patrick.net

RayAmerica says

Obama’s socialistic “bailout

AND the bailout was NOT Socialism. JHC. Socialism is an economic theory where workers - you and me, buddy - control the means and flow of the labour and divide the profits based on merit. In the societal sense its effectively a distribution of benefits in an equal and orderly manner to ALL of the members of that society. Police, Fire dept, public education, highways, etc. It has NOTHING to do with gov giving money to corporations. Damn, if you're going to argue against something at least know what you're saying.

AND the bailout was begun by Bush...

The Japanese often use a little emoticon that we don't see much over here, "orz". Its intended to symbolize a little man on their hands & knees banging their head on the ground in frustration. Thats me right now.

RayAmerica says

Please copy & paste any comment I have ever made in which I stated the Government should not have regulated the mortgage business.

Kentm's answer: ZERO .... nothing copied & pasted because it doesn't exist. LOL

orz

kentm says

Socialism is an economic theory where workers - you and me, buddy - control the means and flow of the labour and divide the profits based on merit.

Eh, what? Employee-owned companies, cooperatives, ? Or more like GM's Saturn experiment which the unions hated and ultimately destroyed? Not sure what you are attempting to describe here.

kentm says

In the societal sense its effectively a distribution of benefits in an equal and orderly manner to ALL of the members of that society.

You are missing the central planning, which requires "central planners", which typically involves a privileged class of individuals which inevitably leads to tyranny. . Socialism means many things to many people. It means state-owned-everything to some people (borderline communism) on one end and activist central planning/regulation with a free market living within centrally controlled parameters (borderline capitalism) on the other. The most effective socialist countries are the latter not the former if I remember correctly.

I think you more accurately described "communism" with your second statement but you left out the "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need". This is where your particular version of socialism causes knee jerk reactions as it smacks of communism. We know how well that works...

We should all get our "isms" correctly defined - Ray seems to think uncontrolled capitalism is the answer while you appear to be pushing towards communism. I prefer the middle-ism ;)

I like the -ism where a committee of overpaid fools take a turn at running a company. Every few years they play musical chairs and move to committees at other companies, so they never have to live with the long-term impact of their decisions. This seems to be working swimmingly! Can we apply it to countries too?

EightBall says

Eh, what? ...

I was describing 'socialism' as its defined in a basic dictionary sense... I agree it would be nice to agree on what socialism is as a starting point to a chat on socialism, but it seems like every time someone uses the world here it has a different meaning. Whatever implications it may have to one person or another, and certainly there are various levels & applications of it, there is a definable idea/theory at the core of the word.

A while ago I'd have thought one thing at least we ought to easily agree on that its not is a government giving money to large banks & corporations. I'm actually honestly amazed at how that has been so easily linked with the word 'socialism' when its almost exactly the direct opposite of a socialist action.

EightBall says

You are missing the central planning

Well... as I understand it the monolithic 'central planning' aspect is a part of one political theory on a way to implement socialist ideas. I was only talking about the basic economic aspect...

But all countries/systems are built on mishmashes of various philosophies and ideologies and the US actually currently has a lot of socialist ideas built into its current system. The police, the fire dept, public parks, public education etc, are all examples of socialist political philosophy in action.

But I think I understand what you mean by 'central planning', you mean a state run production system that makes decisions and gives directives to the entire system it directs, unconnected from supply and demands.

EightBall says

you appear to be pushing towards communism

My ideal is actually something close to Canada, a country which seems to work quite well.

kentm says

I was describing ’socialism’ as its defined in a basic dictionary sense

No you weren't. You were a lot closer than Ray, but socialism does not mean "owned by the workers" It means "owned by the state for the benefit of the people". Owned by the collective, with no state, would be real communism (which has *never* been tried in a population of more than a few hundred. The only places where it exists is in pockets of tribal communities and, well, communes).

All you've described is employee ownership, which is still a form of capitalism, the kind that left libertarians would love. That's not a coop either -- that's "customer owned", which is a little different.

kentm says

My ideal is actually something close to Canada, a country which seems to work quite well.

???

Canada has a basic economy more or less identical to the US. The key differences are:

- Canada doesn't spend much on its military, because it is under the US defense umbrella
- Instead, canada puts its tax money into health care and education
- Canada uses much less oil than it produces, allowing for significant revenue.

Take away that oil, and canada is in the same financial situation as every other country with a high standard of living.

Kevin says

No you weren’t.

Thanks for the clarification, I'll look into it more.

Kevin says

All you’ve described is employee ownership

Works for me. :-) But its sort of incidental, my real issue is with whats being ignored in how the US is structured, ie what aspects of "socialism" are already incorporated, and what it means to us. The thing that really gets me going, and I've wasted far too much time on this thread already, are two key points:

1 - People like Ray are happy to reap the benefits of aspects of "socialism", as long as they don't outright call it such, but are so angry to have to give anything back. All I hear them talk about are their rights and never is there any mention of any kind of personal responsibility.

2 - The other thing is this crazy notion that Obama is somehow a marxist-socialist-communist, introducing marxism-socialism-leniniism-shariaism to the US. Or something. Its just crazy-talk and I can't barely believe that people saying it even believe it themselves.

I came across this a day ago while looking for something else and I think it probably sums up the situation better than I could paraphrase so here it is in part and a link. Please visit the site, "The Toad Report", it seems to be quite good:

http://toadthoughts.blogspot.com/2010/03/from-each-according-to-his-ability-to.html

In fact, let's look at the 10 main points of Communism and see how well Obama is following his so called political ideology.

1. Abolition of property and land and application of all rents of land to public purposes. Nope, nothing Obama ever talked about.

2. Heavy progressive or graduated income tax. Since 1913, has been getting smaller and smaller since 1980.

3. Abolition of all right of inheritance. Nope, nothing Obama ever talked about.

4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels. Nope, nothing Obama ever talked about.

5. Centralisation of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly. Since 1913 we have had a National Federal Reserve banking system but it has never been a monopoly and no one is talking about making it one. The first national, central bank in the US was created back in 1791 so you know, you can't blame that on Obama because he was still killing Christians and white people back in Kenya.

6. Centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State. Well, since the advent of the Interstate Highway system that has been in the hands of the government and there is a virtual communication monopoly by AT&T but it isn't government run, just capitalism in its purest form.

7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of wasteland, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with common plan. Hmm, cultivation of wasteland would be a great idea, unless of course it's the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge...Wait, so Bush was a Communist?

8. Equal liability of all to labour. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture. Industrial armies??

9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equitable distribution of the population over the country. White people have built themsleves all kinds of suburbs abandoning the cities and building on once country pastures abolishing the distinction between town and country but again, that's market forces and the free market doing that. Suburbanites are Communists!

10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of childrens labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production. Oh God no! Free education, no child labor?? Grab the hammer and cycle and run for the hills! Well, we have had free, unequal, public education for many many years now so yet again, nothing to do with Obama.

Obama is a complete failure as a Communist.

and this is a nice capper:

But the Teabaggers of the world still say that he is living up to Marx by following the idea of, "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" and Sean Hannity says this is taken right from the pages of the Communist Manifesto. Well, it isn't. But that's beside the point. Let's assume for a minute that statement was Obama's motto and if it were true, should he be labeled a Marxist? Communist? Let's see:

Acts 4:32All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of his possessions was his own, but they shared everything they had. 33 With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and much grace was upon them all. 34There were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned lands or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales 35 and put it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to anyone as he had need.

Oh my God, Obama is a........................................Christian.

Thats it, I'm done with this thread. I am rubber and you are glue. Ray, good luck with your Obama bashing. He has a lot to be taken to task for, but socialism ain't one of them.

If patriots and freedom loving people are negatively referred to as "teabaggers", then libs must be "douchebaggers" or maybe "colostomybaggers".

kentm says

Thats it, I’m done with this thread. I am rubber and you are glue. Ray, good luck with your Obama bashing. He has a lot to be taken to task for, but socialism ain’t one of them.

Socialism typically makes advances in a society incrementally. What most people I know object to regarding Obama & BUSH, etc. is that the march is ultimately heading towards a socialist state with the only difference between the GOP & Democrats is the speed in which it is achieved.

RayAmerica says

What most people I know object to regarding Obama & BUSH, etc. is that the march is ultimately heading towards a socialist state with the only difference between the GOP & Democrats is the speed in which it is achieved.

You need to get some new friends...

RayAmerica says

Socialism typically makes advances in a society incrementally.

That's so wrong of a statement I don't even know where to begin.

Socialism of the sort you would have found in the soviet union or china pretty much happened over night. A brief civil war, then the socialists took over and took everything.

For the more mixed economies with limited socialism (Norway, South Korea, etc.), things also happened more or less over night.

The idea that america is creeping towards socialism is fucking ridiculous. There is less state ownership of industry today than there was at any time since World War II. Most of what remains are public utilities, vice (liquor, gambling), and that big insurance company called Medicare. Taxes are the lowest that they've been since the depression.

How can anyone with a brain claim that the trend is towards socialism?

Honest Abe says

“colostomybaggers”.

lol ... that is a pretty funny one

RayAmerica says

A fine example of generalizing an entire movement that is made up of Democrats, Republicans, Independents, etc.

I'm trying to find any references to TeaBaggers supporting anyone other than FAR RIGHT social conservatives. Perhaps you can help show how these supposed "Democrats and Independents" in your group, demonstrate their presence?

Do they support for example Western Democrats who take a hard line on fiscal conservatism, but are socially liberal? Nope. They don't even like Ron Paul. Based on results, the Tea Party produces the same output as if they were Fox News footsoldiers.

Hahahahaha - Western Democrats who take a hard line on fiscal conservatism - hahaha. Oh, wait, I get it, they take a hard line on being against fiscal conservatism.

Can you to identify any of those pink-panty waste, ColostomyBagger, liberal defecrats "who take a hard line on fiscal conservatism"?

Abe ... funny thing. I noticed he didn't provide any names. It's amazing to me how many of these liberals just spout of nonsense that can't be supported. This is the same type of ilk that's running the government.

Honest Abe says

Hahahahaha - Western Democrats who take a hard line on fiscal conservatism - hahaha.

The Blue Dog Coalition has 50+ members, listed here:
http://www.house.gov/melancon/BlueDogs/index.html

Most self-styled "independents", it is just coincidence they always vote Republican.

I'm extremely socially liberal, and I can guarantee that I'm more economically conservative than most people. I support policies that would reduce federal government spending by more than 3/4ths and would roughly cut taxes in half.

But I also support sanity, and it's not sane to defend military spending, social security, and medicare, while decrying taxes!

RE: Social views: Conservative vs Liberal. If (big if) personal responsibilty were left in-tact, then I would be a full on libertarian. But, liberal/socialist/progressive/leftist types have removed all personal responsibilty from anyone they do not feel threatened by. OTOH, if a person poses any type of threat to actions or ideals of the liberal/socialist/progressive/leftist types, or exibits any form of independance and freedom despite GOV actions, then they are held to an exacting personal standard, far above that of any social safety-net accesser.

RE: Fiscal views: Conservative vs Liberal. You should be able to earn as much money as you can within the limits of the law. You should be able to keep as much of your money as anyone else does. Flat tax is fair. Taxes should pay for stuff that makes the entire group equally safe, productive, comfortable. Defense, Fire, Police.

Schools MUST be privatized right away. That will close a huge hole in the GOV pocket and reduce the liberal influence of tomorrows leaders. Joe's Middle School would have tuff rules, and better students than the public crap out there now. The liberal adgenda has made public schools their on-going experiment. End it now. Vouchers, private, what ever it takes. Take a look at who opposes any move away from public education, and you may agree that there is a possible liberal bias ... maybe.

All Television and Internet transmission should be ended at 9pm and restart at 5am. Before you say no, what about the 2am cut off for bars?

Bap33 says

All Television and Internet transmission should be ended at 9pm and restart at 5am. Before you say no, what about the 2am cut off for bars?

What, and force people to go back to magazines for their porn? Perish the thought!

Bap33 says

All Television and Internet transmission should be ended at 9pm and restart at 5am. Before you say no, what about the 2am cut off for bars?

Do you even know how the internet works?

Bap .... warning: don't attempt to debate "Kevin.' He thinks he knows more than all the Founding Fathers combined. The guy is an absolute genius.

Bap33 says

Before you say no, what about the 2am cut off for bars?

Thanks for asking. 2am cut-off times are bullshit. In areas where there's a cut-off time, it means that for the next hour there will be a bunch of drunks on the road. People still drink after 2, they just have to do it somewhere else. It's like not selling beer on Sunday - people still drink beer on Sunday, they just buy twice as much to ensure they don't run out.

Bap33 says

The liberal adgenda has made public schools their on-going experiment.

In order to remain competitive in this world, our adgenda must change. and yes, I am fully aware that I spelled that incorrectly. Hard to believe, considering I am a product of the liberal adgenda's schools. As is Bap.

lol .... ellie ellie ellie ..... lol ....you know what I mean. The social twists being introduced in schools have ZERO to do with smarter, more productive voters. It has everything to do with making the social misfits of life feel beter for being queer.

Kevin, my point is more about being a productive member of society. If cutting off drinking times makes sense, then so does cutting of monitor entertainment. Ellie is correct, it only moves the location of whatever desired activity a person is after. Of course a person could just pop in a CD .... just as a drunk can just go to their fridge and open a case. In truth, personal acountablility would mean that bars serve you all you can pay for and if you die, you die. If you drive and kill someone, you die. If you get cought driving drunk you never ever ever get to drive anything that is not painted bright orange-pink with the words "DRUNK DRIVER" in huge bright green letters wrote all over the car with your name on both doors and the front and rear windows. Second offence means you never drive again, and you MUST wear an orange-pink jumpsuit whenever in public with the words DRUNK DRIVER wrote all over it in bright green letters and your name on the front and back. Third offence and you are put to death. That would usher in personal accountablity ... and then bars would be open whenever. I am all for full on personal accountablity to force those who enjoy freedom to act correctly, vs intrusive laws that only limit the behavior of those that follow laws.
How does that tie to in-home intertainment? Let me explain. 90% of all dope smoking, listless, unproductive people enjoy staying up late being entertained. Not only should welfare people have limited entertainment, their ligts should all go off at 9pm and an alarmed wakeup should happen at 5am, giving them all a great start towards a productive day .... and all welfare should require drug testing, and all signle moms that use welfare should have mandatory NORPLANT. ..... I know, I know, I sound stupid. I'm just blowing off some frustration. When I have to watch each dime that I spend at Savemart, and then I have to watch Maria the hyper-breeder (she's about 19 with two kids in-tow and is also prego) pass through line ahead of me with two full baskets, buying alot of stuff with an EBT card... I admit it, I get a bit pissed.

Babb33, I like your last comment. It was not too long for me to understand, mainly because you has something to say and said it. I've gotten that complaint about too long, or mentally taxing as the case may be. I realize that you can't fit all meaningful ideas into a slogan or feeling. Feelings connected to logic is passion. I'm glad you are a little pissed off, but only a little? That implies socialism is a little problem in the USA. Teeny weeny.

Bap33 says

....all signle moms that use welfare should have mandatory NORPLANT. ….. I know, I know, I sound stupid.

It sounds like you believe in Eugenics. I suspect Voter Literacy Test would have been on your list if you'd gone on a bit longer. Being from SouthEast, I know what those were used for.

Again with the impossible social guarantees. Why is it eugenics to be more kind than to let nature terminate reproduction? Preventing conception by welfare moms who live is more pleasant than letting them and their children die based on their own merits, right? Quite a leap of accusations. Troll, troll, troll.

Bap33 says

If cutting off drinking times makes sense, then so does cutting of monitor entertainment.

You already failed because you think the internet is "monitor entertainment".

Bars closing at 2am, not selling liquor on sundays, and state-owned liquor stores are just hold overs of the temperance movement. It's bullshit that doesn't actually work, and it's a terrible basis for any argument about anything other than, perhaps, liquor laws.

Bap33 says

When I have to watch each dime that I spend at Savemart, and then I have to watch Maria the hyper-breeder (she’s about 19 with two kids in-tow and is also prego) pass through line ahead of me with two full baskets, buying alot of stuff with an EBT card… I admit it, I get a bit pissed.

Why don't you just go and be more successful?

Kevin,

I think maybe you misunderstood Bab33's point. It doesn't make sense, with the general population. Right after Bab33 wrote: "Ellie is correct, it only moves the location of whatever desired activity a person is after." He said that kind of thing made sense for people on welfare, not fully functioning adults (and by extension their young children). I think we agree the blue laws have little merit.

Go on to be more successful? This is not a free-market economy. It's half way to what you want, right? Please everybody, see the video Money as Debt. The job market is fixed by the fractional reserve banking system. Here is a link:

http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=5DBF509405ABE238

Please watch it. It is very entertaining and informative. It would be worth having a thread about it.

Kev, why don't she? She is not being effected by my selfish choices, but I am being effected by her selfish choices in many ways ... all bad.

Vince, I figure the facts speak for themself. Most teen/single moms enjoy full welfare and multiple births with the aide of so many welfare programs (WIC, Section 8, Medical, Free school lunches, bus pass, legal, eyes, dental, meds, and the very best one of all CASH CARD aka EBT card) .... so, why not use positive birth control since the millions of dollars spent for free rubbers and pills, plus all of the sex education being stuffed down the throats on 6th graders, just seems to be falling short?

Antifem, that you for at least reading what I wrote.

All,
I was just blowing off steam. Don't expect some detailed explaination of why having to watch another chubby teen mom of 3 spanish speaking kids buying $400 worth of steaks and cookies and sodas pisses me off ... I don't have one. It just bugs me.

Bap33 says

Kev, why don’t she?

I don't know. I don't particularly care, either -- but you're one of these "bootstraps" types, so when I see you make whiney comments about watching every dime that you spend, I have to ask, "Why don't you just go and be more successful?"

She is not being effected by my selfish choices, but I am being effected by her selfish choices in many ways … all bad.

Name one.

I mean, if you're so broke, you're probably in the "deadbeats who don't pay taxes" group anyway. All she's doing is getting a piece of my tax dollars anyway. Why do you care if she's living off of my labor?

I don't know the lady standing in line in front of you. She could be a real piece of shit, or she could be someone who got into a screwed up situation that was beyond her control. I've seen all types. The vast majority of people that I know who receive government assistance and who are fuck ups (and I know plenty, I'm from the midwest...) are going to be fuck ups with or without the assistance.

Really, though, the assistance is inconsequential. I'm way more concerned with all of my tax dollars being spent on bullshit medical treatments to keep people alive for an extra day or on cold war weapons programs.

Bap33 says

Vince, I figure the facts speak for themself. Most teen/single moms enjoy full welfare and multiple births with the aide of so many welfare programs (WIC, Section 8, Medical, Free school lunches, bus pass, legal, eyes, dental, meds, and the very best one of all CASH CARD aka EBT card) …. so, why not use positive birth control since the millions of dollars spent for free rubbers and pills, plus all of the sex education being stuffed down the throats on 6th graders, just seems to be falling short?

I'm not really that familiar with welfare programs myself, but I had read that the Federal programs limit lifetime benefits to 5 years. So I don't quite see how your "welfare Momma" can make it a career. Unless her life is quite short.

Kevin, pretty good post.

Vincent, that 5 year max you have heard about is make-believe. My sister and my wive's sister have both been on full blown aid and all of the sub-programs in California for 25 years (my sister) and 15 years (wifes sister). That cut-off number is just to keep the public from exploding over the truth.

The other most costly welfare abuse is allowing the invaders and their illegally dropped spawn to acess the public funded support system. If the invaders and their spawn were removed from all public aid then there would be less strain on the empty pockets of Uncle Sam.

Bap33 says

Kevin, pretty good post.
Vincent, that 5 year max you have heard about is make-believe. My sister and my wive’s sister have both been on full blown aid and all of the sub-programs in California for 25 years (my sister) and 15 years (wifes sister). That cut-off number is just to keep the public from exploding over the truth.

Isn't that welfare fraud?

No, its not welfare fraud. Its called liberal largess. Government will continually support the mother until each successive child is 18 years old. Lets see, the mom has her first child at 16 (for sake of argument) and receives benefits for the next 18 years (16 + 18 = 34). But when she was 20 she had another child (20 + 18 = 38). But wait, she had twins at 22 (22 + 18 = 40). But she met another guy at 25 and had another child (25 + 18 = 43). Three years passed before she produced another kid (28 + 18 = 46). At 30 she had another (30 + 18 = 48). Then for the next 6 years she had one every other year (36 + 18 = 54). And thats not welfare fraud at all, its just a lifetime of government dependency. She's become an indentured servant to the democratic party, out of necessity.

pretty close ... but, you need to factor in the fact that female childen of most mexican invaders, and welfare moms of all ethnic makeup, start making babies at about 16 years old ... so now they are getting double benifits and the time frame resets to "22 years to go" (up from 18) with the baby. It's pretty bad stuff, if the truth would only be put in the public's eye.
single moms raise the largest percentage of gangsters --- take Barry O for example (just kiddin my liberal peeps)

That's average monthly welfare benefits in 2006 dollars.

That was persons recieving food stamps in millions. Obviously much higher now, with our record breaking unemployment. But these grapghs don't support your assertions.

Persons Receiving Food Stamps: 1962–2006
(In millions)