Socialist Democracy (Viva Revolution!)

[Kandahar]

Actually Western Europe is a social democracy.

Social democracy, democratic socialism...please explain the difference.

And they are not "stagnating" either. They have a higher standard of living than the US. Nice try though Kandhar.

A select few Western European countries have a higher standard of living than the US, but the majority do not. Regardless, that has nothing to do with a country stagnating. Stagnation means the country is not IMPROVING its economy; it has nothing to do with its current standard of living, as both Germany and North Korea are stagnating.

The American economy grows an average of 3% per year. The Euro-zone averages about half of that, because of less economic freedom. But the biggest economic growth in the world comes from Asia, where former socialist and communist countries are liberalizing their economies and, as a result, growing their economies at breathtaking speeds nearing 9%.

 

[wxcrazytwo]

Now, see it was funny till you insulted me.

Your dog-monkey sucks.

SORRY, DIDN'T MEAN TO.

 

[Kelzie]

Social democracy, democratic socialism...please explain the difference.

Man I don't remember. All I remember is that I got schooled by anomoly for calling myself a socialist. Evidently I am a democratic socialist....I think. Or was I a social democrat...either way I prefer the term Euro-socialist.

A select few Western European countries have a higher standard of living than the US, but the majority do not. Regardless, that has nothing to do with a country stagnating. Stagnation means the country is not IMPROVING its economy; it has nothing to do with its current standard of living, as both Germany and North Korea are stagnating.

The US is number 11 as far as standard of living goes. The first 10 countries are social democracies.

The American economy grows an average of 3% per year. The Euro-zone averages about half of that, because of less economic freedom. But the biggest economic growth in the world comes from Asia, where former socialist and communist countries are liberalizing their economies and, as a result, growing their economies at breathtaking speeds nearing 9%.

I'm really okay with slow economic growth as long as they provide for their people.

 

[Kelzie]

SORRY, DIDN'T MEAN TO.

:sigh: That's okay. I'll forgive you this one time. But you'd better watch your step. :lol:

 

[cnredd]

:sigh: That's okay. I'll forgive you this one time. But you'd better watch your step. :lol:

I don't trust her...

She doesn't eat meat which controls tempers...

 

[Kandahar]

Man I don't remember. All I remember is that I got schooled by anomoly for calling myself a socialist. Evidently I am a democratic socialist....I think. Or was I a social democrat...either way I prefer the term Euro-socialist.

European socialism is no different than any other kind of socialism, other than the fact that it's relatively new in Western Europe and therefore hasn't had a chance to completely fail yet like it has everywhere else.

The US is number 11 as far as standard of living goes. The first 10 countries are social democracies.

That may be the case, but it still misses the point that the United States economy is stronger and improving faster than the economies of social democracies.

I'm really okay with slow economic growth as long as they provide for their people.

Fair enough, but don't be surprised then when the United States overtakes the few social democracies still ahead of it in terms of standard of living. It's an issue of spending all your money now as you earn it, or tightening your belt and saving for your long-term financial prospects.

 

[Canuck]

By revolution do you mean violent revolution or something different? I read the comunist party of great brittans draft plan a while back which claimed that electoral politics wouldnt be the right medium to achive there goals. Seams like a pretty moronic stance to take really, isnt democracy good enough for them? why have a violent revolution when you can change things though electoral politics?

the only things you change in AMERICAN democracy ,with it, are what the elite want changed.

No medicare
no advancing of social programs
No real change

status quo untill the elite want it changed

steady as she goes
military might
space race

While there are people ,homeless in the streets,children without food, education system in shambles
levees broken down

Wake up and smell the coffee
my god it took millions of people in the streets to rectify racial problems
and they still are not fully fixed
Licoln didnt save the slaves with the civil war all it accomplished was TAXES

americans have their heads so far up their ass that they can not look further than a 2 party system that are bought and sold by the Elite

you dont become a rep or a dem you are born into it in America
line up good little robots and vote like daddy and grandpappy no matter who
is running
the vote always split down the middle
the same old argument north VS south more or less
time to fracture the union it is too corrupt to save
the richest counrty in the world
no medicare
people homless in the streets children going to bed hungry
morals non existant
levees decayed

so poisoned is the system it is beyond belief
there is a fracture coming and it will be violent, decisive, and without warning.

 

[Kelzie]

I don't trust her...

She doesn't eat meat which controls tempers...

It's true....:twisted:

 

[wxcrazytwo]

It's true....:twisted:

no meat, how about beef?

 

[Kelzie]

European socialism is no different than any other kind of socialism, other than the fact that it's relatively new in Western Europe and therefore hasn't had a chance to completely fail yet like it has everywhere else.

Well none of this is true. W. Europe has been a social democracy for what, like 50 years now? If it was going to collapse, it would have happened a while ago.

And it is different from pure socialism. I don't know if you noticed, but you can own a house in Europe. Euro-socialism has respect for the need of private property.

That may be the case, but it still misses the point that the United States economy is stronger and improving faster than the economies of social democracies.

And what exactly is the point of a strong economy if you don't provide for your people?

Fair enough, but don't be surprised then when the United States overtakes the few social democracies still ahead of it in terms of standard of living. It's an issue of spending all your money now as you earn it, or tightening your belt and saving for your long-term financial prospects.

The US is saving money? When did this happen? And here I was under the impression that we were trillions of dollars in the hole. Silly me.

 

[Kelzie]

no meat, how about beef?

Only if it starts growing on trees. :lol:

 

[Kandahar]

Well none of this is true. W. Europe has been a social democracy for what, like 50 years now? If it was going to collapse, it would have happened a while ago.

The current level of socialism in Western Europe is relatively new. While you are correct that it has usually been more socialistic than the United States in the last 50 years, it did not dramatically increase its spending until after the Wall came down.

The creaks in the system are already becoming evident. Observe the antiquated economies of France, Germany, and Italy. Compare them to the more liberal economies of Britain, Ireland, Poland, and the Czech Republic. Which is improving faster?

And it is different from pure socialism. I don't know if you noticed, but you can own a house in Europe. Euro-socialism has respect for the need of private property.

This is true, and a very good thing.

And what exactly is the point of a strong economy if you don't provide for your people?

When your economy is strong, it improves the standard of living for society as a whole. Following WWII, Hong Kong did almost nothing to "provide for its citizens" and continues that policy to the present day. Yet the standard of living is among the highest in the world today. The moral of this story: the people can provide for themselves when they don't have the government telling them not to.

The US is saving money? When did this happen? And here I was under the impression that we were trillions of dollars in the hole. Silly me.

Sorry, I meant it as an analogy to personal finance. We can make short-term sacrifices for long-term financial gain, or we can throw caution to the wind and have everything in the short-term.

The government has two choices: it can "provide for its citizens" today, and continue having to do this into the indefinite future, as in the case of Western Europe. Or, it can liberalize its economy and let its citizens do as they please with their money, and eventually surpass the socialists anyway, as in the case of Hong Kong.

 

[Z.D.]

I can be so stupid sometimes. It was trotsky that said that quote. :3oops:

Well anyways....

Yes I forgot about western europe in this discussion. I went to Austria a little while ago and when I was talking to some of the locals in Salzburg their government seemed very much like a socialist democracy. It is such a nice country too......

 

[128shot]

Actually, I don't believe the EU is so stupid as to continue its current policy. Its due for a "new economic liberalization"

and its welcome, I quite like europe, but in order to have a social economy, you must allow that society to spend its money how it wishes :smile:


Due time, due time.



Europeans should also treat their immigrants better...I hear in Italy and Germany the turks and others aren't really well treated..

 

[Kandahar]

Actually, I don't believe the EU is so stupid as to continue its current policy. Its due for a "new economic liberalization"

I agree completely. While the Germans may have mangled this election, I'll bet they'll give the reformers more of a mandate next time. Same goes for France and Italy.

There's only so long that (well-educated) countries like these can go before they realize that their economic system simply doesn't work.

 

[Canuck]

By revolution do you mean violent revolution or something different? I read the comunist party of great brittans draft plan a while back which claimed that electoral politics wouldnt be the right medium to achive there goals. Seams like a pretty moronic stance to take really, isnt democracy good enough for them? why have a violent revolution when you can change things though electoral politics?

what has America changed in the past 40 years through democratic means

other then allow an invasion of mexicans against their oath to office
medicare nope any social advancement nope

when the two parties are in the pockets of the ELITE can you honestly expect change
change comes slow with american democracy and ussualy its a step backwards

 

[128shot]

I agree completely. While the Germans may have mangled this election, I'll bet they'll give the reformers more of a mandate next time. Same goes for France and Italy.

There's only so long that (well-educated) countries like these can go before they realize that their economic system simply doesn't work.

They'll lose benefits, but I think they were just experimenting. I'm sure they'll keep alot of the same policys as before, but cut down on all the unneeded junk they have right now, and I also hear that they're going to vote on a EU flat tax..





Hmm, EU looks like a prime business capital once again.

 

[Comrade Brian]

Europeans should also treat their immigrants better...I hear in Italy and Germany the turks and others aren't really well treated..

And of course immigrants here are treated very well:roll:

 

[Kandahar]

And of course immigrants here are treated very well:roll:

Not as well as they should be, but they are definitely treated better here compared to Western Europe. I don't mean to say that there isn't room for improvement, but there are very few countries more immigrant-friendly than the United States of America.

 

[Kelzie]

Not as well as they should be, but they are definitely treated better here compared to Western Europe. I don't mean to say that there isn't room for improvement, but there are very few countries more immigrant-friendly than the United States of America.

Canada. Australia.

 

[SKILMATIC]

Canada. Australia.

Like he said, very few

 

[Kelzie]

Like he said, very few

What, I was just helping him. :lol:

 

[Canuck]

I TeLL YOU What ,there PARTNER
there must be 300 million mexicans inside the border and the border patrol is waving more in and handing out brochures
I'se a fixin to go get the pole eeeee ce
theys all screaming viva la revoulutione
Shucks Golly !
"A Hard Rains A Gonna Fall"
By BOB DYLAN

 

[120X]

first of all , i am not your comrade:doh . socialism ? sounds to much like Siberia . sorry cant go for that . perhaps you should try Canada , i hear they swing that way :rofl