Rolling Stone: Trump’s White House passed around a presentation on how to end American democracy

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

Someone should explain that to the people who don't understand how these things are funded.

Could you actually quote from YOUR socialist notebook how roads, police departments, fire departments, etc are socialist?...

Roads, police, military, etc existed before socialism was ever invented. Or are you going to make up a new conspiracy theory of your own claiming socialists used a time machine and went back in time to invent all these things you claim are socialist?...

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

I understand the idiocy you keep on claiming. It still doesn't make it true no matter how many times you keep writing it.

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
Could you actually quote from YOUR socialist notebook how roads, police departments, fire departments, etc are socialist?

Wow, you can't figure this simple thing out?

Money is collected from property taxes, which are not optional, and then used to pay for police, fire, schools and other services. Maybe if you were an American and owned property you'd know this.

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
I understand...

No, sadly you do not. You don't even understand something as simple as property taxes.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus


Wow, you can't figure this simple thing out?

How can't you understand that police/military, roads, etc, have existed from looong before socialism was ever invented which proves these things are not socialist?... In order for them to be socialist socialism would have been invented before roads, or military/police, etc were ever used by ancient civilizations.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
Money is collected for property taxes, which are not optional, and then used to pay for police, fire, schools and other services. Maybe if you were an American and owned property you'd know this.

Taxes itself is not socialist either... A flat tax is not socialist, but a progressive tax is socialist because it aims at taking more money from the rich....

But you can't understand this simple argument...

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
How can't you understand that police/military, roads, etc, have existed from looong before socialism was ever invented...

Collecting taxes and then using that revenue to fund social programs is socialism.

Taxes itself is not socialist either...

You need to work on that reading still. Using those not-optional taxes for social programs is socialistic. Ask DB, he gets this.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

Collecting taxes and then using that revenue to fund social programs is socialism.

It is not...

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
You need to work on that reading still. Using those not-optional taxes for social programs is socialistic. Ask DB, he gets this.

You mean "reading comprehension." You should learn proper English grammar if you are going to try to school anyone...

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
It is not...

So what do you call forcing people to pay taxes and then using their money to pay other people?

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
...
Maybe if you were an American and owned property you'd know this.

I am an American citizen... Even though this proves nothing. Being an American citizen doesn't make you knowledgeable about anything... But this is something you obviously can't fathom... This ridiculous argument you just made is enough evidence that you can't understand simple concepts.

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
I am an American citizen...

Doubtful since you don't even understand how property taxes function in this country.

It's funny that you think this is ridiculous yet DB, who is a Conservative, agrees with me. Educate yourself.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

Doubtful since you don't even understand how property taxes function in this country.

It's funny that you think this is ridiculous yet DB, who is a Conservative, agrees with me. Educate yourself.

DB can be wrong too... Just because someone agrees with you it doesn't mean you both are right...

If you were right and "taking something without consent makes it socialist" then stealing is socialist... Because the thief is taking without consent... If your argument was true then murder is socialist... Because the murderer took a life without consent...
If your argument were true then rape is socialist too...

But none of these things I described above, nor police departments, nor roads are socialist. You don't understand what socialism actually is. If anyone needs an education, it is you.

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
DB can be wrong too...

But he isn't, he understands basic economics and civics.

If you were right and "taking something without consent makes it socialist" then stealing is socialist...

You need to read what I'm writing, taxing people and then taking that revenue to pay other people is socialistic. Your argumentum ad absurdum is laughable and amusing.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

I think our esteemed associate is confused on the issue.

The programs may be socialist but with the caveat that it actually takes capitalism to fund them.

Socialism cannot exist in a vacuum. It's a failed program/ideology on it's own.

In order for socialism to actually succeed, it requires the benefits of a free and bountiful economy to fund it.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
I think our esteemed associate is confused on the issue.

I'm actually convinced he is confused. This is so fundamentally simple to understand that you'd have to not want to get it to not get it.

The programs may be socialist but with the caveat that it actually takes capitalism to fund them.

You notice he hasn't described what forced taxation and then redistributing that revenue is called?

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

But he isn't, he understand basic economics and civics.

Why because you both agree on something?... You are insane...

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
You need to read what I'm writing, taxing people and then taking that revenue to pay other people is socialistic. Your argumentum ad absurdum is laughable and amusing.

Taxes in and of themselves are not socialist...

When a thief steals he/she takes something that is not his/hers and keeps it or does whatever he/she wants want with what they stole... If your argument were true then stealing is socialistic...

When a murderer kills someone he is taking a life that doesn't belong to him/her for his/her own pleasure...and if your argument were true, then murder would be socialistic...

When an ahole decides to rape anyone he/she is using the body of another person without consent, which would mean rape is also socialistic if your argument were true...

But your argument is inane and insane.

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
Taxes in and of themselves are not socialist...

Taking that revenue to pay other people is.

a reply to: DBCowboy

Sorry to rain on your parade but just because you and AM agree on something it doesn't make your argument true.

Do you understand the concept that a flat tax is not socialistic, but a progressive tax is?...

Capitalism is free enterprise, while socialism doesn't allow free enterprise.

Social programs are not necessarily socialistic...

For example, Social Security. As it was first used in the U.S. social security was a form of pension. A person gives part of his money to the government for when he/she retires/is disabled, and then at the retirement age/when the person is disabled he/she was/is given money at a percentage of what he/she used to make. Some people are paid more after retiring than others.

Now, when democrats began to change social security and began using it for other programs such as paying illegals, or paying for abortions in other countries, etc that's when social security/other programs began to become socialistic.

But things that benefit a society in general doesn't make those things/programs socialistic.

If a citizen of any country, or a group of citizens decide to start cleaning a beach that is full of trash without getting paid for it, that does not make the act of cleaning the beach for free a socialist idea. But to the "socialist" minded people out there this act is socialist, because socialists always claim everything good is socialism, and everything bad is capitalist... Which is just as absurd as the claim that roads, police departments etc are socialist when they are not.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
Taking that revenue to pay other people is.

Then i guess invading other countries must be a "socialist program." After all, a country invading another is taking without consent, and often time the invading country takes money from the country invaded by force. So if your argument were true then invading other countries must be a "socialist program."

But this is not true.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

You're all over the place, like a puppy distracted by jingling keys, pay attention, this is about property taxes and the like being used to fund social programs. Forced taxation that is used to pay others is socialistic.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

You're confusing ideology with an economic practise.

Socialism, in it's fundamental essence is government controlling the means of production.

For some programs, government does control that aspect.

In otherwords, socialism on a micro-scale.

Socialism on a macro-scale is unsubstainable simply due to it's constant requirement for support and funding.