I have come to embrace Socialism!

Originally posted by Matrix Rising
reply to post by amari

 

Exactly,

Obama and many Democrats want people on Food Stamps. This way they can control people's consumption which they see as evil. I wouldn't be surprised if they don't start limiting the calories you can buy on Food Stamps. This will be done for the "common good."

The way I see is that capitalism totally collapsed and millions of people lost their jobs and houses. Today they are barely surviving because of welfare, Food Stamps and unemployment checks, which of course the Repuiblicans/Tea Bags want to take away. I wish they would because then the people would be pushed to such desperation that we would have a revolution in this country.

It's so typical of capitalists to always blame the victims of this system rather than the rich and corporate elites who really run everything and make all the decisions--always in thier own self-interest and never for the good of the country or the common people.

Originally posted by Skyfloating

Originally posted by ImAnAlienOnMyOwnPlanet
Thanks for the list. But I chose to embrace Socialism by facts

Is it not a fact that these Gentlemen were influential socialists of the last 100 years?

Is it not a fact that some of them are still revered by socialist thinkers?

edit on 8-10-2010 by Skyfloating because: (no reason given)

Not really, they were despots who used a warped philosophy for their own benefits.

If you want to look into socialism without a biased agenda, think of the Scandinavian countries, the UK, Holland, etc.

reply to post by witness63


It's crazy how people down capitalism which leads to success. Capitalism allows you to pursue your self interests which is good for the whole.

Do you know how many "successful capitalist" give to charities and non profits? Do you know how many "successful capitalist" have provided people with jobs that help feed and clothe their families? How many poor "common good" liberals have hired you for a job?

I have never worked for a poor person and I own my businesses now because I pursued my self interest. I also give to charities that feed the homeless and help children in third world countries.

I'm just sick of people bashing Capitalism and success for their liberal, pie in the sky ideology.

Originally posted by Skyfloating

Originally posted by witness63
I did live in Poland and the Czech Republic and that's exactly what I heard from almost everyone: socialism was a better deal for the common people than capitalism.

I doubt it. Most of what I learned about Socialism and am sharing here, I learned from Eastern Europeans who are very happy to be free from Soviet Tyranny at last.

I didn't say they wanted the Russians back. Certainly the Poles and Czechs don't, but they definitely didn't want this American-style capitalism, either. That was all imposed on them from above. As I said, I lived there and saw it: a terrible system for the common people and most of them hated it.

Originally posted by syr_ark

What good is production without ethics or limits? Cancer is primarily concerned with production, too.

Why do you automatically assume that creative/productive people are unethical? Actually well-fed people tend to be more ethical because they dont have to steal to get food.

Evil Capitalists are not the rule, they are the minor exception...which the neo-marxist loves to publicize as if all of us were that way.

I practice Capitalism and I dont have luxuries because I dont need them. I enjoy contributing my money to the Community and the greater good. I have a very simple car, I dont need more. I dont spoil the environment. I dont oppress people. People are happy to help me and I help them.

So why would people call me evil and greedy? The only reason can be that they are brainwashed to a degree they cant perceive whats real anymore.

reply to post by Matrix Rising

Obama and many Democrats want people on Food Stamps. This way they can control people's consumption which they see as evil. I wouldn't be surprised if they don't start limiting the calories you can buy on Food Stamps. This will be done for the "common good."

Nobody wants anybody on foodstamps and we certainly don't want the fatties drinking soda anymore than they should be allowed to buy cigarettes or lottery tickets with anyone's money but their own.

Nobody's conscience will accept the logic of paying someone to kill themselves.

If

you don't think drinking soda is "killing themselves" then you are being deliberately obtuse and that is not productive either.

Let them buy garbage to kill themselves and become medicare burdens with their hard earned money, not mine.
I will gladly buy them apples, cereal and milk....until they can get healthy and well or able enough to get back to work. Excepting those disabled of course. I will help take care of them.

And I have a feeling when I say "help" and when you say "help" it will mean vastly different things.
With truly disadvantaged I have NO qualifications for "help" but with the rest I am of the "teach a man to fish" school of thought.

Love the CNN Heros.

Originally posted by triplesod

If you want to look into socialism without a biased agenda, think of the Scandinavian countries, the UK, Holland, etc.

This would be the fifth time in this thread I have to refute this statement. Those are centrist countries, not socialist ones.

Originally posted by Skyfloating

Originally posted by witness63
I spent 5-6 years in the former USSR and Eastern Europe, and almost 100% of the people I talked to said that socially, educationally and economically, life was better for the ordinary people under socialism than it was under capitalism.

Funny...Ive travelled the same areas and heard just the opposite. Certainly you cant mean Estonia, Latvia, Poland and the Czech Republic....

And the reason Russia is struggling economically is not because of Capitalism but because 100 years of socialist propaganda taught them they dont have to do anything but hold out their hand to the Government for money.

This is BS... You assume that nobody had to work and that everything was still free... More western propaganda... If someone didn't work for alcohol reasons, or non justified reasons but could work, they were called "Тунеядцы" and were usually embarrassed publicly by their peers, sent to work in manufactures, or rarely to prisons... Usually the people would go to work after being publicly shamed...

More western propaganda debunked...

Any more propaganda you want me to sort out?

reply to post by rusethorcain


Of course they want people on food stamps and they want more people on the Government dole.

Anyone with a shred of common sense knows jobs are not coming back because we're in a global economy with cheap labor.

So it's not about jobs, jobs, jobs but consumption, consumption, consumption. Jobs will come because the flow of credit will create more entrepreneurs who build businesses that hire people or use their service.

You can't have a massive government and massive debt in a global economy with cheap labor. So big government will put more people under government control.

This is what Obama and the liberals want. They want big government and Obama is smart enough to know that the bigger government gets in a global economy with cheap labor the more people will have to use Government services.

Originally posted by Skyfloating

Originally posted by triplesod

If you want to look into socialism without a biased agenda, think of the Scandinavian countries, the UK, Holland, etc.

This would be the fifth time in this thread I have to refute this statement. Those are centrist countries, not socialist ones.

Why do we not hear people crooning to be centrist?
Perhaps this is all just a misunderstanding of semantics?
As evidenced by your comment, clearly people view a centrist "ism" as socialist.
People take social to mean "social" as in a society....with others.
Is that where people are wrong to nostalgically, without any historical backing but with a linguistic familiarity, hearken for socialism?

Maybe what we are saying is in disagreement but what we are thinking is in unison?

Originally posted by Skyfloating

Originally posted by syr_ark

What good is production without ethics or limits? Cancer is primarily concerned with production, too.

Why do you automatically assume that creative/productive people are unethical? Actually well-fed people tend to be more ethical because they dont have to steal to get food.

Evil Capitalists are not the rule, they are the minor exception...which the neo-marxist loves to publicize as if all of us were that way.

I practice Capitalism and I dont have luxuries because I dont need them. I enjoy contributing my money to the Community and the greater good. I have a very simple car, I dont need more. I dont spoil the environment. I dont oppress people. People are happy to help me and I help them.

So why would people call me evil and greedy? The only reason can be that they are brainwashed to a degree they cant perceive whats real anymore.

I wouldn't say that you're evil or greedy. I would say that Capitalism allows a lot of other people to be evil and greedy because our culture has been corrupted to the point that it has become OK to many people to hurt others for profit or other personal gain. If everyone acted as you claim to, I wouldn't have such a big problem with the way we live in the US.

I can't help but feel that you're just taking the hatred from others posts and applying it to mine as well. You sound like a stand up guy who honestly believes in Capitalism, but you fail to see the exploitation carried out by so many others.

The fact of the matter is this: Profit and productivity are king. Sure, a few people still care about ethics, but most of the people who make big decisions have been taught that profit is more important than ethics. This is the definition of evil. Nothing is more important than ethics. I hope that despite our differences of economic opinion, you can at least agree that the ethics of a society are of paramount importance?

reply to post by Matrix Rising


I don't think you know what anyone wants.
Bigger is not always better. Smarter is better.
Checks and balances is better.
Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
"Power" should not be handed over to corporate interests
and if the government needs more resources to prevent this
and get us good quality infrastructure and vital goods and services, so be it.
I need those things.

Originally posted by Skyfloating
So why would people call me evil and greedy? The only reason can be that they are brainwashed to a degree they cant perceive whats real anymore.

Funny, I feel the same way about people who say that anyone who isn't a capitalist is just lazy or wants to enslave and control people. Capitalists spend at least as much time trying to enslave and control people as most other -ists.

I just want a better world, and I want it to come about in a just manner. Too many people seem content to just leave the world broken because they have faith that if they keep doing the same thing forever, eventually it will fix things. I say we just fix it. Forget about dogma. Just fix it. But to do that, we need to start having some really honest discussions about what we want as a society, and that's pretty hard to do with the amount of propaganda and bellicosity out there today.

We don't need buzzwords and semantics. We just need to be better people. You sound like you're doing that already, but you seem to be crediting Capitalism with something it didn't do. Are you only a good person because you're a Capitalist, or would you be a good person regardless of which -ism you subscribed to? There are good ethical people from all economic schools of thought, I would presume, from my own experience.

Originally posted by Magnum007

Any more propaganda you want me to sort out?

The average Soviet in his socialist paradise made a seventh of what the average American made. There was always a shortage of meat, sugar, vegetables, fruits. To get something as simple as a salt-shaker you sometimes had to wait for months. Hospitals lacked the tools they need. Doctors had to apply for the most basic items,s uch as band-aids or needles and sometimes didnt get them even after applying. Two-thirds of Russian households lacked warm water. A third had no running water. Despite the vast forests of Russia, Paper and Toilet Paper had to be saved.

Russia had a perpetual housing shortage and if houses were built they were crammed and shabby. The architecture of the socialist is dull and ugly because they wanted to make sure everything looks the same so that people could be said to be "equal". Millions of families were seperated due to housing shortages.

reply to post by rusethorcain


You have to be kidding.

Most of the bailout and stimulus money went to Corporations. We have spent all this money and their now talking about more money for "infrastructure" and sadly useful idiots are buying that line again.

The fact is we should have given money to local banks and credit union to loan that money to the American people. Instead the money went to Global Corporations. Crooked Politicians in both the Republican and Democrat party did this. Again, both parties depend on useful idiots that will cheer them on when they use phrases like "the American People" and "we need infrastructure."

The money will just be spent on pet projects and to help out their friends and Americans will be stuck with the bill.

There's private money that's not being loaned out to Americans because we have this massive Government and massive Debt. We have a 13 Trillion dollar GDP with over 13 Trillion dollars in debt. If we had a 13 Trillion dollar GDP with 6 or 7 trillion dollar debt money and credit would be flowing through America.

Big Government is the problem in a Global Economy with cheap labor.

Dear God!!! look at all these comments! I leave for a day and come back the next and see a huge list of replies. This will take some time to sort out!

reply to post by Skyfloating


Anything that came from outside the USSR, there was a shortage of most of the time (candy, gum, pepsi/coke, etc...). Anything manufactured or grown in the USSR (which is pretty much everything), there was plentiful resources. Once the USSR started to break up (my wife says a big thanks to the USA BTW) this is when things started to go south...

My wife says that before, in the USSR, they may not have had much choice from the outside world, but now, what's the point of having choice if nobody can afford it there anyway?

What other questions do you have for me? It's a boring rainy saturday today!

reply to post by Matrix Rising


You just gave a socialistic solution:

Give the money to the people instead of the corporations... This is anti-capitalistic thinking!

You can't have it both ways!

Originally posted by Magnum007
Anything manufactured or grown in the USSR (which is pretty much everything), there was plentiful resources.

You`d figure that with all those woods that have more toilet paper....

The only thing Soviets had an abundance of was hard alcohol.

reply to post by Skyfloating


My wife doesn't ever recall running out of TP and having to use newspaper... She didn't have 1 entire aisle of TP for soft bums, for rough ones but she had TP all her life!

But I bet I can find many Americans right now who have to use public bathrooms because they HAVE NO HOME!

Any more misconceptions?