only people who don't know they have it are the ones who do.

oh I see, so you have GREAT insight into all things.

you really give me joy when you say things like this, your a treasure trove of information for us all.

 

[Serenity]

Moderator's Warning:

There's a topic here folks and it's not each other. Let's get back on it please.

 

[vesper]

"Socialism works until you run out of other people's money."

Is this not right?

A very profound statement made by Margaret Thatcher.

As far as socialism goes in the U.S. ....the Socialist Party was very visible in the turn of the 20th century. The Social Democracy of America was founded by a character by the name of Eugene Debs. He was an outspoken person of the labor movement. Debs ran against Woodrow Wilson. But after Wilson's presidency, the socialists saw they had a friend in the Democrat party and you didn't hear much about them until recently. They are prominent in every Democratic movement. You can visit the websites of the different Socialist organizations today including Communist USA and find them propping up Democrat candidates and policies.

Every year there is a Eugene Debs awarded to approved social or labor activists. Names like Jesse Jackson Sr., John Sweeny, President of the AFL-CIO for several years. And then you will find journalists among the ranks such as Molly Irvin as a recipient of the award who often contributed to Progressive Magazine and wrote a column often carried throughout major newspaper publications.

Here's a link to the recipients of the Eugene Debs award over the years. That in itself is evidence that the Socialist party is alive and well in the U.S. They are officially part of the Democrat party.

Category:Eugene V. Debs Award recipients - KeyWiki

 

[AngryOldGuy]

 

[vesper]

Every liberty/freedom loving American should visit the websites of Communist Party of America and Socialist Party USA on a frequent basis to educate themselves in the power of propaganda. They are pros at it. The best way to stop your enemy is to know them inside and out.

 

[head of joaquin]

A very profound statement made by Margaret Thatcher.

As far as socialism goes in the U.S. ....the Socialist Party was very visible in the turn of the 20th century. The Social Democracy of America was founded by a character by the name of Eugene Debs. He was an outspoken person of the labor movement. Debs ran against Woodrow Wilson. But after Wilson's presidency, the socialists saw they had a friend in the Democrat party and you didn't hear much about them until recently. They are prominent in every Democratic movement. You can visit the websites of the different Socialist organizations today including Communist USA and find them propping up Democrat candidates and policies.

Every year there is a Eugene Debs awarded to approved social or labor activists. Names like Jesse Jackson Sr., John Sweeny, President of the AFL-CIO for several years. And then you will find journalists among the ranks such as Molly Irvin as a recipient of the award who often contributed to Progressive Magazine and wrote a column often carried throughout major newspaper publications.

Here's a link to the recipients of the Eugene Debs award over the years. That in itself is evidence that the Socialist party is alive and well in the U.S. They are officially part of the Democrat party.

Category:Eugene V. Debs Award recipients - KeyWiki

I sure hope so.

 

[vesper]

I sure hope so.

Spoken like a true progressive. And as far as you reaching your goal, .... over my dead body clutching my pocket Constitution.

 

[head of joaquin]

Spoken like a true progressive. And as far as you reaching your goal, .... over my dead body clutching my pocket Constitution.
:

Yep, socialist ideas like a safety net and progressive taxes work to make a prosperous society.

I know that's not what you want as a conservative, but since conservatism is moribund, but used to it.

 

[AngryOldGuy]

say it loud and proud Comrade!

 

[vesper]

Yep, socialist ideas like a safety net and progressive taxes work to make a prosperous society.

I know that's not what you want as a conservative, but since conservatism is moribund, but used to it.

Even the Founders believed in a limited safety net that should be administered at the state/local level.

But a limited safety net no longer is the case after countless years of Progressives allowing the big bad Federal government to take over.

Conservatism is far from being moribund. In fact more folks in our society lean conservative than progressive. I would venture to state more and more people are having an epiphany when it comes to progressive ideas. They are learning first hand it no longer pays to pursue years of education to earn a position that pays well only to have the federal government punish you for your success through increased taxation. They are realizing they have now become the serfs for those who do not contribute to society.

But who created all of those who do not contribute to society? Progressives did. By finding every "victim" often creating them, you set up a system that rewards failure. Now there are two types of progressives, there are those at the low end of the totem pole that are addicted to welfare from the federal government. They look to the federal government as their god to provide for all their needs. But then there are the progressive elites, mostly successful white people who live in their ivory towers, know damn well if the umbilical cord was ever severed from federal government in providing entitlements to the people they helped addict to them, they would be held accountable in paying personally. The Progressive elites have darn near destroyed the Black race by addicting them to welfare that has taken their incentive away to be all they can. It is the most hideous of all things the Progressive elites have managed to accomplish. They have damn near destroyed the Black race.

 

[Glen Contrarian]

Even the Founders believed in a limited safety net that should be administered at the state/local level.

But a limited safety net no longer is the case after countless years of Progressives allowing the big bad Federal government to take over.

Conservatism is far from being moribund. In fact more folks in our society lean conservative than progressive. I would venture to state more and more people are having an epiphany when it comes to progressive ideas. They are learning first hand it no longer pays to pursue years of education to earn a position that pays well only to have the federal government punish you for your success through increased taxation. They are realizing they have now become the serfs for those who do not contribute to society.

But who created all of those who do not contribute to society? Progressives did. By finding every "victim" often creating them, you set up a system that rewards failure. Now there are two types of progressives, there are those at the low end of the totem pole that are addicted to welfare from the federal government. They look to the federal government as their god to provide for all their needs. But then there are the progressive elites, mostly successful white people who live in their ivory towers, know damn well if the umbilical cord was ever severed from federal government in providing entitlements to the people they helped addict to them, they would be held accountable in paying personally. The Progressive elites have darn near destroyed the Black race by addicting them to welfare that has taken their incentive away to be all they can. It is the most hideous of all things the Progressive elites have managed to accomplish. They have damn near destroyed the Black race.

Of course, of course! The Progressives and like-minded liberals destroy economies, societies, and races - it's all SO obvious!

Which is why EVERY SINGLE ONE of the first-world democracies - the most advanced societies on the planet - is a SOCIALIZED democracy.

See, that's the thing - conservatives claim again and again AND AGAIN how Progressives and liberals have or will destroy everything...yet they never, ever, EVER explain why it is that the most successful, most advanced nations on the planet are ALL SOCIALIZED DEMOCRACIES. Every. Single. One. Conservatives NEVER explain why it is that their dogma DOES NOT explain the results - the results being, of course, that the most successful, most advanced nations all have those very same social safety nets and 'nanny states' and 'victim mentalities' that conservatives claim pave the road to socioeconomic hell. Oh, when I ask them this question, conservatives fret and spew and sputter and say, "well, it's happening right now, can't you see?"

Except...according to conservative dogma, the New Deal shouldn't have worked to begin with - it SHOULD have driven us yet further down into the Depression - but it didn't. The taxpayer-funded build-up to WWII was in economic terms the greatest taxpayer-funded economic stimulus in America's history, and SHOULD NOT have gotten us out of the Depression (but it did) and SHOULD have driven us even deeper into the Depression (which it didn't). The stratospheric top marginal tax rates of the 1950's (90% for about eight years, followed by another 20 years at 70%) SHOULD have driven us to become the next Weimar Republic - but they didn't. LBJ's Great Society SHOULD have ruined us economically - but it didn't. The 'Reagan Revolution' heralded a slash in the tax rates (down to 25%) which was immediately followed by what was then the worst economic mess since the Depression - the 1982 Recession, followed a few years later by the S&L crisis (thanks to Republican deregulation). Clinton successfully got our economy back on track, and what happened? The Republicans got back in and gave us the Great Recession.

Yet it's the CONSERVATIVES who must be trusted when it comes to fiscal management - and I guess this would be true...if one flatly ignores our economic history since 1920.

Vesper - EXPLAIN THE RESULTS. Explain why it is that if social democracy - complete with social safety net, higher taxes, and more comprehensive regulation - is SO bad, why it is that it's the SOCIALIZED first-world democracies that are the most advanced, most successful nations on the planet...and don't give me that "it's just a matter of time", because America's been a socialized democracy since the New Deal EIGHTY FREAKING YEARS AGO...and England for longer than that.

 

[yobarnacle]

Look at history.
Technology makes nations great, not government. The Zulu's conquered most of central Africa, because they invented the assegai. A short stabbing spear with a long blade. To all intent, a two handed sword. They figured out it wasn't cool to throw away your weapon, even in the direction of the enemy.
The USA wasn't a power until AFTER WWII. Technology advances made us rich and powerful.
The other 1st world nations, as they slipped into socialism, have diminished.
We are diminishing right now. Economy bad, social unrest, massive unemployment, companies NOT investing in R&D. NOT increasing but downsizing. Why? Because of INCREASE in socialism in our government.

 

[froggigger]

Except...according to conservative dogma, the New Deal shouldn't have worked to begin with - it SHOULD have driven us yet further down into the Depression - but it didn't.

The New Deal gave us the longest, most severe depression in our nations history. Kind of tough to go further down in the crapper when you're already dragging the bottom.

“We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work. I want to see this country prosperous. I want to see people get a job. I want to see people get enough to eat. We have never made good on our promises. I say after eight years of this Administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started. … And an enormous debt to boot!” –Henry Morgenthau Jr

The taxpayer-funded build-up to WWII was in economic terms the greatest taxpayer-funded economic stimulus in America's history, and SHOULD NOT have gotten us out of the Depression (but it did) and SHOULD have driven us even deeper into the Depression (which it didn't).

Oh yeah, death and destruction on a worldwide scale definitely contributes to economic growth. :roll: You can find statistics all day long that "prove" war brought us out of the depression. Take unemployment. Statistics show that war cured unemployment, but the statistics don't mention the goal was reached by sending millions of men across the pond to fight.

Another example was an increase in GDP due to massive government spending for the war effort. It is ignored that spending for goods and services for a wartime military is not as productive as spending by consumers for goods and services in the private sector. There is no incentive to find the best price, and wartime urgency compounds the problem, not to mention that much of the production was sent overseas to be blown up or otherwise destroyed. We didn't fully recover from the depression until many years after the war.

The stratospheric top marginal tax rates of the 1950's (90% for about eight years, followed by another 20 years at 70%) SHOULD have driven us to become the next Weimar Republic - but they didn't.

A lot has changed since the '50s. There is a lot more international competition over taxes today. For investors worldwide in capital markets looking for the best return, even small differences in tax rates can help determine where the money goes. It's a strong incentive to invest in a country where the workers are able to keep more of their earned money, especially if it's not offset by lower cost, higher productivity, or some other advantage - and the corporate tax rate can't be ignored in the equation.

LBJ's Great Society SHOULD have ruined us economically - but it didn't.

Medicare and Medicaid are working great with no financial problems at all. The Economic Opportunity Act has eliminated poverty. The Elementary and Secondary Education Act fixed our education system so no more "fixes" were necessary. The list goes on. The reality is waste, new layers of bureaucracy, a continued war on poverty, and our students leaving school without a decent education.

The 'Reagan Revolution' heralded a slash in the tax rates (down to 25%) which was immediately followed by what was then the worst economic mess since the Depression - the 1982 Recession, followed a few years later by the S&L crisis (thanks to Republican deregulation).

The tax cut in 1981 wasn't a real tax cut. Marginal rates may have been cut, but most folks paid higher taxes thanks to bracket creep and higher SS taxes. Plus, other tax increases weren't called tax increases, but plugging loopholes, raising fees, revenue enhancement, increased enforcement, etc. So the reality is that, if your view of the Reagan economy is correct, it was actually higher taxes that led to the worst economic mess since the depression - the 1982 recession, followed a few years later by the S&L crisis.

Clinton successfully got our economy back on track, and what happened? The Republicans got back in and gave us the Great Recession.

Clinton raised taxes early on lending credence to the view that higher taxes result in prosperity. However, capital gains taxes were cut from 28% to 20% with a higher exemption for capital gains on home sales. Funny that part is hardly ever mentioned, yet it helped fuel the dot-com boom.

 

[AngryOldGuy]

we are diminishing right now

The Zulu's had the assegai
We have these

be afraid be very afraid

 

[Glen Contrarian]

The New Deal gave us the longest, most severe depression in our nations history. Kind of tough to go further down in the crapper when you're already dragging the bottom.

“We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work. I want to see this country prosperous. I want to see people get a job. I want to see people get enough to eat. We have never made good on our promises. I say after eight years of this Administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started. … And an enormous debt to boot!” –Henry Morgenthau Jr

And here's what you didn't realize:



The economy had hit bottom in March 1933 and then started to expand. Economic indicators show the economy reached nadir in the first days of March, then began a steady, sharp upward recovery. Thus the Federal Reserve Index of Industrial Production sank to its lowest point of 52.8 in July 1932 (with 1935–39 = 100) and was practically unchanged at 54.3 in March 1933; however by July 1933, it reached 85.5, a dramatic rebound of 57% in four months. Recovery was steady and strong until 1937. Except for employment, the economy by 1937 surpassed the levels of the late 1920s. The Recession of 1937 was a temporary downturn. Private sector employment, especially in manufacturing, recovered to the level of the 1920s but failed to advance further until the war. Chart 2 shows the growth in employment without adjusting for population growth. The U.S. population was 124,840,471 in 1932 and 128,824,829 in 1937, an increase of 3,984,468. The ratio of these numbers, times the number of jobs in 1932, means there was a need for 938,000 more 1937 jobs to maintain the same employment level.(boldface and underlining mine)

See, that's the difference between your claims and mine - yours are great rhetoric...but mine have demonstrable FACTS - and facts DO have a libera

Oh yeah, death and destruction on a worldwide scale definitely contributes to economic growth. :roll: You can find statistics all day long that "prove" war brought us out of the depression. Take unemployment. Statistics show that war cured unemployment, but the statistics don't mention the goal was reached by sending millions of men across the pond to fight.

But wait - doesn't conservative dogma DEMAND that all taxpayer-funded jobs do is to take money from the private sector and thus hurt the economy even further? YES IT DOES demand that...but that's not how it turned out, is it? WHY didn't the taxpayer-funded economic stimulus - the biggest in our history - that was the build-up to WWII drive us even further down into the Depression JUST LIKE CONSERVATIVE DOGMA SAYS IT SHOULD HAVE?

You won't answer that...because you can't.

Back during the economic troubles of the 1970's and early 1980's, the older people - the ones who could remember WWII - would half jokingly claim that in order to fix the economy, "we just need another good war". They were only half joking because - even though most certainly did not want another war - they remembered very well that it was government spending on a grand scale that got us OUT of the Depression. But then, that was back in the day when 'conservative' also implied that history and common sense also had to be considered in politics (and I was a strong conservative until the early 1990's).

Another example was an increase in GDP due to massive government spending for the war effort. It is ignored that spending for goods and services for a wartime military is not as productive as spending by consumers for goods and services in the private sector. There is no incentive to find the best price, and wartime urgency compounds the problem, not to mention that much of the production was sent overseas to be blown up or otherwise destroyed. We didn't fully recover from the depression until many years after the war.

BUT our economy was no longer in the Depression, was it? In fact, even though we had that truly monstrous debt from WWII - which was significantly higher in proportion to the GDP than it is today - we were able to pay most of it off during the 1950's. Yes, we had a couple tough years with the drawdown immediately after the war - from several million people suddenly becoming unemployed from the military and war industries - BUT our economy did NOT go back down into that Depression. Not only that, but what happened when Truman jacked the top marginal tax rate up to NINETY PERCENT? You know, according to conservative dogma, that SHOULD have crashed our economy...but it didn't. That tax rate (which was maintained by the last truly sensible Republican president (Eisenhower) until 1960), along with the government spending for the Korean War and the Cold War AND a little something called the Interstate System...these SHOULD have crashed our economy...but they didn't. Instead, we not only boomed, but look what happened to our federal debt-to-gdp ratio:



And didja happen to notice that the debt-to-gdp ratio FELL all the way from the end of WWII until 1981 - which just happened to be the years of 90% and 70% top marginal tax rate? But what happened? Reagan and Bush 41 take over, and the debt-to-GDP jumps up. Clinton comes back in and the debt-to-GDP ratio starts to fall again. Bush 43 comes in and tosses economic sensibility out the window and our debt-to-gdp ratio booms...and in January 2009, the oncoming Democratic president gets handed the biggest economic s**t sandwich since FDR took over in the Depression.

Sorry, guy, for the past thirty-odd years, for the economy it's been GOP=bad, Dems=good. That's what the hard data show.

Again, those pesky liberally-biases FACTS trump that oh-so-sensible-sounding conservative DOGMA....

A lot has changed since the '50s. There is a lot more international competition over taxes today. For investors worldwide in capital markets looking for the best return, even small differences in tax rates can help determine where the money goes. It's a strong incentive to invest in a country where the workers are able to keep more of their earned money, especially if it's not offset by lower cost, higher productivity, or some other advantage - and the corporate tax rate can't be ignored in the equation.

AGAIN, didja see what's been happening to our debt-to-gdp ratio during Republican and Democratic administrations?

Medicare and Medicaid are working great with no financial problems at all. The Economic Opportunity Act has eliminated poverty. The Elementary and Secondary Education Act fixed our education system so no more "fixes" were necessary. The list goes on. The reality is waste, new layers of bureaucracy, a continued war on poverty, and our students leaving school without a decent education.

So things are SO much worse in ALL the other first-world democracies, even though - with their oh-so-terrible socialized medicine, they have generally higher life expectancies than we do AND they spend about HALF what we ALREADY do in taxpayer dollars for health care? And when it comes to schools, do you realize that we spend LESS per student than does POLAND? Guy, you get what you pay for - and if you're going to pay peanuts in taxes for our kids' educations, then you're going to get crappy results.

The tax cut in 1981 wasn't a real tax cut. Marginal rates may have been cut, but most folks paid higher taxes thanks to bracket creep and higher SS taxes. Plus, other tax increases weren't called tax increases, but plugging loopholes, raising fees, revenue enhancement, increased enforcement, etc. So the reality is that, if your view of the Reagan economy is correct, it was actually higher taxes that led to the worst economic mess since the depression - the 1982 recession, followed a few years later by the S&L crisis.

But what Reagan slashed wasn't just the top marginal tax rates, but it was the corporate tax rates, too:



And YES, the S&L crisis was caused in large part by deregulation - and who is it that LOVES to deregulate the private sector? Oh, yeah - conservatives.

Clinton raised taxes early on lending credence to the view that higher taxes result in prosperity. However, capital gains taxes were cut from 28% to 20% with a higher exemption for capital gains on home sales. Funny that part is hardly ever mentioned, yet it helped fuel the dot-com boom.

Actually, I give Bush 41 more credit for the 1990's boom than I do Clinton. Why? Do you remember his famous quote that came back to haunt him in the next election? "Read my lips - no new taxes". But Bush 41 had the COURAGE to see that taxes were too low, that he had to ignore his party's wishes and raise taxes to help the economy...and that's what initially set up the boom of the Clinton years.

Sorry, guy, but those pesky facts DO have a liberal bias.

 

[head of joaquin]

Even the Founders believed in a limited safety net that should be administered at the state/local level.

But a limited safety net no longer is the case after countless years of Progressives allowing the big bad Federal government to take over.

Conservatism is far from being moribund. In fact more folks in our society lean conservative than progressive. I would venture to state more and more people are having an epiphany when it comes to progressive ideas. They are learning first hand it no longer pays to pursue years of education to earn a position that pays well only to have the federal government punish you for your success through increased taxation. They are realizing they have now become the serfs for those who do not contribute to society.

But who created all of those who do not contribute to society? Progressives did. By finding every "victim" often creating them, you set up a system that rewards failure. Now there are two types of progressives, there are those at the low end of the totem pole that are addicted to welfare from the federal government. They look to the federal government as their god to provide for all their needs. But then there are the progressive elites, mostly successful white people who live in their ivory towers, know damn well if the umbilical cord was ever severed from federal government in providing entitlements to the people they helped addict to them, they would be held accountable in paying personally. The Progressive elites have darn near destroyed the Black race by addicting them to welfare that has taken their incentive away to be all they can. It is the most hideous of all things the Progressive elites have managed to accomplish. They have damn near destroyed the Black race.

The vapid Big Gummit meme. It's all you ever have. The nation has 310M people. So we have a big government. Get used to the real world.

 

[head of joaquin]

The New Deal gave us the longest, most severe depression in our nations history. Kind of tough to go further down in the crapper when you're already dragging the bottom.

God I love it when conservatives try really hard to foster some particularly idiotic meme. This is one of the best.

Regrettably, under FDR the US became the largest economy on the planet.

So sorry to burst you vapid rightwing meme.

 

[AngryOldGuy]

Your big government is mega-fail

 

[haymarket]

The vapid rightwing meme continues. Like clockwork.

this is my favorite line from the crap from yobarnacle

I am the only law professor in America that teaches how the Organic Law creates a Senate that functions as the United States in Congress assembled under the Articles of Confederation and as the United States Senate under the authority of the Constitution of the United States.

yup --- one lone voice in the wilderness who knows "The Truth" and everybody else is just plain wrong or stupid or a paid agent of the Leon Trotsky Marching Society. :roll:

 

[Glen Contrarian]

Look at history.
Technology makes nations great, not government. The Zulu's conquered most of central Africa, because they invented the assegai. A short stabbing spear with a long blade. To all intent, a two handed sword. They figured out it wasn't cool to throw away your weapon, even in the direction of the enemy.
The USA wasn't a power until AFTER WWII. Technology advances made us rich and powerful.
The other 1st world nations, as they slipped into socialism, have diminished.
We are diminishing right now. Economy bad, social unrest, massive unemployment, companies NOT investing in R&D. NOT increasing but downsizing. Why? Because of INCREASE in socialism in our government.

Ah - it's the "all the other first-world nations have diminished" meme.

BTW, you DO know what's the biggest economy on the planet, right? It's not the U.S. It's not even China. It's the EEC - you know, those guys you claim are 'diminishing'?

And technology does not make a nation great, but is a BYPRODUCT of the greatness of a nation. Technology cannot be invented without the comprehensive education of the people - anymore, while one man may make great leaps in theory and/or invention, he by himself cannot bring it to the world - it takes a whole nation to do it. Bill Gates may have had the most to do with inventing the PC, but there was no way that he could change the world without the help of the corporate world AND the government.

In other words, when he said "you didn't build that", President Obama's words were incomplete. He should have said, "you didn't build that by yourself" - because for ANY major advance or innovation to change a nation, it takes BOTH the private AND the public sectors to enable that change...almost always starting with the comprehensive education of the public, starting at the K-12 level.

Of course you won't want to believe this, but I challenge you to come up with a single example that disproves what I said above...starting with the education of the people.

 

[vesper]

Vesper - EXPLAIN THE RESULTS. Explain why it is that if social democracy - complete with social safety net, higher taxes, and more comprehensive regulation - is SO bad, why it is that it's the SOCIALIZED first-world democracies that are the most advanced, most successful nations on the planet...and don't give me that "it's just a matter of time", because America's been a socialized democracy since the New Deal EIGHTY FREAKING YEARS AGO...and England for longer than that.

According to the OECD's latest measurement of well being, they don't seem to agree with you.

As you can see above, this year during an economic downturn with unemployment at unacceptable rates and welfare membership growing, our poorest live better than all of Europe with the exception of the little country of Sweden. The top 10% in Germany is comparable to our upper-middle class while their lowest 10% fair worse than our lowest 10%. The top 10% for Poland, Japan and France can be ranked to our low-middle class and their lowest 10% far below the U.S. Italy's top 10% is equivalent to our low 10%.

Out of all the countries above U.S. came in #1 so I guess that thing called capitalism really does work. :lol:

Daily chart: The examined life | The Economist

 

[AngryOldGuy]

The USA came in #1

Now now Vesper don't bring truth and reality into this
that will get you no where with these guys!

 

[American]

"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery."
Winston Churchill