Paul Ryan; The Welfare King

Originally posted by RealSpoke
reply to post by gladtobehere

 

Crony capitalism is still capitalism. Unless you're one of those people that think capitalism only exists if there is a free market, which just is not true.

Crony socialism is just as bad..Look at greece.

Crony communism like in china with a fixed market just cheats the
countries that are following the rules. Like how. china.manipulates its.currency./

Its obvious your partisan views have skewed.your thought process.
If.Ryan and the republicans are the only people you think have problems in government
it.just.proves how much a partisan hack one is.
A well fared king is a king in good.standing. Good to know (sad to know) the open minded folks here
only attack with closed.minded views...

reply to post by Tw0Sides
You know it's just too bad that people like some of you are allowed to write sucvh drivel and lie through your teeth or at the very least twist the truth when you don't like someone. I detest people like that. I hope you can't sleep at night for your nastiness.

This is slander against Paul Ryan, and you do NHOt get away with that. Shame shame shame.

reply to post by RealSpoke

Crony capitalism is still capitalism. Unless you're one of those people that think capitalism only exists if there is a free market, which just is not true.

And socialism is still socialism.

Obviously you don’t know that means citizens don’t own anything and you have no clue what freedom is.

reply to post by RealSpoke

There's also a ton of corporations that employ people but to not pay them enough, even though they can more than afford to, so their employees have to go on foodstamps or go hungry.

There are more working people in poverty than unemployed poverty.

Show me some numbers! I doubt that after the welfare king Obama.



You know not what you say….

reply to post by popcornmafia


Exactly look at Greece and what the big banks did to it.

Originally posted by Grimpachi
reply to post by popcornmafia

 

Exactly look at Greece and what the big banks did to it.

For sure the banks / government screwed them over, but I don't give them all the credit. When they were getting all the nice social goodies, no one spoke up about how they could afford all of it. Nothing is for free, someone has to pay for it.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


The federal reserve is a quasi-public institution. Which means it is in some aspects and it isn't in others.

If the fed was nationalized we wouldn't have to go in debt to make money, we wouldn't have to write a bill to audit it and the fed chairmen could not claim "it answers to no one".

Wait a minute: Is the Federal Reserve public or private?



It's neither. From one perspective, the Fed looks like a public institution: Congress created it in 1913 to maintain the stability of the financial system; the president appoints, and the Senate confirms, the members of its Board of Governors; and it's not out to make a profit—after taking care of expenses, the Fed hands off its earnings to the Treasury. Furthermore, the details of its responsibilities are subject to congressional oversight. Still, the Fed is rightly classified as an independent central bank. Neither the executive branch nor the legislature gets a direct say in its decision-making, and it pays for its own operations (primarily by acquiring U.S. government securities on the open market). In short, the Fed is an independent entity within the government.


The Fed is organized like a federation—there's a central governing agency in Washington, D.C., and 12 regional banks scattered across the country. These 12 banks issue shares of stock to thousands of private member banks, including institutions like the Deutsche Bank Trust Co. of America and the Gotham Bank of New York. But regional bank membership isn't like owning stock in Coca-Cola. The member banks are not allowed to sell or trade their shares, which produce dividends at a fixed rate of 6 percent. And they must invest 3 percent of their capital in the Federal Reserve Banks.

www.slate.com...

reply to post by seabag

Show me some numbers! I doubt that after the welfare king Obama.

I already did, and you ignored it.

reply to post by seabag

Obviously you don’t know that means citizens don’t own anything and you have no clue what freedom is.

\

False, you can still own things under a socialist system. The workers would own the means of production and still you still could own personal goods. Plus there there are various forms of socialism as there is capitalism.

reply to post by popcornmafia


Greek wasn't socialist. The means of production was never owned by the workers. It was and still is a capitalist ,that was screwed over by corrupt politicians and banks.

Crony communism like in china with a fixed market just cheats the

China isn't communist at all. It is a capitalist state....a communist state would not have slave workers or social classes. The means of production is once again, mainly privately owned but directed by the state.

In this system, governments use various kinds of state-owned companies to manage the exploitation of resources that they consider the state's crown jewels and to create and maintain large numbers of jobs. They use select privately owned companies to dominate certain economic sectors. They use so-called sovereign wealth funds to invest their extra cash in ways that maximize the state's profits. In all three cases, the state is using markets to create wealth that can be directed as political officials see fit. And in all three cases, the ultimate motive is not economic (maximizing growth) but political (maximizing the state's power and the leadership's chances of survival). This is a form of capitalism but one in which the state acts as the dominant economic player and uses markets primarily for political gain.

en.wikipedia.org...

Its obvious your partisan views have skewed.your thought process.

It's clear you have no clue what you are even talking about. You should start reading what communism and socialism even is before you talk speak about it.

If.Ryan and the republicans are the only people you think have problems in government

Did I say that? No, I didn't. Of course, a partisan hack would think criticizing a republican means you only think republicans have problems.

reply to post by popcornmafia

oh really, WHAT social programs would that be....

I guess you can't comprehend what social programs are in general

Since Ryan is not a communist of course your.views.differ get over it.

I'm not a communist, and of course he isn't, he's fascist.