Sticks and carrots, socialism and capitalism.

[MrWonderful]

This argument is such a lie that the person making it has brown eyes because he is so full of " bleep"

Were such a remark made by a conservative to a fascist liberal, as one calls himself so very accurately, he would be disciplined for insulting. But liberals don't live by the rules they apply to hated conservatives.

Socialism means that the workers own and control the means of production. Socialism doesn't mean handouts.

Socialism means death, fascism, and poverty. 100,000,000 killed in the last century and over a billion languishing around the world. And you celebrate all of this.

Before you reply to me educate yourself about market socialism. (An oxymoron.)

Do you also understand the social democracy is different from the cow dung heap that you are shoveling to the unlearned masses?

Ah the "learned masses" - like the socialists in universities everywhere and in Hollywood. They're so very smart because they say so.

"Social democracy" is found … where, exactly, in the U.S. Constitution?

James Madison: “I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents.”

 

[aociswundumho]

Doesn't matter, if the business is collectively owned by its workers it is socialist, by definition.

A business owned by a group of people is private property in the means of production, which is the very definition of capitalism.

 

[vegas giants]

Were such a remark made by a conservative to a fascist liberal, as one calls himself so very accurately, he would be disciplined for insulting. But liberals don't live by the rules they apply to hated conservatives.



Socialism means death, fascism, and poverty. 100,000,000 killed in the last century and over a billion languishing around the world. And you celebrate all of this.





Ah the "learned masses" - like the socialists in universities everywhere and in Hollywood. They're so very smart because they say so.

"Social democracy" is found … where, exactly, in the U.S. Constitution?

James Madison: “I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents.”

If you want yo blame socialism for millions of deaths you have to blame capitalism and christianity as well

 

[Bullseye]

You have an idea that anything that is socialist must be owned by an authoritarian state and probably funded with tax dollars, which is not true. there are others who have attempted to educate you but you refuse to learn because you have an idea in your head that you refuse to both admit is wrong and learn.

What's the definition of "Socialism"? It ain't the kumbaya "happy, happy, joy, joy, let's all get together and love one another" BS. It is quite simply "The means of production and distribution are controlled be the government". Period.

 

[Lisa]

Were such a remark made by a conservative to a fascist liberal, as one calls himself so very accurately, he would be disciplined for insulting. But liberals don't live by the rules they apply to hated conservatives.



Socialism means death, fascism, and poverty. 100,000,000 killed in the last century and over a billion languishing around the world. And you celebrate all of this.





Ah the "learned masses" - like the socialists in universities everywhere and in Hollywood. They're so very smart because they say so.

"Social democracy" is found … where, exactly, in the U.S. Constitution?

James Madison: “I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents.”

Democratic socialism and fascism are opposite political ideas. I stopped reading when you made that claim.

Capitalism is also not found in the Constitution.

 

[Bullseye]

You're thinking of state capitalism, not socialism. Collective ownership can still exist in a market economy, obviously, because there are businesses that operate on this plan in the United States. I don't see why anyone would bother trying to deny that.

Nope, I'm thinking of SOCIALISM. When you talk of "collective ownership" you're talking on a micro-level not on the national level which IS socialism. a corporation would meet your definition of collective ownership.

 

[Lisa]

What's the definition of "Socialism"? It ain't the kumbaya "happy, happy, joy, joy, let's all get together and love one another" BS. It is quite simply "The means of production and distribution are controlled be the government". Period.

Socialism does not mean that the means of production and distribution are controlled by the government. You seem to be convinced that all forms of socialism are authoritarian, but there are many that are not authoritarian and some that go as far as to deny that the power of the state exists. Read Kropotkin, Bakunin or Chomsky. That seems to be a lie that you have been fed by Dennis Prager and other conservative sources. It is not my fault that you have been fed and have chosen to believe lies.

Social anarchism - Wikipedia

 

[Lisa]

A business owned by a group of people is private property in the means of production, which is the very definition of capitalism.

You seem to incorrectly believe that socialism cannot be cooperative ownership by private individuals or the owners and the customers for net profit. The fact that you only understand one part of it is not the fault of others who are better educated in the idea. You are desperate to paint everything but your brand of underregulated capitalism as bad or a failed idea.

 

[Bullseye]

Socialism does not mean that the means of production and distribution are controlled by the government. You seem to be convinced that all forms of socialism are authoritarian, but there are many that are not authoritarian and some that go as far as to deny that the power of the state exists. Read Kropotkin, Bakunin or Chomsky. That seems to be a lie that you have been fed by Dennis Prager and other conservative sources. It is not my fault that you have been fed and have chosen to believe lies.

Social anarchism - Wikipedia

You're still in the Ivory Tower, Lisa. And it's obvious what YOU'VE been fed.

 

[Mach]

What's the definition of "Socialism"?...It is quite simply "The means of production and distribution are controlled be the government". Period.

That's not any definition I've seen Bullseye. It's social ownership, not government ownership. Government is only a subset of social ownership.

Socialism is a range of economic and social systems characterised by social ownership of the means of production and workers' self-management,[10] as well as the political theories and movements associated with them.[11] Social ownership can be public, collective or cooperative ownership, or citizen ownership of equity.[12]

Social ownership - Wikipedia

As such, state ownership is only one possible expression of public ownership, which itself is one variation of the broader concept of social ownership.[2][35]

Very clearly differentiated from "simply" government ownership.

You may not be use to all those terms because we don't use them much in U.S. political discourse, other than "Socialism bad, capitalism good" sort of silliness.
We DO enjoy a mixed set of rules that govern our system...we hopefully should be picking what works best as private, social, public, and ensuring none of them are not checked by the others (to balance power just like other checks and balances).

Pick the best tool for the job, why demonize one because of political propaganda? Which successful nations have 100% private education systems? Pure market is not the best tool for all applications, nor is public, nor is socialism, etc.

We also use a different language to describe things that share traits with socialist systems. Many corporations do end up going public...we do end up socially owning a large portion of them, we do end up investing in each others wild ideas and we call it investors in a market, but we're also investing in friends and redistributing wealthy just for social reasons (not always to make a profit), etc. We have non-profits. Etc. All of these are a mixed system, and we use them to great effect.

 

[aociswundumho]

You seem to incorrectly believe that socialism cannot be cooperative ownership by private individuals or the owners and the customers for net profit.

That's right, because private property in the means of production is capitalism.

Would you like me to post ten dictionaries defining capitalism?

 

[Lisa]

That's right, because private property in the means of production is capitalism.

Would you like me to post ten dictionaries defining capitalism?

Market socialism is a hybrid economic idea. Regulated capitalism is also a hybrid idea.

 

[Irredentist]

Nope, I'm thinking of SOCIALISM. When you talk of "collective ownership" you're talking on a micro-level not on the national level which IS socialism. a corporation would meet your definition of collective ownership.

Only if that corporation is collectively owned by its workers. Most corporations don't fit that definition, but some do.

 

[Lisa]

You're still in the Ivory Tower, Lisa. And it's obvious what YOU'VE been fed.

I never said that socialism anarchism is workable on a large scale now but it will be in a few generations when we are forced to cooperate to survive as a species. It has worked in smaller groups and it is still working now in a region in Spain.

What would hold you back from supporting this idea?

 

[Bullseye]

I never said that socialism anarchism is workable on a large scale now but it will be in a few generations when we are forced to cooperate to survive as a species. It has worked in smaller groups and it is still working now in a region in Spain.

What would hold you back from supporting this idea?

It's continuing failure to produce successful results in real life. "Smaller groups" and "a region in Spain" aren't a nation of 330 million people with a 17 trillion dollar economy.

 

[Lisa]

Only if that corporation is collectively owned by its workers. Most corporations don't fit that definition, but some do.

As a citizen were are all cooperatively part of the government and make decisions by attending meetings and voting on public services and other ideas such as schools. My power comes from a publicly owned electric utility. It switched from coal-fired to natural gas about 5 years ago to abide by an EPA environmental mandate. They also switched the street light to LEDs.

 

[Iron_Merc]

Obama was a socialist in democratic clothing. Many people in his past and also in his cabinet were socialist as well.

What's also troubling is the youth today is getting indoctrinated to believe that socialism is a good thing.

Socialism is very destructive. But a true democrat never looks back.

We have capitalism to thank for best economy in the world.

 

[Irredentist]

As a citizen were are all cooperatively part of the government and make decisions by attending meetings and voting on public services and other ideas such as schools. My power comes from a publicly owned electric utility. It switched from coal-fired to natural gas about 5 years ago to abide by an EPA environmental mandate. They also switched the street light to LEDs.

I agree, but I don't think that for example the federal US government in general does a good enough job of representing the interests of the people to really meet the definition of collective ownership and responsibility.

 

[Lisa]

It's continuing failure to produce successful results in real life. "Smaller groups" and "a region in Spain" aren't a nation of 330 million people with a 17 trillion dollar economy.

What part of market socialism in a social democracy under the current constitution do you not understand? You seem to think that this would be a mandated national idea. At the current situation, we will always have a mixed hybrid market economy because it is more stable that way, plus wholesales change on a national scale would not be possible in just a few years.

Do I need to write 10,000 words to explain it to you or can you do research and think for yourself?

 

[Lisa]

I agree, but I don't think that for example the federal US government in general does a good enough job of representing the interests of the people to really meet the definition of collective ownership and responsibility.

The current government is bought and sold by corporate interests for their bottom line. We are now being ruled by the chamber of commerce, plus foreign interests.

 

[Bullseye]

That's not any definition I've seen Bullseye. It's social ownership, not government ownership. Government is only a subset of social ownership.

And how would "social ownership" be implemented in real life? Remember we're talking national scale here.

Social ownership - Wikipedia



Very clearly differentiated from "simply" government ownership.

But mostly theoretic, touchy-feely generalities.

You may not be use to all those terms because we don't use them much in U.S. political discourse, other than "Socialism bad, capitalism good" sort of silliness.
We DO enjoy a mixed set of rules that govern our system...we hopefully should be picking what works best as private, social, public, and ensuring none of them are not checked by the others (to balance power just like other checks and balances).

Pick the best tool for the job, why demonize one because of political propaganda? Which successful nations have 100% private education systems? Pure market is not the best tool for all applications, nor is public, nor is socialism, etc.

Public education is NOT a socialist invention. Not every service a government provides is "Socialist". People have banded together for mutual benefit since the dawn of time.

We also use a different language to describe things that share traits with socialist systems. Many corporations do end up going public...we do end up socially owning a large portion of them, we do end up investing in each others wild ideas and we call it investors in a market, but we're also investing in friends and redistributing wealthy just for social reasons (not always to make a profit), etc. We have non-profits. Etc. All of these are a mixed system, and we use them to great effect.

All good and well. And this may work well in small groups, but I can't see it scaling well to a country of 325 million people, with 10's of thousands of business. When the entity is small each member can easily express his views and the entire population can vote an issue. As it grows that becomes harder and decisions have to be deferred to governing class and pockets of experts are required to deal with the increasing complexities. Eventually, a permanent professional ruling class evolves. Sound familiar?

 

[Bullseye]

What part of market socialism in a social democracy under the current constitution do you not understand?

LOL, I understand it just fine; which is why I oppose it. All a "social democracy" means is the people elect the people who then run their lives for them; you choose your rulers, they create the bureaucracy to run the economy and the rest of society. Market socialism is an oxymoron.

You seem to think that this would be a mandated national idea. At the current situation, we will always have a mixed hybrid market economy because it is more stable that way, plus wholesales change on a national scale would not be possible in just a few years.

Or ever.

Do I need to write 10,000 words to explain it to you or can you do research and think for yourself?

Let's see the 10,000 words. :lamo

Seriously you fling out all these pretty buzz phrases but you haven't explained how they would affect America or how they could be implemented. I'm not interested in read dusty books from "great thinkers" who never accomplished anything like what they wrote about. Tell me how you see the end product.

 

[trixare4kids]

This argument is such a lie that the person making it has brown eyes because he is so full of " bleep"

Socialism means that the workers own and control the means of production. Socialism doesn't mean handouts.

Before you reply to me educate yourself about market socialism. Do you also understand the social democracy is different from the cow dung heap that you are shoveling to the unlearned masses?

What do you call the ideologue where the government wants to give their citizens freebies such as loan debt forgiveness and government subsidized health care?

 

[trixare4kids]

LOL, I understand it just fine; which is why I oppose it. All a "social democracy" means is the people elect the people who then run their lives for them; you choose your rulers, they create the bureaucracy to run the economy and the rest of society. Market socialism is an oxymoron.


Or ever.
Let's see the 10,000 words. :lamo

Seriously you fling out all these pretty buzz phrased but you haven't explained how they would affect America or how they could be implemented. I'm not interested in read dusty books from "great thinkers" who never accomplished anything like what they wrote about. Tell me how you see the end product.

I am gonna' go make some opcorn2: and sit back waiting for Lisa's reply.

 

[Bullseye]

I am gonna' go make some opcorn2: and sit back waiting for Lisa's reply.

make a bunch, it's going to take a while.