It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
I was just banned from Google Youtube 4 watching the 2nd Amendement March
page: 6share:
A reply to: TerryMcGuire
Ok first let’s dismiss the untruth that in socialism the worker has liberty and that workers work for themselves. But let’s talk about degree of socialism. In a fully socialist economy, the State controls the means of production. Therefore the boss is always going to be the State. The socialist state is going to involve redistribution of income. In all these places where there is socialized medicine, the worker is going to pay high taxes to pay for it. The worker will also pay high taxes for govt overhead, for the poor, for pretty much whatever the State demands. So is the worker working for themself? At least in a capitalist economy, a as n individual is allowed to work for higher pay based on personal effort. When socialists say that the wealthy should pay “ their fair share”, they really mean that they want to take as much of that wealth as they can son they can redistribute it to those they deem worthy. I have yet to see Nancy Pelosi give away her wealth to the less fortunate. She has made money on the taxpayer dole and probably insider trading. She, the one who is promoting a socialist agenda. Perhaps that is the kind of socialism that isn’t socialist, or at least not truly equitable. But it’s a fact that socialism is full of people who get more than others. It’s not fair at all only equitable for those in power. Historical evidence shows that.
John Dewey, a humanist and the father of our modern educational pedagogy, believed that people exist for the State. There again, the people exist for the State. That is the true socialism and every totalitarian’s dream.
You really didn’t need to give me the Wikipedia definition of socialism. I’m fully aware of what socialism is and what it isn’t. Socialism is an integral part of communism. Indeed the difference is the level of socialism involved. In a fascist system, the State still has control but leaves some private business in place. Did the people of Nazi Germany have control over their own destiny ? Did the State own them ? I find it strange that you refer to “ the State” as a foreign entity. So I’m the former Soviet Union, was the State something foreign and not of the country ? The State is a government apparatus. The State is a controlling apparatus. Why refer to it as foreign, unless you are referring to something like the Chinese rule over N Korea or the Russian control of Eastern European states such as Lithuania or Belarus...
Ok first let’s dismiss the untruth that in socialism the worker has liberty and that workers work for themselves. But let’s talk about degree of socialism. In a fully socialist economy, the State controls the means of production. Therefore the boss is always going to be the State. The socialist state is going to involve redistribution of income. In all these places where there is socialized medicine, the worker is going to pay high taxes to pay for it. The worker will also pay high taxes for govt overhead, for the poor, for pretty much whatever the State demands. So is the worker working for themself? At least in a capitalist economy, a as n individual is allowed to work for higher pay based on personal effort. When socialists say that the wealthy should pay “ their fair share”, they really mean that they want to take as much of that wealth as they can son they can redistribute it to those they deem worthy. I have yet to see Nancy Pelosi give away her wealth to the less fortunate. She has made money on the taxpayer dole and probably insider trading. She, the one who is promoting a socialist agenda. Perhaps that is the kind of socialism that isn’t socialist, or at least not truly equitable. But it’s a fact that socialism is full of people who get more than others. It’s not fair at all only equitable for those in power. Historical evidence shows that.
John Dewey, a humanist and the father of our modern educational pedagogy, believed that people exist for the State. There again, the people exist for the State. That is the true socialism and every totalitarian’s dream.
You really didn’t need to give me the Wikipedia definition of socialism. I’m fully aware of what socialism is and what it isn’t. Socialism is an integral part of communism. Indeed the difference is the level of socialism involved. In a fascist system, the State still has control but leaves some private business in place. Did the people of Nazi Germany have control over their own destiny ? Did the State own them ? I find it strange that you refer to “ the State” as a foreign entity. So I’m the former Soviet Union, was the State something foreign and not of the country ? The State is a government apparatus. The State is a controlling apparatus. Why refer to it as foreign, unless you are referring to something like the Chinese rule over N Korea or the Russian control of Eastern European states such as Lithuania or Belarus...
edit on 22-1-2020 by ThirdEyeofHorus because:
(no reason given)
a reply to: burdman30ott6
And I don't doubt that those subsidies are real. The question is though is that because crony government is controlling Google or because Google is controlling local governments with promises of jobs creation and economic stimulation for areas that cut them those subsidies.
And I don't doubt that those subsidies are real. The question is though is that because crony government is controlling Google or because Google is controlling local governments with promises of jobs creation and economic stimulation for areas that cut them those subsidies.
a reply to: Violater1
Relax people, it's simply code of conduct, we have our own.
Some of TPTB at youtube might feel like this is wrong, but money talks. More outrage, less advertising revenue-when I was on radio you could not mention politics or religion whatsoever. Mention how batcrap crazy scientology is, you get the hook. These sites like youtube are too worried about the helen lovejoys taking away 'sponsorship.'
The first amendment gives people the right to speak, but it also allows a right to rebuttal. If people want the right to march for their right to bear arms, they should have it, however the rebuttal could be someone taking a Barret 50. cal and blowing trumps head off from a mile away.
"For every action there is an equal or opposite reaction"-scooby doo, district attorney.
Relax people, it's simply code of conduct, we have our own.
Some of TPTB at youtube might feel like this is wrong, but money talks. More outrage, less advertising revenue-when I was on radio you could not mention politics or religion whatsoever. Mention how batcrap crazy scientology is, you get the hook. These sites like youtube are too worried about the helen lovejoys taking away 'sponsorship.'
The first amendment gives people the right to speak, but it also allows a right to rebuttal. If people want the right to march for their right to bear arms, they should have it, however the rebuttal could be someone taking a Barret 50. cal and blowing trumps head off from a mile away.
"For every action there is an equal or opposite reaction"-scooby doo, district attorney.
a reply to: Thecakeisalie
Money certainly does talk. No one has to look further than this site. It used to be a premier conspiracy site but now has turned into a 'Trump can do no wrong and I'm going to defend no matter what what good or bad. (and yes there has been good and bad too). Turning the focus with this style site stirs, creates lots of emotions, creates lots of people posting emotionally which creates lots off traffic for the owner(s) and add revenue. I really don't give this site the same credibility once I did.
Money certainly does talk. No one has to look further than this site. It used to be a premier conspiracy site but now has turned into a 'Trump can do no wrong and I'm going to defend no matter what what good or bad. (and yes there has been good and bad too). Turning the focus with this style site stirs, creates lots of emotions, creates lots of people posting emotionally which creates lots off traffic for the owner(s) and add revenue. I really don't give this site the same credibility once I did.
new topics
-
Biden Nationalizes Another 50,000+ Student Loans as He Heads for the Exit
US Political Madness: 16 minutes ago -
An Interesting Conversation with ChatGPT
Science & Technology: 9 hours ago
top topics
-
An Interesting Conversation with ChatGPT
Science & Technology: 9 hours ago, 7 flags -
Biden Nationalizes Another 50,000+ Student Loans as He Heads for the Exit
US Political Madness: 16 minutes ago, 1 flags