The only hope for this country is democratic socialism & equal redistribution of wealth

reply to post by Gramafaloon

To the OP, great thread. There's no better way to rile the "free market capitalists" than by suggesting we should kill Democracy.....or some such nonsense.

Thank you. Socialism is democracy without capitalism. They never seem to teach this in school, do they? I just had a brainstorm today, "Capitalism is privatized socialism".

Or, as Orwell would say, "Everyone is equal. It's just that some people are more equal than others."

Anyone who wants to topple the New World Order and its corporate fascism only has to advocate redistribution of wealth.

That's what our founding fathers did by MANDATING a socialistic central bank NOT A PRIVATELY OWNED ONE by private bankers like we have today in the Fed, who suck our blood when they're not (censored).

reply to post by jmdewey60


I agree we need to get back to our founding document.Our problems are a result of the people allowing politicians to ignore thier oath to the constitution.
On June 30th,I'm proud to say I will be serving a petition on my local congressman.www.givemeliberty.org... I have no idea where this will lead however I feel I'm at least trying.

Originally posted by Zepherian
The problem with talking about economic systems with a lot of americans is they go hiper defensive and think the reds are coming to steal their precious bodily fluids. ... If 5% of the population owns 80% of the wealth how is that better

Not only the "reds", the blacks, browns, yellows, and not to mention, the whites.

reply to post by counterterrorist


Unconstitutional.

You fail.

Only losers support ridiculous ideas like wealth redistribution. They do so out of envy and anger at those who have actually made something of themselves.

reply to post by Gramafaloon

Wait...What was the question?

The question is:

What are the ten top ways a democracy based on socialism is better than a plutocracy or oligarchy based on capitalism?

To the OP ... marxist redistribution of wealth is a failed idea.
It rewards the lazy and punishes the productive.

You'll get a chance to see it fail ... Obamessiah just loooooooves this thought process. His 'global poverty tax' is just the first step.

GOD HELP US ALL!

how about giving every citizen the same amount of benefits regardless of their situation?
Then those who decide/can work for more ,get the benefit of that extra work in extra money ,there would be an incentive for those "on benefits" at the present to work ,because those benefits would not be taken from them ?And wages would be seen as a bonus.

Why not have the minimum wage as the tax free limit on earnings for everybody ,this would save millions in spending and civil service ,revenue costs and make tax forms easier?


At present the benefits system keeps people locked in ,unable to take lower paid ,even part time work because of the benefits trap (In the uk at least)

this thread seems to dovetail nicely on the heels of the "Why Europeans hate America" thread.

Why, oh why, would America desire to emulate anything Europe does or Asia for that matter?

No country in the history of the world has done more for peace, for spreading democracy, for liberating the oppressed, for taking in the needy and 'have nots' than America. All those greedy capitalists - and terrible big corporations, like General Motors, Exxon/Mobil, etc... - provide THOSE jobs you want...hello???

The best way to save America is to send people like the OP to some other country. I hear Russia is very nice this time of year. I will chip in for air fare, as long as its a one-way ticket and you surrender your passport.

Originally posted by counterterrorist
The U.S. Constitution mandates a SOCIALIST CENTRAL BANK for the United States, that benefits ALL AMERICAN CITIZENS by NOT charging interest and NOT using fractional banking...

No, it does not. The Constitution does not specifically state the federal government is authorized to establish a bank. The creation of a central bank was the cause of a debate and controversy in 1790 and 1816. The issue was resolved in 1819 with the Supreme Court decision in McCulloch v. Maryland. The Court found that while the Constitution does not specifically give Congress the power to establish a bank, it does grant the ability to tax and spend, and a bank is a proper tool to do so.

No where in the Constitution does it call for the establishment of a bank, much less a socialist central bank.

Originally posted by Desert Dawg
Who decides who gets stuck doing the work?


I wanna be one of the guys who gets to sit around waiting for my check....

To the OP - this reply may or may not have been a joke, but it represents exactly why socialism and spreading the wealth equally would fail.

The majority would sit and wait for their checks. With the majority sitting and not producing anything, far less money is generated and far less money is distributed. This happens over and over until you run into the inevitable - famine.

Some people sitting and waiting are now forced to get off their butts and work, grudgingly, to produce more wealth to go around. But since there is no individual reward other than survival, it means you get far lower quality of work and services than we have now. But now since the wealth is redistributed, there's a growing unrest toward those who still refuse to work to help generate more wealth. Why should half of the nations people do the work to support everyone?

Ultimately what do you get? Either the people start making strict rules saying who does what (communism) or the country falls into civil war.

I dunno about you but I prefer a democracy.

Originally posted by counterterrorist
We're just going to cap your holdings at a million in liquid cash. If that hurts you're feeling, there's a special cap for whiners, that's two million in liquid capital.

You are already defining a Dictatorial Government. I assume you include yourself in the "We're" who will do the dictating to everyone else what they may or may not earn, possess or do?

You want to run the show without doing the hard work and study to advance to that possitition. How definitavly Socialistic of you

I would hope you were not born with a Silver Spoon and coming from that perspective. You did mention your Father being asked to invest with Gates. Did he by the way? If he did he is very wealthy and you are from lots of money.

I used the old fashioned Capitalism Method. I worked a little harder, took more risks, studied a little harder, chose my Peers more carefully and escaped poverty and started my own business. Only in a Capitalistic Society could I have done that.

Unemployment is still under 6%. Union wages are incredible and so are the benefits. People who are motivated enough to get an education have unlimited earning potential. Education is available to anyone through guaranteed student loans and grants. You really believe that a new version of the old failed USSR is preferable to this?

Originally posted by counterterrorist
That's what our founding fathers did by MANDATING a socialistic central bank NOT A PRIVATELY OWNED ONE by private bankers like we have today in the Fed, who suck our blood when they're not (censored).

Once again, No.

The Founding Fathers did not mandate a socialistic central bank. The First Bank of the United States, established by Congress in 1790, was privately owned and operated.

Originally posted by astrocramp
reply to post by counterterrorist

 

Somebody else brought up Cuba and Zimbabwe, but these are good examples of the failed notion that government elites can predict where and when to invest and how much an occupation, service, or product should cost.

Are you out of your mind. Zimbabwe and Cuba were the victims of CIA and MI-6 coups run by the NWO. Cuba was infested with mafia/cia/drug-smuggling and money-laundering swine, not to mention BUSH offshore oil interests. YOU WOULD THROW THEM OUT OF AMERICA, IF YOU COULD.

Without the darwinistic mechanisms of capitalism, waste would exponentially increase, and scarcity of even basic goods (such as the soviet union and cuba).

Are you nuts? Capitalism has only been institutionalized a few hundred years since the Rothschild central banks took over. Civilization has been around, at last written civilization, for 5,000 years and PROBABLY BEEN HERE FROM THE FIRST DAY THE PLANET WAS CREATED.

The idea is ridiculous really, I'm surprised people still talk about this sort of thing.

You might skim through www.abovetopsecret.com... it's a lot of work, but you certain stand a change of smartening-up your education.

[edit on 25-6-2008 by counterterrorist]

reply to post by counterterrorist


Stand a change of smartening up your education? Seems you could use some of that yourself.

Why not just go out and make yourself successful, that way you won't be envious of those who are better off than you are?

Originally posted by SaviorComplex

Originally posted by counterterrorist
That's what our founding fathers did by MANDATING a socialistic central bank NOT A PRIVATELY OWNED ONE by private bankers like we have today in the Fed, who suck our blood when they're not (censored).

Once again, No.

The Founding Fathers did not mandate a socialistic central bank. The First Bank of the United States, established by Congress in 1790, was privately owned and operated.

You are 100%, totally MISINFORMED BECAUSE THAT BANK WAS PART OF THE BANK OF ENGLAND ROTHCHILD EFFORT TO TAKE-OVER THE US. THAT'S WHY THAT BANK WAS THROWN OUT AND MADE TO NON-EXIST.

The Second Bank of the U.S. was ALSO an attempted takeover by the Bank of England, after a short time, that too was canceled.

The Bank of England was not successful until 1913, in installing private ownership of a u.s. central bank, i.e. THE FED. READ THIS, 'Secrets of the Federal Reserve', it's online, and free www.barefootsworld.net...

The history of the U.S. showcases Thomas Jefferson wanting a publicly owned central bank, & Alexander Hamilton wanting a privately owned central bank. It’s history, lost history.

“Bankers are a den of vipers. I intend to rout you out & by the Eternal God I will rout you out. If the people only understood the rank injustice of our central bank system, there would be a revolution before morning. If the central bank continues to control our currency, receiving our public monies, & holding thousands of our citizens in dependence, it would be more formidable & dangerous than the naval & military power of the enemy. It is not our own citizens only who are to receive the bounty of our government … More than 8 million dollars of the stock of this bank are held by foreigners … Is there no danger to our liberty & independence in a bank that in its nature has so little to bind it to our country? If government would confine itself to equal protection, and, as Heaven does its rains, shower its favor alike on the high & the low, the rich & the poor, it would be an unqualified blessing.”
~ President Andrew Jackson, 1829-1837

“Banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks & corporations that will grow up around will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. The issuing power should be taken from the banks & restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs.”
~ President Thomas Jefferson, 1801-1809

“Whoever controls the money of a nation, controls that nation & is absolute master of all industry & commerce. When you realize that the entire system is very easily controlled, one way or another, by a few powerful men at the top, you will not have to be told how periods of inflation & depression originate.”
~ President James Garfield, 1891

“Capital must protect itself in every possible manner by combination & legislation. Debts must be collected, bonds & mortgages must be foreclosed as rapidly as possible. When, through a process of law, the common people lose their homes they will become more docile & more easily governed through the influence of the strong arm of government, applied by a central power of wealth under control of leading financiers. This truth is well known among our principal men now engaged in forming an imperialism of Capital to govern the world.
“By dividing voters through the political party system, we get them to expend energies fighting over questions of no importance. Thus by discreet action we can secure for ourselves what has been so well planned & successfully accomplished. ~Aug. 25, 1924 USA Banker’s Magazine


[edit on 25-6-2008 by counterterrorist]

Originally posted by slackerwire
Stand a change of smartening up your education? Seems you could use some of that yourself.

Why not just go out and make yourself successful, that way you won't be envious of those who are better off than you are?

It's obvious this guy is just spewing talking points he read on some leftist, socialist commy website. He ignores direct questions and never offers any detailed explanations regarding his views. He just keeps repeating the same old marxist talking points with obvious flawed and straight out incorrect information. Pathetic and pretty sad actually.

reply to post by counterterrorist


You are out of your freaking mind. Who in the hell would invent new stuff or start a business if they didnt think they might get rich as a reward. What do you think drove all the inventions in the world. GREED!

Greed is a good thing. If Bill Gates can create $50 Billion dollars of net worth from selling software, congrats to him. He worked his butt off, made good business decisions, hired great people, and made a lot of other people rich in the process.

I own my own business, and I am honestly struggling to make a go of it. If I didnt see the reward of success I would just give up. However, if I succeed I will create wealth for myself and others. I will create jobs, have more money to give to charity, more money to invest in the risk others want to take, etc...

The problem with this country now is their is too much government and too much redistribution of wealth. If you want more money trying taking some risks and working your butt off and quit worrying about who has more money than you. They earned it or the generations of their family before them earned it. That is how it is done. Its survival of the fittest baby!

Originally posted by counterterrorist

You are 100%, totally MISINFORMED...

Please show me where I am wrong. Please show me where the US Constitution mandates a socialist central bank.

I am not wrong. It was privately owned and operated. The mandate by Congress established it as such.

And, by the by, typing in all caps does not speak well of your intelligence.

Originally posted by counterterrorist

Are you nuts? Capitalism has only been institutionalized a few hundred years

So, Western Democracy and Capitalism has only been around a few hundred years? What I learned about Democracy and Capitalism in Ancient Greece must have been wrong I suppose. Too bad they didn't have Stalin or Chairman Mao around to advise them You know, your heroes

I will try again... ** SIGH **

Since you keep repeating yourself:
A) Please show me where in the Constitution where it mandates a SOCIALIST CENTRAL BANK.

B) Please show me where our founding fathers mandated socialist equality and also show me where 'financial freedom' is listed.

You keep dodging some important points:
1) Whom will you steal from when the rich no longer have any money left to take? So what happens once everything has been distributed 'evenly'?

2) And who's going to be in charge of this so-called distribution of wealth? Will a corrupt government be in charge? Please be specific and not just say 'you' will.

3) Who gets to decide how much your job is or is not worth? Why would anyone have an incentive to take a job that requires a lot of studying (like a doctor) when they could just be a janitor and get paid the same amount?
The point is innovation is gone which leads to stagnation and then a decline in one's way of life.

Please try and answer these questions with some specifics and detail and not just some sly one sentence remark.