111 replies to this topic

[ᗅᗺᗷᗅ]

"This country does in fact have a serious deficit problem. But the reality is that the deficit was caused by two wars -- unpaid for. It was caused by huge tax breaks for the wealthiest people in this country. It was caused by a recession as result of the greed, recklessness and illegal behavior on Wall Street. And if those are the causes of the deficit, I will be damned if we're going to balance the budget on the backs of the elderly, the sick, the children, and the poor. That's wrong." -Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-VT

Bernie Sanders is a socialist. I wish he were president.

[King Biscuit]

Bernie Sanders is a socialist. I wish he were president.

+1

[PrinceVegeta]

Ahhh socialism. How I love thee so. Work for the good of all people, for the greater good of your country, not for your own gain, but for the countries gain, for if the country gains, you shall reap what you sowed into your now flourishing nation.

France also has a Socialist leader, Francois Hollande.

[Thrash]

ok, well... get out of PM so I can nuke you too.

[Edward Reed]

ok, well... get out of PM so I can nuke you too.

+1

[King Biscuit]

COME AT ME BRO!

[Evil Rudekker]

Socialists still want you to gain for your own work. That's why they want you to be able to unionize, get healthcare, and have sick days. Also, American Socialism that worked emphasized individual rights.

/broken record http://en.wikipedia....Sewer_Socialism -/broken record

[ᗅᗺᗷᗅ]

Thrash, go visit a country like Sweden and tell me someone at your socioeconomic level isn't living a much better life. Kind of hard to argue that the right-wing American dream has worked out very well for you. Every time you vote for someone with an "R" next to their name, you are voting against your own economic interests.

[Thrash]

Thrash, go visit a country like Sweden and tell me someone at your socioeconomic level isn't living a much better life. Kind of hard to argue that the right-wing American dream has worked out very well for you. Every time you vote for someone with an "R" next to their name, you are voting against your own economic interests.

I'm content not having a lot of money. I don't want anyone to give me money. I sure as hell don't want someone to be FORCED to give me money.

My economic interests are just fine. I get by paycheck to paycheck. I'm a person they'd be taking money from to give to the "poor." So yea, I'm happy with things the way they are.

[ᗅᗺᗷᗅ]

No, you're not. You're the person that a real socialist system benefits. Wouldn't you like to be able to take a vacation? Go to school? Have kids? I know you would. A working class person in a country like Sweden can do all of those things. It's about creating the opportunity for a decent quality of life for everyone. And yes, it means the rich will pay more in taxes. But they should pay more. There are still plenty of rich people in Sweden. Here's the top ten:

• Ingvar Kamprad - $90 billion
• Stefan Persson - $22.4 billion
• Birgit Rausing - $13.0 billion
• Hans Rausing - $10.0 billion
• Antonia Johnson - $6.0 billion
• Liselott Persson - $3.0 billion
• Gustaf Douglas - $2.0 billion
• Melker Schörling - $1.7 billion
• Fredrik Lundberg - $1.5 billion
• Thomas Sandell - $1.1 billion

The first person on that list, Ingvar Kamprad, is the founder of IKEA, and is often listed as the richest man in the world. The highest tax rate in Sweden is 57%. So clearly high taxes on the wealthy aren't an impediment to business. But we knew that, because at one time the highest tax rate in this country was a whopping 90%. That was in the 1950s. There were plenty of über-rich in the 1950s. Just ask Howard Hughes. (By the way, Sweden is just an example. Many of the developed countries of Europe have similar -- and similarly successful -- systems.)

If you want to be miserable, Thrash, go ahead. But don't fool yourself that you're doing something noble by not taking money out of the pockets of the 1%. They're doing just fine.

[Evil Rudekker]

People should be forced to give you money if you work for them. You should make what you've earned.

[Edward Reed]

No, you're not. You're the person that a real socialist system benefits. Wouldn't you like to be able to take a vacation? Go to school? Have kids? I know you would. A working class person in a country like Sweden can do all of those things. It's about creating the opportunity for a decent quality of life for everyone. And yes, it means the rich will pay more in taxes. But they should pay more. There are still plenty of rich people in Sweden. Here's the top ten:




If you want to be miserable, Thrash, go ahead. But don't fool yourself that you're doing something noble by not taking money out of the pockets of the 1%. They're doing just fine.

Why do they deserve to pay more? Because they are the men and women of ability? Many of those people are hard workers and have made our lives a better place. They work 60 hour weeks, travel accross the globe and our villified by those who are jealous of their work. No man should have to apologize or be treated unfairly for being rich and succesful.

The people who benefit from socialism are the moochers of the world, those who think they deserve another man's hard earned work.

Jorost you will appreciate this fact. A large amount of Welfare dollars in MA were spent in Las Vegas Hawaii and Puerto Rico. Those are the people who need more?


edit: Calling Europe successful? They are in a bigger mess than ourselves and their instability has affected our recovery a great deal.

double edit: There was a time when I use to do alot of volunteer work but what I found was that those who were "needy" had many expensive things that I had to work for and buy with my own money. Many of them had iphones. Now tell me how someone who is struggling just to live can afford to buy an iphone and pay for it?

Edited by Edward Reed, 24 June 2012 - 09:51 PM.

[King Biscuit]

edit: Calling Europe successful? They are in a bigger mess than ourselves and their instability has affected our recovery a great deal.

Europe is failing because of the monetary/market system just like us.
It's the crux of most problems.
Infinite growth in a finite system is destined to fail.
Although I think socialism could do wonders, I hardly think any political doctrine can fix the economy.

[Evil Rudekker]

Some say the poor are mooching off the rich. But rich people often get their wealth by treating their employees cheaply and manufacturing need. If you're a millionaire and your employees make $10 an hour with no benefits, yeah, you should apologize.

Socialists like myself think YOU should benefit from your hard work, not some investor. Maybe you could read up on the Socialists that ran Milwaukee from 1910 to 1960.

Edited by Evil Rudekker, 25 June 2012 - 03:27 AM.

[Redezra]

Quite simply, anyone who disagrees with the concept of those well off assisting those worse off, for the various reasons including:

-Without them, your wealth is for naught. Where did you think you got that money from huh? Magic land? It's *their* inherent wealth you harvested, you are obliged to help them. It's both right, and inherently human.

-Without proper transferal of wealth, a purely capitalistic system will eventually die. Yep, this is because, again, wealth is inherently limited. There's only so much in the world, in your country, etc. Eventually, all of the wealth will collect at the top, and the system will simply stop working, as there is nothing to move the market anymore.

-In a capitalist economy, unchecked capitalism will lead to an ever larger underclass, to, eventually, a mind boggling split between those who have, and those who have not. Very simply, there will be lords, born into ruling and never having to work for it, the staggering mass of their families fortune pushing their agenda and power along. Intriguingly it will lead to that which capitalism was supposed to avoid, an elitist system where the individual is not entitled to the sweat of their brow (bonus points for who I got that from). The other major problem is this will cause social and political unrest once the connection has been made that the dream has died.


Anyway, as I was saying. People who do not support socialism in some form, due to any of the above reasons, and many more, are either stupid, indoctrinated as hell by those with the wealth (yes, that's what I call most of you lower and middle class right wing Americans, willing slaves, like to the Reapers), or you have an agenda, one that does not happen to support the greater good.

The solution is simple. You should be educated, by the book or by the sword.

That's my two cents. I get good mileage for words

[Evil Rudekker]

I should point out that I'm not for "wealth redistribution." I'm not for giving out subsidies for laziness. And anyone who says that that's what socialism is about have been misinformed.

But I want workers who actually make wealth be able to keep it. You work hard, you should keep your money. It should not be siphoned off and redistributed to the wealthy via unfair hiring and wages. If you give 1/3rd of your life to your company (as people with full-time jobs do), then your company has an obligation to support you and your family. You should be able to negotiate the terms of your employment (otherwise, how are you better than a slave?).

You should be able to join with others to do together what you cannot do alone. If you pool your resources, no one has to go hungry or go without medical care.

I believe that Nation-States get in the way of people governing themselves. I don't think having one government representing 300,000,000 people can do anything worthwhile (but probably much that is evil). I think the people of Wisconsinites should govern themselves without worrying about what Mississippi thinks about it. I think Mississippians should govern themselves without worrying what Wisconsinites think about it. Government should be limited to the local, and people should be able to meet and talk to their elected representatives.

I believe in democracy. I believe that each person has one voice and should use it. I do not believe that a rich person should have more pull than a poor person. The rich have already profited. If the poor have a bit of power, maybe they can make their own way, too.

I think politicians should live in constant fear of being fired. I think we should be able to fire our government.

I believe it's a sin to profit from suffering. I also think our laws should reflect right and wrong instead of legality.

I believe in religion. I'm Catholic still, and I go to mass nearly every week. But I believe that my religion is my own business; no one else has a say in it except me and God (and the Church, but it's my business who I let into my conscience). I want to be able to be part of society on equal terms with my atheist and non-theist and Muslim and Evangelical and Pastafarian friends. I'm going to speak up for their right to listen to their own consciences, and I hope you will too.

I believe in peace. I don't want anyone to force their way of life on me, so I don't feel justified in forcing it on others. I believe in freedom, and I believe in people.

And that is why I am a socialist.

Edited by Evil Rudekker, 25 June 2012 - 11:30 AM.

[Evil Rudekker]

Postscript: because I am a Socialist, I am appalled at Obama's militarism, political opportunism, and corporatism. There are very few in America's Democratic Party that I can vote for in good conscience. Socialism is very, very different from what the "Democrats" stand for.

[Edward Reed]

Some say the poor are mooching off the rich. But rich people often get their wealth by treating their employees cheaply and manufacturing need. If you're a millionaire and your employees make $10 an hour with no benefits, yeah, you should apologize.

A worker is paid in relation to the skill level required of their job. And as the one who is actually paying the employee the owner can set any rate you want and one can simply not work there, that is your right. It is not an obligation of the millionaire to provide you with an amazing paying job.

Quite simply, anyone who disagrees with the concept of those well off assisting those worse off, for the various reasons including:

-Without them, your wealth is for naught. Where did you think you got that money from huh? Magic land? It's *their* inherent wealth you harvested, you are obliged to help them. It's both right, and inherently human.

Yes these people are the ones who help make the weathly rich, but it is a trade. You go to the store and pay for what you need, you find the best prices you reward those who have made the best product. You make them rich but it is your choice who you make rich. It will never be right for someone to be forced to support another.

-Without proper transferal of wealth, a purely capitalistic system will eventually die. Yep, this is because, again, wealth is inherently limited. There's only so much in the world, in your country, etc. Eventually, all of the wealth will collect at the top, and the system will simply stop working, as there is nothing to move the market anymore.

Many people state this is the way forward but would you give up your computer that you are posting this on to someone below the poverty line? Everyone wants there to be a transfer of wealth but no one wants to do it themselves, and why should they? Most of us have worked hard for our stuff and want to be able to enjoy it.

-In a capitalist economy, unchecked capitalism will lead to an ever larger underclass, to, eventually, a mind boggling split between those who have, and those who have not. Very simply, there will be lords, born into ruling and never having to work for it, the staggering mass of their families fortune pushing their agenda and power along. Intriguingly it will lead to that which capitalism was supposed to avoid, an elitist system where the individual is not entitled to the sweat of their brow (bonus points for who I got that from). The other major problem is this will cause social and political unrest once the connection has been made that the dream has died.

If we kept a strict laissez faire capitilism system then it would allow for a more fluid class system. Those companies who fall and go bankrupt should not be bailed out because it keeps the same failed people in charge. However if we just leave it all alone those businesses who provide the best innovation and best products will rise, and should there come a day when they are not the best they will be replaced. The bailouts/loans annoy me most within the energy sector: The DoE has sent hundreds of millions to energy companies that have shown no possible merit to accept. These companies tended to be Obama finacial supporters and many of them actually went bankrupt. This has hurt the alternative energy sector businesses that are actually doing well off.

Picture this:
You own a food market and get a loan for 700k then someone opens a food market right down the street and gets a government subsidized loan of about 10 million. How can one even compete with that? The subsidized market will probably outlast yours and the same thing is happening to our companies.

The book Atlas Shrugged may have at one time seemed far-fetched and unreasonable but I feel that we are headed in that direction.

[nicktheww2fanatic]

No, you're not. You're the person that a real socialist system benefits. Wouldn't you like to be able to take a vacation? Go to school? Have kids? I know you would. A working class person in a country like Sweden can do all of those things. It's about creating the opportunity for a decent quality of life for everyone. And yes, it means the rich will pay more in taxes. But they should pay more. There are still plenty of rich people in Sweden. Here's the top ten:

• Ingvar Kamprad - $90 billion
• Stefan Persson - $22.4 billion
• Birgit Rausing - $13.0 billion
• Hans Rausing - $10.0 billion
• Antonia Johnson - $6.0 billion
• Ingvar Kamprad - $6.0 billion
• Liselott Persson - $3.0 billion
• Gustaf Douglas - $2.0 billion
• Melker Schörling - $1.7 billion
• Fredrik Lundberg - $1.5 billion

The first person on that list, Ingvar Kamprad, is the founder of IKEA, and is often listed as the richest man in the world. The highest tax rate in Sweden is 57%. So clearly high taxes on the wealthy aren't an impediment to business. But we knew that, because at one time the highest tax rate in this country was a whopping 90%. That was in the 1950s. There were plenty of über-rich in the 1950s. Just ask Howard Hughes. (By the way, Sweden is just an example. Many of the developed countries of Europe have similar -- and similarly successful -- systems.)

If you want to be miserable, Thrash, go ahead. But don't fool yourself that you're doing something noble by not taking money out of the pockets of the 1%. They're doing just fine.

Uhhh.... 1 & 6???

[Dan2680]

I am a little sleepy (just woke up; night shifts) but yeah, I am definitely not a capitalist. I am not really sure exactly what I am... but I think socialism is pretty close. In my opinion, I don't think taxes should be crazy low, but you shouldn't have to pay to earn money and then pay to spend it. I also think health care should be 100% free, along with schooling (as long as you qualify and have the grades etc etc. Everyone should be treated equally though, there is no benefit from the 1% hoarding all of the money (I would guarantee they no where need/will use even half of their money. Also not saying you shouldn't be rewarded for working hard, its just you shouldn't be given special quarter just because you are rich).

(This is just the short version )