Socialism etc don't work anywhere. Never have.
Norway and Switzerland aren't socialist. They are high-tax welfare states. The
S is a low-tax (relatively) welfare state. The Scandinavian countries are free
arket capitalist nations. But they have large social programs (which is not so
alism) paid for by high taxes.
There is an alleged Swede in the FIDO POLITICS echo who claims that Sweden and Norway are socialists and are perfect examples of it.
I have been wanting to burst his bubble but don't feel motivated enough to do so. :)
There is an alleged Swede in the FIDO POLITICS echo who claims that Sweden and Norway are socialists and are perfect examples of it.
I have been wanting to burst his bubble but don't feel motivated enough to do so. :)
they have a lot of socialist policies.
There is an alleged Swede in the FIDO POLITICS echo who claims that
Sweden and Norway are socialists and are perfect examples of it.
they have a lot of socialist policies.
There is an alleged Swede in the FIDO POLITICS echo who claims that Sweden and Norway are socialists and are perfect examples of it.
I have been wanting to burst his bubble but don't feel motivated enough to do so. :)
There is an alleged Swede in the FIDO POLITICS echo who claims that Sweden and Norway are socialists and are perfect examples of it.
lol, well he likely is just "alleged" and not an actual Swede. Sweden did exp
iment with socialism (60s and 70s) if I recall) but eventually realized it was
ringing them down hard and they managed to shake it off.
lol, well he likely is just "alleged" and not an actual Swede. Sweden did exp
iment with socialism (60s and 70s) if I recall) but eventually realized it was
ringing them down hard and they managed to shake it off.
It is difficult to finance those social programs without enough people
who are making money and paying heavy taxes on it.
I don't know if amendments are a problem, as long as it's accompanied by a well-defined process for amendment by the body adhering to it, and an apolitical judicial group that defends the constitution against attempts to skirt it and abridge the rights of people outside of the amendment process. You know, sort of like what we used to have.
The US government seems hostile to the people who founded it.
he's also done more for black people, people in prison, and animals than an
other president for many years.
(snort) ... Come on, you're trying to be serious, right?
Actually I think the US is having more international crisis exploding at its face since Trump is not in office.
For all the talk about Trump being divisive and trashy, he didn't pour gasolin
on burning fires like this. He posted mean tweets, which I suppose is at least
as bad in the eyes of the public...
He didn't divest of his business interests. He continued gaining
wealth while in office.
Why shouldn't he? Here's a question for ya: Name me a politician in Washington, DC that *DOESN'T* gain wealth in office. Here's a starting
point for you: Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders.
Fuck the world, we're not here to please the fucking world, and we're not her
to be the worlds police force like we have been since WWII.
he's also done more for black people, people in prison, and animals
than an other president for many years.
(snort) ... Come on, you're trying to be serious, right?
Much lower black unemployment than his (ironically black) predecessor.
He got some people who were falsely accused out of prison.
He apparently passed some laws regarding animal cruelity that increased the penalties.
Fuck the world, we're not here to please the fucking world, and we're
not her to be the worlds police force like we have been since WWII.
I think that is what Trump was trying to get us away from... paying to protect others who are not doing much of anything for us. That was a WWII/Cold War thing that has passed its usefulness.
I think that is what Trump was trying to get us away from... paying to protect others who are not doing much of anything for us. That was a WWII/Cold War thing that has passed its usefulness.
My point exactly :)
If they want protection from Russia and other bad actor countries you'd think
they would pony up some cash to pay their share, after all it's them that are in Putins cross hairs, Russia knows we can defend the homeland.
I visted Canada back in 2017. Ran into a Canadian citizen who volunteered in the US armed forces so he could see more of the world. He also wanted his kids to have a choice as to which country they lived in. Whenever people found out I was from the US, politics became a topic they liked to as me about. This fellow pointed out that Europeans dislike the US... until they need our money or our troops.
Re: Re: The stay home and not
By: Dumas Walker to DENN on Fri Feb 25 2022 03:32 pm
I visted Canada back in 2017. Ran into a Canadian citizen who volunteere in the US armed forces so he could see more of the world. He also wanted his kids to have a choice as to which country they lived in. Whenever people found out I was from the US, politics became a topic they liked to me about. This fellow pointed out that Europeans dislike the US... until they need our money or our troops.
Actually, we Europeans seem to hate the US, but we don't stop if we happen t need American funds or troops. We just take them and keep on hating.
If I was American I would be pissed off.
--
gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken
I visted Canada back in 2017. Ran into a Canadian citizen who volunteered in the US armed forces so he could see more of the world. He also wanted his kids to have a choice as to which country they lived in. Whenever people found out I was from the US, politics became a topic they liked to a
me about. This fellow pointed out that Europeans dislike the US... until they need our money or our troops.
Actually, we Europeans seem to hate the US, but we don't stop if we happen to need American funds or troops. We just take them and keep on hating.
If I was American I would be pissed off.
Actually, we Europeans seem to hate the US, but we don't stop if we happe need American funds or troops. We just take them and keep on hating.
If I was American I would be pissed off.
--
gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken
what do you think the source of the hatred is based on?
Socailism works at smaller population levels and it requires everyone to buy into it to work. In communes and family farms, people take care of each other. Once the old are too old to work, they are taken care of. Until that happens, everybody works. Eferybody has a job and is expected to do it even if they don't like it because it is necessary. If you slip up once in awhile, it's ok because others will pick up the slack, but if you're dead weight or refuse to work, there's no place for you. I think the psuedo educated liberals forget about the down side. Society had to be structured so that jobs get filled regardless what the individual wants. Individual rights are over ruled by social responsibilities.
Dumas Walker wrote to MOONDOG <=-that
@MSGID: <623A3BDD.24743.dove-deb@capitolcityonline.net>
@REPLY: <smb_getmsgidx
Socailism works at smaller population levels and it requires everyone to buy into it to work. In communes and family farms, people take care of each other. Once the old are too old to work, they are taken care of. Until
happens, everybody works. Eferybody has a job and is expected to do it even if they don't like it because it is necessary. If you slip up once in awhile, it's ok because others will pick up the slack, but if you're dead weight or refuse to work, there's no place for you. I think the psuedo educated liberals forget about the down side. Society had to be structured so that jobs get filled regardless what the individual wants. Individual rights are over ruled by social responsibilities.
That and Americans who seem to want socialism either want, or believe
that there will still be, a class that does not work and lives off of
the productivity of others. They do not understand the "no place for
you" concept.
Yes, that happens to some extent now, but they want it to be fully-government-sponsored and official.
Socailism works at smaller population levels and it requires everyone to b into it to work. In communes and family farms, people take care of each other. Once the old are too old to work, they are taken care of. Until t happens, everybody works. Eferybody has a job and is expected to do it ev if they don't like it because it is necessary. If you slip up once in awhile, it's ok because others will pick up the slack, but if you're dead weight or refuse to work, there's no place for you. I think the psuedo educated liberals forget about the down side. Society had to be structure so that jobs get filled regardless what the individual wants. Individual rights are over ruled by social responsibilities.
That and Americans who seem to want socialism either want, or believe that there will still be, a class that does not work and lives off of the productivity of others. They do not understand the "no place for you" concept.
Yes, that happens to some extent now, but they want it to be fully-government-sponsored and official.
* SLMR 2.1a * Genealogy. Tracing descent from someone who didn't.
Boraxman wrote to Dumas Walker <=-
Socialism and Capitalism both are promoted by people who believe there
is a class which will live off the productivity of others.
The fight between Socialism and Capitalism is really
these two demographics deciding who gets to mooch of the workers.
Capitalism is winning because it has convinced the workers that their mooching is better,
That and Americans who seem to want socialism either want, or believe that there will still be, a class that does not work and lives off of the productivity of others. They do not understand the "no place for you" concept.
Bingo. The folks taking liberal degrees may have never been able to take them in a socialist system, unless there is a need for such a position and they can pass the testing to get that job. The system may tolerate a student or two dropping out or not acquiring the job they were trained for, and the system will compensate for that by not offering classes or programs that are not required at that moment.
That and Americans who seem to want socialism either want, or believe t there will still be, a class that does not work and lives off of the productivity of others. They do not understand the "no place for you" concept.
Bingo. The folks taking liberal degrees may have never been able to take them in a socialist system, unless there is a need for such a position and they can pass the testing to get that job. The system may tolerate a stud or two dropping out or not acquiring the job they were trained for, and th system will compensate for that by not offering classes or programs that not required at that moment.
Yeah, if the US ever goes that route, I think some people who thought they wanted it will be disappointed when they (1) cannot major in unemployable subjects, and (2) have to be employed and doing their part.
* SLMR 2.1a * Psychics will lead dogs to your body.
Dr. What wrote to Boraxman <=-
@MSGID: <623B1172.45272.dove-debate@dmine.net>
@REPLY: <623AED91.22898.dove-deb@bbs.mozysswamp.org>
Boraxman wrote to Dumas Walker <=-
It's readily appearant that Socialism promotes this (ex. Bernie). But where is a good example of Capitalism promoting this?
Ahh.. Never mind. There it is. The old (literally) Marx propaganda
about the "exploitation of the workers".
Nothing of the sort. Capitalism is winning because it has PROVEN to be better for the workers. Where's the "worker revolts" that Marx and
Engels (and other ignorant, useless marxists) predicted? They never happened. Why? Because the standard of living of said workers went
up, and continued to go up.
Capitalism brings EVERYONE up (as opposed to Socialism which brings everyone down).
The only people who push for Socialism are people who are lazy and
stupid, but want to believe that they are important enough for society
to support them.
Dumas Walker wrote to MOONDOG <=-
Yeah, if the US ever goes that route, I think some people who thought
they wanted it will be disappointed when they (1) cannot major in unemployable subjects, and (2) have to be employed and doing their
part.
If you look at Canada's socialized medical program, people have to travel a hundred miles or more to a major city for an MRI or CAT scan. When a doctor gives an opinion, there is no second opinions or hoping the system will pay for another doctor to look you over. Just hope the doctor you get doesn't misdiagnose the symptoms and chop out something that shouldn't have been removed.
Yeah, if the US ever goes that route, I think some people who thought they wanted it will be disappointed when they (1) cannot major in unemployable subjects, and (2) have to be employed and doing their
part.
We're already seeing that today.
All those whiny grads with useless degrees complaining that no one will pay them the 6 figures that they believe they deserve - so they can pay off their student loans for those useless degrees.
Dumas Walker wrote to Dr. What <=-
Yes, but a lot of those folks believe that we should become a socialist country so that they don't have to get a job at all when, in reality, a socialist government probably won't let them go to college and major in something useless, and they won't let them just sit around and do
nothing while the mooch off the government.
Yes, but a lot of those folks believe that we should become a socialist country so that they don't have to get a job at all when, in reality, a socialist government probably won't let them go to college and major in something useless, and they won't let them just sit around and do nothing while the mooch off the government.
But they look at people like Bernie Sanders, who never worked in his life, yet
has a rich life style.
But no one ever said that these socialist-liking people could comprehend reality.
There is a reason why US Constitutionalist are so anal with their Constitutional rights, and are always bitching "the Constitution this" and "th
Constitution that." The reason is no other than the fact the State is recognized as a rotten entity which cannot be trusted with limitless power. Th
very existence of bills or rights and the like (which are very, VERY Western) is an open admission that State's power structures will be used to stomp the population if left uncheck.
Yes, but a lot of those folks believe that we should become a sociali country so that they don't have to get a job at all when, in reality, socialist government probably won't let them go to college and major something useless, and they won't let them just sit around and do nothing while the mooch off the government.
But they look at people like Bernie Sanders, who never worked in his life, has a rich life style.
Yes, some of them could become politicians, or members of the nomenklatura, and do OK, but that does require some effort, even if most of us would not call it "work."
But no one ever said that these socialist-liking people could comprehend reality.
I know I did not say that. :)
* SLMR 2.1a * Oh very clever Worf, eat any good books lately?
Even folks who don't have normal everyday jobs have to put in some form of effort. I had a cousin who worked for a non-profit after he retired, and his job was to solicit donations and apply for grant money. Granted he made enough money in his other job to retire on, the pay he was offered could allow
him to live a very basic life.
| Sysop: | Chris Crash |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huntington Beach, CA. |
| Users: | 584 |
| Nodes: | 8 (0 / 8) |
| Uptime: | 05:45:01 |
| Calls: | 10,746 |
| Files: | 5 |
| Messages: | 447,220 |
| Posted today: | 1 |