I have a legitimate question for all the liberals...

Shirley, you can't be serious.

 

Socialism is just another diversion by the flagging republican party preaching to their followers who unfortunatly are not inclined to educate themselves on the truth of the matter.

So, why bother answering a question that has no basis in meaning?

No one is running on a socialistic agenda.

No one is running on state owned corporation and redistribution of wealth....

It is assinine to even answer these questions because they are ludicrous, and obviously meant to inflame their ignorant followers.

DD

 

This is when your post became just more stupid conservative rhetoric.I guess the whole middle class in your opinion are some lazy, good for nothing, slackers.The economy almost crashed under Ronald Regan and every republican president after him.I guess when Bill Clinton was in office his tax plans really tore this country apart right?What part of "trickle down economics hasn't been working " that you don't understand?

 

and give it to the people not paying taxes?

Universal health care is obtainable, Let me know if you are for it.

$200/month per family and everyone pays.
You are required to annual physical including finger checkup.
give up smoking.
give up drinking,
give up drugs.
give up skydiving, scuba diving, speeding. multiple partner sex. gay sex. unsafe sex.
require to lose weight to 20% over ideal weight.
required to be healthy, including excercise

Many health problems can be solved w/ enough physical excercise.

etc..., etc..., etc...

Any extra curricular activities that increase chance for medical care, your premiums go up and you must pay the extra costs.

Let's start w/ using the free High School education.

 

From an anti-T.R. letter to the editor of the New York Times in 1908:

Moreover, most of the Rooseveltian policies - the arid land reclamation schemes, the National forests, the leasing of coal and mineral rights, the renting of grazing lands, the construction of the Panama Canal by direct employment, the development of water powers under public ownership and control - are in strict harmony with Socialist principles....The faith of our forefathers in the sacred principle of competition as the self-acting force which yielded ideal justice and rendered to every man according to his deserts, has departed as surely as the belief in witchcraft. [Socialists] can't threaten me worse than Theodore Roosevelt does with his inheritance and income tax schemes and the social workers of New York with their ever-increasing demands on the city budget.

Teddy Roosevelt is McCain's favorite president.

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/10/the-threat-of-s.html

 

i have a question. why is bush a socialist? he signed a $700 billion bailout.

 

Signed,

 

unbelievable. i can tell you've been rich all your life. poor people and the middle class pay taxes too. you're confused. my parents paid taxes all their lives. they used their food stamps cuz they NEEDED them. you might be suprised that very few people abuse the system. now if they vote for obama, they'd probably would see a tax increase, but they're still voting obama....i guess you just have to be in the middle class or be broke as hell to realize that the majority of the people pay their taxes too.

 

"Means of production" is the keyword here - so, for example, does Obama's socialism mean that all of us are going to own Mac and collectively own iPods? Will McDonald's now be 'The People's McDonalds'? Will giant agribusinesses be run by all of us taking turns with the tractors? Then will we take turns driving the trucks (distribution) to deliver all these items? Or does this just mean that the government is going to nationalize all of these things? Does this also mean that all the sweat shops and sent-abroad jobs like computer sales and automobile building will now be the property of the United States government?

By the way - is your anger at socialism the last clause of this definition? Is it the 'equity and fairness' that scares you? If, in some alternate reality (like your reality), this came to pass - I suspect 'equity and fairness' would be as empty a concept as 'market principles' in determing what goes where and to whom.

See point 1. Maybe when Obama's government nationalizes Subway, all the sandwich artists will finally be given a fair wage and cease being exploited. Also, since Obama's campaign is socialist, I'm surprised he hasn't brought up the fact that he'll soon be making Wal-Mart into "The People's Wal-Mart" (again, socialism requires controlling the distribution of production).

This is the point I made in another thread: the 'socialism' you speak about is simply another iteration of "they're the bad guys and we're the good guys. We're capitalist and therefore capitalism must be good, they're socialist and therefore socialism must be bad."

Let me make this point one more time: socialism, as a stage on the way to communism, can only come about in a nation-state that already has a developed system of capitalism - because of that, there has NEVER been a truly socialist state.

The "socialism" you speak of is just about as genuinely socialist as the rest of the world's "capitalism" is genuinely capitalist. They're both artifacts of centuries gone by - they no longer exist in the world. They words function as an over-simplifying shorthand for ideologies that no longer resemble the ideals their architects intended because we no longer live in the same world those same architects observed.

As many have noted, the fact that the Federal Government now essentially owns banks - well, that does sound a bit like socialism. Who knows ... maybe Marx was right. Maybe it's inevitable that developed capitalism will turn into socialism. But you'll note that our entire government is responsible for the transition ... also, you'll note, I don't believe Marx was right. But if you're taking this 'socialism' thing seriously, instead of just using it as a talking-point-OMG-I'M-SKEERED-buzzword-OH-NOES-COMMIES!, maybe you owe it to yourself to figure out how, in its actual form, it would really operate.

So, if you don't agree with the dictionary defintion, tell me OddsOn ... what is socialism?

 

thundercats
thundercats
thundercats

HOOOOOOOOOOOO

 

Let's let McCain define socialism, as the expert. See if you catch the contradiction, after your head explodes.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/04CgBAmXEDM&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/04CgBAmXEDM&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Via ThinkProgress.

 

Hah, I was very poor for most of my life my friend. Much poorer than the people that are claiming to be poor today.

I refused to accept many of the government hand outs knowing that it would be a trap that I have difficulty getting out of. I got my high shool degree and college degree. and have repaid all my college loans.

I worked 2 maybe 3 times as hard as the people above me , from work to work at home, to be where I'm here where I am today.

And from where I am today, There are many people below me that are claiming to be poor are outspending me on, shoes, clothing, cars, stereos, entertainment, eating out, bars, cell phones, cable TV, etc... And they want my help? Puhleese...

 

I have a couple of questions. We all pay taxes...period. The real debate is who should pay the most so my questions are this:

1. Why is it that anytime we talk about increasing the taxes on the middle class it is just "increasing taxes". But any time we talk about increasing taxes on the upper 5% its is referred to as socialism?

2. Where were your cries of socialism, communism, Marxism or whatever when the conservatives put socialistic laws into place like the patriot act that directly infringes on our constitutional rights?

And here is a bonus question:

3. Why would any of you people voting republican continue to vote republican after the last 8 years of watching salaries go down, gas quadruple, electricity quadruple, American jobs go over seas, civil rights taken away etc. etc. etc. While the republican president did nothing but watch as he continued to enjoy record personal profits while the people he is suppose to be leading have seen their quality of life consistently go down hill.

I don't know but these seem like logical questions to me.

 

crash -- do us all a favor and report to the BBS what % of taxes the bottom 50% of wage earners in the United States pay. Please do that. We eagerly await your response.

 

You know when you get to the outer fringes of conservatism and liberalism they sort of meet at the other side and have a lot in common.

Kind of like the bailout...

 

So you have no answers for my questions?

 

This is the most ridiculous thing I've read in some time. You have no idea of everyone that is claiming to be poor today.

Start your own fantasy writing thread if you want to just make stuff up.

 

Listen crash, if you want any of my valuable time, you will answer the question. Otherwise, you will be ignored.

 

Your time is less valuable than a $4 hooker on montrose.

DD